AZFlyer

Last saturday a flight returned to the gate for an indication that the aft bin door was not fully shut.

Turns out that after pushpack was complete, the aft bin was opened again to throw on a late bag. The bin door was then closed and off the plane went. Upon return to the gate, mx looked at the door and saw that just the handle (the old swing type) was slightly unseated.

Company is trying to put the blame on the agent, but my question is, wouldn't the 'door ajar' indication be lit in the cockpit before they would even begin their taxi to the runway? It just seems to me that it would be prudent of the flight crew to verify the door indicator before beginning to taxi. And I'm going to believe that they did verify the indicator before starting their taxi. Which leads me to my assumption that this older style door handle may have become unseated in its flush position during taxi.

Flight crew is also being investigated.

Any bus drivers ever experience the old style cargo bin handles becoming unseated during taxi? I just find it hard to believe that the crew would fail to see it before shoving off.

Ewfflyer

I've personally seen handles etc... seated enough to hold, but then vibrate out once underway. I've also had experience on a few planes that I fly that the handle on the outside is what triggers the light, but you shut the door from the inside it doessn't always seat the outside perfectly. Once I fire up usually it's enough airflow to put the lever in it's place. Honestly I'd pin it on the ground crew, but I don't know how it is annunciated in the cockpit to make a full judgement. Obviously they caught it before they T/o, so that's what is important.

FastDEW

I was on a UAL flight a while back from ONT to DEN. We were an A320 and I was listening on CH9. We were climbing out of FL160 on our way over the mountains from ONT and the crew requested lower from ATC due to pressurization issue. Turns out one of the cargo doors showed a light. We landed in Vegas and they found the door not latched securely. Corrected and on our way after paperwork.

Anyway, I wondered why they didnt have a light before we left ONT.

BoredwLife

Cargo door could have easily "popped" once airborne or the vibration on takeoff jarred the sensor loose. If you were out of FL160 and the aircraft wasn't pressurized the rubber jungle would have made an appearance.

Brendan

Wouldn't the masks dropping be based on cabin altitude, not pressure altitude?

FastDEW

Im sure we were pressurized because no masks dropped. But, the sensor lit in the cockpit. Not sure why the light waited until FL160 to come on. Perhaps the door was not locked tight but was good enough for a seal, at least to 160.

Anyway, I do find it interesting that it was a Bus, like the original post.

UAL T38 Phlyer

AZFlyer:

It's been 5 years, so I may use some terms incorrectly, but here is the gist:

In the A-320/319, all normal checklists are presented on the center glass screen that is dominated by engine instruments.

Prior to pushback, the "Pre-push" checklist is displayed, automatically. It shows an outline of the fuselage, and shows which doors are still open. As they shut, it shows it, but when the last one shuts, it automatically goes to the next checklist. Sorry, I can't remember the exact titles of the checklists.

Emergency checklists are shown the same way: get an engine fire, and all the steps are displayed on the screen, automatically. Critical items are red; clean-up is yellow, and advisory is green. If the checklist calls for "Throttle-Idle," when you pull the throttle to idle, that step disappears from the checklist, and a cursor shows you what is next.

If you do something out of sequence, it sounds a chime and the cursor shows you what you should have done instead.

Point being: it works the same way for normal flight ops. If the door had never been locked (as far as the switch could sense), the before-push checklist would never have been removed and it would not go to the next check.

I'm not sure how it would react if they all showed closed, then one opened later. I guess it would depend upon whether you were in flight mode or ground mode. In either case, it would show a checklist for corrective action.

For what it's worth, I never had any problems with Airbus doors----but I had plenty with doors or door seals on the 727.

FastDEW

Thanks for the clear description T38. This is interesting. Sounds like the Airbus system is well thought out. My guess would be (at least for my UAL flight) that the door was shut as far as the sensor was concerned but after the pressure stated to build it was loose enough that it faulted.

BoredwLife

Yes masks drop based on cabin altitude/pressure. I think you were confused with what I said. I was saying that if the door had popped and that the cabin had depressurized that you would have the rubber jungle hanging out.

Take this with a grain of salt guys. I only have 100 hours on the 319 and haven't flown it in almost 5 months. We had a before start flow in which the captain checks the doors are closed and slides are armed among other things. Then calls for the before start checklist which the call is "Doors and Slides" Response "Closed and Armed" by both pilots. This is done prior to pushback. T38 I am not sure if it is different on the older 319's but these checklists are not on the ECAM in the 319's and 321's I flew. The emergency checklists are.

After engine start the FO completes his/her Before Takeoff flow. During that flow they push the T.O. Config button which checks a list of configurations including all doors closed. If there is a door ajar this is the time that they will get a Amber ECAM message and a continuous repetitive chime saying Doors Open.

My opinion would be that possibly the checklist was completed and the additional bag added after push. They didn't run the check again and missed that the door wasn't closed. After engine start they pushed the T.O. Config and got the config ECAM message. Swiss Cheese Model anyone?

AZFlyer

Thanks for the input guys.

The story as I've later heard was that the cockpit crew received a warning of the door not being secure on the actual take-off roll at about 40kts. Does this sound correct as for what the bus would do?

The poor guy is being slammed by mgt despite his efforts to visually/tactile inspect the door handle after closure. Further, there is no company policy for reinspecting the aircraft from the outside when a bin is reopened after pushback. Sounds like one is needed.