A320 pack failure.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: right here inside my head
Age: 65
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you asking what the MEL says, or are you asking for a sensibly cautionary, judgement call, style decision after the MEL says go?
If the MEL says go, it'd better have a few provisos that will include terrain hight, fuel quantities and things to consider should the other side go for a dump.
Anyway, that's where your answer is, if that'll do.... ETOPS, I'd think it's an about face, back to the gate.
In any case, don't push the throttles to the go band before at least finding out what the book says.
If someone tells you otherwise, contrasting what the book says, quit and find a safer employer.
If the MEL says go, it'd better have a few provisos that will include terrain hight, fuel quantities and things to consider should the other side go for a dump.
Anyway, that's where your answer is, if that'll do.... ETOPS, I'd think it's an about face, back to the gate.
In any case, don't push the throttles to the go band before at least finding out what the book says.
If someone tells you otherwise, contrasting what the book says, quit and find a safer employer.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Roma
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when doors are closed obviously references come from QRH. Anyway limiting cruising level up to FL315 is led by good judgment criteria.
Last edited by Pennellino; 22nd Aug 2011 at 22:03.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Roma
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ECAM will state Air Pack 1(2) Fault: Pack (affected) ....OFF and in Status you'll see Inop Sys: Pack 1(2)
after having referred to QRH,Computer Reset,C/B and having found nothing to deal with you definitely give a look to MEL. I'd be go minded, limiting FL315 according to fuel required and loaded, weather, kind of route and destination (obstacles,not assisted maintance places and so on)
after having referred to QRH,Computer Reset,C/B and having found nothing to deal with you definitely give a look to MEL. I'd be go minded, limiting FL315 according to fuel required and loaded, weather, kind of route and destination (obstacles,not assisted maintance places and so on)
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Rome
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How would you handle a pack 1(2) fault before takeoff ?
Etops and non etops
Thanks.
Etops and non etops
Thanks.
Non ETOPS : turn the pack off as per ecam. Continue your flight as planned. Note : Be sure that at your destination you have someone able to put the pack in the MEL.
ETOPS : You need both of them, so request an alternate non etops routing according to your fuel or if you get a pack overheat wait until it will eventually cool down.
EDIT : In case the failure happens during taxi out the MEL are no longer applicable therefore you can continue with a single pack even in an ETOPS scenario. The decision is yours.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Last edited by I-2021; 25th Aug 2011 at 16:29. Reason: Correction
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pack failure before take-off is not an en route mel any more, well at least for the new metals. One has to go back to the back for maintenance action.
There are still some old airbus, in which it is an en route mel. Once under mel, there is no flight level restrictions, as far as your speed brakes are operative.
Just flew in one of them, with 1 pack under mel, last night.
Still fresh.
There are still some old airbus, in which it is an en route mel. Once under mel, there is no flight level restrictions, as far as your speed brakes are operative.
Just flew in one of them, with 1 pack under mel, last night.
Still fresh.
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Formerly of Nam
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to back up Hotrod yes that's correct. However there's no
restriction for the Co MEL to impose the FL315 restriction on
the newer ones if it sees fit. I flew a newie not long ago which
had this limitation in the TL.
Why I don't really know.
I'd be very twichy going over shark-ridden waters on a dark
and stormy night. A long ETOPS trip likely means you are
limited on fuel anyway, and the FOB at ETP2 is probably a lot
less than you'd like in the all-engine depressurised case.
restriction for the Co MEL to impose the FL315 restriction on
the newer ones if it sees fit. I flew a newie not long ago which
had this limitation in the TL.
Why I don't really know.
...you can continue with a single pack even in an ETOPS scenario. The decision is yours.
and stormy night. A long ETOPS trip likely means you are
limited on fuel anyway, and the FOB at ETP2 is probably a lot
less than you'd like in the all-engine depressurised case.
Slasher
You said:
'However there's no
restriction for the Co MEL to impose the FL315 restriction on
the newer ones if it sees fit. I flew a newie not long ago which
had this limitation in the TL.
Why I don't really know.'
The post immediately above yours says:
Once under mel, there is no flight level restrictions,as far as your speed brakes are operative.
You said:
'However there's no
restriction for the Co MEL to impose the FL315 restriction on
the newer ones if it sees fit. I flew a newie not long ago which
had this limitation in the TL.
Why I don't really know.'
The post immediately above yours says:
Once under mel, there is no flight level restrictions,as far as your speed brakes are operative.
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Rome
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd be very twichy going over shark-ridden waters on a dark
and stormy night. A long ETOPS trip likely means you are
limited on fuel anyway, and the FOB at ETP2 is probably a lot
less than you'd like in the all-engine depressurised case.
and stormy night. A long ETOPS trip likely means you are
limited on fuel anyway, and the FOB at ETP2 is probably a lot
less than you'd like in the all-engine depressurised case.
It was just for the sake of what you can or cannot legally do but common sense is always a great tool eheh.Cheers.