"Somewhat scary one near Winnipeg" - The AC Master Incidents Thread
#3451
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,789
overwritten."
My law would be 1) any airplane flying to, from, or over my country who provides internet access for passengers, employee, or onboard sales is REQUIRED to live stream FDR/CVR/GPS location to government run archiving server. Failire to to so results in 7 day suspension of operators and fleet airworthiness certificates.
My law would be 1) any airplane flying to, from, or over my country who provides internet access for passengers, employee, or onboard sales is REQUIRED to live stream FDR/CVR/GPS location to government run archiving server. Failire to to so results in 7 day suspension of operators and fleet airworthiness certificates.
#3452
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
Why is this shocking? What do you think was done poorly? Nothing was omitted, and SOPs were followed, and the captain made the best decision given the info he or she had. That the procedures may require amending is conceded, but this and a thousand other similar incidents are what improve commercial aviation.
Those less familiar with a given industry are more easily shocked when irregular events occur.
Those less familiar with a given industry are more easily shocked when irregular events occur.
#3453
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2017
Programs: AC
Posts: 2,167
Shocking to me that while SOPs were followed, that so many checks and balances did not prevent an aircraft to depart when it clearly should not have done so. The SOPs were insufficient to adequately have prevented a damaged airframe from leaving the ground.
#3454
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Halifax
Programs: AC SE100K, Marriott Lifetime Platinum Elite. NEXUS
Posts: 4,561
Neither the aircraft manufacturer nor Jazz provide the flight crew with a definition of a hard landing or
criteria to determine what a hard landing is.
criteria to determine what a hard landing is.
Crystal clear to me that the airframe did not meet a threshold of unserviceablility. EHUMS isn't regulatory. The next flight was fine (apparently).
#3455
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2017
Programs: AC
Posts: 2,167
" The inspection at CYUL found that the aircraft had sustained substantial damage, including buckling of the skin below the windows on the right fuselage (Figure 1). The landing conditions experienced by the right main landing gear during the second touchdown exceeded its ultimate design criteria, which resulted in failure of the orifice support tube during the in-stroke (Figure 2). Once the orifice support tube failed, shock strut damping was effectively lost, thereby generating significant bottoming loads."
"
#3457
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2017
Programs: AC
Posts: 2,167
I understand that, and I don't think I need to quote my post again which you quoted which is that I was surprised to read that even though SOPs were followed that such a gap existed whereby an aircraft later flew only to be recognized as a damaged airframe.
#3458
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,789
Why is this shocking? What do you think was done poorly? Nothing was omitted, and SOPs were followed, and the captain made the best decision given the info he or she had. That the procedures may require amending is conceded, but this and a thousand other similar incidents are what improve commercial aviation.
(It appears there was a warning, but it was dismissed.)
#3459
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
The airline may (or may not) tweak their procedures as per the TSB recommendations, and one more incremental smidgeon of safety will have been added to the collective wisdom within the industry.
#3460
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
It's amazing that some people are shocked (bold shocked even) to learn that a visual walk-around inspection on an apron at night did not yield the same level of detail and clarity than a determined inspection in a bright hangar by a team of maintenance professionals.
#3461
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,789
The warning was not "dismissed". The pilots contacted their company maintenance about the indication. This was clearly stated in the report.
It's amazing that some people are shocked (bold shocked even) to learn that a visual walk-around inspection on an apron at night did not yield the same level of detail and clarity than a determined inspection in a bright hangar by a team of maintenance professionals.
It's amazing that some people are shocked (bold shocked even) to learn that a visual walk-around inspection on an apron at night did not yield the same level of detail and clarity than a determined inspection in a bright hangar by a team of maintenance professionals.
Bottom line remains, there was a warning, but it did not have the effect that it should have had. Indeed the next flight happened although it never should have. Because maintenance apparently did not figure out that the inertial switch that was triggered by this hard landing cuts power to the FDR. Admittedly the material they got from the manufacturer may not have been crystal clear either.
#3463
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: YYZ most of the time
Programs: AC SE100K MM, Princess Elite
Posts: 3,921
the core issue of flying after the hard landing is one thing, but the Gotta-Get-There-Itis was flawed, they had an extra hour to deal with getting someone to come check, and if they wanted to, they had more than enough time since they landed approx 2120, and would have been at the gate by 2130. It would have taken priority dispatching maintenance but they could have reasonably gotten there by 2230.... IF it was important enough which it clearly wasn’t.
#3464
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: YYZ most of the time
Programs: AC SE100K MM, Princess Elite
Posts: 3,921
I would bet that Porter maintenance could have done it, but that would require Jazz and Porter to have some arrangement for not only the check but the payment.
#3465
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Sun Peaks, Taupo.
Programs: NZ Elite, AC SE100K, Westjet Teal, Marriott Bonvoy Gold Elite, Nexus, Global Entry
Posts: 6,127
Whilst reading the report I put myself into the pilot's heads.
That was a tough landing, what just happened, should we have gone around?
Dark out, flashlight only for a visual inspection.
What are we actually looking for when we inspect?
Our passengers want to get home.
The company wants our passengers to get home.
I am not for one minute insinuating that the company puts pressure on the pilots to keep to schedule as the cost of safety, however it is human nature to want to please your employer and customers, or to not let them down. The consequences of cancelling are significant. It is human nature for the pilots to put pressure on themselves.
Human factors and their relationship to decision making are an integral part of flying and a significant part of training. A thorough debrief of the pilots with regard to human factors would have been interesting. What went through their minds and what were their discussions to cause them to not conduct a go-round and to then fly the aircraft to YUL?
That was a tough landing, what just happened, should we have gone around?
Dark out, flashlight only for a visual inspection.
What are we actually looking for when we inspect?
Our passengers want to get home.
The company wants our passengers to get home.
I am not for one minute insinuating that the company puts pressure on the pilots to keep to schedule as the cost of safety, however it is human nature to want to please your employer and customers, or to not let them down. The consequences of cancelling are significant. It is human nature for the pilots to put pressure on themselves.
Human factors and their relationship to decision making are an integral part of flying and a significant part of training. A thorough debrief of the pilots with regard to human factors would have been interesting. What went through their minds and what were their discussions to cause them to not conduct a go-round and to then fly the aircraft to YUL?