MD-11
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Troubleshooting
Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
After the Pilot Flying called for 'Slats retract; after takeoff checklist;' I promptly moved the flap/slat handle to RET and after slats retraction we received the Level 1 Alert HYD 1 OFF. After running the QRH and as a crew we elected to continue to ZZZZ. Once in cruise we discussed potential outcomes of our situation we planned that we may have a total HYD 1 Failure and discussed what we wanted to do if we did. After planning to configure early to see if our problem would manifest into a failure we did indeed have a total HYD 1 FAIL level 2. We [requested priority handling] with ZZZZ Approach asked to continue on our current heading for 5-10 minutes and we would get back with them after we accomplished our checklists. We were given Runway XXR as an option; given that this runway was the longest we elected to utilize this option. We ran the QRH procedure and discussed potential threats and issues. Given that our nose wheel steering would be limited to the left we elected to stop on the runway and request to be towed in via a tug. We informed ZZZZ Approach of this issue and let them know souls on board and approximately how much fuel we had remaining. After being handed off to ZZZZ Tower I once again reminded them we were not going to be able to clear the runway due to our failed condition. I thought this might be important because of the restricted visibility and poor runway conditions so no one would commence a takeoff or an approach with our airplane parked on an active runway. Tower understood clearly our intentions there was no miscommunication. Our approach was normal and normal procedures were utilized in the event. The airplane performed exactly as we anticipated. After engine cool down; assuring the brakes we not too hot and we started the APU we let Tower know our engines were shut down and the aircraft was safe to approach with our company tug. As Company Maintenance personnel entered through the FWD avionics compartment and communicated with Company ground personnel via his handheld radio and would sit in the CA (Captain)'s seat while in control of the aircraft's brakes. I continued to perform Pilot Monitoring duties to obtain a taxi clearance and monitored the aircraft until we set the parking brake at Gate XX. The event overall was a well orchestrated event; [the] Captain showed excellent leadership; CRM and cockpit management skills. [The] Captain reacted calmly and confidently as I backed him up during the process. I posed questions and [a] hypothetical to ensure we had all of our bases covered and [the] Captain was very respective the few I had to offer. [The] Captain demonstrated by example exactly how a captain should react and respond to a potential dangerous situation. I would also like to note that ZZZZ Approach and Tower performed above expectations despite a slight language barrier we all had an understanding of what we needed and they were able to provide that with ease. Lastly ZZZZ Company Operations performed flawlessly we couldn't have asked for anything more. After landing in ZZZZ; Maintenance personnel identified the issue right away it was stated it was an 'auto brake controller'; that caused the #1 HYD system to leak all of its fluid and fail. I have not followed up to see if this indeed was the case after maintenance completed its final inspection and repair.
MD-11 First Officer reported hydraulic system 1 failure due to a faulty auto brake controller.