ep1992
Topic Author
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:57 pm

Ramp Incident

Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:09 pm

There was an incident a witnessed in the ramp two weeks ago

The crew leader of the flight had already been done doing everything in the ramo area cones were removed ground power disconnected numbers given to pilot etc etc.

The crew leader was sitting in this convertible PushBack waiting for the signal from the AO crew to disconnect the jetbrige and to proceed with the Push.

All of a sudden the pilot and co pilot decided to turn on the front headlight noticeably causing the crew leader to hold his eyes duento the impact of the light.

There are procedures that should be taken when pilots and or co pilots are trying to have a crew leader from ground operations attention.

Due to this the crew leader suffer an corneal
Edema( swollen cornea) lost
Of vision and photobia for
Life

What protocols by FAA or in general were not made and what can the crew leader do to his favor
 
FGITD
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:02 am

Every airline should have a procedure in place. At least every airline I've worked on.

If he's that close to pushback time, there should be someone close by with a headset to communicate directly. If not, most aircraft have a horn (more a siren, but same principle) to notify the ground staff that they need something.

And as a last resort, I've even seen yelling down from the cockpit window.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2019
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:13 am

I think you mean photophobia. An unfortunate incident. I assume by "front headlight" you mean the taxi light(s).
I don't recall any FAA regs about taxi lights when not in taxiing. Common sense is the rule. Like "Strobe lights should not be illuminated [on ground] if doing so will have an adverse effect on other aircraft or vehicles." https://www.faa.gov/airports/runway_saf ... 202012.pdf
page 1-9.
Last edited by WPvsMW on Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:16 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
stratclub
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:14 am

With the crew on board ready for pushback there should have been ground communication established. It is pretty difficult to impose rules for flight crew that have no common sense. You just can't fix stupid.
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:04 am

There's no regulation to this end, and guidance from the FAA non-existent. I find it hard to believe that a flash from a landing or taxilight caused permanent damage unless one spent considerable time staring into the light.

It's very common around the world to gain attention by flashing the taxi or landing lights, and in some locations, it's procedure to notify that the crew is prepared to push, start engines, etc. Especially in cold climates and other situations in which one may not necessarily be standing by on the headset, or ground delays, it's very common to notify ground personnel by flashing the lights.

If the lights were turned on by mistake that's more than a flash, but fear of lights and permanent damage? Sounds more than a bit melodramatic.
 
T prop
Posts: 963
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:33 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:00 am

ep1992 wrote:
Due to this the crew leader suffer an corneal
Edema( swollen cornea) lost
Of vision and photobia for
Life


Right, what airplane is this? Does it have lasers for taxi lights? Lol. I don't believe your story.
 
ilovelamp
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2017 12:45 am

Re: Ramp Incident

Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:22 pm

If the light is as bright as you make it seem to be, how could any human stare at it for 5 seconds? The natural reaction would be to shut your eyes or turn your head.

This does sound a little fishy.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2019
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:07 pm

BTW, photophobia is not a disease, but among those afflicted, bright lights sometimes trigger headaches. That said, the retina can be destroyed by excessive photons (as Galileo sadly discovered from sun gazing), and real issue is whether there is permanent retinal injury. From the sound of it, this could become a worker's comp case, and the ophthalmologist and the worker's comp review board will analyze the patient's exam reports. I would say taxi lights are just one of many ramp risks that rampers accept. Based on the facts presented, I see no basis for action against the pilots.
 
FGITD
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:27 am

WPvsMW wrote:
I would say taxi lights are just one of many ramp risks that rampers accept. Based on the facts presented, I see no basis for action against the pilots.


while I agree with what others have been saying about this thread being...questionable... This I must absolutely disagree with.

No airline that I've worked for, alongside, or with, has ever had an official procedure of flashing the lights to get the attention of the ramp staff, while parked at the gate. (Except the red beacon, which is used to indicate emergency or movement, depending on circumstance)

The ramp is a dangerous enough place as it is, and yes, the staff out there do accept the risks. But to claim that it's perfectly fine and acceptable to potentially temporarily blind someone because ol' captain go fever is getting impatient is intolerable.
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:34 am

It's been standard procedure at each of the places I've worked. Moreover, it's procedure where I fly now. Additionally, it's the prescribed procedure for another operator with whom we closely work.

UPS ramp procedure at Louisville is to flash the lights when ready.

I see and use this procedure all over the globe.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2019
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:27 am

FGITD wrote:
WPvsMW wrote:
I would say taxi lights are just one of many ramp risks that rampers accept. Based on the facts presented, I see no basis for action against the pilots.


while I agree with what others have been saying about this thread being...questionable... This I must absolutely disagree with.


"Based on the facts presented,..." There has been no statement that turning on the taxi lights was INTENDED to injure the ramper. Nor did the OP assert that it was not a standard procedure, which we know it to be at many operators. The facts as presented are ... ramper and a pilot (captain?) had a heated discussion. A pilot (captain? FO?) later turned on the taxi lights. Now, if a pilot had said, "I'm going to blind you with the taxi lights...", different conclusion. Act intended to cause injury. That's criminal assault. If you say angry words at someone, and thrust your fist at them.. that's assault. If you actually hit them, that's assault and battery. However... facts as presented reflect standard operations. Moreover, if flashing the taxi lights is not done at that operator, I doubt that the operator has a policy about not flashing taxi lights (no facts about that). We have one side of the story, and what's presented lacks important facts, e.g., does that operator by policy or custom have pilots flash taxi lights when ready to push. Was the ramper's intercom working? Possible scenario, ramper doesn't respond on intercom, pilot flashes taxi lights.
 
ep1992
Topic Author
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:57 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:40 pm

Please guys ( Some of you ) dont get mad a t me by saying that Im over reacring Im just telling a truth a witnessed thats all,

Watching the poor crewmember on a daily basis with his glasses and the way he completely changed even as a person he no longer even likes to laugh but anyways another small detail.

The captain never tried the buzzer or horn that typically is used nor the they called Ops so that Ops could reach the ramp by radio.

Also guys remember the fact that when the crewmember talked to the captain he was verbally assault and told that they did not care about had happened and he was also never told the rrasoj of why he was being called for.

Idk sorry if I sound ( dramatic ) as some of you as said but Im just sharing what a consider a sad situation with people taht know about this.
 
User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 7649
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Re: Ramp Incident

Sun Dec 23, 2018 7:26 pm

747Whale wrote:
UPS ramp procedure at Louisville is to flash the lights when ready.


I haven’t been in the sim in a few years, but isn’t flashing the lights the way to get the simulated marshaller to do his thing?

I’ve been “hit” with the landing lights before. Uncomfortable and seeing a big glob of blue for a few moments, but no lasting affects. It would usually happen due to a miscommunication between the guy doing the flight deck and me doing the walk around. Those landing lights on the 57 are just over eye level.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
Unless it's expressly prohibited, it's allowed.
You are not entitled to a public safe space.
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2019
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sun Dec 23, 2018 7:49 pm

I'm glad the ramper is back at work.
Pilots forget they have a horn, since it's mostly used in MX. I've never heard a plane's horn used on the ramp.
https://blog.klm.com/does-a-plane-have-a-horn/
 
FGITD
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Sun Dec 23, 2018 8:21 pm

fr8mech wrote:
747Whale wrote:
UPS ramp procedure at Louisville is to flash the lights when ready.


I haven’t been in the sim in a few years, but isn’t flashing the lights the way to get the simulated marshaller to do his thing?

I’ve been “hit” with the landing lights before. Uncomfortable and seeing a big glob of blue for a few moments, but no lasting affects. It would usually happen due to a miscommunication between the guy doing the flight deck and me doing the walk around. Those landing lights on the 57 are just over eye level.


The only time I've seen it used is when approaching the gate, to get attention if need be. Never while parked. But admittedly my scope of perception is a bit limited, as I haven't worked all over the world with dozens of airlines, like some others on here have.

I too have been hit with lights before. Not pleasant or fun, but I also wouldn't think of it as being a life alerting condition. Unless of course he was staring straight into it...which given some of the people who work the ramp, wouldn't surprise me enormously.
 
stratclub
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:20 am

WPvsMW wrote:
BTW, photophobia is not a disease, but among those afflicted, bright lights sometimes trigger headaches. That said, the retina can be destroyed by excessive photons (as Galileo sadly discovered from sun gazing), and real issue is whether there is permanent retinal injury. From the sound of it, this could become a worker's comp case, and the ophthalmologist and the worker's comp review board will analyze the patient's exam reports. I would say taxi lights are just one of many ramp risks that rampers accept. Based on the facts presented, I see no basis for action against the pilots.

The flight crew should have been reprimanded for operating an aircraft system without clearance from the ground crew. Anytime you operate a system on an aircraft that is in the ramp crews control, you always get the ground crews clearance before operating any system.

You do have to be on your toes around live aircraft, but in no way should someone have to make allowances for a flight crew member that through shear stupidity puts people on the ground at risk.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2019
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 4:22 am

I think all would agree with "in no way should someone have to make allowances for a flight crew member that through shear stupidity puts people on the ground at risk.", but we don't have all the facts in this particular incident.
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:05 am

stratclub wrote:
WPvsMW wrote:
The flight crew should have been reprimanded for operating an aircraft system without clearance from the ground crew. Anytime you operate a system on an aircraft that is in the ramp crews control, you always get the ground crews clearance before operating any system.


Hold the phone there.

There's a reason why there's no position called "ramper-in-command." There is, however, a pilot in command.

A flight crew does not require a clearance to operate an aircraft system, and certainly not to flash or turn on a light.

When doing preflight checks in the cockpit, I'll make an effort to ensure that ground personnel are happy with testing hydraulics, and I'll do a safety check to ensure it's okay, but I don't need a clearance to activate the hydraulics and checking with maintenance or ground personnel is not required. I will generally check, but I don't seek ground clearance for most system functions, from starting the APU to setting brakes to power transfers, etc.

When it comes down to it, the last communication with the mechanic or tug operator on the intercom is generally "cleared to disconnect, show me the pin off the left side." The pilot's final call is to clear the ground personnel, not the other way around.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2019
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:51 am

747Whale wrote:
stratclub wrote:
WPvsMW wrote:
The flight crew should have been reprimanded for operating an aircraft system without clearance from the ground crew. Anytime you operate a system on an aircraft that is in the ramp crews control, you always get the ground crews clearance before operating any system.


Hold the phone there.

There's a reason why there's no position called "ramper-in-command." There is, however, a pilot in command.

A flight crew does not require a clearance to operate an aircraft system, and certainly not to flash or turn on a light.

When doing preflight checks in the cockpit, I'll make an effort to ensure that ground personnel are happy with testing hydraulics, and I'll do a safety check to ensure it's okay, but I don't need a clearance to activate the hydraulics and checking with maintenance or ground personnel is not required. I will generally check, but I don't seek ground clearance for most system functions, from starting the APU to setting brakes to power transfers, etc.

When it comes down to it, the last communication with the mechanic or tug operator on the intercom is generally "cleared to disconnect, show me the pin off the left side." The pilot's final call is to clear the ground personnel, not the other way around.


Wrong author attributed ... stratclub wrote that, not me. Square brackets are tricky when excising non-germane content. ;)
 
stratclub
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:11 am

747Whale wrote:
stratclub wrote:
WPvsMW wrote:
The flight crew should have been reprimanded for operating an aircraft system without clearance from the ground crew. Anytime you operate a system on an aircraft that is in the ramp crews control, you always get the ground crews clearance before operating any system.


Hold the phone there.

There's a reason why there's no position called "ramper-in-command." There is, however, a pilot in command.

A flight crew does not require a clearance to operate an aircraft system, and certainly not to flash or turn on a light.

When doing preflight checks in the cockpit, I'll make an effort to ensure that ground personnel are happy with testing hydraulics, and I'll do a safety check to ensure it's okay, but I don't need a clearance to activate the hydraulics and checking with maintenance or ground personnel is not required. I will generally check, but I don't seek ground clearance for most system functions, from starting the APU to setting brakes to power transfers, etc.

When it comes down to it, the last communication with the mechanic or tug operator on the intercom is generally "cleared to disconnect, show me the pin off the left side." The pilot's final call is to clear the ground personnel, not the other way around.

It's attitudes like that that get people killed.

I would admit that the landing light issue the OP referred to would probably not cause injury but does nod toward safe ground operation of aircraft systems.

There is some give and take in ground operations between the flight crew and ground personnel. Not all system operation such as switching power require ground crew clearance although setting brakes on every aircraft except a 787 would require hydraulics which would require ground clearance because the flight controls would become active when hydraulics are turned on.

Until the ground crew is cleared off of the headset and the all clear to taxi is acknowledged by the flight crew, control of the aircraft is in the hands of the ground crew. Just the way it is. Most of the flight crews I have ever worked with understand and appreciate the team effort of the concept, then there are some..........

The correct communication for pins would be:
Pilot: Pull the pins.
Ground crew: Observe the pins.
Pilot: Thumbs up for pins.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 3802
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 3:28 pm

I was fueling a CRJ once when the pilot decided to flash his wing mounted landing lights. For those unfamiliar the fuel panel is located about 1 foot in front of the wing root landing lights. It’s irresponsible. Had I happened to have been looking back towards the fuel panel at that second I have no doubt that I would have had some kind of vision damage. Too close, too many lumens.
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 7649
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 5:48 pm

747Whale wrote:
A flight crew does not require a clearance to operate an aircraft system, and certainly not to flash or turn on a light.


stratclub wrote:
The flight crew should have been reprimanded for operating an aircraft system without clearance from the ground crew. Anytime you operate a system on an aircraft that is in the ramp crews control, you always get the ground crews clearance before operating any system.


stratclub, 30+ years in maintenance, but I’m going to agree with the yoke actuator here. If the flight crew arrives at an aircraft, and the logbook is clean and complete, and there are no warning placards on the controls, the flight crew should be free to activate whatever systems they need to get the aircraft ready, without further permission. I would expect a certain level of caution and awareness with a “live” aircraft, but to ask for clearance is unnecessary.

If certain systems should not be operated because they present a imminent hazard to personnel, those systems should be tagged out and the logbook properly annotated and left “open”.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
Unless it's expressly prohibited, it's allowed.
You are not entitled to a public safe space.
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 6:54 pm

stratclub wrote:
It's attitudes like that that get people killed.


You're not a pilot, are you?

stratclub wrote:
Until the ground crew is cleared off of the headset and the all clear to taxi is acknowledged by the flight crew, control of the aircraft is in the hands of the ground crew. Just the way it is. Most of the flight crews I have ever worked with understand and appreciate the team effort of the concept, then there are some..........


Perhaps in your operation, that's the case. Perhaps you operate domestically, in one location, at a base, with the same operator or company.

I operate in most countries, in the busiest airports the world, and some very third world rural ones, too.

Team effort, yes, we all do that. But most of the time when I'm in the cockpit on the ground, there's nobody on a headset down there, nor is there expected to be. Not uncommonly 2 hours before departure, we're up there busy and there's enough going on surrounding us on the ramp and in the aircraft that there's nobody to ask, and I do not require a clearance to do my job.

It's more than a bit arrogant to tell me how to do my job, or to assume you have the big picture based on operating in one small corner of the globe.

stratclub wrote:

The correct communication for pins would be:
Pilot: Pull the pins.
Ground crew: Observe the pins.
Pilot: Thumbs up for pins.


Again, at your location, your operation, perhaps. Don't attempt to suggest that your way or procedure is the way it's done everywhere else, because it isn't. When you assert that "the correct communication is..." you're assuming a lot. It's more than a little arrogant. By making such a narrow assertion, you're implying that any other way is incorrect, and that is absolutely untrue.

fr8mech wrote:
747Whale wrote:
stratclub, 30+ years in maintenance, but I’m going to agree with the yoke actuator here.


A bit more than a yoke actuator...nearly four decades of that, but also nearly four decades of actuating wrenches, too. Plus inspector. Plus director of maintenance several times. But yes, I also actuate a control yoke.
 
stratclub
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:04 pm

Certainly you give the aircrew a clean aircraft when it's released for flight. If it is not released for flight because maintenance is still ongoing you would communicate that to the aircrew when they arrive at the aircraft either by tagout or verbally.

I think that what I take exception with is someone having the need to be "in charge". It doesn't quite work that way me thinks. The way ground operations work is that everyone has a specific piece of the process and cooperate to get the job done. The idea that requesting ground clearance is asking permission from the the person in charge of the ground crew is absurd.

Landing lights? Why would a pilot have a need to turn landing lights on on an aircraft that is already pre-flighted? If you need to contact the ground you should use the ground call. And yes, landing lights are extremely bright and will momentarily blind you if someone turns them on when you are looking at them.
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3585
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:00 pm

I have been blinded momentarily by a nose taxi light on a Qatar A330. I was sitting on the tug with the headset plugged in, when they flashed the taxi light to get my attention. They got it all right. Pain in my eyes that lasted about half an hour. I could not see for a couple of minutes, and as I was on my own they got a late departure of about 10 minutes until I could see well enough again.
Our system here when awaiting aircraft with departure delays due ATC, is to sit in the van (it is cold here) until the pilot turns on the red anticollision lights. Then we go and ask what he wants. It is strictly verboten to flash the lights when stationary at the gate.
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:10 pm

stratclub wrote:
I think that what I take exception with is someone having the need to be "in charge". It doesn't quite work that way me thinks. The way ground operations work is that everyone has a specific piece of the process and cooperate to get the job done. The idea that requesting ground clearance is asking permission from the the person in charge of the ground crew is absurd.


You understand the concept of pilot in command?

There's no such thing as a ramper in command, or mechanic in command. Or loadmaster in command. Or flight engineer in command.

Every flight does have a PIC assigned, however, and a PIC is required, responsible, and very much in charge of the operation of the aircraft.

It has nothing to do with an individual's need to be "in charge," but it is very much a regulatory issue, a legal issue, and every certificate holder (read: airline) must designate a pilot in command.

Other positions have supervisors and leads, but none of those are command positions or legally allowed to be or required to be in charge of the aircraft or operation. None of them take the full legal responsibility for the aircraft, either, or hold the final responsibility for the airplane.

The pilot in command does, however.

The crew will seek clearance for an engine start, and for taxi, and will coordinate operation of systems that might impact ground personnel, but it is presumptive and arrogant to suggest that the aircraft "is in the hands of the ground crew," or that the flight crew requires authorization from ground personnel to operate systems.

When it's time to taxi, the ground personnel do not release the flight crew to begin operating. The flight crew releases the ground crew to go do something else, because the flight crew is done with them.

It's a team effort, but authority resides in the cockpit.

stratclub wrote:
Landing lights? Why would a pilot have a need to turn landing lights on on an aircraft that is already pre-flighted? If you need to contact the ground you should use the ground call. And yes, landing lights are extremely bright and will momentarily blind you if someone turns them on when you are looking at them.


Standard procedure at UPS operations at Louisville is to notify the ground personnel when ready by flashing the lights. This is by no means an isolated procedure, and is often done around the world.

Preflight is irrelevant.
 
stratclub
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 1:34 am

747Whale wrote:
stratclub wrote:
I think that what I take exception with is someone having the need to be "in charge". It doesn't quite work that way me thinks. The way ground operations work is that everyone has a specific piece of the process and cooperate to get the job done. The idea that requesting ground clearance is asking permission from the the person in charge of the ground crew is absurd.


You understand the concept of pilot in command?

There's no such thing as a ramper in command, or mechanic in command. Or loadmaster in command. Or flight engineer in command.

Every flight does have a PIC assigned, however, and a PIC is required, responsible, and very much in charge of the operation of the aircraft.

It has nothing to do with an individual's need to be "in charge," but it is very much a regulatory issue, a legal issue, and every certificate holder (read: airline) must designate a pilot in command.

Other positions have supervisors and leads, but none of those are command positions or legally allowed to be or required to be in charge of the aircraft or operation. None of them take the full legal responsibility for the aircraft, either, or hold the final responsibility for the airplane.

The pilot in command does, however.

The crew will seek clearance for an engine start, and for taxi, and will coordinate operation of systems that might impact ground personnel, but it is presumptive and arrogant to suggest that the aircraft "is in the hands of the ground crew," or that the flight crew requires authorization from ground personnel to operate systems.

When it's time to taxi, the ground personnel do not release the flight crew to begin operating. The flight crew releases the ground crew to go do something else, because the flight crew is done with them.

It's a team effort, but authority resides in the cockpit.

stratclub wrote:
Landing lights? Why would a pilot have a need to turn landing lights on on an aircraft that is already pre-flighted? If you need to contact the ground you should use the ground call. And yes, landing lights are extremely bright and will momentarily blind you if someone turns them on when you are looking at them.


Standard procedure at UPS operations at Louisville is to notify the ground personnel when ready by flashing the lights. This is by no means an isolated procedure, and is often done around the world.

Preflight is irrelevant.

With all due respect sir, yes I do understand the concept of Pilot in command. However, if the aircraft you command is currently in the ramp area that ground activities are taking place, your eyes on the ground are a valuable resource you rely on to ensure safety to the aircraft, ground equipment and personnel. And yes, any Pilot in command will tell you that even though they are the pilot in command they will defer to the ground crew for safe operation in such situations.

Once you clear the ground crew off of the headset, they just don't wonder off. They always wait for acknowledgment for O.K. to taxi from you and wait until you start to taxi.

The only time I have seen landing lights used during launch is when an aircraft is blocked out and after the person on the headset is cleared off, the flight crew will flash the nose taxi light to let the marshaller know the aircraft is ready to depart. From what I have heard, that for FEDEX, many of their pilots are ex military and the flash the nose taxi light is a carryover from military operations. Sitting on the stand, there is absolutely no reason to turn on landing lights except for the ground crews preflight.
 
User avatar
CLTRampRat
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:42 am

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 4:03 am

During my time with the airlines as a ramp rat I've had plenty of stare downs with taxi and landing lights that pilots forgot to turn off as they pulled into the gate. It sucks, but it's nothing that will scar you for life. Old school bulb or LED it doesn't matter, a few blinks and some curse words about "Glorified Bus Drivers" and you'll be all good.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2019
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 5:58 am

There should be a hand signal for "turn your taxi/landing lights off".
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 6:16 am

stratclub wrote:
With all due respect sir, yes I do understand the concept of Pilot in command. However, if the aircraft you command is currently in the ramp area that ground activities are taking place, your eyes on the ground are a valuable resource you rely on to ensure safety to the aircraft, ground equipment and personnel.


No argument there whatsoever. No one has said differently.

stratclub wrote:
And yes, any Pilot in command will tell you that even though they are the pilot in command they will defer to the ground crew for safe operation in such situations.


Refer to and coordinate with ground crew, yes. Defer to them, no.

Space and time are inadequate to list all the first hand reasons why.

One will absolutely incorporate the ground crew as part of CRM during ground operations, but I've seen far too many cases of ground personnel giving incorrect signals, incorrect information, incorrect guidance, and doing incorrect things to defer to them. Listen to them, coordinate with them, consider their input, even seek their input, absolutely, yes, of course.

What I've seen ground personnel do over the years would fill volumes with what-not-to-do. Whether it's the two I caught spraying a fuel truck down with fuel in an attempt to kill a bee, the crew ground crew that tried to repeatedly ramp the tug attached to our nosegear with a second tug, in order to move the first tug, the ground crew that taxied us into another 737 when I rode as a passenger, resulting in a sheared winglet, personnel that attempted to load incorrectly, fuel incorrectly, overload, overfuel, pulled chocks without asking, or thousands of other examples...there are very valid reasons why the ground crew is not in charge, not the least of which is that they aren't responsible for the aircraft.

I've had ground crew panic and shout for a shutdown when an engine torches on start; crew response is to follow procedure, not the direction of the ground crew. I had a start valve fail to close several months ago; a mechanic on board told me it was only an indication and said I should ignore it and "just go." Negative. Shut down, tow back to the gate, and do a manual start valve close. Had I followed his counsel, most likely we'd have had a burst starter. On and on.

stratclub wrote:
Sitting on the stand, there is absolutely no reason to turn on landing lights except for the ground crews preflight.


Again, it's procedure at many locations, one of which I cited as an example. In such cases, it's expected. In fact, it's required.

WPvsMW wrote:
There should be a hand signal for "turn your taxi/landing lights off".


When one sees ground personnel shading their eyes, it's a pretty good indication that one should turn off the lights.

During fire operations, we keep them on; we use pulse light functions on the landing and taxi lights to make us more visible in flight, and we hot load; while pulled into the pit, and all engine run times, and most times when the battery is on, the lights stay on.

In other operations, both domestic and international, we start in place and taxi from the park spot with no push; there may be some time after start before we move, and the marshaller is waiting. When ready to taxi, the standard is to flash the light to alert the marshaller that we're ready to leave the spot.
 
stratclub
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:31 am

Great stories. Ya, there are some people that have no business around live aircraft. It is a given that when things go wrong, the person responsible would be the PIC because he is in command of the aircraft.

During the B767 AWACS certification program, we had a lot of new hires that hadn't been around large aircraft much. On one occasion, day shift launched the airplane which was a straight out shot to the taxi way.

The guy on paddles, which was the wrong place to be, stood in front of the aircraft and motioned it forward and when he figured out the aircraft was on a direct path to run him over if it continued he froze. Fortunately, you guys are trained to stop if you loose sight of the marshaller. :biggrin:

Being it was a military program, it was just amazing the shit storm of rules they inflicted on us for this "incident". It seems like with a military programs there are so many rules both from the company and the military customer, that if you try to comply with all the rules you will be in non compliance for some of those vary same rules.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 3802
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 12:53 pm

WPvsMW wrote:
There should be a hand signal for "turn your taxi/landing lights off".


If marshaling I’ll put the wands down and won’t give further guidance until they are off. I’m not damaging my eyesight, especially at night.
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 3:22 pm

Having made my previous statements, I'll say that there are flight crews who seem to have no sense of those around them, too; I've seen a lot of severed headset cords dangling from nose gear after flights when crews attempted to taxi while someone was still attached, and have seen a few headsets dangling, too. For some reason, more often on the 747 than any other.
 
greendot
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 6:08 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 3:49 pm

stratclub wrote:
747Whale wrote:
stratclub wrote:

Until the ground crew is cleared off of the headset and the all clear to taxi is acknowledged by the flight crew, control of the aircraft is in the hands of the ground crew. Just the way it is. Most of the flight crews I have ever worked with understand and appreciate the team effort of the concept, then there are some...........


This is incorrect. Any time the aircraft is moving, including on the ground, the PIC is legally in charge. The ground crew is delegated a task but not the legal responsibility. The PIC must intervene to stop the aircraft either through affirmative action or verbal command if a collision is imminent. There is a big difference between the "team" element and the legal reality.

Similarly, ship captains are also always liable even when a habour pilot is guiding a ship through difficult ports. There was an episode of Mighty Ships where the Captain took over from a harbor pilot because he was incompetent.
 
stratclub
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Ramp Incident

Tue Dec 25, 2018 9:42 pm

greendot wrote:
stratclub wrote:
747Whale wrote:
Until the ground crew is cleared off of the headset and the all clear to taxi is acknowledged by the flight crew, control of the aircraft is in the hands of the ground crew. Just the way it is. Most of the flight crews I have ever worked with understand and appreciate the team effort of the concept, then there are some...........


This is incorrect. Any time the aircraft is moving, including on the ground, the PIC is legally in charge. The ground crew is delegated a task but not the legal responsibility. The PIC must intervene to stop the aircraft either through affirmative action or verbal command if a collision is imminent. There is a big difference between the "team" element and the legal reality.

Similarly, ship captains are also always liable even when a habour pilot is guiding a ship through difficult ports. There was an episode of Mighty Ships where the Captain took over from a harbor pilot because he was incompetent.

I'm real good at arguing myself into a corner and really I think I was arguing semantics more so than fact.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 3221
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

Re: Ramp Incident

Sat Dec 29, 2018 5:30 am

At one US major airline, after pushback and after interphone communications are done and push tug is disconnected, the taxi light is flashed to notify the marshaller he may leave and we are on our own. They acknowledge with a wave of the wands in the direction we will taxi.
The gun is a precious Symbol of Freedom
Criminals are the deadly cancer on American society
Those who believe otherwise are consumed by an ideology
That is impervious to evidence of tyrants who disarm their citizens

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos