Aviation Safety

Abstract

Aircraft accidents are not very common, but when they happen, the level of damage is large compared to other means of transport. This is because some aircrafts have a very large capacity of passengers that they can accommodate. This is not always the case, as some of them are small and do not carry so many people. Aircrafts accidents range from fires, collisions, ditching and accidents caused by pilot errors among others. This paper will look at an accident that happened in 1997 at Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The paper will address the causes of the accidents, the findings of the investigation carried out after the accident, recommendations after the investigation as well as the measures taken to make sure that accidents of this type do not happen again.
Aviation Safety
FedEx Express Flight 14
This scheduled cargo flight was going to Newark International Airport, New Jersey from the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport in Anchorage, Alaska. It crashed when trying to make a safe landing on July 31, 1997. The pilots thought that the plane would have little stopping distance after landing, which made them think of landing early on the runway. Misinterpretation of runway data was the main cause of the crash (Dismukes, Berman & Loukopoulos, 2012). The pilots were aware that the plane had problems with its auto-breaks because they failed to initiate during landing, which also contributed to their hasty decision to land the craft earlier than expected. The problem arose at the commencement of the flare phase. The MD-11 touched down and rolled, which continued until the spars of the right wing broke. The craft crashed on the runway on its back and it was on fire. Luckily, none of the crewmembers suffered any injuries.
The National Transportation Safety Board conducted an investigation on the causes of both the fire and the crush. The board agreed that the cause of the crash was the pilot’s over control of the plane during the landing process. The problem started about 17 feet above the runway, but the pilot had already let the nose lower to achieve the earlier touchdown as he had planned. He was forced to raise it and increase the thrust in order to slow the craft’s descent. He then pushed down the nose again to keep the plane on the runway as it was close to landing. These last control inputs were too late and large enough to cause some stability problems on the plane, which eventually crashed.
Analysts and investigators did not determine the cause of the fire, although some suspect factors were identified. The presence of aerosol cans, containers of acidic liquids, as well as the packages of marijuana could have accelerated the fire, which destroyed the plane. The board stated that the flight engineer’s failure to act on the shutoff T-handle as required ensured that normal circulation continued in the cargo area. The presence of aerosol cans, containers of acidic liquids and packages of marijuana provided the fire with a source of oxygen and contributed to the growth of the fire (Byrne, 2002). The crew did not depressurize the plane, which delayed evacuation procedures. This is because the passenger exit door cannot open when the airplane is still pressurized.
Pursuant to the causes and effects of this accident and the results of the investigation that followed, the NSTB made new recommendations, which were based on the findings and conclusions derived from the investigation. These recommendations were meant to improve the safety of operations of the MD-11 aircraft. They recommended that the FAA develop new methods of training pilots on information about factors that may contribute to the development of structural failures involving single-gear landing. They also recommended that the Federal Express should review and modify their evacuation checklist and training. This would help to campaign for the need and importance of breathing equipment during evacuation from a place that has a smoke. All the certified airports were urged to coordinate with appropriate fire departments that might get involved in case of an accident (Byrne, 2002).
The craft operators were urged to train their pilots on the proper high sink recovery techniques that can be used in case the craft develops any technical problem while landing. The crewmembers are supposed to be informed on how to open the doors in case of emergency, especially where pressure mechanisms open the doors. Proper information should be provided on the type and class of the hazardous material that may be carried by the craft. This allows measures to be taken in case the plane develops technical problems in the air.
Measures taken to avoid future accidents
These measures borrow from the findings of the investigations from various accidents that have occurred. A visual display that shows gear touchdown status in MD-11 planes helps pilots in conducting recovery operations that arise from large bounces and make a judgment from there. Most of the craft making companies have focused their effort on improving the flight control programs which helps the pilots to control the craft and also make well informed decisions in case of a technical problem (Dismukes, Berman & Loukopoulos, 2012). The companies have been ensuring that they employ competent crewmembers who have enough risk management skills regarding planes.

References
Byrne, G. (2002). Flight 427: Anatomy of an air disaster. New York: Copernicus
Dismukes, R. K., Berman, B. A., & Loukopoulos, L. D. (2012). The Limits of
Expertise: Rethinking Pilot Error and the Causes of Airline Accidents. Retrieved from http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/flightcognition/Publications/KD_CRMHF_Conference.pdf.