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

Lauda 320 UK report

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

Lauda 320 UK report

Old 6th Aug 2020, 19:35
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 344
Lauda 320 UK report

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/a...ncy-evacuation

2019 event
A0283 is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2020, 22:31
  #2 (permalink)  
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 80
Posts: 4,881
What are the potential legal burdens of the captains?
Loose rivets is online now  
Old 6th Aug 2020, 23:03
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,823
Don't get the question.

Report says cc were only put on alert but the senior still evacuated.
Superpilot is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 08:47
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: FL390
Posts: 62
There is a reminder here to everyone to consider how fraught the tension might be in the cabin after potentially even a minor (to us) event.
Fursty Ferret is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 11:06
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: under an ils
Posts: 19
What puzzles me about the report is how much it focuses on lessons learned about passengers taking their baggage, in opposition to the consideration given to how unprepared the senior was, and more importantly why was she so.
No hunt for blame, but regulators really should see a problem here, and I am afraid it is spreading through the industry.
ECENE is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 11:07
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 427
The only way to stop passengers evacuating with their carry-on baggage is to make them check it in. The majority of airlines now offer 'Hand-baggage only' fares so the consumer thinks he can get a better deal by carrying a smaller suitcase onboard. This behaviour is completely driven by commercial considerations and is patently to the detriment of Flight Safety.

As always the primary concern of regulators is the continued commercial success of the country's airlines. It will take another Manchester air disaster where NOBODY survives a runway evacuation before a civil-servant ends up in the dock for permitting such a commercially led situation to arise.
Magplug is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 11:38
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Neither here or there
Posts: 137
I know in a perfect world, our lives are more sacred than our belongings. But we need to think a bit more critically about why the bag collection thin is still happening and what we can do. Just picture it, a plane evacuates on the runway after an engine fire. Pax escape on to the adjacent grass. They're picked up by a bus and taken to the terminal. The fire is put out. There is no damage inside the cabin. Everything is safe...

How are the bags and coats collected from the aircraft and reunited with their owners? When does it happen? How long after the incident? I guarantee even most of us aviation industry professionals don't know the logistics of such an undertaking. What would really help is if passengers were educated about how the bag reuinion might work, because most have this fear that their...
  • Laptop
  • Tablet
  • Wallet
  • Naked pics of girlfriend
...will either be:
  • Stolen by some scumbag (let's face it, this even in a disaster is real)
  • Be burned/destroyed
  • Confiscated as part of some long investigation

A 10 second blurb on a video safety announcement (video screens, low cost should be forced to install them) might go some way to address.
CW247 is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 14:14
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,419
Exactly what is the point of dimming the cabin lights for night takeoff and landings? The folly of this policy was demonstrated when the report said visibility in the cabin was poor because the lights were dim. It certainly has nothing to do with preserving night vision for any night emergency evacuation since any pin point of bright lighting such as that used with individual seat reading lights on, destroys night vision instantly.

The FA's don't go up and down the cabin telling people to switch off their reading lights do they?. In an airliner you can bet the galley lights will be left on for takeoff and landing so that destroys the night vision of the nearest FA.
It is supposed to be good sense to count the number of seats ahead or behind you to the nearest exit. With a dimmed cabin that is difficult particularly for those passengers that need glasses even in bright light.

The pilots will have no night vision since that is already shot by bright runway and taxyway lights and landing lights. Normally, emergency lighting illuminates escape slides so that destroys night vision before you even go down the slide. So night vision as an excuse for dimming of cabin lights for emergency evacuation simply does not add up.

Far better to have cabin lights on bright to for takeoff and landings at night. At least the nearest emergency exits can be easily seen at leisure a long way off right up to the moment to power being cut (for whatever reason). Full night vision adaption takes at least 20 minutes . As time goes by, however, we gradually become able to detect a room's contents. This phenomenon is known as "dark adaptation," and it typically takes between 20 and 30 minutes to reach its maximum, depending on the intensity of light exposure in the previous surroundings.

It used to be policy for cabin lights to be dimmed so that passengers could enjoy the view of city lights. Well that was the usual reason given over the PA. It was never about night vision.

If night vision adaption is the official reason for dimming cabin lights then why not have total darkness in the cabin for quicker night adaption . Clearly that would not appeal to frightened passengers. Far better to consign night vision adaption to an Old Wives Tale and have cabin lights on Bright so passengers can read their briefing cards up to the last minute and see where things are including nearest exits. FA's can also see if any panicky passenger is standing up prematurely.
A37575 is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 15:08
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,460
I think you will find:

With dimmed cabin lights, you will have more night vision than you would with a bright cabin.

With a bright cabin, the emergency door markings and lane markings to those doors will be much less visible than they will be in a dimmed cabin. If there is a crash, who will dim the lights after the crash? The CC next to the switch panel might be incapacitated.

If you are walking along a country lane at night and one of your colleagues is using a torch - that won't destroy all your night vision unless they shine it right into your eyes. Similarly, a tightly focussed reading light in an otherwise dim cabin, or the runway approach lights at night, will not completely destroy your night vision. Whereas, a bright cabin or cockpit most certainly will. Imagine getting to a door and having to jump out onto a slide without being able to see anything and not being able to see clearly for several mins.

Re seat rows, you don't need to see clearly to count the rows - you can do it by feel. Maybe you have not done exercises in smoke filled cabin trainer rigs, but pilots and cabin crew have.

If the PA told passengers the dimming was to "enjoy the city lights", that was so as not to alarm them with the real reason.
Uplinker is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 15:29
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,075
In the UK:

CAP 789 - Requirements and Guidance Material for Operators

15 Cabin Lighting

15.1 The dimming of interior cabin lights, particularly when taking off and landing at night, is recommended
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 17:30
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 954
The other (and more important) reason for dimming cabin lights is to give the cabin crew a better chance of seeing and assessing the outside conditions through that tiny window to determine if an exit is safe to use - or not. I can't recall which one but there was an accident report done several years ago which identified problems seeing outside because of the brightness of the cabin lighting. This led to the dimming of the lights being SOP in most of the world.
J.O. is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 21:50
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 427
I tend to disagree that dimming the cabin lights makes no sense. For the experiment, I recommend that you try to leave only the emergency lighting on next time you have a couple of spare minutes on the ground at night. It's not even close to the normal cabin lights in terms of illumination. And the procedures assume the worst-case scenario, in which normal lighting becomes unavailable on the ground for whatever reason. The slide lights are not a culprit either as they are not directed into the eyes of descending passengers. Their purpose is to illuminate the area right in front of the slide so that people have some idea of what they will be stepping onto once they jump off the slide and start running away from the troubled aircraft.
PilotLZ is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2020, 22:24
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the Old Folks' Home
Posts: 399
Most passengers do not understand that when they get into an airplane, they are entering into a survival situation and if the airlines were to publicize that, the public would go berserk. I have seen passengers remove billfolds and even passports from their pockets when sitting down. Then, even in non-emergency situations, they will leave those items behind yet they are spring loaded to get that suitcase from the overhead. There's no such thing as a rational passenger.

Smilin_Ed is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2020, 13:10
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,183
Thumbs up

Quote from an FA in the official report:

She attempted to contact FA3 at the rear of the aircraft, initially without success. She reported that it felt like a long time that she was trying to contactFA3. There was confusion while they attempted to communicate using a combination of the interphone, hand signals and the PA. The darkness in the cabin made the use of hand signals difficult and she could not see well enough to understand signals given by FA3.
Unquote.
Interesting point. With dimmed cabin lighting the length and width of the cabin affects the distance passengers and cabin crew can see. More obvious in a large aircraft than a A320/737 type. A dimmed cabin makes use of hand signals difficult. Maybe FA should be equipped with lighted wands like police manning booze buses and learn semaphore....
Tee Emm is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2020, 14:09
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London
Posts: 172
Originally Posted by ECENE View Post
What puzzles me about the report is how much it focuses on lessons learned about passengers taking their baggage, in opposition to the consideration given to how unprepared the senior was, and more importantly why was she so.
No hunt for blame, but regulators really should see a problem here, and I am afraid it is spreading through the industry.
Yes there is - page 25.
The SFA had recently been promoted after a relatively short time as an FA. During her time as FA, there was a period where she did not fly due to the operator’s bankruptcy. As a result, she did not meet the operator’s requirement for promotion in terms of duration of operational experience. Her initial training course as an FA was within a large group which may have resulted in aspects not being fully explained or understood by all that attended. The pressure to have staff operationally available for flights after the bankruptcy and change of operator meant that the subsequent training for SFA was purely theoretical and short in comparison to the operator’s more recent practice. These factors may have meant that the SFA was not well prepared for her role in the emergency.

All FA practical training for emergencies involved a practice evacuation. None of them had practiced a return to normal operation. This may have resulted in a false expectation that all emergencies would result in an evacuation.

Overall, it seems that the SFA’s emotional response to the emergency was aggravated by her general inexperience and the communication difficulties the FAs encountered. Despite meeting regulatory requirements, there were weaknesses in her training that meant she was not well prepared for the situation. Together this resulted in an overwhelming ‘flight’ response in which she felt the need for herself and everyone else in the cabin to escape the situation as quickly as possible. She did not contact the pilots and ended up commanding an evacuation. The operator has undertaken to implement a range of improvements to FA training and to instruct FAs to attempt to establish communication with the flight deck before commanding an evacuation.
possel is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2020, 08:45
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 516
Locking overhead bins

Hopefully the recommendations made by the AAIB in their report will lead to EASA introducing regulations mandating the locking overhead bin solution. It seems to me to be the only practical way of stopping passengers evacuating with their luggage.

As for dimming the cabin lights, it serves multiple purposes. Yes, it aids in developing a form of night or low light vision, but it also reminds passengers that they can expect the exterior of the aircraft environment to be dark. Air travel enables people to cross multiple time zones and international travellers may not always be aware of the night/day situation. Finally, the CC need visibility out of the aircraft prior to deploying doors and slides. A darkened cabin during the hours of darkness enables them to see out of the windows.
asdf1234 is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2020, 17:52
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,075
Originally Posted by asdf1234 View Post
Hopefully the recommendations made by the AAIB in their report will lead to EASA introducing regulations mandating the locking overhead bin solution.
I don't think it will. The AAIB stopped short of explicitly recommending lockable bins.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2020, 23:25
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 392
Until the Regulators and airlines stop treating cabin crew as "trolley dollies" and as a way of generating ancillary revenue then this sort of event will continue to happen. The primary purpose of the cc is to ensure the safety of the passengers. That requires more than firehosing them with information within the absolute minimum of time and setting high standards for practical and theory exams. Its not going to happen because it costs too much. The main reason the SFA called an evacuation was pure fight or flight and she chose flight. The best way to suppress this response is through effective training and careful selection of personnel. To allocate the SFA role based on who is senior on the day is crazy.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 05:21
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: 5Y
Posts: 497
How much recurrent training and evaluation do CC get? And does it involve realistic decision making in complex and confused environments, or just 'procedures'?
double_barrel is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 11:25
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,841
Two days annually for our lot.

Some of that training/eval was scenario based, done in mock up cabins and often involved comms via interphone with "tame" flight crew sat in another room or another cabin in the mock up.

Results were often interesting to say the least.

Last edited by wiggy; 10th Aug 2020 at 15:45.
wiggy is online now  

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.