|
ACARS Safety Issue?
Can anyone comment on the following document that was given to me? It seems to relate a serious safety concern and I wonder if those of you in industry share the concern.
Public Interest Issue ACARs is an automated system for monitoring and reporting airline on-time performance, introduced in 1988 and used internationally – by more than 120 companies. Airlines apply intense pressure to their own staff to achieve good ratings, and as a consequence it has apparently become common practice to use certain ‘tricks’ to fool the ACARs system into reporting better on-time performance. These practices violate aviation safety regulations, create safety significant risks to passengers and staff, and create a climate of disrespect for other safety regulations – the beginning of a very dangerous ‘slippery slope’ for commercial aviation safety. The ‘tricks’ ACARs detects that a flight has begun when all doors are closed and the aircraft parking brake is released. The system can be fooled by releasing the parking brake early before the aircraft is ready to push back, thus signalling a false departure time. ACARs detects that a flight has ended when any door is opened and the parking brake is applied. For safety reasons, doors are supposed to be opened only after all engines are shut down and the aircraft is safe to approach. The ACARs system can be fooled by momentarily applying the parking brake and opening a door prematurely, thus signalling a false arrival time. The consequences Both of these unauthorized practices greatly increase the risk of aircraft standing at the gate with the parking brake left off. In this situation the aircraft may or may not immediately move – it may be held stationary by the wheel chocks and/or the small ‘tug’ vehicle that is used for pushback. However it may spontaneously start to roll later, at any time. Most ramps slope slightly for drainage and a large aircraft fully loaded and fuelled weighs hundreds of tons. In an uncontrolled roll it becomes a massive slow-motion projectile that can injure or kill ground staff and collide with gate structures, ground equipment or other aircraft. It is also quite conceivable that a ground collision involving two aircraft could result, potentially injuring or killing many people. The evidence Gate incidents are a significant source of risk for passengers and crew: internationally, hundred of such incidents are reported every year, some of them involving fatalities. Uncontrolled or unplanned rollbacks represent a significant proportion of gate incidents. It is impossible to determine how many of these incidents are related to these ACARs-related practices, however various sources (such as online forums frequented by pilots) suggest that such practices are widespread and are a matter of concern to many airline staff. |
ACARS
Will show a return to stand prior to the doors being opened as the parking brake will be set, hence back on stand.
|
I don't think the incidence rate is too high. Flt crew can't see what/who is around the aircraft so SOPs usually stipulate requesting clearance from ramp to release brakes. I'm not saying it doesn't happen accidentally due to miscommunication but to deliberately try and fool the system? Any capt with that type of attitude at most majors would be asking for trouble, not to mention a rather unpleasant reputation among the rampees.
I'd like to see the forum where they state that practice is commonplace. |
OK, here we go then, I'll say it:
I've seen the "Out" event cheated by cycling the parkbrake Off/On after all doors closed many times - and even for a while it was done at the behest of the Company.....but on all occasions it was done in coordination with the pushback crew, the aircraft was fully closed up, hydraulics pressurised and a pushback tug was attached. It was usually done to 'give' the station an ontime departure when ATC was delaying clearance to push. Just to be clear - once the "Out" event has been registered the park brake can and usually was reapplied, reapplying the parkbrake does not trigger a "return to stand" message. OTOH I have never, ever, seen the "In" event being cheated - not sure there's any point since most Companies are only interested in publising the Ontime departures. Frankly this is a bit of a non-issue - what's the source document for this "scare"? There have been aircraft rollback incidents on ramps, sure, but often as not they've been the consequence of incorrect ground handling practices e.g. towing without hydraulics pressurised, incorrect chock placement, or even forgetting the chocks. I've never ever heard of an unintentional rollback "caused" by ACARS, perhaps someone can enlighten me? |
Ramp -- rolling WHEEL mishaps
RAMP rolling WHEELS mishaps
I doubt that you'll find any recorded RAMP mishaps with the ACARS mentioned as a factor. Maybe the main point of the notice was that pilots should understand more about RISKS to RAMP WORKERS -- since the PILOT's health isn't threatened by the early Brake Release. The biggest problem is that few of these sorts of cases were recorded in either the NTSB nor the FAA database (during past decades). Recall, there was FATAL ramp pushback mishap [21Aug00], not recorded in either database. During the past few years there is a new player in airline safety, OSHA, who may record some details after future mishaps -- but so far OSHA has not been a source for such information. Mostly, recorded injury cases have been at the end of the push-back, during or after the disconnect of the Tow Bar, eg: NTSB ... SEA08LA182 Here's another example of ROLLING wheels injury:... Eva Air ... Saturday, August 16, 2008 in San Francisco, CA ... Boeing 777-300, ... B-16710 Injuries: 1 Serious ... ... preliminary information ... On August 16, 2008, at 0202 Pacific daylight time, Eva Air 17, Taiwanese registry B16710, a Boeing 777-300, was being pushed back from the gate when a mechanic was pinned under the left nose gear at San Francisco ... ... an Eva Air mechanic and a Swissport ramp employee were pushing the flight back from the gate. The tow bar was then removed, the airplane came forward, and the mechanic was pinned under the left nose gear. Tow-bar discon a/c rolled The Board's website is "down" at this moment, here are some rough notes:** Report created 3/10/2008 ** IDENTIFICATION Regis#: UNK Make/Model: A319 Description: A-319 Date: 03/08/2008 Time: 1300 Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None [??] ... Damage: None LOCATION City: PORTSMOUTH State: NH Country: US DESCRIPTION WHEN THE TOW BAR WAS DISCONNECTED DURING THE PUSH BACK, THE AIRCRAFT ROLLED FORWARD AND OVER THE GROUND EMPLOYEE'S FOOT ... Delta L1011 / 27Mar97 LGA push-back, fatal: ramp worker (push crew) under NLG wheel [NTSB web site]. Here's another possible version of a RAMP mishap, that occurred near or about the "OUT" event: Frontier / 4Mar97 B737-201, N217US airplane was ready for pushback when the 'B' flight attendant told the 'A' flight attendant that a thru passenger had reported the cabin cleaning crew had mistakenly removed his child's stuffed animal and he wanted it returned. The 'A' flight attendant opened the forward entry door after the jetway had backed away from the airplane. Either losing his balance or not realizing the jetway had backed away, he fell 8 feet, 3 inches to the tarmac below, fracturing both wrists, his jaw, and sustaining a concussion. According to the company's chief flight attendant, the injured flight attendant violated company policy and procedures by opening the cabin door prior to the jetway being placed in position. P.C. = flight attendant's failure to assure that the jetway was placed in the proper position prior to opening the forward cabin entry door. [fall, L1 Door, jetwey, ramp; NTSB web site.] |
I'd like to see the forum where they state that practice is commonplace. Frankly this is a bit of a non-issue - what's the source document for this "scare"? |
IGh
Thanks for the info. You are absolutely right that pilots need to understand the risks to ramp workers. OTOH whilst I understand the rampies are often in a hurry if they stand on the stand centreline, chocks in hand, waiting for me to taxi the aircraft onto the gate, they'll be in for a long wait...and my pet peeve - stop diving under the ********* aircraft the moment it stops yet before both the engines have been shutdown and/or the anti-clunks have been turned off.....
dhc2.... well it's clearly not at the "cosmic/ need to know /UK/US Eyes only" level of confidentiality since you've already found another link to it and we are freely discussing it here. If your source is looking to raise safety awareness on the Ramp then great, but if he/she thinks he/she has discovered some shocking scandal or conspiracy along the lines of the grassy knoll I'm afraid he/she is going to be disappointed..when the article going to appear and in which newspaper? |
I'm not a journalist wiggy :) - just a "safety advocate". The document was given to me for further research. As a "safety advocate", I promise confidentiality to anyone who asks for help.
|
I fully agree with wiggy.
In the airline I fly for, I have seen a few cases where the "cheating" occurred on the "out" part of the ACARS, by just releasing the brakes in coordination with the ground crew (doors closed, ready to go, and ATC messing around). I Have never seen it on arrival, though. :E |
Delays - who cares...?
No need to "fake it" with the ACARS.
xxx If a flight is late leaving, it is late. Period. There are numerous delay codes that exist in our list of codes. xxx Such as - Delay consequence of late arrival of aircraft. Late departure due to strike of baggage handling staff. Delay due to late arrival of crew - Hotel to airport bus in traffic. Late departure because of handling (late boarding of passengers). Delay due to immigration, airport security clearance etc. Late departure due to delay for flight documents - Passenger manifest. Delay due to faulty ground equipment, i.e. pushback availability... Late departure due to F/As. Nose painting or nail polish drying. Delay due to ATC - Slot time for oceanic clearance at proper level. Late departure due to XX passengers joining from late flight XXX. Delay due to APU inoperative (by MEL) and waiting for airstart. Cargo flights - Delay due to freight late arrival (trucking). xxx No need to be "on time" and play ACARS acrobatics. Airlines never paid bonus to crew for ON TIME operations. You have a headache... about this...? I don't... xxx Above not applicable to BA flights - Always ON TIME. You fly third world airline... what do YOU expect...? xxx :E Happy contrails |
I hope it is not an issue with all airlines. However, it does seem that it could be/have been systemic for at least one ...
A senior manager of Flight Operations at a major airline stated in the Autumn of '03: "An aircraft parked at a gate will normally have two or three independent measures applied to keep it from moving, those being the aircraft parking brakes, wheel chocks, and a push tractor attached. If one or even two of these systems fail, the last should normally hold the aircraft in place. In these recent incidents, one or more of the independent systems failed or were applied incorrectly - each of which were preventable. In both cases the aircraft rolled. Fortunately, in one incident there was no injury or damage. In the second however, there was significant aircraft damage caused by impact with a cargo loader. Both cases had high potential for serious personal injury. These were classic James Reason "Swiss Cheese Model" failures that involved technical, process, human, and management failures; things were a "little off the rails", people were rushing to "do the right thing". "OVER THE LAST TWO WEEKS THERE HAVE BEEN THREE VERY SERIOUS PARKING INCIDENTS. IN ALL CASES PILOTS FAILED TO SELECT THE PARK BRAKE TO ON AS PART OF THE SHUTDOWN PROCEDURE. THESE INCIDENTS HAVE BEEN BOTH DANGEROUS ANDCOSTLY. PLEASE REVIEW THE APPROPRIATE STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES AND REDOUBLE YOUR EFFORTS TO PREVENT THESE INCIDENTS." "PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THE OSH POLICY COMMITTEE HAS RECEIVED SAFETY CONCERNS WITH REGARDS TO THE SETTING OF THE AIRCRAFT PARKBRAKE AND SUBSEQUENT ROLLBACKS. WITH HEALTH AND SAFETY IN MIND ENSURING THAT THE PARK BRAKE IS SET AS PER SOPS PROTECTS ALL THOSE INVOLVED. PLEASE BE GUIDED ACCORDINGLY" |
Hola dhc2window -
xxx You are correct for flight play with some airlines. With PanAm, we were paid - the greatest of - (a) Published scheduled flight time in OAG, or (b) Actual elapsed block to block time. xxx ACARS or not, departure time remains the time given verbally to departure station. The aircraft log sheet carries these times, DEP OUT/OFF, ARR ON/IN. These 4 numbers are our official records, as kept by F/E, signed by captain. They give you "block time" for pay, and "air time" for maintenance. xxx :ok: Happy contrails |
dhc2widow
The statements you quote all discuss brakes not being set - a real hazard - but they don't mention circumstances - why do you imply in your footnote that a wish to cheat ACARs was the reason. BelArgUSA In our outfit ACARs is the final arbiter when it comes to Out/IN and block times. We don't discuss times with the station and we dont sign for times....it's all ACARs |
ACARS
Sure - ACARS can be the final arbiter.
Until there is a discrepancy. As an example - paycheck. Like banks make mistakes (wrong entries) - beancounters make mistakes too. Easy to say "computer error" as an excuse - I call it "operator's fat fingers". Computers are very accurate and failproof. Fingers are NOT. xxx I logged my flying with a little pocket book. Entering just total block time, hours and tenth. And a flight log page number. A couple of times, some errors. Manual flight log entries became the reference. In agreement with you. It depends on airline management policies. xxx :} Happy contrails |
ACARS.... That's a method of getting information via text message for me to use when I need it. As far as I know it works via VHF or something.
|
Acars "safety" threats
"... ACARs is the final arbiter ... Out ... times.... it's all ACARs...." That does bring to mind a possible safety threat, where a station (non-licensed management) could impact SAFETY in a desire to preserve an ON TIME "out" event.The possible threat could result when a local agent, manager, or ramp-controller tells the pilots "its OK to RELEASE BRAKES", before ramp personnel are finished. The agent or manager (unlicensed) might have no idea of the other requirements that the pilots are obligated to observe (under-aircraft clear). The local station might want the pilot to generate the false OUT event, to make their local managers look better (extra $$ for on- time departures). |
This is a complete non story.
No pilot is just going to release the parking brake without speaking to the goundcrew and making sure the tug is connected first and the area around the aircraft is clear. As someone said, all you have to do is cycle the brakes off and on which involves applying manual brake pressure to over-ride the parking brake, then re-applying it which as no safety risk. No-one cares about arrival on time performance, in fact if anything I've seen people cycle the brakes AFTER arriving on stand but before the doors are opened in order to get more flying time logged towards the annual total, especially if there is a long delay before ground staff attend the aircraft. |
I'm not questioning the usefulness of the ACARS system itself. The concern is for pay/management practices surrounding use of the ACARS.
From the ASRS online database: ACN: 756059 (1 of 1)Time / Day Local Time Of Day : 1201 To 1800 Date : 200710 Place Locale Reference.Airport : ZZZ.Airport State Reference : US Altitude.AGL.Single Value : 0 Environment Aircraft : 1 Operator.Common Carrier : Air Carrier Make Model Name : A319 Operating Under FAR Part : Part 121 Flight Phase.Ground : Pushback Flight Plan : IFR Person : 1 Affiliation.Company : Air Carrier Function.Flight Crew : Captain Function.Oversight : PIC Experience.Flight Time.Last 90 Days : 260 Experience.Flight Time.Total : 12000 Experience.Flight Time.Type : 1500 ASRS Report : 756059 Events Anomaly.Non Adherence : Company Policies Independent Detector.Other.Flight CrewA Resolutory Action.None Taken : Unable Assessments Problem Areas : Company Primary Problem : Company Narrative 3 OUT OF 4 PUSHBACKS CAME WITH REQUEST FROM RAMP PERSONNEL FOR BRAKE RELEASE PRIOR TO CLRNC FROM CREW. AS THE CREW IS STRICTLY ADHERING TO THE FLT MANUAL PROCS FOR PUSHBACK, THIS REQUEST IS INAPPROPRIATE AND AGAINST WHAT THE COMPANY MGRS ARE SAYING THE RAMP PERSONNEL ARE TRAINED TO DO. RAMP PERSONNEL ARE OBVIOUSLY GETTING A DIFFERENT MESSAGE THAN THE FLT CREWS WITH POTENTIAL SAFETY IMPLICATIONS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: REPORTER STATED THAT GND PERSONNEL ARE RECEIVING BONUSES FOR ON-TIME DEPARTURES. AS A RESULT, COMPANY PROCEDURES ARE REPEATEDLY VIOLATED IN AN EFFORT TO GET CREDIT FOR PUSHING AN ACFT ON TIME. SINCE THIS TIME IS TRIGGERED BY PARKING BRAKE RELEASE, AN EARLY BRAKE RELEASE HAS BECOME A GOAL IN ITSELF. REPORTER STATED THAT THE GND CREW IS TO NOTIFY THE COCKPIT VIA HEADSET THAT THEIR PREDEPARTURE CHECK IS COMPLETE. THE CAPT WILL RESPOND WITH EITHER 'STANDBY,' OR IF HE HAS RECEIVED CLRNC, 'CLEARED TO PUSH, BRAKES SET.' IT IS THEN THAT GND WILL COMMUNICATE, 'ROGER, RELEASE BRAKES.' REPORTER STATED THAT HE BELIEVES THE GND CREWS ARE ATTEMPTING TO COERCE FLT CREW'S TO RELEASE THE PARKING BRAKE EARLY TO ACHIEVE THEIR ON-TIME GOAL. Synopsis A319 CAPT REPORTS THAT PUSHBACK CREWS ARE ASKING FLT CREWS FOR BRAKE RELEASE PRIOR TO PUSHBACK CLRNC AND IN VIOLATION OF COMPANY POLICY. |
Nah! Who's in charge of the park brake lever? I had to be quite firm with some ground crew who wanted me to release the park break just to get that message sent. I told them we are not clear to push, the park break is set and we're not moving until clear to do so. The delay is down to a SLOT! You understand? Reply "then that's your delay!".. Umm! NO. I don't give a stuff!
|
After "rumours" that a few crews had been releasing the brake early to fake an on time departure our ACARS was re-programmed to use park brake AND aircraft motion to trigger an out message.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 18:55. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.