曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

Reading this report evokes the humorous image of a fuel truck
racing along behind the taxiing airliner still connected by a
length of hose — the airliner destined to become “the one that got
away.” But the Captain didn’t think it was so funny:
“Normally I would execute a left turn out of this spot to parking.
If I had done this, the outcome probably would have been
much different…. Somebody dropped the ball here. I do have a
right to know what is going on with my aircraft!”
We must give the fueler credit: he didn’t panic and run, but
disconnected the fuel hose before disaster struck. The Captain
subsequently discovered that “ … the fueler was [apparently]
employed by a … firm … [that] was contracted by my company to
help out with the overload from the diversions.” (And therefore
was likely not completely familiar with the air carrier company
procedures — Editor.)
Getting the Message
Why hadn’t the fueler contacted the flight crew before fueling?
There are a number of possible reasons — total confusion on the
ramp because of the number of aircraft; the fueler did not realize
the engine was running; was not aware of special procedures for
fueling with passengers on board; assumed the Captain was
aware his aircraft would be fueled; rushing to keep up with the
task at hand. Regardless of the causes and factors involved, there
existed a large opportunity for disaster; fortune dealt kindly with
all involved — this time.
We could say more about the need for proper coordination
between the dispatch office and the cockpit, and the need for
adequate training of ground personnel, but this narrative speaks
eloquently enough by itself.
Everything is funny as
long as it is happening
to somebody else.
– Will Rogers, 1879-1935
10 Summer 1992 ASRS Directline
F ew in-flight problems are guaranteed to raise the concern of pilots
and controllers alike as much as the prospect of an aircraft running out
of fuel. In the period following the Avianca accident in January of 1989
(where Avianca Flight 52 crashed short of its destination after running out
of fuel), the ASRS has seen a rise in the number of reports that concern “lowfuel”
conditions. Reports may detail the confusion and communications
breakdown among flight crews and controllers about what is meant by a
“minimum fuel” situation. In more than a few situations, conscientious and
understandably vigilant controllers have elevated to emergency status what
the flight crew intended only as an advisory.
by Jeanne McElhatton
Great Expectatioioioioioioioioioions
“While holding we decided to divert to LGA [La
Guardia] and were asked of our fuel status.
We told NY [New York] ARTCC it was fiftyfive
minutes, which would take us to our
reserve fuel. But, apparently, this was interpreted
as a minimum fuel situation. We never
mentioned ‘minimum fuel,’ critical fuel, or
emergency of any sort. Only on downwind to
LGA, approximately thirty minutes later, did
I become aware that something was out of the
ordinary when we were told that the final was
twenty miles long, and if we needed less to
please let them know. We said that would be
okay, but wondered why they even asked us
that. Upon landing, we noticed that the
emergency equipment was standing by.”
Given ATC’s reaction to what they may perceive
as a critical fuel condition in this incident
report, it’s not surprising that pilots might
hesitate to use the term “minimum fuel.” Flight
crews tend to feel that a controller response
such as the one illustrated above will create
mounds of paperwork, and they certainly wish
to avoid that. This flight crew never even used
the phrase “minimum fuel,” but their flight was
handled as an emergency because they had
mentioned their limited fuel status.
Sometimes, however, the scene plays the other
way and the message does not get through even
though stated clearly. The flight crew must then
declare minimum fuel and request priority.
“Shortly after reaching cruising altitude of
FL330, we were given a long delaying vector
90 degrees to our route of flight, followed by
several more vectors. At this point we asked if
‘the vectors would continue, because we were
burning most of our contingency fuel.’ We were
promised this would be the last vector and
[were] handed over to ZAU [Chicago ARTCC].
ZAU immediately initiated more delaying
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：ASRS Directline(45)