Vacuum Pump Failure + Infringment
Essel,
First of all, you appear to have done a good job in recognizing and dealing with the problem. You already indicated that you did not know exactly what had happened, or what else may have happened, and made a good, conservative decision to land and sort it out.
Some discussion has been made regarding the basics of flying. Perhaps the focusing too much on the failed vacum and gyro were a key that got you into trouble. Fixating on an instrument or a single problem is one of the biggest problems any of us face. Aviate first; fly the airplane. That means heading and altitude. Where a precessing instrument might tend to lead one astray, I recommend carrying post-it notes; the sticky back notes that you can put over an instrument in a pinch to keep it from enticing you to turn or climb or dive.
Therefore, aviate. Fly the airplane.
Next, you already recognized that you should have spoken with control. Confess; tell them you have a problem, tell them what your intentions are. While vacum pumps do fail with alarming regularity, vacum pumps are driven by the engine accessory section, which is full of small parts and gears which on occasion also fail. When they fail they send parts throughout the engine, and the upshot is an engine failure soon thereafter due to oil starvation or broken parts going places they shouldn't. So yes, you did have a problem which on the face is very minor, but could be a sign of something much bigger. Don't hesitate to not only tell air traffic control what your problem is, but the nature of any assistance you require, and tell ATC what you intend to do. That's the communicate part.
The third part is navigate. The heading failed, but the magnetic compass should be a regular part of your scan (as you check for precession of the directional gyro), and therefore something you're accustomed to using all the time. However, if you have any concerns about navigation at all, don't be afraid to ask ATC for vectors or guidance at the same time you tell them your problem and state your intentions.
Flying is about decisions and judgement, and that comes from experience, which in turn comes from evaluating decisions and judgement. Ideally it gets a little better each time. Today's event is nothing more than a step in that process. Fly safe.
First of all, you appear to have done a good job in recognizing and dealing with the problem. You already indicated that you did not know exactly what had happened, or what else may have happened, and made a good, conservative decision to land and sort it out.
Some discussion has been made regarding the basics of flying. Perhaps the focusing too much on the failed vacum and gyro were a key that got you into trouble. Fixating on an instrument or a single problem is one of the biggest problems any of us face. Aviate first; fly the airplane. That means heading and altitude. Where a precessing instrument might tend to lead one astray, I recommend carrying post-it notes; the sticky back notes that you can put over an instrument in a pinch to keep it from enticing you to turn or climb or dive.
Therefore, aviate. Fly the airplane.
Next, you already recognized that you should have spoken with control. Confess; tell them you have a problem, tell them what your intentions are. While vacum pumps do fail with alarming regularity, vacum pumps are driven by the engine accessory section, which is full of small parts and gears which on occasion also fail. When they fail they send parts throughout the engine, and the upshot is an engine failure soon thereafter due to oil starvation or broken parts going places they shouldn't. So yes, you did have a problem which on the face is very minor, but could be a sign of something much bigger. Don't hesitate to not only tell air traffic control what your problem is, but the nature of any assistance you require, and tell ATC what you intend to do. That's the communicate part.
The third part is navigate. The heading failed, but the magnetic compass should be a regular part of your scan (as you check for precession of the directional gyro), and therefore something you're accustomed to using all the time. However, if you have any concerns about navigation at all, don't be afraid to ask ATC for vectors or guidance at the same time you tell them your problem and state your intentions.
Flying is about decisions and judgement, and that comes from experience, which in turn comes from evaluating decisions and judgement. Ideally it gets a little better each time. Today's event is nothing more than a step in that process. Fly safe.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNS3GUPPY
Aviate, communicate, navigate - you will be in trouble, but a well explained post never the less of the point I was seeking to make earlier.
I think a vac failure in IMC with only an electric turn and slip is nearly always going to be a least a pan.
Aviate, communicate, navigate - you will be in trouble, but a well explained post never the less of the point I was seeking to make earlier.
I think a vac failure in IMC with only an electric turn and slip is nearly always going to be a least a pan.
Aviate, navigate, communicate - you will be in trouble,
Navigate goes hand in hand with flying the airplane.
Communication is always second to flying the airplane, second to remaining oriented, knowing where you are, and making the airplane go where ou want it to be. Fly first, talk later. There's little point in talking if you haven't made inroads in flying the airplane. Priorities.
You will be in trouble if you don't aviate, navigate, and communicate. Always.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"vacum pumps are driven by the engine accessory section, which is full of small parts and gears which on occasion also fail. When they fail they send parts throughout the engine, and the upshot is an engine failure soon thereafter due to oil starvation or broken parts going places they shouldn't."
Exactly what was going through my mind. By sheer and weird coincidence I had been reading about such an incident, and so was concerned to get overhead the nearest asap. If I hadn't climbed slightly (300ft) as I approached the overhead I wouldnt be writing this post now, of course. If was hardly no time between infringing and uninfringing (thanks to LARS informing me).
re: the DI. Yes, I was also aware that could no longer be accurate.
Thanks to all the other posters too. What a fantastic resource this is.
Also reasuring to know, as an airline passenger, how good the UK ATC system. Hats off to them.
More posts very welcome btw.
Exactly what was going through my mind. By sheer and weird coincidence I had been reading about such an incident, and so was concerned to get overhead the nearest asap. If I hadn't climbed slightly (300ft) as I approached the overhead I wouldnt be writing this post now, of course. If was hardly no time between infringing and uninfringing (thanks to LARS informing me).
re: the DI. Yes, I was also aware that could no longer be accurate.
Thanks to all the other posters too. What a fantastic resource this is.
Also reasuring to know, as an airline passenger, how good the UK ATC system. Hats off to them.
More posts very welcome btw.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One further point..and this is not in any way an excuse...but the LARS freq was very very busy...it was solid transmissions. Waiting for a silence and pouncing on it would have been a task in itself...coupled with not wanting to alarm the passenger I chose to concentrate on getting tothe overhead and watching the T&Ps.
I could have switched to 121.5 of course, in hindsight. But again, I was only 2 or 3 mins away from the overhead.
I wasn't panicking or such like, I chose my priority (getting tarmac beneath me until I was happy the engine was operating okay) and saw it through...my vertical navigation (in terms of airspace, not terrain!) dropped off my attention for a short while - unfortunately.
I could have switched to 121.5 of course, in hindsight. But again, I was only 2 or 3 mins away from the overhead.
I wasn't panicking or such like, I chose my priority (getting tarmac beneath me until I was happy the engine was operating okay) and saw it through...my vertical navigation (in terms of airspace, not terrain!) dropped off my attention for a short while - unfortunately.
Last edited by Essel; 20th May 2008 at 20:59.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing I wanted to make love to after that flight was a bottle of Corona thanks very much!
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate was drilled into me right from the start...and it did guide my actions. But I suppose it does depend to some extent on the nature of the problem. Communciating can help you aviate and navigate better of course if the nature of the problem is not directly affecting the handling of the aircraft.....which was my scenario...however I was also concerned it could get nastier if the engine had been affected.
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate was drilled into me right from the start...and it did guide my actions. But I suppose it does depend to some extent on the nature of the problem. Communciating can help you aviate and navigate better of course if the nature of the problem is not directly affecting the handling of the aircraft.....which was my scenario...however I was also concerned it could get nastier if the engine had been affected.
Essel,
In practice the basics tend to get done at the same time, of course. However, particularly when faced with an abnormal situation, it's crucial to remember which things take priority.
One of the flying jobs I've done for many years is aerial firefighting. Several years ago we had a pilot die at a training school. The school involved complex scenarios on the ground, and then in the air, with simulated fires, diversions, airspace issues, etc. One of the things required during the exercise was to address a diversion to a new fire, and that required programming radios and fixing new coordinates.
These particular airplanes aren't very stable, and require that the pilot be hands-on at all times. The radios, particularly the FM radios, require up to fifteen steps to change the frequency; they require a lot of attention in some cases. The same may be true for navigating to the fire, particularly when it's in an area of a thousand square miles of rough country and mountainous terrain, in strong winds and turbulence, and in the case of the school, no smoke available to actually see the fire (simulated fire with panel markers on the ground). The pilot died tuning his radio.
All the pilots doing that work are good hands-on stick and rudder aviators. Very experienced pilots. All with an ag/crop dusting background, as well as other types of flying. Considerable mountain experience, a lot of flying close to obstcles, formation flying, flying in low visibility or instrument conditions, etc. However, this pilot left the fire area and entered an orbit so he could program his radio and set up a diversion to the new coordinates. He became preoccupied with the need to get this done and get on his way, and in the process stalled and spun. He was killed on impact and the wreckage, having descended vertically, was spread over a very small area. A fire broke out, but was quickly extinguished by the water in the drop tank.
This was a very good example of placing navigation and communication ahead of aviating. A month later another pilot from the same company died on a fire as he was busy talking on the radio during a drop run at low altitude, and missed a single power line stretched through the brush across a hillside. He caught one landing gear and struck the ground, where he exploded. All three, aviating, navigating, and communicating are often done nearly simultaneously; we think, talk and do at the same time. However, there are times when it's best to separate the functions; flying the airplane should take priority at all times and take precedence over all other functions. It sounds so obvious, but we could spend hours and pages after pages listing the fatalities that have resulted from not doing this very thing. It only takes once, after all.
In practice the basics tend to get done at the same time, of course. However, particularly when faced with an abnormal situation, it's crucial to remember which things take priority.
One of the flying jobs I've done for many years is aerial firefighting. Several years ago we had a pilot die at a training school. The school involved complex scenarios on the ground, and then in the air, with simulated fires, diversions, airspace issues, etc. One of the things required during the exercise was to address a diversion to a new fire, and that required programming radios and fixing new coordinates.
These particular airplanes aren't very stable, and require that the pilot be hands-on at all times. The radios, particularly the FM radios, require up to fifteen steps to change the frequency; they require a lot of attention in some cases. The same may be true for navigating to the fire, particularly when it's in an area of a thousand square miles of rough country and mountainous terrain, in strong winds and turbulence, and in the case of the school, no smoke available to actually see the fire (simulated fire with panel markers on the ground). The pilot died tuning his radio.
All the pilots doing that work are good hands-on stick and rudder aviators. Very experienced pilots. All with an ag/crop dusting background, as well as other types of flying. Considerable mountain experience, a lot of flying close to obstcles, formation flying, flying in low visibility or instrument conditions, etc. However, this pilot left the fire area and entered an orbit so he could program his radio and set up a diversion to the new coordinates. He became preoccupied with the need to get this done and get on his way, and in the process stalled and spun. He was killed on impact and the wreckage, having descended vertically, was spread over a very small area. A fire broke out, but was quickly extinguished by the water in the drop tank.
This was a very good example of placing navigation and communication ahead of aviating. A month later another pilot from the same company died on a fire as he was busy talking on the radio during a drop run at low altitude, and missed a single power line stretched through the brush across a hillside. He caught one landing gear and struck the ground, where he exploded. All three, aviating, navigating, and communicating are often done nearly simultaneously; we think, talk and do at the same time. However, there are times when it's best to separate the functions; flying the airplane should take priority at all times and take precedence over all other functions. It sounds so obvious, but we could spend hours and pages after pages listing the fatalities that have resulted from not doing this very thing. It only takes once, after all.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: An ATC centre this side of the moon.
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never be affraid to call Pan or even mayday if you have any concerns what ever and you feel the situation warrants it,especially on a busy frequncy when it is difficult to get a word in you will be amazed how those words "Pan Pan" captivate the controller!!! It certainally grabs my attention!! You will never get reprimanded for over reacting with ATC and one day it may save your life!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNS3Guppy : A very sobering but informative post.
The obviously frightening thing about your story is how such a basic and tragic mistake can occur to even the best. Interpolating that back to my amateur flying leaves me feeling very vulnerable indeed.
Just out of interest I would be very curious to know how you feel as a pilot after completing such missions successfully as you unplug...relief or elation?
The obviously frightening thing about your story is how such a basic and tragic mistake can occur to even the best. Interpolating that back to my amateur flying leaves me feeling very vulnerable indeed.
Just out of interest I would be very curious to know how you feel as a pilot after completing such missions successfully as you unplug...relief or elation?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Age: 59
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread. There is a lot of discussion "on the ground" about the correct actions, but until it happens for real who know's what one will do.
I had a vacumn pump fail on a 172 a couple of years ago coasting out to
Alderney just approaching the Isle of Wight. I didn't declare a Pan but requested an immediate divert and explained why to Southampton who were controlling us at the time. I have to say the calm ATC voice really helped. I was above cloud at about 3000 feet. Although we had a working GPS, Southampton gave us vectors.
The only slightly sticky point was descending through the cloud on partial panel, which we all practice during our instrument training and think we'll never have to use ! We covered up the failed instruments with post-its to avoid disorientation as has been mentioned. The vectors from Southampton would have made for a descending turn on partial panel in cloud so we requested a descent without turning in cloud to reduce the potential for a problem which was granted without discussion. Reduce throttle a bit, get on instruments, keep the wings level and watch the VSI - and keep scanning, - it seemed we were in cloud for ages but it was less than a minute. When we popped out no further problems. And no landing charge from Southampton as well ! Another lesson learnt !
LF
I had a vacumn pump fail on a 172 a couple of years ago coasting out to
Alderney just approaching the Isle of Wight. I didn't declare a Pan but requested an immediate divert and explained why to Southampton who were controlling us at the time. I have to say the calm ATC voice really helped. I was above cloud at about 3000 feet. Although we had a working GPS, Southampton gave us vectors.
The only slightly sticky point was descending through the cloud on partial panel, which we all practice during our instrument training and think we'll never have to use ! We covered up the failed instruments with post-its to avoid disorientation as has been mentioned. The vectors from Southampton would have made for a descending turn on partial panel in cloud so we requested a descent without turning in cloud to reduce the potential for a problem which was granted without discussion. Reduce throttle a bit, get on instruments, keep the wings level and watch the VSI - and keep scanning, - it seemed we were in cloud for ages but it was less than a minute. When we popped out no further problems. And no landing charge from Southampton as well ! Another lesson learnt !
LF
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had you established contact with the LARS freq before the failure occurred? If so, I'm a little disappointed that they didn't advise you of your impending infringement. Ok, I know you said the frequency was busy and maybe that's why they didn't notice. I hope it wasn't any of the Farnborough sectors. Helping to avoid CAS infringments is part of their objective...
It’s a win-win for all of us! We can help you to
have a safe flight through some of the UK’s
busiest skies, whilst at the same time, avoid
infringing controlled airspace used by the
many commercial flights descending into,
or climbing out of, the London area airports.
have a safe flight through some of the UK’s
busiest skies, whilst at the same time, avoid
infringing controlled airspace used by the
many commercial flights descending into,
or climbing out of, the London area airports.
Just out of interest I would be very curious to know how you feel as a pilot after completing such missions successfully as you unplug...relief or elation?
Usually when one gets out of the airplane, there's fueling and servicing to do, chasing down any maintenance issues, paperwork, and I make a habit of always washing the airplane thoroughly as the retardant is corrosive in the long run. Dispatches don't allow much time to prepare, so there really isn't a lot of time to think about where one has just been; just to think about what's next. It's much like approaching an obstacle in flight; it's the center of your universe until obstacle clearance is assured, then you're focusing on the next obstacle and beyond...sort of flying through the obstacles, rather than worrying about what's gone behind.
I think that same mentality translates well to abnormal experiences in flight for any of us. One may be flying along on a beautiful day, fat, dumb, and happy, and then the engine fails. At that point, things have changed. Let go of what was, deal with lays ahead...mentally switching gears, not getting tied up in past. Same kind of thing with the fires...not really a fright or a thrill, just a job to do, and when it's over, there's only the next job to think about.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For whatever it is worth I thought I may as well put my two cents in here and support the aviate before all other tasks when flying.
When I was flying the Cats in the fire suppression business there were two Cats that hit each other head on circling around a downed helicopter that had crashed near the fire they were working....the sad part is the helicopter pilot was unhurt and four pilots died because they failed to aviate while doing something else.
As far as having tired legs after a day of fire suppression we really had it tough flying the Cats because they are real heavy bitches as far as rudder use goes.....and we didn't get much time to fly straight and level as we usually could scoop water near the fires.....three minutes from drop to drop was not unusual.
The most drops I ever did in one day was 142 in the North West Territories.
But I degress so back to the topic.
When I was flying the Cats in the fire suppression business there were two Cats that hit each other head on circling around a downed helicopter that had crashed near the fire they were working....the sad part is the helicopter pilot was unhurt and four pilots died because they failed to aviate while doing something else.
As far as having tired legs after a day of fire suppression we really had it tough flying the Cats because they are real heavy bitches as far as rudder use goes.....and we didn't get much time to fly straight and level as we usually could scoop water near the fires.....three minutes from drop to drop was not unusual.
The most drops I ever did in one day was 142 in the North West Territories.
But I degress so back to the topic.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navigate goes hand in hand with flying the airplane.
You have a problem - there is absolutely no doubt that aviate comes first.
In this case chances are your instant reaction is to continue on the chosen course until you have established you have the problem under control and it is not escalating.
What do you do next?
I am simply suggesting that if you are surrounding by CAS, tensions are running a little high etc.. you tell AT you have a problem, declare a pan whatever, and would like to divert to X or the nearest.
All of a sudden the airspace ahead of you is probably clear, you probably dont have to worry if you are about to bust a bit of CAS, you dont have to worry too much about other traffic and you dont have to worry about setting up the GPS or the VOR or the whizz wheel at that instant.
In fact you have a whole lot more time to worry about aviating - the one that is ultimately going to save your life!
You also have a carm head on your side and in your ears - for all you old timers you may well say so what, but if you are new to this game I suspect their are times when that alone is very comforting!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose - all in good spirit I am sure.
However, on a more serious note I think when you start flying we are most vunerable. We have a responsibilty to dispel some concerns that many have when they are new to the game.
Major airports is one. Dont go there, they are scary places.
Of course if you have flown in America you realise nothing could be further from the truth as you taxi in front of a 47 who is told to give way to you. I know you must have done so many many times around Europe.
The reality is slotting an aircraft with a genuine emergency into the flow causes almost no disruption. In fact it would be insulting to AT to suggest otherwise.
I'll respect any pilot who decides the situation warrants an immediate diversion. I can imagine how you might feel if you went somewhere twice as far and wrote off the aircraft (never mind yourself) in a field in the second leg of the diversion!
In terms of twin flying if I know the aircraft systems sufficiently well and I am confident after an engine loss there is no reason for believing the problem will not escalate then I am happy going with the one engine, however if the POH is telling me to land as soon as possible and I have genuine concerns about the problem escalating I am going to follow the POH every time. I am afraid I am not going to get too excited about who owns the tarmac and I am really not bothered about what bit of tarmac I record in my log book - bit long in the tooth for that - much like you I suspect.
However, on a more serious note I think when you start flying we are most vunerable. We have a responsibilty to dispel some concerns that many have when they are new to the game.
Major airports is one. Dont go there, they are scary places.
Of course if you have flown in America you realise nothing could be further from the truth as you taxi in front of a 47 who is told to give way to you. I know you must have done so many many times around Europe.
The reality is slotting an aircraft with a genuine emergency into the flow causes almost no disruption. In fact it would be insulting to AT to suggest otherwise.
I'll respect any pilot who decides the situation warrants an immediate diversion. I can imagine how you might feel if you went somewhere twice as far and wrote off the aircraft (never mind yourself) in a field in the second leg of the diversion!
In terms of twin flying if I know the aircraft systems sufficiently well and I am confident after an engine loss there is no reason for believing the problem will not escalate then I am happy going with the one engine, however if the POH is telling me to land as soon as possible and I have genuine concerns about the problem escalating I am going to follow the POH every time. I am afraid I am not going to get too excited about who owns the tarmac and I am really not bothered about what bit of tarmac I record in my log book - bit long in the tooth for that - much like you I suspect.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However the nearest airfield I was heading for was very close, outside of CAS, and a perfect location to land if reqd.
I'm fairly sure sitting here on the ground that I would rather land on very dodgy field then divert into a major airport like LGW, or LHR. a) There are lot more lives at stake if your sudden unannounced arrival causes more swiss cheese holes to line up and b) if the fault is minor you'd have an awful lot of explaining to do..possibly in court????
Last edited by Essel; 21st May 2008 at 09:41. Reason: Typos
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I'm fairly sure sitting here on the ground that I would rather land on very dodgy field then divert into a major airport like LGW, or LHR. a) There are lot more lives at stake if your announced arrival causes more swiss cheese holes to line up and b) if the fault is minor you'd have an awful lot of explaining to do..possibly in court????
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway, drifiting wildly off topic! (my fault - sorry).
Last edited by Essel; 21st May 2008 at 10:34.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look up the list of CAA prosecutions (on their website, one can search for "prosecutions" etc).
They almost never prosecute busts.
They sometimes go after RA busts big time, presumably to set an example.
They mostly go after blatent cases like somebody carrying 30 people to some event, pretending they are all 'friends' of his and none of them paid him anything. In fact anything remotely smelling of an AOC breach (i.e. depriving the CAA or AOC holders of revenue) gets attention.
They, being a bunch of ex policemen, also go after "usual suspects" - just like the police have always done. If you continue to wind them up, one day they will stitch you up for something...
But pilots involved in the scenario described here have no prosecution to fear - unless they behave really arrogantly afterwards.
They almost never prosecute busts.
They sometimes go after RA busts big time, presumably to set an example.
They mostly go after blatent cases like somebody carrying 30 people to some event, pretending they are all 'friends' of his and none of them paid him anything. In fact anything remotely smelling of an AOC breach (i.e. depriving the CAA or AOC holders of revenue) gets attention.
They, being a bunch of ex policemen, also go after "usual suspects" - just like the police have always done. If you continue to wind them up, one day they will stitch you up for something...
But pilots involved in the scenario described here have no prosecution to fear - unless they behave really arrogantly afterwards.