Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Swiss evacuates in Thessalonique

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Swiss evacuates in Thessalonique

Old 30th Jul 2002, 03:37
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,441
nojacketsrequired
I will then say ''hi, I'm NJR and I suggest you only ask for a sealed bottle of water''!!!!!.

Carruthers
Don't let yourselves be identified guys, otherwise don't drink the cappuchino!!

What is this fascination with "poisoning" people? Are you fully capable of landing an airliner once the captain is incapacitated? Or do you really think that its funny to a PAX have a medical reaction to whatever you decide to put in his water?


Mutt
mutt is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 06:59
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: staines,uk
Posts: 82
Mutt,
The answer is no to all.No I would not poision anyone and no I cannot land an aircraft in the event of a pilot incapacitation as I am not trained to do so and I could'nt get through the door!!.

Please let me make it clear my statement was out of anger and frustration of some totally arrogant comments that to be honest I felt very derogatory towards cabin crew in the way they had been said.

I am certainly not above my station and do not get involved in power struggles with flight crew.As previously stated I fully understand and respect the chain of command as the chain of command is vital to a safe operation.

Any incharge crew member who believes they have as much power as the Capt/ F/O are living in a fantasy world.

I enjoy my job and have never even thought about becoming a pilot 1/ because I'm not bright enough and 2/ cabin crew is a great job.

I have a good working relationship with both flight and cabin crew and assure you I will keep it that way.
Apologies if the 'bottle of water' comment offended anyone
but was written in anger...sorry .

NJR.
nojacketsrequired is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 08:36
  #83 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,582
SP - since we are in the same operation, the following may be of use to you and your colleagues:-

Jet engines are designed to run with permanent, intense flames inside them. These flames can sometimes be seen inside an engine that is running normally from astern of the engine at night. On occasions, NORMALLY during engine start, over-fuelling can sometimes result in what is called a tail-pipe fire. Sometimes clouds of white smoke appear as the fuel is semi-burnt. The procedure to deal with this is to keep the engine running so that the excess fuel can be burnt and blown safely out of the exhaust. PLEASE ONLY ADVISE THE F/DECK if you see this. An evacuation initiated by you would result in the engine being prematurely shut down with possible disastrous consequences, the probability being that the burning fuel will impinge on part of the structure. Evacuation into running engines or from a moving aircraft (you didn't mean that, I trust??) causes tears. You cater for the time when there IS an engine fire during start-up by talking to the flight-deck if they haven't already contacted you. The Captain will decide (guided by you, of course) whether to evacuate the aircraft

Our company lay down GUIDANCE for c/crew as to what is to be considered 'catastrophic' (FCO4403 and SEP 737 11.2). There should be VERY FEW situations where c/c should ever intitiate evacuation on their own, and every option to contact the f/deck should be explored. Just about (NOT exhaustive, and disregarding post-impact) the only situation where I can see a c/c initiated evacuation as justified would be SIGNIFICANT fire with the aircraft stationary, with smoke or flames entering the cabin. As I say, though, not exhaustive.

You had better raise this with SEP on your visit next year? It seems there are a few gaps.
BOAC is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 09:15
  #84 (permalink)  
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Global village
Age: 51
Posts: 3,018
Unhappy

Perhaps the POSITIVE side of this post has been that the cabin crew assigned to me for the next 4 days, were - this morning - given a VERY thorough briefing on Tailpipe fires, and the FACT that they are a regular occurence on some (of the older) P&W`s.
For sure they should advise the cockpit if they, or a pax, notice fire emanating from an engine at any time - however during ground starts, the mechanic will more than likely (hopefully) also advise the cockpit crew.
(BTW, there is NO indication in the cockpit of a tailpipe fire.)

It sometimes (more often these days) alarms me as to some of the information that is being allowed to be fed to the cabin crew. Listed below are 5 items that the airline I work for have deemed reason for the cabin crew to evacuate the aircraft WITHOUT receiving instruction from the cockpit:
(i) Aicraft fire;
(ii)Dense smoke in cabin;
(iii)Unusual aircraft attitude during take-off or landing;
(iv)Sensation of unusual sounds or impact;
(v)Leakage of fuel from the wing.


Bearing in mind that our MOST senior girls (yes, they`re ALL girls ) have been F/A`s for a maximum of 4 years, and the attitude of some of the cabin crew posters here who have shown that they will do what they want, mixed with the combination of poorly defined evac. "triggers" is an extra consideration that cockpit crew need to take into account, to prevent UNNECESSARY PAX EVACUATIONS.

Either way, at the inquiry, the cockpit crew is going to wear it!

"Captain, did you order the evacuation?"
"Captain, did you contact the cabin crew and tell them NOT to evacuate?"

After all, sir, under LAW YOU are legally responsible for the aircraft, and its occupants, the crew and the correct discharge of their duty!
Are you not?!!
Kaptin M is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 11:28
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: staines,uk
Posts: 82
I am now finding some of the posts on this subject interesting and useful.
Thank you BOAC for the explanation on tail pipe fires and maybe examples of this type can be used in CRM to help we the cabin crew understand the aircraft a little better.

We all never stop learning so maybe a little more interaction between flight and cabin crew at CRM will help those cabin crew who may need to, define 'catastrophic' from non catastrophic.

Many thanks,

NJR.
nojacketsrequired is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 16:05
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 300
Cool

.... and which is why I said some posts ago that it might help if cabin crew could come a watch what happens in the flight-deck during some of our drills, either that or viewing some well-put-together videos of what we're doing (and why) during certain scenarios - in that it hopefully would show some measure of the timeline and actions of the FlightDeck crew - e.g. there's a good video of a simulated Decompression from the pilots view point, and I'm sure that there are others covering other events .......... so anybody got any good tips on these and / or where to source them from ?
Devils Advocate is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 17:51
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Pub
Posts: 204
Well the result of this thread is that we as crew now know what tailpipe fires are. I for one now know what to look for and will not be concerned! I will bring it up with SEP not next year but imeadiately as next year may be as good as a chocolate tea pot if we get a mistaken evacuation because of this phenomenon.
I for one would like to see a video on this phenomenon so we know EXactly what to look for - and how come we have never been told about this berfore? - have we all stumbled across a gap in the SEP training? I wiil bring it up on my next visit to JB house and hopefully get an answer sometime soon.

BUT if you have issues in about how we are trained as cabin crew - BRING IT UP WITH TRAINING! we are trained the way we are trained - we all have to make a decision on the day based on the situation and if we deem in catastrophic. There are no hard and fast rules so here in lies the problem. As NJR says we are all learning every day and I've learnt here today, but if you want to clearly deffine to crew what catastrophic is then I suggest you take it up with your relevent training departments as it seems it is a grey area!

Thank you BOAC for a very constructive post (that's not meant sarcastically) - we are trained not to evacuate a moving aircraft in our drills.

AND FINALLY!!! - I AM IN NO WAY THE FLETCHER CHRISTIAN OF THE FLYING COMMUNITY!!!

As I've said in a previous thread I am in no doubt who is on charge of the aircraft and anyone who has flown with me will tell you that is exactlly the case. I am not some 55 yr old CSD earning more than the Captain and the FO put together and been around since the Wright Brothers and thinks he is THE DADDY! I am a new forward thinking young Purser who gives a monkeys about the company and his PAX and wants everything to run smoothly and safely. I do not look for every opportunity to unsurp command or do my own thing without consulting the captain, far from it. I am a true advocate of CRM and believe it to be the way forward in preventing incidents that should not happen. I am trained by the company to behave the way the company wants me to.

You can draw your own conculusions about what people are like from what they type on here.... but - I'm sorry! - until you meet them, talk to them, and work with them, YOU HAVE NO IDEA!!!

This is a forum where people express their views, opinions, ideas and feelings. Sometimes these conflict as we have people at all ends of a varied spectrum on here (411A for exampe). I'm a headstrong guy who likes to be honest with his views and opinions and not afraid to express them on here or in person, but at the same time - ready to learn. I have learnt something here and will now pass it on my my crews in my briefings.

Now here's an idea - How about I start a thread on WHAT IS CATASTROPHIC? - If we get input from all sides perhaps we can come to a happy resolution to this? From there we can go to our respective companies and get some clearer guidelines set down? Sound good?

I hope so. I'll put it in the CRM forum.


Last edited by Shadowpurser; 30th Jul 2002 at 18:04.
Shadowpurser is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 18:20
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Earth
Posts: 495
WHAT IS CATASTROPHIC?

Thats easy. It's a phenomenon know as marriage.
Whiskey Zulu is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 20:29
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,332
Catastrophic in the FAR/JARs is hull loss with multiple fatalities.

(25.1309) advisiory mateial
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 20:50
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Earth
Posts: 495
Might be a bit late then. You lot can initiate an evacuation after the hull has been lost with multiple fatalities.

Wait for it, wait for it.
Whiskey Zulu is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 21:22
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,332
I?m very happy to see the positive responses above from those willing to learn. In response to an earlier request from an operator who did experience an unexpected cabin evacuation in response to an engine tailpipe fire. Video footage of what these may look like were provided for a training video and incorporated in the FAA Engine & Propeller Directorate report on PSM + ICR (Propulsion System Malfunction + Inappropriate Crew Response) report found under the following link.

http://www.faa.gov/certification/air...ial_topics.htm

The narration words used to support this video are provided below.

I?m sure that any updates to your crew training requirements will benefit from this and other similar material available from this website.

?Engine torching? or ?tailpipe fires? mostly occur during an abnormal engine start, but they may also occur after shutdown, or during other ground operations.
Although there may be no cockpit engine instrument indications, these events can be very spectacular when viewed from the ramp or cabin, and have been confused with an actual engine fire. The torching may be of short duration or it may last for several seconds. Note that the flame is confined to the tailpipe.
Flames may turn upward and threaten the wing if no airflow is maintained through the engine. And in some cases an EGT increase may be indicated on the flight deck. Simply cutting fuel flow while continuing to motor the engine normally extinguishes the flames. The flight crew depends on ground personnel to identify engine torching.
If you are told of an engine fire without any flight deck indications of a fire, follow the ?engine torching? procedure as outlined in your flight manual. This procedure will direct you to motor the engine and extinguish the flames; the regular fire procedure will not.
Do not perform the ?engine fire? procedure unless a fire warning indication occurs,
Executing the regular fire procedure may disable bleed air to the engine starter and prevent you from being able to motor the engine to blow out the tailpipe fire.
There have been cases where flight attendants or passengers have initiated evacuations due to engine torching. These unnecessary evacuations can be minimized by prompt flight deck and cabin crew coordination to provide passengers with pertinent information and to alleviate their concerns.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2002, 22:56
  #92 (permalink)  

Total Internal Reflection
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Between the Tropics
Posts: 46
May I say that this is a particularly informative thread for me. It has as much to say about issues of intra-aircraft attitudes, prejudices and relationships as it does (even if late) about issues technical.

I have learnt enough here about 'tailpipe fire / engine torching' to allay any fears of the 3 kids and spouse should we encounter the effect when we travel as SLF.

It seems to me that a tailpipe fire is simply the incomplete combustion of fuel. And it reminds me of our old high school chemistry classes when the Bunsen burner air supply was shut off resulting in a relatively large, wafting and somewhat harmless yellow flame.

I'm left wondering whether the nomenclature (tailpipe fire) is appropriate. It seems evocative of mayhem and disaster when in fact a normally operating turbine is a lot hotter!

Perhaps the effect could be called something else more in keeping with its benign nature. Say..'tailpipe ignition'? Any other suggestions?

In the meantime many thanks to all crew for numerous safe journeys through the skies. Heaven knows some SLF challenge professionalism, but here is a family appreciating you all.
rainbow is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.