37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 541635 |
Time | |
Date | 200203 |
Day | Tue |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : bwi.airport |
State Reference | MD |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Weather Elements | Ice Turbulence |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : bwi.tower |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B737-300 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | climbout : takeoff |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 11000 flight time type : 7000 |
ASRS Report | 541635 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : continuous stick shaker other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Resolutory Action | controller : provided flight assist controller : issued new clearance flight crew : diverted to another airport none taken : detected after the fact other |
Consequence | other other other |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | FAA Aircraft Company Flight Crew Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Company |
Narrative:
Air turn-back for bent angle of attack probe/continuous stick shaker. This flight was an air turn-back for continuous captain's stick shaker from takeoff (air/ground logic to 'air' mode) to landing. It started at main wheel liftoff. Captain's angle of attack vane was badly bent probably caused by jetway on arrival at bwi. No walkaround -- crew change in bwi was captain (myself) only, first officer did not do another exterior inspection. No one mentioned anything about jetway mating being rough. Rainy night, so ground crew didn't notice bent angle of attack probe on pushback. No birds seen near airplane at any time so no bird strike. After landing from the turn-back, my first officer mentioned that on their previous arrival the jetway hit the aircraft unusually hard and 3 distinct times. Also had a single channel automatic slat fail indication. Stick shaker was unusually loud. Difficult to hear over, had to turn radio volumes way up. Could not read an approach chart on either yoke. Autoplt unusable. When engaged, it went straight to MCP speed with the 'a' airspeed warning and drove the aircraft nose down. Light turbulence, IMC above 3000 ft, rain and icing conditions. Since the stick shaker was a nuisance indication, we requested a turn-back from ATC and did not declare an emergency. Flew long enough to check all cockpit circuit breakers and warning lights. Search for QRH guidance, coordinate with dispatch, inform flight attendants of our return, make a calming and appropriate PA to passenger and lastly run qpc landing data was 115500 pounds versus the 114000 pound limit. I elected to land because of the fatigue of this situation rather than break off the approach to burn fuel. (The landing was very smooth, minimum braking used, written up in logbook for inspection.) in hindsight, I could have lowered the landing gear earlier to burn more fuel without adding flying time, but didn't think of it. In summary, this is the first time I've had a continuous stick shaker in-flight. Although not alarming, I found it unsettling and very fatiguing. I cleaned the airplane up on climb out keeping speed well above minimums wondering if the nuisance indication would stop with flaps up, and angle of attack vane possibly unsticking, or possibly figuring out some way to reset it. Electing to turn back and accomplishing all coordination mentioned above, I did not think about aircraft weight until the last min. At night in mediocre WX, with a long runway in sight, slightly above weight limits, and the stick shaker very irritating for the previous 15 mins, I elected to land and have the airplane inspected for that along with other necessary maintenance. Is it possible and/or prudent to silence a nuisance stick shaker in-flight? Over the last 24 hours many pilots I've spoken with have raised this question. I considered and elected not to try to silence it in our case because I could not identify nor recall any guidance on the issue.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737-300 CREW HAD A CONTINUOUS STICK SHAKER CAUSED BY A DAMAGED 'ROSEMONT ANGLE OF ATTACK PROBE.'
Narrative: AIR TURN-BACK FOR BENT ANGLE OF ATTACK PROBE/CONTINUOUS STICK SHAKER. THIS FLT WAS AN AIR TURN-BACK FOR CONTINUOUS CAPT'S STICK SHAKER FROM TKOF (AIR/GND LOGIC TO 'AIR' MODE) TO LNDG. IT STARTED AT MAIN WHEEL LIFTOFF. CAPT'S ANGLE OF ATTACK VANE WAS BADLY BENT PROBABLY CAUSED BY JETWAY ON ARR AT BWI. NO WALKAROUND -- CREW CHANGE IN BWI WAS CAPT (MYSELF) ONLY, FO DID NOT DO ANOTHER EXTERIOR INSPECTION. NO ONE MENTIONED ANYTHING ABOUT JETWAY MATING BEING ROUGH. RAINY NIGHT, SO GND CREW DIDN'T NOTICE BENT ANGLE OF ATTACK PROBE ON PUSHBACK. NO BIRDS SEEN NEAR AIRPLANE AT ANY TIME SO NO BIRD STRIKE. AFTER LNDG FROM THE TURN-BACK, MY FO MENTIONED THAT ON THEIR PREVIOUS ARR THE JETWAY HIT THE ACFT UNUSUALLY HARD AND 3 DISTINCT TIMES. ALSO HAD A SINGLE CHANNEL AUTO SLAT FAIL INDICATION. STICK SHAKER WAS UNUSUALLY LOUD. DIFFICULT TO HEAR OVER, HAD TO TURN RADIO VOLUMES WAY UP. COULD NOT READ AN APCH CHART ON EITHER YOKE. AUTOPLT UNUSABLE. WHEN ENGAGED, IT WENT STRAIGHT TO MCP SPD WITH THE 'A' AIRSPD WARNING AND DROVE THE ACFT NOSE DOWN. LIGHT TURB, IMC ABOVE 3000 FT, RAIN AND ICING CONDITIONS. SINCE THE STICK SHAKER WAS A NUISANCE INDICATION, WE REQUESTED A TURN-BACK FROM ATC AND DID NOT DECLARE AN EMER. FLEW LONG ENOUGH TO CHK ALL COCKPIT CIRCUIT BREAKERS AND WARNING LIGHTS. SEARCH FOR QRH GUIDANCE, COORDINATE WITH DISPATCH, INFORM FLT ATTENDANTS OF OUR RETURN, MAKE A CALMING AND APPROPRIATE PA TO PAX AND LASTLY RUN QPC LNDG DATA WAS 115500 LBS VERSUS THE 114000 LB LIMIT. I ELECTED TO LAND BECAUSE OF THE FATIGUE OF THIS SIT RATHER THAN BREAK OFF THE APCH TO BURN FUEL. (THE LNDG WAS VERY SMOOTH, MINIMUM BRAKING USED, WRITTEN UP IN LOGBOOK FOR INSPECTION.) IN HINDSIGHT, I COULD HAVE LOWERED THE LNDG GEAR EARLIER TO BURN MORE FUEL WITHOUT ADDING FLYING TIME, BUT DIDN'T THINK OF IT. IN SUMMARY, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE HAD A CONTINUOUS STICK SHAKER INFLT. ALTHOUGH NOT ALARMING, I FOUND IT UNSETTLING AND VERY FATIGUING. I CLEANED THE AIRPLANE UP ON CLBOUT KEEPING SPD WELL ABOVE MINIMUMS WONDERING IF THE NUISANCE INDICATION WOULD STOP WITH FLAPS UP, AND ANGLE OF ATTACK VANE POSSIBLY UNSTICKING, OR POSSIBLY FIGURING OUT SOME WAY TO RESET IT. ELECTING TO TURN BACK AND ACCOMPLISHING ALL COORD MENTIONED ABOVE, I DID NOT THINK ABOUT ACFT WT UNTIL THE LAST MIN. AT NIGHT IN MEDIOCRE WX, WITH A LONG RWY IN SIGHT, SLIGHTLY ABOVE WT LIMITS, AND THE STICK SHAKER VERY IRRITATING FOR THE PREVIOUS 15 MINS, I ELECTED TO LAND AND HAVE THE AIRPLANE INSPECTED FOR THAT ALONG WITH OTHER NECESSARY MAINT. IS IT POSSIBLE AND/OR PRUDENT TO SILENCE A NUISANCE STICK SHAKER INFLT? OVER THE LAST 24 HRS MANY PLTS I'VE SPOKEN WITH HAVE RAISED THIS QUESTION. I CONSIDERED AND ELECTED NOT TO TRY TO SILENCE IT IN OUR CASE BECAUSE I COULD NOT IDENT NOR RECALL ANY GUIDANCE ON THE ISSUE.
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.