The Causes of the Accident that Occurred as the Aircraft: Flight BA5390 upon leaving Birmingham International Airport for Malaga - Coursework Example

Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction:......................................................................................................................... 4 Case Summary:.................................................................................................................... 5 Discussion of Case Summary:............................................................................................. 8 Recommendation:................................................................................................................ 9 Conclusion:.......................................................................................................................... 10 References:.......................................................................................................................... 11 Abstract A proper Code of Ethics needs to be alert to the changing anticipations of not only the society, but also the profession, as well as the global principles pledged by the Institution. According to the Engineers Joint Council and American Association of Engineering Societies (1990), the IPENZ Code of Ethics gets rooted in the five fundamental ethical values; with three sections; the first part consists of five basic ethical values meant for informing members high standards of professional life; the second part offers guidelines on the constituents of the ethical professional behaviour, and finally, the third part specifies the minimum standards judging members’ behaviour when making a decision in regards to behaving ethically. These three parts offer members the appropriate way of responding to circumstances they find themselves in when it comes to their professional life (Claude, 2002). This essay examines the causes of the accident that occurred as the aircraft (flight BA5390) was climbing through 17,300 feet upon leaving Birmingham International Airport for Malaga, Spain (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). Moreover, the essay comes up with recommendations as per the IPENZ Code of Ethics regarding what should have been done in avoiding the accident. Introduction The engineering professions get and uphold their respect from society by means of their members demonstrating a strong, steadfast devotion to ethical values (Mitcham, 2005). This commitment is, in addition to the responsibilities like, obedience to the law and reflection of other duties that society expects every member to observe considering that they are professionals. As a result, there is a need of upholding a proper Code of Ethics by the Institution, publishing it to inform the public, while, at the same time, enforcing it objectively (Mitcham, 2005). It is necessary for this Code to be alert to changes in society, and also in the profession, as well as the global principles pledged by the Institution. According to the Engineers Joint Council and American Association of Engineering Societies (1990), the IPENZ Code of Ethics is rooted in the five key ethical values comprising: protection of life, along with safeguarding people; sustainable management along with care for the environment; commitment to community well-being; professionalism, integrity and competence; and sustaining engineering knowledge. This Code has three sections (Engineers Joint Council & American Association of Engineering Societies, 1990); the first part consists of five basic ethical values meant for informing members high standards of the professional life; the second part offers guidelines on the constituents of the ethical professional behaviour, and finally, the third part specifies the minimum standards judging members’ behaviour when making a decision in regards to behaving ethically. These three parts offer members the appropriate way of responding to circumstances they find themselves in when it comes to their professional life (Engineers Joint Council & American Association of Engineering Societies, 1990). Therefore, this essay examines a real situation as a case study and applies the IPENZ Code of Ethics in understanding what happened. The case study involved an aviation accident that was found to have been caused by poor engineering standards of practice. Case Summary The accident occurred as the aircraft (flight BA5390) was climbing through 17,300 feet upon leaving Birmingham International Airport for Malaga, Spain (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). Apparently, the left windscreen that had been replaced before the flight got blown out due to the effects of the cabin pressure as it overcame the maintenance of the securing bolts, whereby 84 out of 90, were smaller than the specified diameter. This resulted in the commander getting sucked halfway outside the windscreen aperture with the cabin crew restraining him and the co-pilot flying the aircraft into a safe landing at Southampton Airport (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). When the aircraft took off at 0720hrs from Birmingham, aboard it were 81 passengers, 4 cabin crew and 2 flight crew. The co-pilot was in control of the takeoff while the commander had been handling the aircraft according to the operator’s usual operating procedures; both pilots had loosened their shoulder harness with the commander loosening his lap-strap. At 0733hrs, there was a loud bang, along with the fuselage getting filled up with condensation mist; this was a sign that an explosive decompression had happened. The commander got partly drawn out of his windscreen aperture with the flight deck door getting blown to the flight deck whereby it lay transversely on the radio and navigation console (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). Immediately, the No.3 steward, hurried to the flight deck and held the commander around his waist thereby securing him. The purser took out the debris of the door and put it inside the forward toilet, the other two main cabin crew directed the passengers to fasten their seat belts and to take up their emergency positions (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). The copilot was successful in effecting a safe landing by heading to Southampton Airport and finally transferring to their approach frequency and stopping on the runway at 0755hrs this was followed by the investigation team taking over. According to the information uncovered by the subsequent air accident investigation (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990), there were several errors that led to this accident; some of these errors had been committed by the Shift Maintenance manager (SMM), the engineer, which linked him directly to the accident, while some of the given errors had resulted due to the working conditions of the organization (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). Apparently, the SMM failed in the identification of the distinction between the used 7D bolts and the new 8C bolt used in fitting the windscreen of the aircraft. He had reported to the investigators that when picking the bolt from the poorly lit store, he was capable of discriminating a 7D bolt from an 8D through sight and touch by holding both bolts between his forefinger and thumb of one hand, then rolling them between his forefingers and his thumb of the other hand (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). He also reported that he did not use his glasses since he was not wearing them at the moment as recommended by his doctor; which led him to poor judgement regarding the size of the bolts, which had been used even after the later realisation that they were different (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). The SMM also failed in using the IPC and stores computer to their best effect, the storeman’s detection of the bolt had not been acted on and, conservative action was not taken when recognising later that bolts of dissimilar size had been used from those utilized on the same job the preceding day (Aicraft Accident Report, 1990). Although this leads to the assumption that the SMM was not functioning with the level of care the job demanded, according to his fellow workmates’ impression, the SMM was also found to be a person who was considered to be usually thorough when performing his duties. He had arrived 45minutes earlier at work so as to prepare for his work the day the windscreen was refitted. Discussion of the Case Study Mitcham (2005) explains that every organization needs to conduct an independent inspection, if this had occurred in this incident, it would have averted the accident from happening since the poor-fit bolt heads inside the countersinks would be ascertained considering that they were potentially observable. Inspection is an extremely significant addition when it comes to the maintenance of work practices that are evident within this accident (Gale, 2010). This is particularly essential for work carried out at night, when workers are prone to making errors, while, at the same time being unlikely to detect them. Apparently, had this windscreen been adjusted in the Royal Airforce, not only would the work have gotten inspected, but the aircraft would have been pressure tested on the ground prior to flight. According to Mitcham (2005), there is a need of maintaining standards in the working practice, although the maintenance environment gets checked periodically there does not seem to be any verification of the knowledge of, or any procedures used by engineers. In fact, it seems as though the system operated at Birmingham while fully relying wholly on the professionalism of individual Shift Supervisors to make sure that the working practices were suitable. Whereas it is entirely right to suppose a professional tactic from such persons, the wisdom of placing the safety of aircraft wholly to individual judgement without any systems for the maintenance of consistency or for verifying that high standards get upheld must be questioned. There is a need for design safety when designing any parts of an object, especially those in need of getting assembled (Gale, 2010); every part should be evidently identified and get stored correctly thereby avoiding confusion. In this case, there is evidence of poor design in that a wrong bolt got used in fitting the windscreen. There is further evidence of poor design whereby the aircraft got fitted with the wrong bolts i.e. 7Ds rather than 8Ds in the old windscreen. Moreover, engineers need to fit the existing bolts instead of replacing them, unless if they get damaged or paint clogged; unfortunately, the bolts used in this aircraft did not have any identifiers hence the confusion. The torque used in the refitting was also incorrectly used. Recommendations Based on the case study, it is evident that if there had been correct work practice, correct work ethics and a professional supported work environment, then the accident would not have taken place. Therefore, the organization needs to consider the following recommendation so as to avoid other incidents of the same sort: It has to perform an independent inspection on a regular basis; considering that inspection tends to be an extraordinarily essential routine in maintaining work practice, this will be helpful in ascertaining whether the aircraft is fitting for flight. This recommendation is in accord with the IPENZ code of conduct clause one that deals with the protection of life and safeguarding of people and within their engineering activities (Mitcham, 2005). Its is essential for the management to continuously uphold principles within the working practice by applying a professional approach; this will ensure that the aircraft safety is not letting entirely on a single person considering that this entails the maintenance of regularity or verification of high standards before the aircraft takes off. This recommendation is in accord with the IPENZ code of conduct clause two that deals with the undertaking of engineering activities by way of professionalism and integrity while working in their competence levels (Gale, 2010). The organization should ensure that it has a place where it stores the spare parts necessary for the aircraft; this store should be well lit, ever spare part correctly stored and well labelled. This recommendation is in accord with the IPENZ code of conduct clause two that deals with using resources effectively (Mitcham, 2005). If these recommendations get well adhered to, then chances of having a repeat of the same are almost impossible. Conclusion The IPENZ Code of Ethics is a highly significant document that streamlines the essential ethical values of protection of life, along with safeguarding people (Claude, 2002); sustainable management along with care for the environment; commitment to community well-being; professionalism, integrity and competence; and sustaining engineering knowledge. Although these ethical values are extremely influential in any organization, unfortunately, it is clear that the organization in this case study failed in wholly adhering to the IPENZ Code of Ethics hence the errors discussed above, which led to the accident (Claude, 2002). This Code provides members with a suitable way of responding to circumstances they find themselves in regarding their professional life (Claude, 2002). Had this organization been faithful in abiding to the rules, along with regulations stated in the IPENZ Code of Ethics, this accident would never had taken place. References: Aicraft Accident Report No.1/92. (1990). United Kingdom: HMSO. Claude, R. P. (2002). Science in the Service of Human Rights. Maryland: University of Pennsylvania Press. Engineers Joint Council, HYPERLINK "http://www.google.co.ke/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22American+Association+of+Engineering+Societies%22&source=gbs_metadata_r&cad=7" American Association of Engineering Societies . (1990). Directory of engineering societies and related organizations, Volume 13, Part 1989. Michigan: American Association of Engineering Societies. Gale, C. (2010). Awards, Honors & Prizes: International, Volume 2. New Jersey: Gale / Cengage Learning. Mitcham, C. (2005). Encyclopedia of science, technology, and ethics, Volume 1. Colorado : Macmillan Reference USA. Read More