PDA

View Full Version : Ba 038 incident at lhr


KENNEDY TOWER
29th Jul 2011, 15:43
Very interesting investigation on Ch5 last night, details of the thorough search to determine the cause of the accident. Well presented and I thought Capt Burkill was very calm and precise in his statements. Apparently the cause of the accident was slush type ice that restricted the fuel flow to the engines with severe consequences. The AIB investigators were very thorough.
As it turns out ROLLS ROYCE had to modify a part on all the engines so that the problem will hopefully not happen again. Apparently a Delta flight enroute from China to Atlanta suffered the same symptoms on their 777 however problem resolved itself at a lower altitude presumably the slush ice in the lines went to liquid thus averting a possible tradgedy.
Glad to Capt Burkill is now back flying with BA a good pilot with a wealth of experience, he sure prevented a serious accident by raising the flaps from 30 to 25 giving the A/C more distance however the down side was a much greater sink rate. Well done.:ok:

subsonicsubic
29th Jul 2011, 15:49
Have you just re-awakened from a coma?...............

206Fan
29th Jul 2011, 16:03
Took the words out of my mouth Sleeper!

Capetonian
29th Jul 2011, 16:19
KENNEDY TOWER I think your abuse is misplaced despite the sarcastic responses your posting invoked.

I also saw it and thought along the lines of : "Oh no not another .....", so a date or some other reference to the fact that this is related to a past incident would have been welcome. It is after all always possible that there could have been another 777 incident at Heathrow, of course we all hope not.

Tediek
29th Jul 2011, 16:21
Rename the subject, this avoids these kind of shocks

Lord Spandex Masher
29th Jul 2011, 17:06
It is in Aviation History and Nostalgia!

Akrapovic
29th Jul 2011, 17:37
It is in Aviation History and Nostalgia!

Well it is now!

Lord Spandex Masher
29th Jul 2011, 17:40
Ah! ............

J.O.
29th Jul 2011, 18:01
Funny, I've heard similarly misdirected vitriol from Kennedy Tower before. Usually it's aimed at a pilot who dared to set foot on JFK holy ground without having memorized the taxi chart in advance. :}

stepwilk
29th Jul 2011, 18:22
JFK, every single word in your post has been known to every professional pilot on this forum for ages. Neither your post nor "Ch5," whatever that is, has added an iota of information via this useless thread. That's why you got jumped on.

PPRuNe Pop
29th Jul 2011, 19:32
KT is now 'resting.' Carry on with the debate, but no more unecessary vitriol and childish comments please.

CH5 by the way, is channel on TV here. Should you consider the thread is still useless it is your prerogative to go or stay.

barit1
1st Aug 2011, 01:05
I'm not sure why people persist in labeling this event, and many others both fatal and non, as "incidents". They meet all practical and legal definitions as "accidents" don't they?

(Except perhaps when safety-related SOPs are disregarded, in which case I call them "accidents looking for a place to happen...") :ugh:

Flying Lawyer
1st Aug 2011, 23:46
Air Accidents Investigation: Definitions (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/reporting_an_accident/additional_information.cfm)


FL