Incident at Heathrow
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: brisbane
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cowls unlocked should have been picked up on the walk around! S##t happens!
Cowls unlocked should have been picked up by the engineer who signed it off, and presented it to the crew. Bigger s##t happens.
Once airborne the crew did a good job, as expected.
Cowls unlocked should have been picked up by the engineer who signed it off, and presented it to the crew. Bigger s##t happens.
Once airborne the crew did a good job, as expected.
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...1EV%201-06.pdf
Can anyone with industry experience honestly level genuine criticism at the crews actions(one airborne, of course)?
No, because the only ones who knew the exact situation, as they knew it, were those on the flight-deck.
Of course, that will not stop all the official Monday morning quarterbacks in the various "inquiries" that will take place, once the media have lost interest, from finding all sorts of faults.
Just like happened to Sullenberger ---- and so many others over the years --- remember right back to the Elizabethan at Munich, the BOAC L-049 (or was it a 749) Connie at Singapore/Kallang, the QF "Bahrain Bomber" ---- and so on.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gazumped
Cowls unlocked should have been picked up by the engineer who signed it off, and presented it to the crew. S##t happens!
(if) the crew did a good job, Cowls unlocked should have been picked up on the walk around!
as expected Bigger s##t happens Once airborne.
(if) the crew did a good job, Cowls unlocked should have been picked up on the walk around!
as expected Bigger s##t happens Once airborne.
Last edited by slip and turn; 3rd Jun 2013 at 14:50.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sh!t happens, does it gazumped? Well that's alright then - no need to rethink anything because 'sh!t happens'. No need to check the things on your checklist properly because 'sh!t happnes'. Don't check the latches on the cowls because you might get your overalls dirty and anyway 'sh!t happens'. Overflying a major populated area is irrelevant because 'sh!t happens'. Let's not bother to try to design out avoidable human error because 'sh!t happens'.
You must work at Morton Thiokol.
You must work at Morton Thiokol.
Amazing read
WHBM, thanks for the link. Incredibly interesting and well worth the read.
The crew and ATC executed like a well greased machine.
A lot of good info there and plenty to think about. Sometimes there are no perfect answers, just the right choices.
The crew and ATC executed like a well greased machine.
A lot of good info there and plenty to think about. Sometimes there are no perfect answers, just the right choices.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever someone will pay me to do fun stuff
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say there was just one hole left in the cheese & all concerned were fortunate that the pilots did everything necessary to ensure, on this occasion, it didn't line up.
Or are you one of those people who thinks that pilots are little short of superhuman and whose role in life is to sort out other peoples' screw ups?
If you are going to comment using Jim Reason's model please, at the very least, understand what the holes mean!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: another hotel room
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pilots are a potential hole in the cheese!
Or are you one of those people who thinks that pilots are little short of superhuman and whose role in life is to sort out other peoples' screw ups?
If you are going to comment using Jim Reason's model please, at the very least, understand what the holes mean!
Or are you one of those people who thinks that pilots are little short of superhuman and whose role in life is to sort out other peoples' screw ups?
If you are going to comment using Jim Reason's model please, at the very least, understand what the holes mean!
Go back to flight sim!
Last edited by flapassym; 3rd Jun 2013 at 17:49.
Too much "reasoning" about cheese holes and what ifs. Unless you truly can define the various holes you really shouldn't be arguing about how many are left.
How close is not suitable for argument among non-professionals. What we are really interested in is the adequacy (not perfection since **** sill will happen) of the expected AAIB recommendations after they finish their investigation of contributing factors
How close is not suitable for argument among non-professionals. What we are really interested in is the adequacy (not perfection since **** sill will happen) of the expected AAIB recommendations after they finish their investigation of contributing factors
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Buckinghamshire
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try the AAIB and MATS 10.10.2 here (page 7) and Safety Recommendation 2005-069 (page 16).
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...1EV%201-06.pdf
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...1EV%201-06.pdf
In the full report it will be interesting to see what happened between the crew declaring PAN, with the intention of returning to Heathrow and subsequently ATC providing radar vectors to 27R.
Either:
ATC simply provided the vectors over central London, with no suggestion of alternatives. Hopefully we'd be told the reasoning behind ATC not following the procedures suggested in the N481EV report.
OR
The crew were given alternatives to Heathrow but elected to remain with their original request. ATC would then have complied with the crew's choice. Hopefully we'll find out the reasoning behind the crew's decision to goto Heathrow.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK, sometimes USA
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy, you build a new London Gateway airport in the Thames estuary
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't see a vast difference in overflying London for either LHR or the Thames estuary airport.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am noticing a striking similarity to the 1990 G-BJRT depressurisation.
In that incident, the primary cause was quickly identified as the failure of engineering to properly carry out a safety critical task.
The correct procedure was documented in company maintenance manuals, but not followed.
Have a read of the AAIB's summary report on G-BJRT.
Same operator, 23 years later - something to think about?
In that incident, the primary cause was quickly identified as the failure of engineering to properly carry out a safety critical task.
The correct procedure was documented in company maintenance manuals, but not followed.
Have a read of the AAIB's summary report on G-BJRT.
Same operator, 23 years later - something to think about?
Last edited by Sillert,V.I.; 3rd Jun 2013 at 19:46.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slip n turn
With your logic the Captain would have to get out of the aircraft after the baggage doors were closed and the refuelling finished and do a walk around to check up on everyone just before departure on every single flight. If another department is working on the aircraft just prior to pushback the flight crew have to trust them to do their jobs to a degree. That's just modern aviation. You can't know for sure that they have " done their own diligent external check", you have to trust that as professionals, they have done their job. You're living in a fantasy land.
It's going to be your aircraft when doors are closed. If you've been planted in your seat 45 minutes since you last had a look outside then manage the bloody thing by getting out and looking at it whilst you still have the chance so you know no other bugger fiddles with it again before you depart. If you don't know that the ground crew talking to you on pushback or their mate giving you the thumbs up and wave have done their own dligent external check on your aircraft too, and are competent to do it, then why are you leaving the apron?
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I want to ask a question and it is how do you feel the CAA and EASA is doing with regulating the industry and improving safety?
My reason for asking is related to the recent issues in Australia regarding the Pel Air accident its investigation which resulted in a very comprehensive Senate Inquiry into the failings of both CASA and the ATSB.
This Avweb link gives a pretty good summary
AVwebFlash Complete Issue
There is a forum running on the Australian section. Would be interesting to hear from some new voices.
http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...011-a-100.html
My reason for asking is related to the recent issues in Australia regarding the Pel Air accident its investigation which resulted in a very comprehensive Senate Inquiry into the failings of both CASA and the ATSB.
This Avweb link gives a pretty good summary
AVwebFlash Complete Issue
There is a forum running on the Australian section. Would be interesting to hear from some new voices.
http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...011-a-100.html
