37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 922887 |
Time | |
Date | 201012 |
Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | STL.Airport |
State Reference | MO |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Parked Taxi |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Anticollision Light |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Ground Event / Encounter Person / Animal / Bird |
Narrative:
Upon arrival at the gate; we were parked with the parking brake set waiting for ground power to be plugged in and the left engine running as per company procedure. During this time; the ramp personnel were signaling to us something about the beacon. We could see in the reflection from the terminal that the upper beacon was on and I was motioning that it's on because the engine is still running. This exchange went on until the external power was on and we shut off the engine and beacon.with post flight checklist complete; I went down to speak with ramp personnel regarding the beacon. I was told they were trying to tell us to turn on the lower beacon because the engine was still running and one of their rampers had to be physically pulled back from engine 1 to prevent being ingested. I explained to him that both beacons are on the same switch but the lower one must have burned out on the flight over. It is their procedure to approach the aircraft after the beacon is turned off. Seeing the lower beacon not blinking; (the ramp agent's view of the upper beacon was blocked by the jetway); he approached the aircraft in front of engine 1 while it was still at idle. He was pulled away before he could be harmed. The beacon was written up and I even called the airbus maintenance control desk; told them what happened and advised the beacon needs to be replaced at an out station.the cause of this near-miss with death was the company's procedure on engine and APU usage at the gate; and a lower beacon outage. Had the APU been running; both engines would have been shut down and the incident never materialized. The real problem is inconsistencies. Some taxi in with the APU on; some don't. When I ask captains about the APU and taxiing in; they state 'safety first'; or something similar.I have recommended; along with most pilots and at least one FAA inspector that the company adopt the procedure of shutting down the running engine(s) and operating the APU when blocked in at the gate. The APU procedure could be made policy simply by making it standard operating procedure for the ramp to chalk the aircraft and plug external power; every time; regardless. When the crew leaves an aircraft for an right.O.north. And there's still no power on it; they simply make sure someone is APU qualified or shut it down.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A failed lower anti-collision light and the lack of a company SOP for shutting down engines when parked nearly spelled disaster when a ramp employee had to be physically prevented from passing in front of the still operating left engine.
Narrative: Upon arrival at the gate; we were parked with the parking brake set waiting for ground power to be plugged in and the left engine running as per company procedure. During this time; the ramp personnel were signaling to us something about the beacon. We could see in the reflection from the terminal that the upper beacon was on and I was motioning that it's on because the engine is still running. This exchange went on until the external power was on and we shut off the engine and beacon.With post flight checklist complete; I went down to speak with ramp personnel regarding the beacon. I was told they were trying to tell us to turn on the lower beacon because the engine was still running and one of their rampers had to be physically pulled back from engine 1 to prevent being ingested. I explained to him that both beacons are on the same switch but the lower one must have burned out on the flight over. It is their procedure to approach the aircraft after the beacon is turned off. Seeing the lower beacon not blinking; (the ramp agent's view of the upper beacon was blocked by the jetway); he approached the aircraft in front of engine 1 while it was still at idle. He was pulled away before he could be harmed. The beacon was written up and I even called the Airbus Maintenance Control desk; told them what happened and advised the beacon needs to be replaced at an out station.The cause of this near-miss with death was the company's procedure on engine and APU usage at the gate; and a lower beacon outage. Had the APU been running; both engines would have been shut down and the incident never materialized. The real problem is inconsistencies. Some taxi in with the APU on; some don't. When I ask Captains about the APU and taxiing in; they state 'safety first'; or something similar.I have recommended; along with most pilots and at least one FAA Inspector that the company adopt the procedure of shutting down the running engine(s) and operating the APU when blocked in at the gate. The APU procedure could be made policy simply by making it standard operating procedure for the ramp to chalk the aircraft and plug external power; every time; regardless. When the crew leaves an aircraft for an R.O.N. and there's still no power on it; they simply make sure someone is APU qualified or shut it down.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.