ssd ponders: I don't think the problem is unique to Airbus; any aircraft has this potential. A colleague did a safety study on a military aircraft: What happens if the aircraft bellies in, pilot is incapacitated, engine(s) still running, inlets just behind the cockpit, how does the fire brigade shut down engines to rescue the pilot? :ugh:

Quote ChristiaanJ
That one will do for the purposes of my question.
Thanks for your time and trouble.
Be lucky
David

barit1,
Perfectly plausible scenario, too......
Did your colleague come up with any ideas worth passing on?
Always good to have a few ideas before it happens, rather than have to try and cope when it happens.

Direct two or three foam branches into the intake. That'll do the trick.

Fire trucks
 

I believe this scenario would have to be dealt with at the scene, by what ever emergency response vehicles arrive. That would be the fire trucks would have to blow maximum, water and foam through the intakes. But this related to size of water hose volume, the engine thrust setting at the time....., I suppose many problems to be considered.
There were no escape slides used to get ten people out of this mangled wreck. They were all bound for the ripped and gashed openings of a severed cockpit. More dangerous getting out, than being involved in the actual accident, so it seems.
I gather no one used a seat belt on the ground and the cockpit would have more than two people in it, but what about the rest of the engineers.
Lots of questions left in the open on this one!
I think the "what if" scenario just arrived.

Flight International's page has an update to the investigation:

Wrecked A340 was unchocked, with engines at high thrust: Investigators

:uhoh:

Having engines still running is a very real problem for occupants and rescue services alike. Even my old Volvo had a (beta I think it was called) signal to allow the fuel pump to run.

There would have to be a tipple system for each engine to duplicate such a feature, but since Gerona and now this, I believe it would be worth it.

An short update has been published by the BEA
http://www.bea-fr.org/francais/actua...m20071120.html

Rough translation:
The aircraft was stopped; wheels were not choked. A last engine test, with brakes, was ongoing. The first CVR/FDR data show that the four engines were at high power since approx 3 minutes. The aircraft started to move and hit a blast deflector thirteen seconds later [...].

I'm still trying to understand the typical way that these tests are run.

Is somebody always stitting in a seat prepared to handle an emergency like an unexpected release of the brakes?

Do we still accept yesterday's report of somebody falling over a pedastal?

13 sec seems like a long time if the guy in a typical command seat is able to reach the throttles and put a foot on a brake. I suppose that they might have been playing musical chairs at the time, I ve even seen this happen in flight by pure accident with both pilots standing up at the same time and running into each other. I'm still puzzled why any such abnormal situation couldn't be corrected in a reasonable amount of time.

My old Ford Taurus got rear-ended a dozen years ago - not much structural damage, but the impact tripped the G-switch that disabled the fuel pump.

As luck would have it, there was a Ford dealer right across the street so I consulted with them about how to reset it. :}

My guess is that the bird was experiencing a bit of clear air turbulence and the real movement was not recognized.

London buses have a little hatch outside at the back marked "Emergency Engine Stop" . . . . !

...from another pilot forum:
 

FROM : AIRBUS FLIGHT SAFETY DEPARTMENT TOULOUSE
SUBJECT: A340-600 - MSN 856 - ACCIDENT IN PRODUCTION OUR REF.: F-WWCJ AIT 2 DATED 20th OF NOVEMBER 2007 PREVIOUS REF: F-WWCJ AIT 1 DATED 16th OF NOVEMBER 2007

THIS AIT IS AN UPDATE OF PREVIOUS AIT N°1 CONCERNING THE A340-600 PRODUCTION AIRCRAFT MSN 856 INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT IN AIRBUS PRODUCTION FACILITIES IN TOULOUSE ON THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2007 AT 17:00 LOCAL TIME.

THE FOLLOWING IS THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS ACCORDING TO THE RECORDERS, WHICH HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR RELEASE BY THE FRENCH INVESTIGATION AUTHORITIES (BEA).

FOR ABOUT 3 MINUTES BEFORE THE END OF THE EVENT, ALL FOUR ENGINES EPR WAS BETWEEN 1.24 AND 1.26 WITH PARKING BRAKE ON AND WITHOUT GROUND CHOCKS.
THE ALTERNATE BRAKE PRESSURE WAS NORMAL. (WITH PARKING BRAKE ON, BRAKE PRESSURE IS SUPPLIED BY ALTERNATE).

13 SECONDS BEFORE THE IMPACT THE AIRCRAFT STARTED TO MOVE. WITHIN 1 OR 2 SECONDS THE CREW APPLIED BRAKE PEDAL INPUTS AND SELECTED PARKING BRAKE OFF. THESE ACTIONS LED THE NORMAL BRAKE PRESSURE TO INCREASE TO ITS NORMAL VALUE.

2 SECONDS PRIOR BEFORE THE IMPACT, ALL 4 ENGINE THRUST LEVERS WERE SELECTED TO IDLE.
THE AIRCRAFT IMPACTED THE CONTAINMENT WALL AT A GROUND SPEED OF 30 KTS.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ANY AIRCRAFT SYSTEM OR ENGINE MALFUNCTION.
AIRBUS REMINDS ALL OPERATORS TO STRICTLY ADHERE TO AMM PROCEDURES WHEN PERFORMING ENGINE GROUND RUNS
ENGINE GROUND RUNS AT HIGH POWER ARE NORMALLY CONDUCTED ON A SINGLE ENGINE WITH THE ENGINE IN THE SAME POSITION ON THE OPPOSITE WING OPERATED AT A LIMITED THRUST SETTING TO AVOID DAMAGE TO THE AIFRAME
WHEEL CHOCKS ARE TO BE INSTALLED THROUGHOUT THE TEST.
YANNICK MALINGE
VICE PRESIDENT FLIGHT SAFETY
AIRBUS
...sitting there, full thrust, low gross weight. then i notice the brakes can't hold it. and then it takes 11 seconds till someone cuts the power?

Interesting news FCS explorer.

is there any news where the a/c is today? still parked at the wall? Further to all previous msg's, I find it unreal to read, that noone pulls the plug when this a/c started to move, being empty and full thrust.:ugh:

I felt the same until I considered what Loose Rivets said in post #191.

It made me think about the A/C shudder of running all 4 engines at high power and .....if nobody was looking out a window (after all there is no scenery to look at).

30kts criminey!!

so where in hell did the story about falling over a pedastal come from that was posted earlier:confused:

AIRBUS REMINDS ALL OPERATORS TO STRICTLY ADHERE TO AMM PROCEDURES WHEN PERFORMING ENGINE GROUND RUNS. ENGINE GROUND RUNS AT HIGH POWER ARE NORMALLY CONDUCTED ON A SINGLE ENGINE WITH THE ENGINE IN THE SAME POSITION ON THE OPPOSITE WING OPERATED AT A LIMITED THRUST SETTING TO AVOID DAMAGE TO THE AIFRAME.

So what does the Manual actually say?

Ref shutting down engines with no access to the normal methods:
Not really appropiate in this situation and certainly not in the cited overrun, pax on board sceinario, but I read of a bush pilot in Canada or Alaska who shut down the runaway PT6 on his Twin Otter by shooting it to death!

FCS Explorer, Tediek,

just to be strict on terminology: high power is not "full thrust"! The AIT said between EPR 1.24 and 1.26.

If the Trent 500 is anything like the V2500, EPR 1.25 would still be somewhat below Max Climb thrust. So quite a bit, but still well below "full", if I take it to mean MCT. A340-600 drivers could shed light on this.

I don't know if "full thrust" is defined at all. Is it MCT? TOGA?


Bernd

Bernd,

you wrote it, I thought it. No problem will look after this. :=

Lack of Chox is the same as lack of Seat belts, they both need to be fitted before they are needed.
.
However worth remembering Chox come in different sizes, if large energy is involved, suggest big Chox used.
.
Also to note, during Engine runs, Chox should be a little distance from tyres, touching the tyres has caused many aircraft to move.
.
Good to hear all involved getting better.
.
I hope Airbus has a Learn Culture, not a Blame one.