UPS 747 Dubai Final Report
#31
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
I've never understood the immediate need to takeover especially in the FLs? I mean US Air in the Hudson, sure a takeover is necessary due to being that close to the ground and with the FO's lack of time-in-type. But even with a fire warning in the FLs? Once the CA has taken over as PF, the "thinking and solving" role is up to the PM. Or the CA can try and do both, but his workload has increased by taking over PF duties.
Maybe a Delta pilot can chime in, I recall regarding a Delta newsletter of some type which talked specifically of the merits of letting the FO fly the plane and the CA taking over the PM role which would allow him/her to better analyze the emergency situation and come up with a game plan. Personally, I think it makes sense. Now obviously if there are flight control issues then the PIC can takeover and do what's best. Ditto for takeover when close to the ground or when the FO's time in type is low.
Now I'm not saying this happened because of taking over from the FO. If the CA has more time in type, more experience overall, then maybe he's better off in the analyzing/solving/PM role of things when things go bad in the FLs? Just an opinion.
Maybe a Delta pilot can chime in, I recall regarding a Delta newsletter of some type which talked specifically of the merits of letting the FO fly the plane and the CA taking over the PM role which would allow him/her to better analyze the emergency situation and come up with a game plan. Personally, I think it makes sense. Now obviously if there are flight control issues then the PIC can takeover and do what's best. Ditto for takeover when close to the ground or when the FO's time in type is low.
Now I'm not saying this happened because of taking over from the FO. If the CA has more time in type, more experience overall, then maybe he's better off in the analyzing/solving/PM role of things when things go bad in the FLs? Just an opinion.
In both the UPS and Swiss Air accidents, the F/O's were flying.
The Capt's were out of their seats at the time of impact.
Or do I misunderstand what you are talking about?
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
18. Two minutes after passing into the Bahrain FIR,Twenty one minutes after take-off there is a fire alert at 15:12 indicating a,FIRE MAIN DK FWD.
19. The Captain assumes control as Pilot Flying, the F.Obegins the FIRE MAIN DK FWD non-normal checklist.
Again, for FO low time in type and/or low to the ground, a CA takeover is appropriate (as was the US Airways Hudson case). But at cruise altitude, with at least some time to analyze options, I would think that the FO remaining in the PF role would be best as the CA can then use his experience and judgement to decide on the best action given the situation at hand. The CA becoming PF doesn't change the situation much... the FO took off, climbed and went to cruise. There was no structural failure so it's not like the FO couldn't do the descend and landing in a plane. Most airline manuals are leaning towards (and Timbo I believe you can confirm what I read in a Delta newsletter) that the strong recommendation is barring things like lower time FOs or proximity to ground, the PF is better off being left to the FO, so the CA can use his experience and judgement to make a decision. For example, if the CA becomes PF immediately, as was the case here in UPS 6, that is one less brain/mind that is evaluating the situation when the first priority becomes flying the plane. It is then the FO who does the PM role. I'm just not sure a role reversal should happen just because a bell goes off. All factors should be considered.
#33
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
OK, I see what you are getting at now.
Yes, the Delta training dept. wants the F/O to fly, even if it's the Capt's. leg, so that the Capt's mind is freed up to think Captain thoughts and make command decisions.
I don't know what UPS or anyone else teaches.
Yes, the Delta training dept. wants the F/O to fly, even if it's the Capt's. leg, so that the Capt's mind is freed up to think Captain thoughts and make command decisions.
I don't know what UPS or anyone else teaches.
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
I don't mean to quarterback these guys, they fought to the very end. The industry needs to change in the way we currently do business with lithium batteries onboard cargo planes.
#35
Sounds like tha Pack 1 Trip ended up being a significant factor in them losing time to smoke in the cockpit.
"The flight crew was able to restore Pack 1 operation at climb 12,200 ft (UTC 15:00:03) by accomplishing a reset per the PACK 1,2,3 non-normal procedure. All three packs were on at the time of the FIRE MAIN DECK indication (UTC 15:13:46). Pack 2 and Pack 3 were then shutoff. This is the expected result of the crew performing the FIRE MAIN DECK non-normal procedure. Pack 1 was the only remaining source of flight deck ventilation per system design. However, FDR indicates that Pack 1 stopped operating at UTC 15:15:21. The shutdown of Pack 1 resulted in loss of all ventilation to the flight deck, which compromised flight deck smoke control. Furthermore, with no packs operating, the Forward Equipment Cooling System automatically reconfigured into the “closed loop” mode, which changed the cooling air to the flight deck instruments from pack air (outside “fresh” air) to recirculated air via the equipment cooling fan. Consequently, any smoke that would have migrated to the E/E Bay would have been drawn into the Forward Equipment Cooling System and supplied to the flight deck instruments. The system is capable of automatically restoring Pack 3 operation if Pack 1 is detected off. However, this capability does not exist if the Pack 3 selector is in the OFF position. Because the FIRE MAIN DECK nonnormal checklist instructed the flight crew to select off Pack 3, it was not able to be automatically restored upon the loss of Pack 1 at UTC 15:15:21. Boeing subsequently revised the crew procedure to eliminate the instructions for selecting off Pack 3"
That, and the CA oxygen hose failure leading to him having to search for the portable. What a tragic series of events. May their families have some peace in the knowledge that they fought until the end.
RIP.
PS: A UPS freind of mine told me yesterday that they do not carry lithium batteries as cargo any longer (just as equipment in the ELT and ship's batteries on the 787).
"The flight crew was able to restore Pack 1 operation at climb 12,200 ft (UTC 15:00:03) by accomplishing a reset per the PACK 1,2,3 non-normal procedure. All three packs were on at the time of the FIRE MAIN DECK indication (UTC 15:13:46). Pack 2 and Pack 3 were then shutoff. This is the expected result of the crew performing the FIRE MAIN DECK non-normal procedure. Pack 1 was the only remaining source of flight deck ventilation per system design. However, FDR indicates that Pack 1 stopped operating at UTC 15:15:21. The shutdown of Pack 1 resulted in loss of all ventilation to the flight deck, which compromised flight deck smoke control. Furthermore, with no packs operating, the Forward Equipment Cooling System automatically reconfigured into the “closed loop” mode, which changed the cooling air to the flight deck instruments from pack air (outside “fresh” air) to recirculated air via the equipment cooling fan. Consequently, any smoke that would have migrated to the E/E Bay would have been drawn into the Forward Equipment Cooling System and supplied to the flight deck instruments. The system is capable of automatically restoring Pack 3 operation if Pack 1 is detected off. However, this capability does not exist if the Pack 3 selector is in the OFF position. Because the FIRE MAIN DECK nonnormal checklist instructed the flight crew to select off Pack 3, it was not able to be automatically restored upon the loss of Pack 1 at UTC 15:15:21. Boeing subsequently revised the crew procedure to eliminate the instructions for selecting off Pack 3"
That, and the CA oxygen hose failure leading to him having to search for the portable. What a tragic series of events. May their families have some peace in the knowledge that they fought until the end.
RIP.
PS: A UPS freind of mine told me yesterday that they do not carry lithium batteries as cargo any longer (just as equipment in the ELT and ship's batteries on the 787).
#36
#37
[QUOTE= PS: A UPS freind of mine told me yesterday that they do not carry lithium batteries as cargo any longer (just as equipment in the ELT and ship's batteries on the 787).[/QUOTE]
UPS hauls lithium batteries just about every weekend on the military charters. Hopefully they're not sitting out on a scorching hot tarmac somewhere in the middle east for hours prior to being loaded onto an aircraft with class one explosives also on board.
UPS hauls lithium batteries just about every weekend on the military charters. Hopefully they're not sitting out on a scorching hot tarmac somewhere in the middle east for hours prior to being loaded onto an aircraft with class one explosives also on board.
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,190
Wow... Lots of things that may provoke big changes. I cannot believe there is no intermediate step between pressurization for suppression and a landing. Especially with a two man crew in that situation and not having someone to even physically inspect the situation..
As for the landing at a closer airport, I wonder if the situation would have been different if it were daytime. The fact that it was completely dark really can't have helped. They did make it back to Dubai though, but were apparently too high. Very unfortunate set of circumstances. Does anyone know the outcome with the shipper ?
As for the landing at a closer airport, I wonder if the situation would have been different if it were daytime. The fact that it was completely dark really can't have helped. They did make it back to Dubai though, but were apparently too high. Very unfortunate set of circumstances. Does anyone know the outcome with the shipper ?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post