37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 211585 |
Time | |
Date | 199206 |
Day | Mon |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : bcn |
State Reference | FO |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 3000 msl bound upper : 3000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : bcn |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Widebody, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng |
Navigation In Use | Other |
Flight Phase | climbout : initial |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 50 flight time total : 17500 flight time type : 300 |
ASRS Report | 211585 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | inflight encounter : weather other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Aircraft |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
Shortly after takeoff on runway 07, we experienced what I felt was a static discharge explosion, of such a nature that it scared the hell out of everybody including the crew. I have experienced this occurrence before, as well as a lightning strike, and since there were no abnormalities with the aircraft, I elected to proceed to destination 40 min away. After reassuring the passenger that all was safe. Aircraft exterior was inspected after landing at destination, no damage was observed. I have since been told by those in authority that I should have dumped fuel to landing weight, returned to originating station through line of thunderstorms we had just penetrated, landed, and had aircraft inspected for damage. I am at a loss to explain this type of thinking. Perhaps with the state of the industry as it is, the most conservative action, not relying on crew experience, is the approach to be taken.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: FLC OF AIR CARRIER WDB ACFT EXPERIENCED A STATIC ELECTRICITY EXPLOSION SHORTLY AFTER TKOF.
Narrative: SHORTLY AFTER TKOF ON RWY 07, WE EXPERIENCED WHAT I FELT WAS A STATIC DISCHARGE EXPLOSION, OF SUCH A NATURE THAT IT SCARED THE HELL OUT OF EVERYBODY INCLUDING THE CREW. I HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS OCCURRENCE BEFORE, AS WELL AS A LIGHTNING STRIKE, AND SINCE THERE WERE NO ABNORMALITIES WITH THE ACFT, I ELECTED TO PROCEED TO DEST 40 MIN AWAY. AFTER REASSURING THE PAX THAT ALL WAS SAFE. ACFT EXTERIOR WAS INSPECTED AFTER LNDG AT DEST, NO DAMAGE WAS OBSERVED. I HAVE SINCE BEEN TOLD BY THOSE IN AUTHORITY THAT I SHOULD HAVE DUMPED FUEL TO LNDG WT, RETURNED TO ORIGINATING STATION THROUGH LINE OF TSTMS WE HAD JUST PENETRATED, LANDED, AND HAD ACFT INSPECTED FOR DAMAGE. I AM AT A LOSS TO EXPLAIN THIS TYPE OF THINKING. PERHAPS WITH THE STATE OF THE INDUSTRY AS IT IS, THE MOST CONSERVATIVE ACTION, NOT RELYING ON CREW EXPERIENCE, IS THE APCH TO BE TAKEN.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.