RTO:Aircraft positonning
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: FL410
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my company is sop's and i believe this is right:
Stay on the runway, if the fire is right turn right, if the fire is left turn left, this is applicable only in headwind conditions, in tailwind conditions is exactly the opposite.
and if the captain wants to turn the wrong way, you are there to TELL him the right way!!!
Stay on the runway, if the fire is right turn right, if the fire is left turn left, this is applicable only in headwind conditions, in tailwind conditions is exactly the opposite.
and if the captain wants to turn the wrong way, you are there to TELL him the right way!!!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have tried this in the 737 simulator (turning into the wind, that is.) The problem is you must first use max braking capability to stop the aircraft. The operative word is "Stop" and park the brakes. You then have to decide whether to tackle the fire-warning immediately. Or do you open up both throttles and use nosewheel steering to "screw" the nosewheel around to position the aircraft with regard to any wind direction. In the simulator that takes valuable seconds and meanwhile you can bet your life the passengers are releasing their seat belts and scrambling for exits. Harsh nose wheel steering to full lock will quickly throw them all over the place, adding to the panic.
And don't even think about watching the ground speed and leaving the "screwing" of the nose wheel until you are about five knots. It is all about being wise after the event. The Manchester B737 event was ameliorated by the pilot's decision to clear the runway and get on the adjacent taxiway -which took valuable time. The massive fuel spill caused by a part of the engine putting a hole in the fuel tank is an event that could never have been foreseen and certainly not "practiced " before in a simulator.
Originally, Boeing criticised the pilot for not applying maximum braking and stopping straight ahead. In a later amendment to the FCTM I believe Boeing changed their advice to say apply max braking until you are sure the aircraft will stop within the remaining runway ahead. The pilot is then faced with the decision to stop with max braking ahead (assuming engine fire warning) - or ease up on the braking with a long runway. In the latter case, the risk is those extra seconds taken to reduce heavy braking because of excess runway ahead, could mean less time available to evacuate if the fire breaches the cabin (Manchester).
Opinions differ but one view is that when faced with an engine fire warning requiring an abort, the aircraft should be brought to an immediate stop with maximum braking regardless of the luxury of a long runway ahead. The crew may not know if the engine fire is severe, is a small fire or even if it is a false warning. Risking hot brakes the safest bet is to stop with maximum braking and then cross the next bridge. A cynic would say that after the event it is a monte that someone will try and prove the pilot did something wrong. All interested parties have their own agenda in aircraft accidents.
Harking back to the original discussion on whether to try and stop with regards to the prevailing wind at the time - then next time you are in a simulator give it a try. It is more difficult than you might think - especially if you have gone for absolute maximum braking until actually stopping. Every second may count when it comes to evacuating a cabin filled with heat and smoke.
And don't even think about watching the ground speed and leaving the "screwing" of the nose wheel until you are about five knots. It is all about being wise after the event. The Manchester B737 event was ameliorated by the pilot's decision to clear the runway and get on the adjacent taxiway -which took valuable time. The massive fuel spill caused by a part of the engine putting a hole in the fuel tank is an event that could never have been foreseen and certainly not "practiced " before in a simulator.
Originally, Boeing criticised the pilot for not applying maximum braking and stopping straight ahead. In a later amendment to the FCTM I believe Boeing changed their advice to say apply max braking until you are sure the aircraft will stop within the remaining runway ahead. The pilot is then faced with the decision to stop with max braking ahead (assuming engine fire warning) - or ease up on the braking with a long runway. In the latter case, the risk is those extra seconds taken to reduce heavy braking because of excess runway ahead, could mean less time available to evacuate if the fire breaches the cabin (Manchester).
Opinions differ but one view is that when faced with an engine fire warning requiring an abort, the aircraft should be brought to an immediate stop with maximum braking regardless of the luxury of a long runway ahead. The crew may not know if the engine fire is severe, is a small fire or even if it is a false warning. Risking hot brakes the safest bet is to stop with maximum braking and then cross the next bridge. A cynic would say that after the event it is a monte that someone will try and prove the pilot did something wrong. All interested parties have their own agenda in aircraft accidents.
Harking back to the original discussion on whether to try and stop with regards to the prevailing wind at the time - then next time you are in a simulator give it a try. It is more difficult than you might think - especially if you have gone for absolute maximum braking until actually stopping. Every second may count when it comes to evacuating a cabin filled with heat and smoke.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find quoting the mantra to yourself and even pre-takeoff briefing it is not enough. I have a procedure I follow turning onto the runway. Radar on, ensure transponder is switched on (that's dropped off the checklist!), lights on, quiet review of the wind, and I announce to the copilot 'if the LEFT/RIGHT engine has a fire, we will turn left/right as we stop'. That way, there is no doubt, or working out to do, and it is the last thing in our minds as we roll.
As for asking ATC about aircraft positioning in an RTO......is that serious?
As for asking ATC about aircraft positioning in an RTO......is that serious?
I think A37575 makes some very valid points.
It's all very well to brief "we'll turn left/right", etc. but we don't really cover how we are we going to do it.
A modern "heavy" using a dry runway with anti-lock going on fresh carbon brakes, full reverse and aerodynamic braking will probably decelerate at 1g or more. That's 60kts to stopped in less than 3 seconds. When are you going to initiate this manoeuvre? Too early and your partner-in-crime might think you've lost control. Too late and you're at a standstill. If you stop, then set off again, if you're obviously on fire (as seen from the cabin) an evacuation may already be in progress.
IMHO this is something that is talked about a lot since Manchester but rarely practiced. In a widebody on an average runway, you don't have to go far off the centreline to make it more difficult for the emergency services to get to you. I've heard some people suggest going right over to one side then bringing the aircraft back to the middle at an angle... Great idea but as pointed out, wasting valuable time in doing so if you are going to evacuate anyway.
I tend to agree that there is too much emphasis put on the very unlikely scenario of an engine on fire with a ruptured fuel tank. If this is the case, it's really not your day. If you do the engine fire checklist properly it'll probably go out 999,999 times out of a million. I also wonder about the airflow around a fuselage/wing when side on to the wind - there might be some sort of reverse flow that dragged the flames upwind anyway...
It's all very well to brief "we'll turn left/right", etc. but we don't really cover how we are we going to do it.
A modern "heavy" using a dry runway with anti-lock going on fresh carbon brakes, full reverse and aerodynamic braking will probably decelerate at 1g or more. That's 60kts to stopped in less than 3 seconds. When are you going to initiate this manoeuvre? Too early and your partner-in-crime might think you've lost control. Too late and you're at a standstill. If you stop, then set off again, if you're obviously on fire (as seen from the cabin) an evacuation may already be in progress.
IMHO this is something that is talked about a lot since Manchester but rarely practiced. In a widebody on an average runway, you don't have to go far off the centreline to make it more difficult for the emergency services to get to you. I've heard some people suggest going right over to one side then bringing the aircraft back to the middle at an angle... Great idea but as pointed out, wasting valuable time in doing so if you are going to evacuate anyway.
I tend to agree that there is too much emphasis put on the very unlikely scenario of an engine on fire with a ruptured fuel tank. If this is the case, it's really not your day. If you do the engine fire checklist properly it'll probably go out 999,999 times out of a million. I also wonder about the airflow around a fuselage/wing when side on to the wind - there might be some sort of reverse flow that dragged the flames upwind anyway...
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 30 West
Age: 65
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The quicker you stop, tell someone and let the professional services have full access to your aeroplane, the sooner the potential emergency will be contained - this is why the whole community work together and why we trust the fire and emergency services that when we call, they will come.
I believe that this is best done by stopping straight ahead, calling the emergency, doing the on ground emergency checklist and co-ordinating with the fire boss on 121.6.
It is what I brief, this is what I will do in the unfortunate event of it happening.
As a result of seeing what has happened previously and discussing things with members of the emergency services, I am sure that it is the correct approach.
I believe that this is best done by stopping straight ahead, calling the emergency, doing the on ground emergency checklist and co-ordinating with the fire boss on 121.6.
It is what I brief, this is what I will do in the unfortunate event of it happening.
As a result of seeing what has happened previously and discussing things with members of the emergency services, I am sure that it is the correct approach.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Australasia
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will Fire Services be Available?
There has been a lot said about positioning the aircraft to give the Fire Services best access. An admirable consideration, except when there are no such services or the response takes longer than you dream to be the case.
I plan for minimising the risk to the aircraft and the escaping passengers. I brief the RTO actions with and without a fire before I release brakes. Like A37575, I have also done it in the sim and trained it there also. Unlike A37575, I have never found it that hard nor is it that time consuming to position the aircraft so as to reduce the effect of any crosswind of the fire path or fire debris/sparks.
The opinions about passenger behaviour I do not share. First, if you are max rate stopping (and there is no sensible alternative!), they will be pinned in their seats by their seat belts. If you are at least partially into wind, even if all cabin discipline breaks down and the passengers decide to evacuate, you will have minimised the risk to them. In most cases, the passengers will be well into the evacuiation, controlled or otherwise, before you see a fire vehicle (if they are available).
We train and pay Captains to think about these situations on each and every occasion - there is trained reaction and process for RTO but no rote solution for positioning at the end.
I plan for minimising the risk to the aircraft and the escaping passengers. I brief the RTO actions with and without a fire before I release brakes. Like A37575, I have also done it in the sim and trained it there also. Unlike A37575, I have never found it that hard nor is it that time consuming to position the aircraft so as to reduce the effect of any crosswind of the fire path or fire debris/sparks.
The opinions about passenger behaviour I do not share. First, if you are max rate stopping (and there is no sensible alternative!), they will be pinned in their seats by their seat belts. If you are at least partially into wind, even if all cabin discipline breaks down and the passengers decide to evacuate, you will have minimised the risk to them. In most cases, the passengers will be well into the evacuiation, controlled or otherwise, before you see a fire vehicle (if they are available).
We train and pay Captains to think about these situations on each and every occasion - there is trained reaction and process for RTO but no rote solution for positioning at the end.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Middle East
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you are positioning the A/C into the wind you also have to consider the operation of the doors. As you know, the doors open outwards and it might be very hard for a C/A to open them, even in light headwind.
So, what to do?
So, what to do?
