Abnormalities in BRU-ANR-CRL-LGG-OST in 2015

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
Passenger
Posts: 7263
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Abnormalities in BRU-ANR-CRL-LGG-OST in 2015

Post by Passenger »

On 10th July 2015, a Bluebird Cargo 737-300F from LGG to ??? had a gradual loss of pressurisation during the climb. The Belgian AAIU has published an interim report on 31st January 2017. I don't think it has been published here before:

pdf 177kB:
http://mobilit.belgium.be/sites/default ... 2015-6.pdf

Quote from the above report: "...When setting T/O Thrust FO GUD noticed a slightly different N1 on the engines. After lift-off I noticed pressure in my ears and the cabin not pressurising. The setting of the pressurisation panel was checked by FO GUD and correct. We cleaned up the aircraft on schedule, accelerated to 250kt and I used V/S with a rate of 1000ft/min for a shallow climb. The cabin climbed and followed slightly below the present altitude. We were cleared for further climb, initially with a left turn to SUXIM and thereafter to maintain present heading. Passing approximately FL050 the AUTO FAIL LIGHT came on. We tried to stabilise the cabin by switching the PRESSURISATION MODE SELECTOR to STANDBY and set the CAB ALTITUDE to 6400ft for a climb to FL330 according the CAB/FLT Altitude Placard. While reading the AUTO FAIL CHECKLIST of the QRH we were cleared to BOMBI. Shortly before reaching FL100 the cabin appeared to stabilise because a differential pressure build it up, the cabin climb decreased and I felt a different pressure change on the ears. I decided to continue the shallow climb with 1000 ft/min above FL100 and to return to Liege if we are not able to reach a higher flight level because we were not able to reach the destination in FL100 with the fuel on board. While discussing the system, continuing the checklist and reaching FL140 the cabin altitude warning horn came on. We donned the oxygen masks and initiated a descent to FL100 according procedure. FO GUD declared emergency and requested vectors back to LGG. A normal landing in LGG on RWY 23L followed..."

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 40815
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Abnormalities in BRU-ANR-CRL-LGG-OST in 2015

Post by sn26567 »

sn26567 wrote: 26 Feb 2015, 11:36 Ryanair flight FR2829 from Reus (Spain) to Charleroi was caught in strong turbulence last night and diverted to Bordeaux. Two hostesses were injured and hospitalized in Bordeaux.

The plane took off from Reus, Spain, and was scheduled to arrive at Charleroi at 21:30. But over the Pyrenees, the flight "was rocked by large, heavy turbulences," said a spokesman for Bordeaux airport.

Caught in a big air pocket, the plane was badly shaken and two hostesses were injured. One suffering from "back edge" and the other a broken ankle. The latter was wounded by a drinks trolley that struck her. They have both been hospitalized in a Bordeaux hospital.

On the passenger side, many have also been very shaken but there are no injuries. After waiting for several hours at Bordeaux airport, they were able to return to Charleroi via another Ryanair flight that came from Barcelona and was able to take them in charge. They took off from Bordeaux-Merignac at 01:24.

This morning around 10:00, Ryanair confirmed in turn the incident. Explaining that after having suffered "some turbulence," the plane was able to land normally.

"The medical staff took over two crew cabin with minor injuries", says the company. "A replacement aircraft and a rescue crew were sent from Barcelona to minimize the delay for customers, who received good refreshments in Bordeaux. Ryanair apologizes to all customers affected by this diversion and the delay incurred. "

After L'Avenir
On Nov 25th 2021 the BEA released their final report in French only, concluding the probable causes of the accident were:

Scenario

Prior to departure, during flight preparation, the crew requested a modified route due to the risk of strong turbulence along the planned route. The modified route went west of the area for which strong turbulence had been forecast. After departure shortly before reaching cruise altitude, the crew queried the air traffic controller for any pilot reports of turbulence and received the response that no turbulence was known along their modified route. When the aircraft came near the area, that SIGMET had identified as a zone of severe turbulence, the aircraft entered turbulence the onset of which was so sudden and violent that two flight attendants received serious injuries while performing their duties.

Contributing factors:

The new trajectory as requested during flight preparation, the absence of turbulence during the climb, the absence of any report of turbulence along the modified route may have gradually led the crew to underestimate the risk. The captain thus permitted the cabin service to commence during the climb and its continuation until the aircraft experienced severe turbulence in the vicinity of an area that SIGMETs had identified as an area of risk.

Safety lessons

The accident confirms the difficulties of accurately predicting areas of turbulence in clear air. A risk identified by e.g. SIGMETs must be considered as a relatively imprecise indication. If operational constraints require nearing such areas of risk the crew must take appropriate precautions to avoid exposing cabin crew and passengers to the risk of injury. Pilot weather reports (PIREPs) are encouraged to share information with other pilots who may be exposed to the same hazardous phenomenon in nearby area and time. The existence of a PIREP can increase vigilance, the absence of PIREPs does not guarantee the absence of risk.

(after The Aviation Herald)
André
ex Sabena #26567

Post Reply