Airline Pilot Central Forums - KMGM accident 12/31

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Safety (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/)

- - KMGM accident 12/31 (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/141019-kmgm-accident-12-31-a.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AerChungus (Post 3563349)

Right, as a pilot, that may be intuitive. As a ramper with 5 days of training you don't/barely know what a beacon light is, much less what it represents. The standing practice in a lot of places is you listen for the sound of the engine being cut

They should be teaching that, and emphasizing it hard, it's probably the most important piece of information you need to know :confused:

The sound of an engine cutting doesn't help much if it wasn't both engines, or if there are other engines running in the alley, or at the gate next door.

Dark Humor Alert: Or issue them all cranial protection (this guy survived):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC1TCXyCqrg

[QUOTE=I was inverted;3563211]Well, yeah. But if you read the thing I quoted it said “before the shutdown of engines” not “engine” and the dude got sucked into the #2. Never flown the 175, but on the 190 with the APU inop, the norm is to shut down #2 (the side where the baggage doors are) and keep #1 on until power is established. The #1 is the same side as the GPU receptacle and opposite side of the baggage door, and there isn’t much reason to keep #2 up, at least on the 190. Was hoping an envoy 175 guy would chime in for clarification on the quoted text for their specifics because as a former 190 guy #2 probably wouldn’t have been running from my experience. Not throwing stones, more just curious about that quoted text and norms on the plane outside of what I know.[/QUOTE
photos online show the incident was #1 engine

Having spent 10 years working for a ground handling contractor after decades of other aviation "exposure" of various types, and two careers in safety focused fields I can attest that:

Ground handling pay sucks.
Due to the pay leadership also is sub par (including trainers) I've seen people promoted to trainer after a couple months on the job because nobody else would take it for a dollar raise...
Mgmt regularly hides or looks away from reported safety issues when reported even when it's all on airport video. I've reported arrival walk around done with the agent texting the entire walk around never looking at the aircraft and also walking behind running engines......not a word was said publicly or privately.
You can't expect new agents to learn when their trainer doesn't know squat outside of read this book.
This culture fostered the I won't get fired for anything.
When you have my management openly fabricating Records required to be retained by the Contract, that hadn't been Completed for months.... You've got a culture problem.
When aircraft are dispatched after de/anti ice with contamination and nobody loses Thier Jobs....you've got a culture issue
When the manager tells a supervisor to falsify deice op files.......culture issue
When management thinks it is wise to have an entire supervisor cadre under the age of 24 with no college /military/or leadership experience (that's a whole separate colorful story)

this agent is ultimately at fault paying the ultimate price for one or more of the following. lack of knowledge, not being situationally aware, blindly doing what he/she was told to do, following local practice rather than company procedures, being rushed (by leadership or last operation of the shift: new years eve and next flight was 5 hours I believe)

The ramp is inherently unsafe as many industrial jobs are....but with professionalism, training, experience etc....they can be fatality free

It will be interesting to see where other root causes are.

Does anyone know if if AA has to a requirement for ramp markings such as aircraft envelope/safety zone, ingestion zone, etc. Google Maps seems to show no safety markings only lead in lines.

Tragic loss and very avoidable

Side note 10 years I've never worked an inop APU where the engine opposite the cargo/baggage doors wasn't the one left running (to allow for baggage to offload to start) #2 off on all wing mounted engine aircraft (mainline tail engines 717/88/90)#1 off on CRJs and ERJ145.

Recent years policies at at least two legacy carriers and thier regionals is no approach (save GPU hookup) until beacon is off (no engines running).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletcheroes (Post 3563402)

Having spent 10 years working for a ground handling contractor after decades of other aviation "exposure" of various types, and two careers in safety focused fields I can attest that:Ground handling pay sucks.Due to the pay leadership also is sub par (including trainers) I've seen people promoted to trainer after a couple months on the job because nobody else would take it for a dollar raise...Mgmt regularly hides or looks away from reported safety issues when reportedeven when it's all on airport video. I've reported arrival walk around done with the agent texting the entire walk around never looking at the aircraft and also walking behind running engines......not a word was said public ally or privately.You can't expect new agents to learn when their trainer doesn't know squat outside of read this book.This culture fostered the I won't get fired for anything, as I p we pokepoke my d ok wh as über my to he to want.When you have my management openly fabricating Re CC orda required to be re to add in Ed by the Contract, that hadn't been Completed for months.... You've got a culture problem.When aircraft are dispatched after de/anti ice with contamination and nobody loses Thier Jobs....you've got a culture issueWhen the manager tells a supervisor to falsify deice op files.......culture issueWhen management thinks is wise to have an entire supervisor cadre under the age of 24 with no college /military/or leadership experience (that's a whole separate colorful story)this agent is ultimately at fault paying the ultimate price for one or more of the following. lack of knowledge, not being situationally aware, blindly doing what he/she was told to do, followi g local practice rather than company procedures, being rushed (by leadership or last operation of the shift: new years eve and next flight was 5 hours I believe) The ramp is inherently unsafe as many industrial jobs are....but with professionalism, train in g, exp er riemce etc....they can be fatality free It will be interesting to see where other root causes are. Does anyone know if if AA has to a requirement for ramp markings such as aircraft envelope/safety zone, ingestion zone, etc. Google Maps seems to show no safety markings only lead in lines. Tragic loss and very avoidable

spellchecker? This was barely readable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletcheroes (Post 3563391)

photos online show the incident was #1 engine

That's what ASN says.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/305466

Quote:

Originally Posted by drywhitetoast (Post 3563408)

spellchecker?

Fat fingers on my phone...you get the point

At Southwest the captain gives an engine cut hand signal to the marshaller who then relays that signal to the gate crew before anyone walks into the safety zone, screw relying on looking at a beacon light. Sounds like that needs to be implemented at AA, on top of shutting down the #2 when you have an inop APU. its beyond me how you somehow don’t notice an engine running though and try to open the cargo hold door

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 3563409)

That's what ASN says.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/305466

Well now. Number 1 makes it a different story. Still just as tragic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pangolin (Post 3563418)

Well now. Number 1 makes it a different story. Still just as tragic.

Agreed:

Speculation:

Agent was placing cones in front of the engine
Agent was attempting to chock (walking into ingestion zone)
Agent was in transit to guide jet bridge (walked thru ingestion zone)
Agent was instructed to do something that had them move past the engine inside the ingestion zone

can't think of much else: hooking up conditioned air or Huffer maybe

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrandallCrawler (Post 3563411)

It was #1, I don't think the 175 has a cargo door on the left side.

Personally I like the beacon... still controlled by the CA, cannot be misunderstood and everyone on the ramp can see it if they care to look. But no reason not to also have a hand signal to the marshaller, who then signals the rest of them. Beacon is a backup in case of misunderstanding.