Safety, CRM, QA & Emergency Response Planning A wide ranging forum for issues facing Aviation Professionals and Academics

Fire/smoke workload structure

Old 19th Nov 2021, 22:57
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: FL390
Age: 35
Posts: 168
Fire/smoke workload structure

I am interested of hearing your opinions on your structure on an non extinguishable fire or smoke (ENG, APU, cargo smoke, cabin smoke)

Letís say you complete your procedure and the fire remains. How do you plan on doing things?
Specifically on the delegation aspect. Itís the perfect time to delegate so you can earn time!

Aside from gathering latest weather.

Do you give controls and comms to the other pilot to prepare the approach while you handle NITS and PA if there is time? Then check FMS and do a quick brief and execution of the approach?

Or do you split your roads with delegating him to do the NITS and PA if time while you self prepare the FMS and then join together and brief to shoot the approach?

Or any other way or mix you like better? I understand that altitude and time to go is a factor to account in (especially you want to avoid PF to be heads down) and there is no correct or wrong answer, but whatís your main plan? I am amazed by the different opinions that I hear by my colleagues!
Lantirn is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2021, 02:17
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Seattle
Posts: 81
The scenario would dictate the actions you might take.

If you had an engine fire at V1 that was unextinguished then you would want to LAND ASAP with either a visual circuit or short radar vectors. The firefighting is done and the priority is landing.

On the other hand if you had unidentifiable smoke on as transpacific route ETOPS 180+ then the priority would be fighting the smoke/fire via an unwieldy checklist as it’s your only chance of survival bar ditching in an ocean.

In the first scenario it would be sensible for the skipper to be PF and demonstrate their finely honed manual handling skills after all these years to land as quickly as possible.

In the second it would be sensible for the FO to be PF and monitor the AP in the cruise and for the skipper to carefully run through every item on the checklists.

Also it’s useful to bear in mind that some items can be modified or dispensed with entirely. For example on the EFATO scenario the pax/crew are already secure for take-off so a NITS/PA can be dispensed with or done over the PA via a brief alert call.

Also briefing for an approach when you are downwind to land can be superfluous too - would you delay landing to finish talking about landing? (Although I have seen that in the sim )
BoeingDriver99 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 © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.