False cockpit indications
#11
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,467
Swissair 111 is a frustrating example. For some reason, a large amount of pilots do not understand why we dump fuel. I don't have any comment whether safe landing would have been possible, but anyone dumping fuel when you are on fire should spend some time understanding why we have the option to jettison fuel.
The only reason plane has to be able to dump fuel is engine out go-around performance. Halifax is a short-ish runway, but seeing how some dump fuel on short final to LAX tells me those pilots had no clue why you dump fuel.
The only reason plane has to be able to dump fuel is engine out go-around performance. Halifax is a short-ish runway, but seeing how some dump fuel on short final to LAX tells me those pilots had no clue why you dump fuel.
#12
SR111 was a watershed event. I don't consider the crew especially at fault since we have 20/20 hindsight and general industry practice has transformed dramatically due to this event and a couple others, including some where they made it to the ground but didn't evac in time.
1. Point the nose at a runway and start down.
1b. Tough call... risk (or accept) an over-run on a short runway or delay to reach a longer one. Situational. Smoke in the cockpit or cascading electrical failures suggest the former.
2. On the ground, with any plausible fire indications, evacuate immediately.
The UPS crew in Dubai reinforced this, IIRC they *could* have made it if they hadn't tried to RTF.
If the source of the fire is known to be a pax item that's accessible in the cabin, ie a PED and not part of the aircraft, and is under control then maybe you can be flexible. In that case I'd still get on the ground due pax smoke inhalation liability but would do so in a safe and methodical manner, on an adequate runway. That's probably the most likely scenario you'll face.
1. Point the nose at a runway and start down.
1b. Tough call... risk (or accept) an over-run on a short runway or delay to reach a longer one. Situational. Smoke in the cockpit or cascading electrical failures suggest the former.
2. On the ground, with any plausible fire indications, evacuate immediately.
The UPS crew in Dubai reinforced this, IIRC they *could* have made it if they hadn't tried to RTF.
If the source of the fire is known to be a pax item that's accessible in the cabin, ie a PED and not part of the aircraft, and is under control then maybe you can be flexible. In that case I'd still get on the ground due pax smoke inhalation liability but would do so in a safe and methodical manner, on an adequate runway. That's probably the most likely scenario you'll face.
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,347
I was having a debate with a friend of mine about false indications and I was wondering what people thought. It's very rare obvoiusly but there's been a couple of instances at our company to have false Engine Fire indications since sometimes the fire detection loops malfunction. It's a memory item to turn the engine off if you have the indication. One time the crew just turned it off right away to find out on the ground it was a false indication. Another crew actually investigated it because they didn't notice anything wrong other than the indiction, no smoke behind them as they turned, smooth running engine etc. What would you do? It's an obvious memory item, but based on your knowledge that they have failed before and if you don't notice anything abnormal should you just blindly turn off a perfectly good engine?
Last edited by Elevation; 05-06-2022 at 10:44 AM.
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 128
Modern transport category aircraft have redundancy in fire detection (especially engine fire detection)... both to ensure that a fire is detected if present, but also to vastly minimize the odds of a false alarm (especially engines).
If you get an engine fire alarm, follow the published procedure. OEI is not an actual emergency in transport aircraft, it's an abnormal, although you will declare an emergency with ATC to get priority handling.
If the second engine were to fail later, you could always restart the one you had shut down.
If you get an engine fire alarm, follow the published procedure. OEI is not an actual emergency in transport aircraft, it's an abnormal, although you will declare an emergency with ATC to get priority handling.
If the second engine were to fail later, you could always restart the one you had shut down.
#15
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,009
Blown bottles won't prevent a re-start. If you have two and the second fails, and you don't have a fire indication, you may end up reconsidering on the former engine, There are reasons to shut down that don't necessarily preclude a later restart. There are procedures which specify one or both bottles as part of the shut down, and certainly if you'd had an issue that caused loss of both bottles, and you had shut down a perfectly good engine, you would restart if you needed that engine.
If you arrive at such a point in space and time, things have gone far enough sideways that you're beyond published procedures, and beyond concern over the re-start, such as both engines shut down. It may be time to rethink starting the engine.
If you arrive at such a point in space and time, things have gone far enough sideways that you're beyond published procedures, and beyond concern over the re-start, such as both engines shut down. It may be time to rethink starting the engine.
#16
Yes, everything I've flown you can simply put the engine fire switch or handle back to it's normal position and restore all fuel, hyd, bleed, etc to the engine, thus allowing a restart. Obviously only going to work if the engine isn't damaged or just plain broke.
If you shut a motor down for things like excessive (but not ridiculous) vibes, or hot/low oil good chance you could restart it.
Having blown the bottle shouldn't affect a restart. I don't think bottles blow into the core flow path anyway and if it did it would be flushed out in a split second during flight.
If you shut a motor down for things like excessive (but not ridiculous) vibes, or hot/low oil good chance you could restart it.
Having blown the bottle shouldn't affect a restart. I don't think bottles blow into the core flow path anyway and if it did it would be flushed out in a split second during flight.
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2021
Posts: 319
Ugh ... this is 100% FALSE. STOP REPEATING THIS LIE AND THROWING THE GOOD PILOTS OF SWISS AIR 111 UNDER THE BUS !!!!
Page 257, paragraph 5 of "Other Findings" of the Swiss Air 111 Accident Investigation Report, Canadian Transportation Safety Board ... https://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rappor...3/a98h0003.pdf
"From any point along the Swissair Flight 111 flight path after the initial odour in the cockpit, the time required to complete an approach and landing to the Halifax International Airport would have exceeded the time available before the fire-related conditions in the aircraft cockpit would have precluded a safe landing."
The investigators said a safe landing was impossible, why are you telling this lie?
Page 257, paragraph 5 of "Other Findings" of the Swiss Air 111 Accident Investigation Report, Canadian Transportation Safety Board ... https://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rappor...3/a98h0003.pdf
"From any point along the Swissair Flight 111 flight path after the initial odour in the cockpit, the time required to complete an approach and landing to the Halifax International Airport would have exceeded the time available before the fire-related conditions in the aircraft cockpit would have precluded a safe landing."
The investigators said a safe landing was impossible, why are you telling this lie?
the crew requested more flight distance to allow the aircraft to descend safely from its altitude of 21,000 ft (6,400 m) at the time. The crew then requested to dump fuel to reduce their weight for landing.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post