Hi folks, 

 

I am just cruising back as KLM686 MMMX-EHAM over the Golf and get GEN BUS 2 FAULT. 

As a consequence I get the message 'AUX PITOT HEAT INOPERATIVE'. 

 

That's not nice (see the Birgen Air disaster BHY301), but the pilot and co-pilot pitots are ok and should bring us savely over the Atlantic. 

 

Additionally I check the QRH and find to my astonishment on page AP.30.13 that (after a one-time trial to reset the generator)...

- Continue with affectec circuits inoperative

- Land at the nearest suitable airport

- Review applicable consequences

 

Well, the only announced consequence is the inoperative AUX pitot. 

 

Is the loss of GEN BUS 2 yet a reason to divert? 

This seems rather careful. I agree that a second loss in pitot would be reason enough due to unreliable speed indications. 

 

What do the real jockeys do in this situation? 

 

Thanx in advance.

Hi,

 

 

What do the real jockeys do in this situation?

 

Divert.

 

 

Well, the only announced consequence is the inoperative AUX pitot. 

 

Is the loss of GEN BUS 2 yet a reason to divert? 

This seems rather careful. I agree that a second loss in pitot would be reason enough due to unreliable speed indications.

 

Beeing carefull is important. Many people died because pilots wheren't carefull enough.

 

Always think: Better be on the ground and whish to be in the air than being in the air and wish to be on the ground.

 

BTW: You also loose the battery charger.

Point taken. 

A boxed Level 2 Alert should give me the indication that the issue is urgent... 

 

A boxed Level 2 Alert should give me the indication that the issue is urgent...

 

A red boxed level 3 alert is urgent. As in land as soon as possible.

 

An amber boxed level 2 alert requires pilot action but is not exactly a reason to divert unless the QRH recommends it.

 

 

Is the loss of GEN BUS 2 yet a reason to divert?

 

If you continue to read the checklist, it states "land at the nearest suitable airport". I think that would be a reason to divert.

I might get speared for saying this, but you can, in fact, be too careful:

Being too careful would mean you never departed in the first place, because removing yourself from terra firma means you're placing yourself at increased risk of harm.  Why risk it, right?

 

While the loss of a GEN BUS has taken you from three to two now, and you've lost your aux pitot, I wouldn't see it as a reason for any crazy diverts.  I see no reason to turn around, and no reason to try and stuff the plane into Greenland or Iceland.  If you're already over the Atlantic, press on to the destination.

 

I'm all for safety, but notional safety is bothersome.

Hi Kyle, 

 

But would Shannon then your choice for the divert? Or do we go on one hour more to EHAM, the home base? 

 

But would Shannon then your choice for the divert? Or do we go on one hour more to EHAM, the home base?

 

Personally, I'd push on.

 

Here are my factors:

-GEN BUS Failed - I still have two more, plus a RAT.  I'm now a 767/777/787/330.

-Likelihood the aux pitot heat is going to cause an issue, particularly at cruise - not likely.  Plus, it's aux, not primary.  Care must be taken in avoiding situations that could cause further issues, as a primary failure means any form of icing could be potentially disastrous.

-Maintenance base is AMS - why divert and inconvenience the passengers when it's not an emergency?  I'm sure another field could service the unit, but the cost will likely be a lot higher than if performed by company maintenance.  That's also not including the cost of the delay to the passengers, the aircraft re-positioning later, the landing/servicing fee (among several other fees), and the crew schedule now being thrown off.

 

Sure, your margin of safety just took a hit, but you're still reasonably safe.  Weather is the same way, yet we still fly in it all the time.  Clear weather with no wind or turbulence is ideal, but if weather is out there, we don't immediately start cancelling/diverting flights just because our margin of safety has been reduced.

 

 

Okay - flame suit on.

Going on, that was my choice... landed on time in EHAM, pax happy. Thanx. 

So basically - EROPS has been degraded; Check the flightplan for the EROPS segment - usually over water - to make sure it is inside the new EROPS limitations for 2 gens. (you'v turned into a twin as far as electricity is concerned).

 

Aux Pitot heat is down - Primary is still working. Checking enroute weather is an idea to make sue you don't encounter icing.

 

Talk to company maintenence (satphone, HF, VHF relaying via other company traffic, ACARS, whatever you need to do).

 

Trouble shoot to the extent you can (which is probably already covered in the above 2 items)

 

Make a Decision (divert? Change the flightplan to go around icing or stay closer to diversion airports? keep trucking on as planned because weather is good and no icing around?)

 

Keep re-assessing the situation periodically in case something changes (further degradation of systems or weather)

 

EROPS has been degraded

 

Never heard of EROPS (Extended range ops). We learn every day... Thanx, Trent. 

it's a little bit like ETOPS without the "T" bit

I wonder if the QRH directive to divert comes from an assumption that whatever caused the first failure could soon cause another?

 

I like the recommendation to call home base and talk to Maintenance.  They would know more about what could have caused those warnings.

Well I would divert. Since the QRH recommends it someone with way more knowledge than us has decided that divert is the best option. As a pilot you have all legal requirement to divert. Let us say that someone dies because of this (fire or some other reason) the pilot is fully responsible for that. If you land you'll be safe and know that it all went good. If it was stupid to land the company sure will change the QRH quick enough to make sure nobody else does it but the pilot's job is to follow procedures...

Yes, there are rare cases when the pilot shouldn't follow procedure but that is usually against the safer direction, not towards the unsafer..

 

HTH,

 Manfred

 

As a pilot you have all legal requirement to divert.

 

...stemming from where, exactly?

...stemming from where, exactly?

From the checklist. As a pilot you have to ensure the safety of your vehicle. If it says in the checklist that you should divert than you are forced to follow the checklist. If you land nobody can say "Why did you land? You broke a rule!" It is your job to follow the checklist. If you land and it actually was nothing wrong the company might get mad but that is their fault for having the wrong checklist, they can not sue the pilot for burning unnecessary fuel since it said to land in their papers. You can get in deep sh*t if you continue to fly and bad stuff happens though.

I admit that i am not a pilot but I am learning to be a maritime officer (ship captain) and the laws sometimes are surprisingly similar.

 

In this case the checklist is from McDonnell Douglas so I guess they chose the safer option. A company might have changed the info to something else.