Parking Brake on the Runway

[telex]

If the above post is a first hand account of being onboard I'll believe it.

Otherwise I call bs.

[altiplano]

To those that "never use the park brake" - Do you not set the park brake after push back?

It will be much easier to discover a problem during a long, low power taxi than during a high power takeoff roll. Might want to reconsider.

might want to reconsider setting the brake after push? at all? what do you mean?

bottom line, you set the brake when you don't want to move... when set the brake on a Boeing, you don't go anywhere... lower power, higher power... taxi, takeoff... whatever... pretty f-ing easy to figure out either way because you're stopped.

[pelmet]

To those that "never use the park brake" - Do you not set the park brake after push back?

It will be much easier to discover a problem during a long, low power taxi than during a high power takeoff roll. Might want to reconsider.

might want to reconsider setting the brake after push? at all? what do you mean?

Stone69 said it best.

"It seems to me that the OP was questioning the use of the parking brake when in position on the runway for takeoff. There have been all sorts of situations covered in the previous posts that really have nothing to do with the original question. Setting the brake after push-back has nothing to do with the question. I will tell you that back... way back... a situation occurred where a large ( for the day ) four engine jet was cleared to position and hold.... this was done and the parking brake was then set..... when take off clearance was given, the takeoff was commenced and the crew thought the acceleration was slower than normal, but the takeoff was continued and it was only after takeoff that it was discovered the parking brake was still on.... the only thing that saved them was the runway was " contaminated ".... make that ice covered and who knows what sort of JBI it would registered, but they did live to fly another day.... after that it was drilled into crews not to set the PB when in position on the active.... not an old wives tale at all.... happened in YYZ.... "

And I gave the real world examples.

[av8ts]

Stone69 starts out by saying most posts have nothing to do with the question then gives tells us a "well I heard" story that has nothing to do with the question. Most modern airliners have a takeoff warning horn that will sound if you try to increase power/thrust with the brakeon, so what happened in the story won't happen.

[stone69]

This thread is why I don't bother posting most of the time. It happened on runway 32 ( YYZ ) and who said it was a " modern airliner " with all the protections that are now provided....

[telex]

Can we assume this is a first person account of the event? I heard it was a 747.

[stone69]

DC-8 ...YYZ -YUL

[Illya Kuryakin]

Stone69 starts out by saying most posts have nothing to do with the question then gives tells us a "well I heard" story that has nothing to do with the question. Most modern airliners have a takeoff warning horn that will sound if you try to increase power/thrust with the brakeon, so what happened in the story won't happen.

And almost everything more modern than an Apache has a "the gear is still up azzhole" warning, but pilots still just leave it up.
Illya

[av8ts]

I'm not saying it was a modern airliner or that it didn't happen, I'm just saying that today it's no more or less relevant than anyone else's post

[ahramin]

I agree. While this thread has been interesting and has some information I didn't know that could have applied very much to a couple aircraft I flew in my career, the practice of never setting the parking brake because a few crews managed to take off with it on doesn't apply to a single one of the many types of aircraft I currently fly.

I've always been against the philosophy of flying aircraft A in a certain manner because aircraft B needs to be flown that way, but it's good to know about aircraft B nonetheless.

[pelmet]

I agree. While this thread has been interesting and has some information I didn't know that could have applied very much to a couple aircraft I flew in my career, the practice of never setting the parking brake because a few crews managed to take off with it on doesn't apply to a single one of the many types of aircraft I currently fly.

Why not?

[PointyEngine]

It's written into our SOP's that if the crew is to make any changes to the FMS, then the parking break MUST be set. Logic would dictate you would advise ATC of the delay, and either have things sorted out prior to lining up, or taxi clear of the active runway - unless traffic wasn't going to be an issue. If you tried to advance the power levers with the park break on, all hell would break lose and the computers would quickly start squawking.

[oldtimer]

Hey guys, they are parking BRAKES that if left on one may BREAK the airplane.
But if one is inclined to set the park BRAKE on the runway, make sure it is fully on so the airplane will not move until the BRAKES are released and begin to move forward with minimum BREAK away thrust.
Just my $0:02

[Cat Driver]

It's written into our SOP's that if the crew is to make any changes to the FMS, then the parking break MUST be set.

Your company SOP's allow you to accept to position and hold for take off while you are typing into your FMS?

[ahramin]

I agree. While this thread has been interesting and has some information I didn't know that could have applied very much to a couple aircraft I flew in my career, the practice of never setting the parking brake because a few crews managed to take off with it on doesn't apply to a single one of the many types of aircraft I currently fly.

Why not?

Most don't have enough power to overpower the brakes, the ones that do have ECAM warning or takeoff config warnings for just this situation.

[pelmet]

I agree. While this thread has been interesting and has some information I didn't know that could have applied very much to a couple aircraft I flew in my career, the practice of never setting the parking brake because a few crews managed to take off with it on doesn't apply to a single one of the many types of aircraft I currently fly.

Why not?

Most don't have enough power to overpower the brakes, the ones that do have ECAM warning or takeoff config warnings for just this situation.

Try selecting full power on a large aircraft when light and see what happens with brakes applied. Then try it on a slippery or wet runway and see what happens.

Depending on the takeoff config warning is not a good idea.

Just ask these guys....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest ... Flight_255
Contributing to the accident was the absence of electrical power to the airplane takeoff warning system which thus did not warn the flightcrew that the airplane was not configured properly for takeoff. The reason for the absence of electrical power could not be determined.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Air ... light_1141
Probable cause #2..."the failure of the plane's TOWS to sound and alert the crew that their plane was not properly configured for takeoff."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanair_Flight_5022
"The CIAIAC determined the following contributory factors:
The absence of any warning of the incorrect take-off configuration because the TOWS did not work. It was not possible to determine conclusively why the TOWS system did not work."

Three accidents with takeoff warning failures, over 300 dead and plenty of injured.

And there are more if I take the time to really do a search.

[ahramin]

Exactly Pelmet. If through some misfortune I end up flying old aircraft with all sorts of inop systems, I'll be very glad of the information contained in this thread.

[Rowdy]

It's written into our SOP's that if the crew is to make any changes to the FMS, then the parking break MUST be set.

Your company SOP's allow you to accept to position and hold for take off while you are typing into your FMS?

Cat, did you miss the bulk of that post? He later went on to state that if you were unable to comply with that, you would stay holding short or advise ATS and taxi clear. No one's SOP's are going to tell you to stop on a runway and reprogram the FMS...

As for Pelmet, You pointed to a bunch of old accidents that were related to configuration screw ups. Mostly flap/slat. Nothing to do with park brakes. If you operated in the airline environment you'd be aware of proper park brake usage and the systems to avoid a foul up. The aircraft I operate has a big glaring PARK BRAKE light in plain view on the caution panel, it also has a config horn that will sound. It also won't move. The park brake handle is also in a position that makes it an easy catch, as are the handles in most of the airliners I have had the pleasure of riding the jumpseat. Not to mention the Before Takeoff Check requires a confirmation that ALL of those caution lights are out.

I do notice a trend here.. Many of the operators of smaller equipment lament the use of park brakes due to hearsay/old wives tales/stories/etc. Thats fine, do as you wish. I personally never set the park brake in the beechs I flew, they were always chocked. Those that operate airline equipment seem to be operating them as per their respective SOPs. SOP compliance is mandatory. Good on you.

I've always been against the philosophy of flying aircraft A in a certain manner because aircraft B needs to be flown that way.

THIS! RIGHT HERE! Thanks ahramin.

[pelmet]

As for Pelmet, You pointed to a bunch of old accidents that were related to configuration screw ups. Mostly flap/slat. Nothing to do with park brakes.

Exactly Pelmet. If through some misfortune I end up flying old aircraft with all sorts of inop systems, I'll be very glad of the information contained in this thread.

I was hoping that people would understand that when someone says that they can rely on a takeoff warning system to warn them of a critical item not being where it should be, that they would understand that my examples were examples of the takeoff warning system NOT warning of a critical system being where it should be.

There are multiple systems on many aircraft that are involved in the takeoff warning system. It would be foolish to assume that because the accidents involved flaps settings that a failure cannot involve the parking brake system, especially if the entire takeoff warning system has failed(which can be the reason due to an open CB as was suspected in the NW 255 case).

I would also caution people against assuming that because the examples given were older generation aircraft, that miraculously, this kind of failure could not happen in a more modern aircraft or that somehow, there were multiple inoperative systems(there were not). But to each his own. Excuse after excuse can be made for any action despite multiple examples being shown of disasters resulting from those actions.

[ahramin]

Well Pelmet, I'm still open to changing my mind. If you know of any example in the 30 year history of Airbus FBW aircraft where an accident happened because a crew forgot the parking brake on a takeoff please post it. Alternatively if you know of any Airbus or Boeing document that supports not setting the parking brake on the runway I'd follow that.