Ask The Pilot

[D747]

Ah OK - that puts a different light on it! I guess it is possible the reporter wasn't aware of the modifications. Are the mods suspected of playing a part in the cause of the fire?

Unlike anything to do with the Ethiopian B787 fire (I'm trying to make this relevant to this thread, sorry if it's not Mods) the electrical modifications to the Mercedes were found to be the sole cause of the fire.

 

[RSD]

Unlike anything to do with the Ethiopian B787 fire (I'm trying to make this relevant to this thread, sorry if it's not Mods) the electrical modifications to the Mercedes were found to be the sole cause of the fire.

Cheers - and yes apologies for taking things off topic a little.

 

[jb747]

On arriving into back into Australia 18hrs+ later the media ran an article saying there was a disagreement between the Captain and one of the SO's surrounding the take-off parameters and whether the runway was contaminated or not. Not sure whether there was any substance to the media report but it definitely was a PITA to overnight in Dallas.

I know of this event, but time has taken the details, if I ever knew them. From what I do remember, the FO failed to step up, and the SO was actually correct. The captain concerned was quite unpleasant.

When I was an SO, I once told a Captain that I thought what he’d briefed was incorrect. He simply pointed out the line in the books that allowed what he wanted to do, but then also added words to the effect of “don’t ever stop trying to call us out - you only have to be right once”. As a Captain, various FOs and SOs corrected the error of my ways. I was always happy to take any help I could get, but sadly that was a lesson lost on some.

Unlike anything to do with the Ethiopian B787 fire (I'm trying to make this relevant to this thread, sorry if it's not Mods) the electrical modifications to the Mercedes were found to be the sole cause of the fire.

I started it because anything to do with these batteries is relevant to flying. I can’t imagine trying to deal with the smoke alone from some of these events, and a sadly large percentage of passengers believe that all rules are there simply to inconvenience them, and have no real basis.

 

[RSD]

I know of this event, but time has taken the details, if I ever knew them. From what I do remember, the FO failed to step up, and the SO was actually correct. The captain concerned was quite unpleasant.

When I was an SO, I once told a Captain that I thought what he’d briefed was incorrect. He simply pointed out the line in the books that allowed what he wanted to do, but then also added words to the effect of “don’t ever stop trying to call us out - you only have to be right once”. As a Captain, various FOs and SOs corrected the error of my ways. I was always happy to take any help I could get, but sadly that was a lesson lost on some.

It sounds like a sensible captain in the DFW situation could have just said "I disagree, but I'm happy to take the more cautious option that you have suggested".

Human factors and team dynamics can have a huge effect on the outcome of any complex operation - even if no unexpected situations or emergencies arise. In technical diving we are more and more applying things learned from aviation - either through studies or incidents etc. Human factors training etc is playing more and more into how we do things, everyone always thought that teams of two were the ideal number, but recently our thinking has changed to teams of four - although there isn't a designated leader etc - it is all input into the plan, agree on the plan, dive the plan.

 

[mjt57]

Now, think about these things on aircraft, both as part of the aircraft equipment (787) or as passenger carried devices.

Yep, it's not as if you can throw the burning objects out the window, eh?

When doing emergency response training many years ago, a favorite was a video of a British football field stadium (Bradford City) going up.

From first smoke to full engulfment was something like 7 minutes.

Hope the folks who lost their home are OK, given the circumstances.

 

[RSD]

Yep, it's not as if you can throw the burning objects out the window, eh?

Having a disposal system built into the aircraft could become necessary! Open the inner door - place offending article (or passenger) into chute - close inner door - open remotely controlled outer door - shut outer door - someone else's problem now!

 

[markis10]

started it because anything to do with these batteries is relevant to flying.

A timely reminder given the new restrictions on powerbanks some airlines are introducing on the weekend.

More airlines ban popular travel gadget being used on flights

EVEN more airlines are introducing strict rules on what can be taken and used onboard during a flight. Earlier this month, Korean airline Air Busan banned passengers from having power banks in thei…

www.the-sun.com

 

[elanshin]

With the near miss at MDW yesterday, I was just wondering at that point in the landing sequence, would it generally be more the pilot monitoring looking ahead more broadly as it would be pretty close to where the pilot flying would be flaring and touching down?

 

[mjt57]

A timely reminder given the new restrictions on powerbanks some airlines are introducing on the weekend.

More airlines ban popular travel gadget being used on flights

EVEN more airlines are introducing strict rules on what can be taken and used onboard during a flight. Earlier this month, Korean airline Air Busan banned passengers from having power banks in thei…

www.the-sun.com

Yeah right.

This bit: "Instead passengers are being urged to use the onboard power outlets which have both AC and USB-A ports."

Last 3 flights on which I travelled there were no 240VAC outlets, only the US style ones. Something to consider when travelling, I guess.

And the USB outlets in our seats didn't work.

 

[TheRealTMA]

Ah OK - that puts a different light on it! I guess it is possible the reporter wasn't aware of the modifications. Are the mods suspected of playing a part in the cause of the fire?

 

[Warragul]

Yeah right.

This bit: "Instead passengers are being urged to use the onboard power outlets which have both AC and USB-A ports."

Last 3 flights on which I travelled there were no 240VAC outlets, only the US style ones. Something to consider when travelling, I guess.

And the USB outlets in our seats didn't work.

Taiwan uses the same AC outlet as the US so for EVA Air seems reasonable - if they are working.

 

[jb747]

It sounds like a sensible captain in the DFW situation could have just said "I disagree, but I'm happy to take the more cautious option that you have suggested".

All the paperwork you could possibly need was carried on the aircraft. You just need to stop, pull the books out, and prove it one way or the other. Sadly some people aren't even prepared to be proven right, or wrong.

With the near miss at MDW yesterday, I was just wondering at that point in the landing sequence, would it generally be more the pilot monitoring looking ahead more broadly as it would be pretty close to where the pilot flying would be flaring and touching down?

In visual condtions, you're both looking ahead much of the time. The flare actually involves looking at the far end of the runway, so someone crossing should be pretty obvious. People who look close in, tend to underflare, and drive into the ground. That's a real issue in reduced visibility.

 

[D747]

People who look close in, tend to underflare, and drive into the ground. That's a real issue in reduced visibility.

What is the trick in reduced visibility to prevent underflare? Look to an invisible point that you imagine or just use instruments?