Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Search the maintenance guides for answers to 99.999% of Omega questions

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - LC0112G

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 164
16
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 05 January 2024, 17:12:20 »
I've read elsewhere that this is the 8th time a FADEC engine has failed to shut down (or respond to commands to shut down) during an incident. Basically the engine control electronics tries to keep the engine going in the last commanded state in the event of lost coms. In the QF1 Singapore A380 event, it took the fire brigade 3 hours to eventuallly 'drown' the engine in water/foam before it stopped.

There is now some doubt about the evacuation timings. There is onboard video of PAX in the rear cabin running forwards through empty front cabins as the fire brigade foam the wing/engine/fuselage areas. Initial reports were that the first fire appliance arrived about 6 minutes after the plane stopped. If that's correct it's far too long - The last survivor from the Manchester 737 was carried out (by a fireman) at about 5:37 from the alarm being raised. My understanding is/was that airport fire services are supposed to reach the scene of an on-airport incident in 3 minutes.

Also AIUI the CVR and ADR have not yet been found. Another problem with letting the aircraft burn to the ground. They are very very rugged devices, but may not survive 5-6 hours in an intense fire. Worrying.

17
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 05 January 2024, 11:34:35 »
https://youtu.be/LNmeTHY1m5g?si=_n4e8DgD7-6U7HlO

Found the footage I was looking for. Attendant clearly holding the handset either waiting for an answer or actually using it. The pinkish light in the exit sign above her is illuminated suggesting a connection between that handset and another.

And that video also shows the L4 exit slide at time 2:50. Yes sliding down that is better than simply jumping out the door and hitting the ground 7m later, but I maintain you can't evacuate 25% of the pax down that slide in 90 seconds without causing significant injuries and possibly deaths. And as you rightly say the back of the plane is usually more packed with scum class pax so in a similar future evac L4/R4 will be the closest "usable" door for the majority of the PAX.

Yes given no other choice I'd use it, but that's not to say we shouldn't learn from this and at least think about how things might be made (even) safer.

18
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 05 January 2024, 00:22:37 »
To your Man maths...

All gear down. D1 5.09m, D4 5.2m, inclination 0°.
Nose gear collapsed. D1 2.54m, D4 6.99m, inclination -4.74°
Main gear collapsed. D1 4.98m, D4 2.9m, inclination +2.37°.
All gear collapsed. D1 5.4m, D4 2.24m, inclination +3.55°

Figures for the -1000 of a particular configuration, and assumes a flat level surface... (a base line can't account for every what if).
Ok, so worst case D1 is 31.5 degrees. Worst case D4 is 48.4 Degrees. If they put a 10.25m slide (same as D1) on D4 then the angle comes down to 42 degrees - still too high IMHO but a lot better.

There must be some ICAO figures somewhere for slide lengths vs height - probably calculated from injury statistics for various angles/heights. If not, then what not have 80 degree slides to save weight on a rarely used item?

And in the video of the evacuation from outside, L4 appears to be perfectly useable as demonstrated by people using it and walking away ;)

One of the videos I saw showed someone late in the evacuation - perhaps the captain? - basically dropping down the rear chute and landing on the tail end of it like an airbed. Try that with 100+ people in 90 seconds and you'll end up with people soup. Other reports (which may or may not be correct) were that the rear cabin crew were sending people to the front door slides because of the steepness of the drop. Will be interesting to see how many people used the rear slide versus the front two, and why. That info may be in the final report.


19
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 04 January 2024, 22:58:02 »
Ok. Airbus figures.... https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/2021-11/Airbus-Commercial-Aircraft-AC-A350-900-1000.pdf

So worst case - the dash1000 - front slide length 10.25m, rear slide length 9.35m  (2-8-0 Page 2) . Front sill height 5.05m, Rear sill height 5.29m. (2-3-0 Page 10) So angle of dangle when standing normally on all U/C is 30 degrees front and 34 degrees rear.

Nose wheel is 32.5m ahead of the MLG, 4.63m behind the nose and about 2.9m tall.(2-7-0 Page 13)
D4 is 59.53m behind the nose, and therefore 22.4m behind the MLG. (2-7-0 Page 5)

If the nose wheel 'fails' and the thing ends up nose down arse up, I think the trigonometry says the rear sill ends up roughly 2m higher - or about 7.29m up - assuming it's still on it's MLG. For a rear slide of 9.35m that's an angle of dangle of 51 degrees.

More difficult to calculate for a nose up arse down, but I'd be surprised if it's much better.



20
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 04 January 2024, 22:29:20 »
Oh and if you want a meal choice, pre order it at least a week ahead. :y

Funny you should say that. LHR->VCE next weekend on BA. Can't see the caviar and salmon starter with Wagu beef main option in my scum class booking though. >:D
I don't think even First get Wagu beef ;D

You should now get a choice of sweet or savoury complimentary snack and a napkin. There's a choice of sandwiches/hot handheld snacks available to be pre-ordered. Pre ordering is better than waiting to see what's on board.

Which tastes better - the sweet/savoury snack or the napkin? :)

21
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 04 January 2024, 21:07:52 »
Oh and if you want a meal choice, pre order it at least a week ahead. :y

Funny you should say that. LHR->VCE next weekend on BA. Can't see the caviar and salmon starter with Wagu beef main option in my scum class booking though. >:D

22
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 04 January 2024, 21:03:18 »
#2 - Yes if a plane ends up resting on it's engine nacelles rather than main undercarrage it's likely to tip backwards (particularly B737!). Similarly older planes (B707) had a habit of doing it on the ground, and KC-135's still have a ground prop inserted under the tail when parked.

But that's really not the point. With these very long fuselages if the plane ends up nose high or tail high then 1L/R or 4L/R ends up a very long way above ground. Yes it's still better to jump onto a slide inclined at 60 ish degrees (rather than a more normal 45 deg), but quite severe injuries are going to result. The PanAM case says 6 serious back injuries, and there are also a few injuries in this A350 case (although accepted it's unclear if they were from using the rear slide).

I would be disappointed if the regulators didn't at least look at extending the length of the 1L/R and 4L/R slides on this and similar long fuselage planes. IMV we got lucky with this crash If 90+ PAX (one quarter of them) had been forced to use the 4L slide in 90 seconds I reckon we'd be looking at a lot more injuries - some very serious.

23
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 04 January 2024, 20:47:32 »
#1 - I understand and accept all your points. I can understand why the crew may want to keep the PAX inside the aircraft whilst external fires are dealt with by the fire crews - which may explain the initial 8 minutes before first doors open. However, 10 further minutes to clear the cabin via 3 of the 8 exits? IATA specs are 90 seconds through half the available exits. Obviously 3 is less than half, but still, 10 minutes?

AIUI there was a failure of the internal intercom so crews were communicating through megaphones. The front crew (1L/1R) were taking instructions from the cockpit. The rear crew (4L/4R) couldn't hear that, and were basically waiting for instructions.

Anyway, whether the evacuation decisions and delays were 'acceptable' will no doubt form a large part of the accident investigation report, and thankfully in this incident they don't appear to have had any adverse effects.

24
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 04 January 2024, 18:38:25 »
To answer most of your questions are you familiar with CCOM as a concept?

Not an FLA that I'm familiar with, and google doesn't help. I assume it's summut to do with Command and Managment. Trouble is PAX that haven't read the emergency card certainly won't have any knowledge of CCOM.

25
General Discussion Area / Re: Haneda incident.
« on: 04 January 2024, 16:26:11 »
It's seemed fairly obvious to me from early on that the Dash8 entered the runway without clearance, and that ultimatley is the root cause. Not that there aren't other contributory factors of course.

However, what's done is done, and the important thing is what lessons can be learnt. Couple of things that strike me as being in your immediate area of expertise are....

1) Evacuation of the A350 didn't start till 8 minutes after the aircraft came to a halt. It then took 10 minutes to complete. Now I understand the reluctance to disgorge 360+ PAX from a 'safe' environment inside the aircraft to outside when there is fire on the ground and engines are still running - but once the fire brigade turn up and start hosing foam everywhere - I think 18 minutes to get everyone out starts to look a little suspect.

2) Nose wheel failure/collapse isn't *that* uncommon. It appears this renders the rear emergency slides basically unusable - the aircraft's ar5e is so high in the air the slides are hanging not far off vertical.

3) There needs to be a way for ground based fire and rescue to cut the fuel from a free running engine. This was a problem in QF1 at SIN, and it was a problem with the starboard engine here. Having an engine run on - even at idle power - whilst PAX are running about like headless chickens won't end well. It also reduces the number of useable emergency exits dramatically.

4) Allowing the airframe to burn out - hmm. In an emergency it is drummed into you that you leave all hand luggage behind. Yet we regularly see PAX (in the west anyway- though not in this case) ignoring this and walking away with their hand luggage. So you're held on the aircraft for 8 minutes - you've got valuables in your hand luggage - and you know they'll let the plane burn to the ground. Like it or not - PAX will modify their behaviour in light of this. I already keep passport, keys and wallet in my pockets on flights for this very reason.

26
General Discussion Area / Re: What has P*ssed you off today?
« on: 04 January 2024, 15:58:59 »
I'm well aware how ADSB works. I was making a comment on the quality of the Sky reporting that postulated the above, and I'd be very surprised if any aircraft, military, civil or other, was allowed to operate from an international commercial airport without some form of EC.

I wouldn't be surprised. Many of the Japanese airports are dual use Military/Civil (Ok - not Narita, Haneda, Nagoya). Chitose/Sapporo is one such airport (from where the A350 departed)

Fighter jets in particular rarely have Mode S, and even those that do usually have it turned off. Yes they do also have sophisticated military IFF and that usually is turned on, but that won't show up on a civil airports ground SSR.

However, in this instance the Dash 8 did have Mode S, and it was turned on and operational. Therefore it should have shown up on the airports ground SSR, although it would not show up on things like FR24. Which I accept is piss poor reporting by Sky and others.


27
General Discussion Area / Re: What has P*ssed you off today?
« on: 03 January 2024, 12:14:06 »
I understand where you're coming from, I suspect that we do it for fatigue management purposes on longer sectors rather than ETOPS.

It's the little details that make the difference, and had anyone in the flight deck of the Dash 8 looked right, they should have seen the A350 on finals and could have clarified their clearance, although that might not have been a culturally 'correct' thing to do.

But it will all come out in the wash.

Latest 'rumours' are that...

1) The Dash8 had been lined up on the runway for 45-60 seconds before the impact. If correct, then even if the co-pilot had looked up the approach before entering the active, there would have appeared to be space/time - the A350 would have been 2-3 miles away which is fine in VFR conditions.

2) Dash 8 strobes were not on, because SOP is to turn them on only once take of clearance is received. TO clearance was not issued.

3) The A350 and Dash 8 were on different Tower Frequencies. These may or may not have been bandboxed (joined transmissions so one freq can be re-heard on the other). If they were not bandboxed, then neither plane would have been aware of clearances issued to the other.

4) Some runway and taxiway lighting NOTAMED as in-op - Specifically the STOP markers at the intersection of C5 and RWY.

5) ATC clearances in English perhaps mis-understood by non native English speakers.

Does sound like the holes in the cheese are lining up. All very sad - the sort of thing that shouldn't happen, but there for the grace of god...

28
General Discussion Area / Re: What has P*ssed you off today?
« on: 03 January 2024, 10:32:25 »
We operate our 350s with three flight crew... An extra pair of eyes is never a bad thing.

But "you" don't operate A350's on domestic routes. I did about a dozen flights in Japan a decade or so ago - and all were on B747-400's. They have a very high passenger rate between relatively close cities. Basically no A320 sized (180-200 pax) commuter stuff - it's all done with 350-400 seat B777/A350's even on short sectors. No need for ETOPS style crewing on that.

29
General Discussion Area / Re: What has P*ssed you off today?
« on: 03 January 2024, 10:12:42 »
It's been suggested elsewhere that the Dash 8 was turning into the runway a ways along it for a short take off (the Dash 8 being a pretty effective STOL aircraft) just as the 350 main gear touched down. Effective they dropped the nose gear into the back of the Dash 8.

Some variables which depend on how the 350 was configured for landing and some will be airline rather than type specific...

If the thrust reversers on the A350 have an auto mode, then once the mains touched, then the WOW system would have automatically pulled the throttles back and deployed the reversers... At which point TOGA override would have been impossible. (This is one thing that Ryanair flight crews seem to do quite often that is actually quite dangerous... Activating the reversers between flare and touchdown...removes all options).
However, the engines showed no sign of the reversers having been deployed, so the throttles were being manually operated. In which case, hitting the the TOGA switch would have opened the throttles and the aircraft would accelerate and climb without any other input... The configuration of the wings for landing makes for a decent amount of lift with modest throttle so it's an almost exponential reaction... More throttle = more thrust = more airspeed = more lift. Done early enough, they might have swatted the Dash 8 with the tail. Have had a couple of go arounds after the mains have touched, so it is a reasonable thing to do.

The A350 flight crew should have seen something unusual ahead of them even if it didn't register as an aircraft... Runway lights blocked from view would have been one thing, lighting on the Dash 8 another. And the landing lights on the A350 would have illuminated from a reasonable distance, although ~130knots wouldn't take too long to be on top of it.

Can see the blame being laid squarely onto the Dash 8 crew and controllers with some responsibility to the A350 crew for not seeing the Dash 8 earlier.

Think of it as a car pulling out of a side road onto a dual carriageway a couple of hundred yards in front of another car without looking.  Yes it's their fault for not looking but the driver of the car on the dual carriageway should be looking far enough ahead to anticipate it and react accordingly.

There were experiments carried out at LAX a few years back after a similar incident. Dash-8's and similar are incredibly difficult to see in the dark against all the other airport and runway lighting. Also SOP is not to turn on anti-collision lights and runway spot lamps until you're lined up and ready to depart - so the Dash 8 may not even have been strobing. It would have been a miriacle if the A350 drivers had seen the Dash8 in time to go-around.

My bet is the Dash8 crew misunderstood an ATC instruction to "Line up after landing A350" (or similar) and pulled onto the runway infront of the landing airliner.

30
General Discussion Area / Re: What has P*ssed you off today?
« on: 03 January 2024, 10:04:43 »
Apparently nobody knew the DASH8 was on the runway because it doesn't have ADSB. Hmm...

That's a mis-understanding of how ADSB is used.

There is full ADSB-out whereby an aircraft transmits its lat-long when interrogated by a SSR radar source. This is what things like FR24 rely on to track aircraft. But there is also an earlier standard (Mode S) where the aircraft replies to normal Mode A/C/S SSR interrogations, but does not respond to ADSB position requests.

Most military/government aircraft do not respond to ADSB position requests, and hence don't show up on FR24 and the like. They will show up on the airports own SSR radar screens due to the Mode S responses.

There are some 'open world' tracking sites such as ADSB Exchange that support something called MLAT. This allows non ADSB-out aircraft to be located by triangulation. However, for that to work it needs at least 3 receivers to be getting signals from the aircraft, and in that area of Japan it appears coverage is not good enough to track anything by MLAT below about 1500'. So the coast guard plane doesn't show on any publically accessible trcking sites.

Just because you and I can't 'see' it on FR24 does not mean that ATC cannot see it on their screens.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 164

Page created in 0.04 seconds with 19 queries.