Narrative:

Air carrier flight was clrd to cross flowr at 10000' and 250 KTS. These parameters were programmed into the FMC. At the computed top of descent point, the FMC/autoplt initiated a standard descent. At 18000' the seat belt sign was turned on and at 5000' the F/as were directed to 'prepare for landing'. At approximately 4000' a F/a called the cockpit on the intercom. The captain took the call, which he terminated quickly due to cockpit workload and sterile cockpit rules. (I later learned the call was to complain about the rate of descent). An uneventful approach and landing were accomplished. In the terminal after the flight, the F/a approached the captain (in my presence) and again complained about the rate of descent, the fact that a serving cart had 'nearly run over my foot', and that the captain should 'notify the F/as before a descent like that.' the captain explained that it was a normal computer generated autoplt descent. He suggested that if it created a problem for the F/as, she should file a report through channels that might result in a change to procedures or to software modification. The F/a then walked off, apparently to her next flight. I viewed the encounter as one caused by a senior F/a who was having a bad day and who perhaps failed to set the brake on a serving cart, since everything else appeared normal and in accordance with sops. On july tue, 1990, the captain concerned notified me that he had been notified on july mon, 1990, that the F/a had reported to the company that she was injured on the flight when a serving cart ran over her foot during descent. This was my first indication that an injury had been incurred. Since everything about the descent appeared normal to me, I am not sure what can be done to prevent recurrence. The FMC software could be modified to start dscnts earlier and therefore reduce the rate and angle of descent. This solution has obvious impacts on the ATC system. The only other suggestions would be to verify the condition of serving cart brakes and the F/a training in their use.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CABIN ATTENDANT INJURED WHEN SERVING CART ROLLED OVER HER FOOT DURING DESCENT. CABIN ATTENDANT CLAIMS THE DESCENT WAS TOO STEEP.

Narrative: ACR FLT WAS CLRD TO CROSS FLOWR AT 10000' AND 250 KTS. THESE PARAMETERS WERE PROGRAMMED INTO THE FMC. AT THE COMPUTED TOP OF DSNT POINT, THE FMC/AUTOPLT INITIATED A STANDARD DSNT. AT 18000' THE SEAT BELT SIGN WAS TURNED ON AND AT 5000' THE F/AS WERE DIRECTED TO 'PREPARE FOR LNDG'. AT APPROX 4000' A F/A CALLED THE COCKPIT ON THE INTERCOM. THE CAPT TOOK THE CALL, WHICH HE TERMINATED QUICKLY DUE TO COCKPIT WORKLOAD AND STERILE COCKPIT RULES. (I LATER LEARNED THE CALL WAS TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE RATE OF DSNT). AN UNEVENTFUL APCH AND LNDG WERE ACCOMPLISHED. IN THE TERMINAL AFTER THE FLT, THE F/A APCHED THE CAPT (IN MY PRESENCE) AND AGAIN COMPLAINED ABOUT THE RATE OF DSNT, THE FACT THAT A SERVING CART HAD 'NEARLY RUN OVER MY FOOT', AND THAT THE CAPT SHOULD 'NOTIFY THE F/AS BEFORE A DSNT LIKE THAT.' THE CAPT EXPLAINED THAT IT WAS A NORMAL COMPUTER GENERATED AUTOPLT DSNT. HE SUGGESTED THAT IF IT CREATED A PROB FOR THE F/AS, SHE SHOULD FILE A RPT THROUGH CHANNELS THAT MIGHT RESULT IN A CHANGE TO PROCS OR TO SOFTWARE MODIFICATION. THE F/A THEN WALKED OFF, APPARENTLY TO HER NEXT FLT. I VIEWED THE ENCOUNTER AS ONE CAUSED BY A SENIOR F/A WHO WAS HAVING A BAD DAY AND WHO PERHAPS FAILED TO SET THE BRAKE ON A SERVING CART, SINCE EVERYTHING ELSE APPEARED NORMAL AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH SOPS. ON JULY TUE, 1990, THE CAPT CONCERNED NOTIFIED ME THAT HE HAD BEEN NOTIFIED ON JULY MON, 1990, THAT THE F/A HAD RPTED TO THE COMPANY THAT SHE WAS INJURED ON THE FLT WHEN A SERVING CART RAN OVER HER FOOT DURING DSNT. THIS WAS MY FIRST INDICATION THAT AN INJURY HAD BEEN INCURRED. SINCE EVERYTHING ABOUT THE DSNT APPEARED NORMAL TO ME, I AM NOT SURE WHAT CAN BE DONE TO PREVENT RECURRENCE. THE FMC SOFTWARE COULD BE MODIFIED TO START DSCNTS EARLIER AND THEREFORE REDUCE THE RATE AND ANGLE OF DSNT. THIS SOLUTION HAS OBVIOUS IMPACTS ON THE ATC SYS. THE ONLY OTHER SUGGESTIONS WOULD BE TO VERIFY THE CONDITION OF SERVING CART BRAKES AND THE F/A TRNING IN THEIR USE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.