Virgin Atlantic A330 precautionary evacuation at LGW

[Dysneyland]

The TWR just reported the main runway 08R/26L is closed.

[BrummyGit]

Flight Radar 24 showed the following 40 minutes ago "Squawk 7700 (general emergency). G-VSXY (Virgin Atlantic A333)" which looked like it was heading back to LGW

EDIT: Add a little more info

Virgin Atlantic Flight VS27, Callsign VIR27X, make a rapid return to Gatwick.

The aircraft had passed south of the Isle of Wight after departing Gatwick for Orlando, Florida when she issued a general emergency 7700 squawk.

Link Plane Finder ? Flight Radar | Aircraft Tracker | Live Flight Tracking (http://t.co/QjBnhaQJ)

[Dysneyland]

The ATIS refers to an "incident with undetermined delays" (+ Fire Category 0)...looks like an aircraft is blocking the runway,

[Charley B]

Nothing has gone out of LGW or in for about 30 mins since the VS A330 arrived back-not quite sure what is happening !

[Kestrel_Stu]

Evacuated apparently, following in-flight turn-back.

[rondun]

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c130/rondun/G-VSXY.jpg

... smoke reported in the cockpit apparently

[Dysneyland]

An helicopter operating on behalf of BBC News & seeking clearance to fly over the airfield just got its request denied by LGW Director...not much happening on other frequencies apart from flights diverting to LTN, BOH, STN & LHR

[iainp]

BBC News - Virgin aircraft makes emergency landing at Gatwick Airport (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-17730154)

[Spitfire boy]

A340-300 returned and blocking runway. Pax out on slides. No movements currently.

[JSCL]

A340-300? Looks a lot like an A330 to me...

[STN Ramp Rat]

Smoke in the cabin. Return to LGW. Stopped on runway slides blown but pax take off by steps.

also hearing that it was in fact a fire (or smoke) in the rear hold and the extinguishers deployed. I understand they are just going to offload the hold and take a look

[Ramper1]

Pax were evacuated using slides only! No steps involved

[Spitfire boy]

Watching from LGW NT gate the only movements are ambulances away from the aircraft. Hopefully no major injuries evacuating. Never seen it so quiet at LGW.

Ps well done to BA Captain for talking to pax on our flight.

[Aero Mad]

BBC News - Virgin aircraft in emergency landing at Gatwick Airport (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-17730154)

[Lord Bracken]

https://p.twimg.com/Aqmd28gCIAAGFQt.jpg

[lomapaseo]

Just a general question on slides

Once a slide is deployed what do you have to do in order to use steps instead ?

Like how much time is needed to make the change assuming the steps are at hand ?

[Metro man]

Slides are designed to be used as rafts in the event of a ditching, therefore they are designed to disconnect easily from the aircraft, usually by pulling a release and then cutting the mooring line with the attached knife.

[NWSRG]

Naive question from SLF...could the reserve runway not be used to keep the airport open? Or is the airport closed due to the emergency services being tied up with this incident? Or does proximity come into it?

[Kestrel_Stu]

Ps well done to BA Captain for talking to pax on our flight.

Yes well done to the BA Captain! I'm sure his PA was reassuring and informative. :ugh:

It might be nice to say well done to the Virgin guys and girls, up front and in the cabin, who just did something which will only happen once in their careers. Something we all train for and hope will never happen.

[Ramper1]

Emergency runway is too close to the main runway to be used in this case. There will be people everywhere on the ground, lots of debris ( taken off by pax I.e bags, papers, rubbish ) all over the place, so until the runway is clear and clean, the emergency one would not be used.




And well done to the virgin crew who were on the flight, they got everyone off quickly and effiiciently, and their day has only just begun. They will now be caught up in hours of debriefs, paperwork etc , reliving this 90 seconds of trauma for hours to come.

[SevernTMA]

What on earth is an "Emergency Runway?"

[Ramper1]

It's the runway the use in emergencies :ugh::ugh: that's what it's called at LGW! Or in other terms. The northern runway:ugh:


Clue Is in the name!!!! Lol

[bjornvil]

Anybody know if the Virgin aircraft is still on the runway? Waiting for the airport to open in order to get my aircraft from EGSS to EGKK :suspect:

[Ramper1]

Yes it's still on the rnway

[gazcork]

any update on this - seems strange for smoke in cabin when slides have been closed up again so soon...

Why not exit the runway...

[Charley B]

Just this minute reopened LGW using 08L the northern runway(the emergency runway!)

[WASPERNATOR]

Looking at the track - why did they not divert to Bournemouth?

As usual, it looks a lot like they wanted to return to their base airport - as with Kegworth..

Some things never change. Lessons are not learned.

Thankfully no harm done on this occasion.

[STN Ramp Rat]

Emergency runway is too close to the main runway to be used in this case. There will be people everywhere on the ground, lots of debris ( taken off by pax I.e bags, papers, rubbish ) all over the place, so until the runway is clear and clean, the emergency one would not be used.

I believe the emergency runway will be in use shortly, the airport was fire category zero during the incident preventing movements.

[merlinxx]

T'was a normal return with smoke in cabin/flight deck, and yes it was 330 nothing else:ugh:

[Flightmech]

Looking at the track - why did they not divert to Bournemouth?

As usual, it looks a lot like they wanted to return to their base airport - as with Kegworth..

Some things never change. Lessons are not learned.

Thankfully no harm done on this occasion.


Maybe LGW had better fire cover etc. Glad you know the facts. No need for an investigation now.:ugh:

[SENFLYER]

A/c still on runway, standby runway inop due clearances and fire cover. At mo.

[Buster the Bear]

Far more access for the emergency services, my guess is that the crew were told to stop and close down on the runway?

Airport now open, not too sure if they are using the main or the northerly?

[Right Way Up]

T'was a normal return with smoke in cabin/flight deck

:eek::eek:

[SevernTMA]

Thank-you for enlightening me. I never realised that was the case.

[gazcork]

Latest:

It was a fire warning in the aft cargo hold. Fire extinguisher bottles activated and the aircraft made a rapid return to LGW, descending from 21,000 feet very fast and then landing overweight I believe at LGW. Captain declared a full Mayday and the aircraft was stopped on the runway as per SOPs. Passengers were disembarked by stairs even though the slides were deployed. I understand the airport staff are opening up the rear hold to find out what caused the alarm – some reports are saying there was smoke in the cabin, which makes this potentially very serious indeed

[Kestrel_Stu]

Looking at the track - why did they not divert to Bournemouth?

As usual, it looks a lot like they wanted to return to their base airport - as with Kegworth..

Some things never change. Lessons are not learned.

Thankfully no harm done on this occasion.

I suspect you don't fly these planes for a living. Perhaps the silliest comment I've seen on here for a long time. Not to mention a gross misunderstanding of the cause of the Kegworth accident.

[fantom]

I agree.

Wasp,

* The aircraft was going to Orlando = lots of fuel = heavy
* Not a lot of time to dump fuel (emergency)
* BOH runways are not long
* see #1

[Spitfire boy]

Tug on A330 on runway

Some flights departing presuambly from parallel taxiway/runway . Easyjet and BA shorthaul keen to resume ops.

[TurboTomato]

A/c still on runway, standby runway inop due clearances and fire cover. At mo.

Well one runway is use at least as I've just witnessed 2 departing aircraft!

[Charley B]

aircraft DEFINATELY departing on 8L-using standby runway for the time being!

[Kestrel_Stu]

The landing distance available on BOH 08 is 1,800m. It has a significantly displaced threshold. This A330 could easily have weighed 210+ tonnes = not really enough room (yes, I do fly them for a living).

Also the aircraft was at around FL210 I believe when the turn-back occurred (just south of BOH/SOU over the channel). To divert to Bournemouth they would have needed to circle overhead to lose height and meanwhile plan an approach into an unfamiliar airfield, which I suspect would have taken about the same amount of time as turning back for a straight in to LGW 08R (also a fair amount of height to lose from that distance).

[Sky Wave]

Not to mention the fact that they know LGW, it was possibly already in the secondary flight plan, they'd already know they didn't have a landing distance issue so no calculations to run and it probably made very little difference to the airborne time. If LGW & BOH had a very definite Westerly wind they may have elected to go to BOH. They would of obviously considered their options, weighed up the pro's and cons and elected to return to LGW. It looks like a job well handled to me.

[lederhosen]

Ironically the 737 at Kegworth was in the overall scale of things pretty much overhead the airfield it chose to divert to. Nearest suitable airfield includes factors like familiarity of the crew with the aerodrome as well as length of the runway and fire cover. It looks like a good job was done here, although as with Sullenberger's Hudson ditching no doubt a few monday morning quarterbacks will pipe up.

[xtypeman]

Good SOP's based on the experiences of the Airtours 737-200 at MAN.

[BBK]

Most of us will never have to deal with a full evac. Well done to the crew. Save the analysis until some hard facts are available.

Ps where did I put that wasp spray;)

[jhpic]

Good job. At the end of the day they successfully dealt with whatever the problem turns out to be...

[i_like_tea]

Is the 330 like the 320 in this situation? I.e emergency elec config styleeee or do they have a different way of working?

Sorry to the 330 drivers if thats a dunse question!

[dkatwa]

I have been reading the chain and confess I know nothing about flying jets...I am a PPL (C152) so that is the extent of my knowledge of flying...

However, I do work it IT and was wonder if it is possible to automate the emergency landing decision (which airport to land at), in the sense that the aircraft knows how much fuel it has on board, how high it is, how much fuel to dump, runway lengths, time to airport (straight in approach, no waiting) etc....

Or is it not possible due to number of variables...?

[KTF]

Out of interest why do the VS 330-300 not have the facility to dump fuel? Is this for all A330 or just the VS ones?

[gem380]

The most important thing is that the crew made a successful emergency landing, and everyone is safe.

Well done to all the crew!!!

[Kestrel_Stu]

In my previous airline our A330-200s did have fuel dump capability, but the A330-300s did not.

In my current airline none of our A330s (all -200s) have fuel dump capability (all 233,000kg MTOW aircraft).

Basically, it's a customer option. Like any airliner, the aircraft can be landed up to MTOW in an emergency.

[vulcanised]

A bit more here

Emergency landing disrupts flights - Yahoo! News UK (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/plane-gatwick-emergency-landing-121925010.html)

[mixture]

Each slide costs upwards of $50k

Erm... surely they get serviced and re-packed rather than chucked in the nearest skip ? Or is that the servicing cost ?

[JCviggen]

Another passenger, Mark Bell, from Bracknell, said: "I knew something was wrong when we took off.
"The plane was really wobbly. The cabin crew made things worse. They were all really panicked.
"We weren't told anything other than we had to go back to Gatwick and make an emergency landing.



:rolleyes:

[vancouv]

Gatwick now seems to be open and using the standby runway (as they refer to it on their website) - does that restrict operations in any way?

[A and C]

There is some doubt in posts above as to what happens with the slides after they are deployed.

These slides will be inspected, if required repairs will be made and then they will be repacked for return to service.

It is common for quality control that a number of slides are deployed each year as a random test, if Virgin maintenance are sharp ( and I have no reason to think otherwise) these slide deployments can be used as part of the statistical analysis saving them from having to deploy more slides for maintenance.

Finally I would like to add my congratulations to the whole crew of the aircraft for a job well done.

[Case One]

Well done to the crew.

dkatwa, interesting suggestion, don't know if its been tried. I am sure most of us can think of more than a few problems with it though. Also, I suspect that the aeroplane's "vote" may be a case of too many cooks or jumping to conclusions, depending on the implementation.

Wasp . . .

On second thoughts I don't think I'll bother.

[Iwashere]

Northern rwy is 2565m, main rwy is 3316 so indeed could be more restricted for a heavy as an example. We use the northern on week days now (when no lvo's) due to resurfacing/wip of the main overnight and the swapover is sometimes delayed for heavy's departing.

[Old King Coal]

Whilst I appreciate that this was an Airbus, here's what a Boeing 'Quick Reference Handbook' (aka, in layman's terms, the checklist that is used when the aircraft is in a 'non-normal situation') has to say about the phrase "Land at the Nearest Suitable Airport" wherein the guidance for a twin-engine aircraft type will, necessarily (and is Regulated as such), be very very similar regardless of whether it's an Airbus or a Boeing, etc:

There are some situations where the flight crew must land at the nearest suitable airport. These situations include, but are not limited to, conditions where:
the non–normal checklist includes the item “Plan to land at the nearest suitable airport.”
fire or smoke continues
only one AC power source remains (engine or APU generator)
only one hydraulic system remains (the standby system is considered a hydraulic system)
any other situation determined by the flight crew to have a significant adverse effect on safety if the flight is continued.

It must be stressed that for smoke that continues or a fire that cannot be positively confirmed to be completely extinguished, the earliest possible descent, landing, and evacuation must be done. If a smoke, fire or fumes situation becomes uncontrollable, the flight crew should consider an immediate landing. Immediate landing implies immediate diversion to a runway. However, in a severe situation, the flight crew should consider an overweight landing, a tailwind landing, an off-airport landing, or a ditching.

And here's what the Boeing 'Flight Crew Training Manual' has to say on matter (and, again, the Airbus version will, necessarily, be very very similar in its content and message):

A suitable airport is defined by the operating authority for the operator based on guidance material but, in general, must have adequate facilities and meet certain minimum weather and field conditions.

If required to divert to the nearest suitable airport (twin engine airplanes with an engine failure), the guidance material also typically specifies that the pilot should select the nearest suitable airport “in point of time” or “in terms of time.”

In selecting the nearest suitable airport, the pilot-in-command should consider the suitability of nearby airports in terms of facilities and weather and their proximity to the airplane position.

The pilot-in-command may determine, based on the nature of the situation and an examination of the relevant factors, that the safest course of action is to divert to a more distant airport than the nearest airport. For example, there is not necessarily a requirement to spiral down to the airport nearest the airplane's present position if, in the judgment of the pilot-in-command, it would require equal or less time to continue to another nearby airport.

For persistent smoke or a fire which cannot positively be confirmed to be completely extinguished, the safest course of action typically requires the earliest possible descent, landing and evacuation. This may dictate landing at the nearest airport appropriate for the airplane type, rather than at the nearest suitable airport normally used for the route segment where the incident occurs.


Herein end'th a lesson, for a few of you supposed 'Professionals' ! :ugh:

Well done the crew !! :D

[jameslon]

Is that photo caption from the Mail story correct??

Crisis: Firefighters used powerful jets to douse the flames as evacuation slides were deployed to allow passengers off

???

[Modburyboy]

Memo to the BBC reporter at LGW today - actually the main thing is not that the airport is back up and running normally, but that a professional crew got the a/c back down on the black stuff quickly and efficiently and that there were no serious injuries !

Also, why is everyone so surprised that fire engines were following the a/c as soon as it was down, would that not be standard procedure and logical?

[G-CPTN]

Passenger being interviewed on BBC Radio Five suggested that panic was induced by a member of the cabin crew screaming at passengers causing a 'pile-up' with resulting injuries as they fell onto each other at the bottom of a slide.

[Teevee]

Just how much of this stuff is being made up? I listened to another passenger being interviewed on 5 live coming home from work around 14.30 and when they asked him about smoke in the cabin he said he didn't really see much but then he was sitting towards the back, said there was 'bit' of pushing and shoving but no panic that he was aware of, and he praised the crew for keeping everyone calm by not mentioning the word 'emergency' until they were telling the pax to evacuate when it was on the ground and stationary. Maybe the good old beeb dumped him for telling the truth?:rolleyes:

[gatbusdriver]

Let me guess.....possibly screaming something along the lines of...."unfasten your seatbelts, come this way"

[PPRuNe Pop]

Ridiculous speculation is coming from some on here. Until you, and us, know the facts perhaps you would care to stop feeding the journos. Then maybe they won't print the rubbish that has already surfaced.

[Checkboard]

Out of interest why do the VS 330-300 not have the facility to dump fuel? Is this for all A330 or just the VS ones?

Aircraft only only required to fit fuel jettisoning systems if it is shown that they cannot meet the missed approach climb gradient at take-off weight:

“JAR/FAR 25.1001
A fuel jettisoning system must be installed on each aeroplane unless it is shown that the aeroplane meets the climb requirements of Approach Climb gradient and Landing Climb gradient at maximum take-off weight, less the actual or computed weight of fuel necessary for a 15-minute flight comprised of a take-off, go-around, and landing at the airport of departure with the aeroplane configuration, speed, power, and thrust the same as that used in meeting the applicable take-off, approach, and landing climb performance requirements of this JAR-25.”

As a matter of interest, in an emergency evac, woul a crew member not go down the slide first in order to get evacuating pax off the bottom of the slide ASAP?
Love it! :) <Open Door>, shout "Follow me to safety!", jump down slide and leg it! :)

... on a serious note, when there is time, there is a procedure to get a couple of able-bodied passengers to stand at the bottom of the slide to clear it of log jams.

May I ask a question (slight drift, taking advantage of pilots on this thread) reading some past posts I understand that the slides double as a rafts for water emergency landings.

Would the number of slides/rafts (thinking Titanic, freezing waters) be sufficient for a full a/c pax and crew to be accommodated on them?

On a long range aircraft like this, it would be fitted with slide/rafts. On short range aircraft, they are an option - but it is quite possible that simple slides are fitted. In that case, long over-water flights need to have extra life-rafts placed on board. Yes, there are always enough places for everyone (provided they can all be deployed...)

[BobnSpike]

Ridiculous speculation is coming from some on here. Until you, and us, know the facts perhaps you would care to stop feeding the journos. Then maybe they won't print the rubbish that has already surfaced.Given that poseurs are quickly called out as such on PPRuNe, but the press will devour as gospel anything they are told by said poseurs despite their being called out, do you doubt the journos will be fed?

The poseurs want to be listened to. This community knows enough to spot BS, so we don't listen. The press, on the other hand, doesn't care if it's BS as long as it sells papers. The poseurs talk, the press listens, everyone is satisfied and the facts become irrelevant.

[snafu]

Airsound - thanks for the timing clarification. I must confess to having wondered about the time taken to divert back to LGW from somewhere along the south coast when there are other airports available, albeit with varying runway lengths, which is clearly going to be an issue, rather than landing asap. The previous post about the issues getting down from FL nosebleed and the (in)ability to dump fuel also explained it very nicely, so thank you.

Before anyone decides to ask about my own experience, I've got over 2000 hrs flying military support helicopters and I've had smoke in the cabin on three occasions. We're normally slightly better off than the FW community in that we have the option to put the cab down a bit quicker wherever we are if we need to, although that wasn't an option in South Armagh or Helmand, where I did continue back to Bessbrook or Bastion first!

I just wish that civvies (SLF) would realise that leadership in a high-stress, dynamic situation does occasionally require the use of a raised voice!! :E

Well done to the crew for getting everyone back safely...they can even use the jet again - result! :ok:

[loopylee]

Now im sorry but im cabin crew myself, and our policy with regards to evacuating the aircraft is to evacuate the aircraft ASAP after we've heard the evacuation command. We dont care about whether there is a pile of passengers at the bottom of the slide, people need to get off quickly. As we all know an evacuation of an aircraft should be made within 90 seconds of that evacuation call, and whats with the guy on the BBC website interview saying the crew were screaming to get people off... they aint gonna be asking people nicely are they??!!!! They did a bloody good job i say to evacuate that big bird as they did with only 4 slight injuries. Good job to all involved.

[halwise]

Listening to the radio this afternoon, 5Live, I felt genuinely sorry for the Virgin spokesman having to deal with the questioning of the presenter, I think gave his name as "Andrew Verity". The hectoring and ill informed speculation that this so called "presenter" spouted had to be heard to believed. Quoting one of the Passenger's who thought something was wrong as soon as the Aircraft became airborne, claiming it was all "wobbly" this excuse of a presenter, then asked the
spokesman, should the aircraft, have taken off if that was the case!!
Unbelievable!!!:mad:

[mr.777]

It gets better though....the guy who claimed that one of the crew was "screaming like a banshee" has now said, "I could smell fuel-it smelt like a BBQ".

[lomapaseo]

Recent study suggests that on the Titanic "Women and Children First" was strongly enforced by crew and captain with firearms. Otherwise history shows that an every man for himself situation on shipboard means the women and kids don't make it.

Therefore one needs very very firm discipline to insist on an orderly evacuation. Sounds like this was a textbook case.

We've been through this before on PPrune

Short of using fire arms to enforce your theory, it's every person for themselves

live with it, those who get to the door first should exit first

[typhoonboy]

May I ask a question (slight drift, taking advantage of pilots on this thread) reading some past posts I understand that the slides double as a rafts for water emergency landings.

Would the number of slides/rafts (thinking Titanic, freezing waters) be sufficient for a full a/c pax and crew to be accommodated on them?

Daz I stand to be corrected, but its actually slighty better than that.

The certification requirements are that passengers can evac in a given time (90 seconds rings a bell) using only half the slides(i.e on the assumption that one side of the aircraft is completley unuseable - unusual attitude, fire etc)
I also believe that the raft / floation passenger capacity requirement assumes the complete loss of one raft? but i'm not 100% on that one.

As far as I know you are correct except it's the complete loss of the raft with the highest capacity!

[Basil]

Wot lomapaseo says - first come first out.

Loved this (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-17730154):
Tom Alridge said one of the cabin crew panicked upon landing.
"She was screaming like a banshee - 'Get off, get off' - she was literally pushing people down the chute," he said.
Good report - sounds like she was doing her job as trained :ok:

[Jack1985]

Good report - sounds like she was doing her job as trained http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

exactly! :)

[funfly]

Did the people who complained about being shouted at by cabin staff also comment that the same cabin staff were putting the safety of the passengers before their own in what could have been a very dangerous situation.
One assumes that, unlike recent maritime history, the captain did not exit in the first batch.

[Bemarost]

I appreciate that I am a first time poster but have always had an interest in aviation and have followed the various forums for a while now.
I have no experience in working in the industry but have now retired from the Police after 30 interesting years.
I only post to give some encouragement to those crew involved in today's incident.
Two points.
1. I have been in situations when I and others have had to move a lot of people on very quickly to keep them safe. There is always confusion and it is imperative to speak or realistically shout loudly and decisively without any cause for misunderstanding. This would appear to be the case here and left no doubt as to what was required.
This leads me onto point 2 which is that a news spin story sells more copy than the hard facts. I too have been involved in incidents which have later been reported so vastly different to the facts.

There isn't much you can do about except to accept accept the praise of your peers and colleagues, who are after all the best judges.

Anyway just to let you know that there are still some of us out there who would rather read facts and not hype!

As you can see I am in no way an aviation expert but would lime to say well done to all involved in avoiding a disaster and saving lives.

[TSR2]

This quote is from the BBC News report

Tom Alridge said one of the cabin crew panicked upon landing.

"She was screaming like a banshee - 'Get off, get off' - she was literally pushing people down the chute," he said.


I would not expect anything less. That's how to get people off as quickly as possible. Well done Cabin Crew.

[nippysweetie]

15 people taken to hospital after this incident, according to the local ambulance service. Largely minor injuries but still not an insignificant number.

PS hospital figures are fact, unlike pretty much everything else on this thread

[tubby linton]

The AvHerald is reporting that the fire service found no trace of smoke or fire,but was this aircraft de-iced this morning?It was certainly cold enough overnight to require a treatment.

[vulcanised]

Some of the 'news' reports are quite hilarious.

I was fully expecting to encounter 'inferno' while reading them.

[edi_local]

I would not expect anything less. That's how to get people off as quickly as possible. Well done Cabin Crew.

Exactly.Especially in this day and age when everyone is far too busy/ignorant to listen to the safety instructions. No doubt half of them were filing the evacuation on their phones too, probably still ignoring the CC.

What does he expect the crew to say?

"We will begin by evacuating our Gold card holders, followed by families with young Children and then economy customers by seat row, please remain inside the smoke filled cabin until your seat row number has been annonced!" :ugh:

[EyesToTheSkies]

My observational comment about several passengers being seen after the evacuation holding personal belongings must not have been judged to be appropriate by someone.

I think it is very important discussion to be had about passenger behaviour when some passengers on the news appear to have been complaining about the tone of the crew!

Mods: I would love to know (by PM if preferred) why my post appeared and then was deleted.

[bbrown1664]

These things happen and, despite what the pax are saying to the press, it sounds like the cabin crew (and FD crew) did exactly as trained to do in these circumstances.

More worrying to me as an LGW local is the fact that NONE of the injured appeard to be taken to local hospitals. Instead they were taken to Brighton and Tooting in London.

When I did my Avionics apprenticeship with BCal, we were given a presentation by the police and ATC at the time telling us about the emergency plans for LGW. This was when Crawley, East Grinstead and Horsham still had their own A&E departments as well as East Slurrey. Even then patients would need to be transfered to places as far afield as Oxford and Cambridge just based on a percentage of people needing treatment if a full 747 had an incident at LGW. I am guessing Oxford and Cambridge would be some of the more local places with Paris, Brussels and Glasgow taking some in the event of a major incident now.

[stuinn]

Curious, the passengers who experinced today are they travelling again on a seperate aircraft today?

[foxmoth]

More worrying to me as an LGW local is the fact that NONE of the injured appeard to be taken to local hospitals. Instead they were taken to Brighton and Tooting in London.

Not sure, but if the complete picture is not known it would make sense to take minor injuries to more distant hospitals, thus leaving the nearby ones fully available if the incident develops further with more urgent cases able to be attended to without delay.

[mercurydancer]

15 minor injuries? In general, that means cuts and scratches, or a minor undisplaced fracture (wrist etc.. painful but not anything that cant be fixed in short order in any A&E) From a professional point of view, I'm at the other end of alerts... Majax for hospitals. It will be interesting to see the extent of the injuries.

I'm sure that the cabin crew know perfectly well the inevitability of injury by getting people out of the aircraft by the slides. They do not do it lightly. I do not think for one moment that the flight crew gave the instruction for such an evacuation lightly either.

Sounds like a completely professional handling of the situation. The London hospitals did get the alert as planned, and acted with commendable speed. I'm sorry if some people had their surgery cancelled for today.

[Thridle Opdes]

Well done to the crew :D.

Any experienced aviation professional will know that situations such as these rarely pan out as cleanly as they do in the sim and that as such, actually making the decisions can be far more difficult and doubt-ridden processes than one would expect them to be.

I just hope that with all of the media hype and Ill-informed speculation that inevitably accompanies such an event, the crew-members involved (CC and FD) don't let the opinions of others undermine their own, well deserved, sense of pride at a job well done.

I would also take the opportunity to remind everyone else, in the nicest possible way, that for the crew this is far from over. They will all be re-examining their actions and reliving moments from today's incident for a long time to come. They will also be having to describe and account for their actions and decisions as part of the formal de-briefing process. They may well be having a look at this thread in order to read what is being written about them.

If they are, I say again, good job. Well done.

[cwatters]

I note the usual reports of friction burns. Perhaps this is something the industry could/should address?

[riverrock83]

Beeb quotes:
A spokeswoman said six fire appliances were called to the scene but actually dealt with a small fire on the undercarriage caused by the emergency landing.

Is this due to an over weight landing - or was the pilot heavier than normal on the brakes? Wouldn't the airport fire service be better to deal with this with foam jets rather than regular firemen with presumably water (takes ordinary firemen a while to mix the foam in my recollection).


Fifteen people needed hospital treatment after the evacuation, 14 of them for suspected fractures.
So slightly worse than originally thought. Any thoughts on how to make emergency slides slower / safer while still allowing maximum evacuation speed?

I worked on a passenger fast ferry and had the privilege of going down one of the emergency slides after it was activated as part of annual maintenance / testing. Those slides were much narrower than the A330 and we were trained to tell passengers to manage their speed by using feet on the sides. We also had to have someone at the sea end to sort people out at the bottom (they also have other jobs, like inflating the life rafts...). However on a ship, there is probably a better ratio of crew to passengers so we have the man power to do that. There is also more time available and the system can be more complex as the weight and size of the system is less of an issue.

Ideas for improvement?

[dizzylizzy]

This does resemble a little bit of the Qantas A330 evacuation in KIX in 2005. Though pending formal investigation publication.... BUT it was diversion to KIX from multiple cargo smoke indications in the flight deck with no let up despite extinguisher discharge. Swift actions of the flight crew to return & evacuate, professional actions of the cabin crew too! A desirable outcome :D

[AeroMad]

So slightly worse than originally thought. Any thoughts on how to make emergency slides slower / safer while still allowing maximum evacuation speed?

I worked on a passenger fast ferry and had the privilege of going down one of the emergency slides after it was activated as part of annual maintenance / testing. Those slides were much narrower than the A330 and we were trained to tell passengers to manage their speed by using feet on the sides. We also had to have someone at the sea end to sort people out at the bottom (they also have other jobs, like inflating the life rafts...). However on a ship, there is probably a better ratio of crew to passengers so we have the man power to do that. There is also more time available and the system can be more complex as the weight and size of the system is less of an issue.

Ideas for improvement?

It's understandable people won't have a great experience going down emergency slides but at the end of the day, they do exactly what it says on the tin and that's getting passengers out of the aircraft FAST!

However, I do think passengers closest to the doors should be told to stay at the bottom of the slides to assist evacuating passengers and prevent pile-ups. (Feel free to correct me if this is already part of procedure)

Anyways, the aircraft's on the ground and nobody died. In my eyes that's a job well done and pints all round.

[clareprop]

Ideas for improvement?
The reality of the situation is that if we were looking at a burning hulk on the runway, everyone would be congratulating the crew and each other with relief that there were only such "minor" injuries.
However, whatever the rights and wrongs (which will come out during the investigation) if, as is reported, between 5 and 14 people have suffered broken limbs as a result of an incident which has apparently not resulted in any serious damage to the aircraft and such an evacuation is "standard operating procedure", then I think questions will certainly be asked about "room for improvement"

[procterg]

I bet Richard wishes he had a few more planes like this.
According to Daily Mail plane was mid Atlantic when emergency was called.
It landed within 30 mins of take off.
I doubt if it had actually left British airspace in that time.
Yet more sloppy journalism

[GlennTheBaker]

My post from last night was deleted due to my over-exhuberant use of Anglo-Saxon so I'll try again.......

I watched the report on ITV news last night and was truly stunned to see passengers complaining about 'cabin crew shouting for us to get out' and 'the escape slides were almost vertical, they hadn't deployed properly' as well as 'my knees/elbows are all grazed'. The pilot landed a (possibly overweight) aircraft safely, the cabin crew ensured you got off quicky and safely and you complain about the odd graze? These people are nothing more than publicity-seeking idiots who are pandering to the media's desire for a sensationalist angle on an otherwise uneventful story. Shame on you.

[mrast]

Where do Virgin get the plane from to keep VS027 in service while this one is assessed by the authorities etc?

Do the have spare planes they can pull into service?

[kaikohe76]

Incident well handled by the Crew, good for you. Unfortunate there were a number of minor injuries, ankles etc. However the total Idiot on BBC TV who was making a song & dance about the Cabin Crew screeming at the pax, needs to understand, this is exactly what the Cabin Crew are supposed to do in such a situation.
Well done again to all concerned.

[crosswindaviator]

At 20000 feet 25 miles or so from Bournemouth is a bit steep... Flying back to a field you know by heart or to one you don't know and might have to brief 5 mins for that little difference in distance is a no brainer. Pilot flying is probably alone, while the other is managing the failure, atc, cabin.....

So your comment seems cheap... :ugh:

[crosswindaviator]

It's time that journalists become responsible for the nonsense they sell... And stop hiding behind freedom of speech which has been yanked out of context by themselves

Smoke in the sim is already stressy enough... Imagine in real life....

[Ms Spurtle]

Well done to the CC. Sounds like a text book evacuation.


Just a point about this thread...
Moved to 'spotters corner' ??? Really ??? :ugh:

[douglasheld]

Why not? Has a single commenter here been the least bit knowledgeable about the actual flight and situational details? No. the sum total of data in this thread at present doesn't add a lot of value over that telephoto photograph, from the parking lot, showing slides deployed.

Fun summer reading for today, but I'm happy to wait for the report for lessons learned.

[Golf-Sierra]

When the LOT Boeing 767 SP-LPC made a gear up landing last year, despite the fact that:

- it could be classified as a crash and not an emergency landing,
- the runway was covered in foam,
- there was plenty of smoke coming from the plane,
- parts of the plane were genuinely on fire,
- fire crews were extinguishing said fires during the evac,
- the pax and crew had experienced the fatigue of an 8 hour transatlantic flight and were definitely aware of the gravity of the situation,

somehow the CC managed to evacuate everyone without a single injury. So it can be done.


The outcome on British soil and on a British operated aircraft is not as favourable. Perhaps an eye-opener that the elfensafety terror is already bringing more harm than good.

[underread east]

re LOT lack of injuries.

I would think that an a/c on its arse vs an aircraft on its gear would have a significantly lower gradient to its slides, so pax exit velocity down them will be much lower and risk of injury sustained on leaving the end of the slide subsequently reduced/removed.

[SLF3b]

777 has been evacuated without injury down the slides with a suspected engine fire. In large measure due to an assertive but composed crew who effectively paced the evacuation to make sure no-one was hurt. They had the advantage that they could see the ´fire´and the fire crew so knew they had time.Not so obvious if you think the fire is under your feet, but it is certainly the case that how the crew behave can affect how many people are injured. So whether ´screaming like a banshee´is an accurate description of her behaviour or was appropriate in the circumstances is subjective - just like this thread.

[VJW]

Their flight path looks as though they potentially dumped some fuel. Should this be the case would they do this and then evacuate when they land? The only thing I can think of is the situation worsen as they returned.

If there was smoke in the flight deck, and they thought a return was warranted (which of course it is), why did they take the time to fly south after their departure to SAM, the only thing I can think of is to dump fuel. Surely turning around heading directly back to LGW would not have left them too little track miles to descend?

[A and C]

Ifyou had taken the trouble to read this thread you would know that the type of A330 can't dump fuel.

From the tone of your post it is clear that you have no idea about how long it takes to get an airliner to turn around and the distance that it takes to decend and slow the aircraft for landing.

Rather than post inaccurate rubbish I would respectfully suggest that you read the whole thread before posting.

There are posts from people who clearly know less than yourself but there are also some pearls of wisdom above and it is not hard to sort them out.

[theshed]

As someone who was fortunate enough to watch this incident unfold from a very prime viewing point in a less stressful pointy end. I think it's only fair to add a couple of points.

1. The crew from what I could see and hear conducted themselves very well. As i could hear on the RT the decision to evacuate was not taken lightly. The situation was controlled but because the fire chief could not confirm the presence of smoke or the absence of it due to the jet efflux the only option open for the crew (in my opinion) was to evacuate the aircraft.

2. I am not a A330 operator but as it is a ETOPS a/c i can only imagine that the holds must have a minimum time period they have been certified to contain a fire with minimal risk to pax. (I'm sure someone will know this)

3. I would like to congratulate both the crew on board the VS and also the entire LGW team for their reaction and for the hard work done on a very abnormal day. From the VS crew to the controllers to the fire teams to the guys driving the buses to have a major incident like that evacuate a 330 and have the airport open in what seamed to be around the 2 hour mark is a very big achievement and a very big learning day. I know I took alot onboard just watching it. :D

[VJW]

Forgive me A&C I was being lazy, and went on a stint on this thread with nothing but useless info, and from what I can see, the only thing I am guilty of is being a bit rusty on distance between LGW-SAM and back around. I don't know exactly what altitude they'd be at around SAM, but with their weight and step climbs out of LGW I was ball parking it at around FL200-FL250. Again with that altitude, you'd need around 60-70 miles to get down, and now I think about it more, thats looks about right with their track miles from the picture of their flight path.

I wasn't meaning to give a tone as to them not doing a good job, my statements were meant to simply asking if a dump took place (didn't know these 330's couldn't dump) in any situation, would an evacuation normally follow suit? It's kind of why I posted in the first place, I'm sure the evacuation was required, but I couldn't imagine them dumping.

[primreamer]

Previous posts have covered the ill-informed press coverage of this incident yesterday so I don't have anything to add on that subject. However I would like to say well done to the Virgin Atlantic flight and cabin crew. A difficult situation, skillfully handled by professional people.

[Magplug]

An Aft-Cargo Smoke ECAM south of the I-O-W without further signs of smoke/fire entering the cabin is a no brainer... turn round and Mayday back to LGW. An overweight landing brings it's own problems but those are not insurmountable and certainly do not add to the current level of peril.

An Aft-Cargo smoke warning is not an automatic evacuation. The evacuation itself will cause injury and maybe broken bones for a few so is not a decision to be taken lightly. The average VS passenger might even get a few friction burns if they buy all their wardrobe at JD Sports :hmm:

Once on the ground fire crews scan the aircraft surface with IR equipment for hot-spots within. Therefore a latched fire warning or cargo-smoke warning without sign of smoke in the cabin and without supporting hot-spot reports from the fire crew outside is almost certainly false. Any source of smoke in closed hold that has already been drenched in BCF is not an immediate threat and passengers can be disembarked via steps when they are available. Naturally the fire crews continue to monitor and evacuation remains an option at all times. The offending hold will not be opened until all the pax are disembarked.

It appears the crew were not presented with any evidence of fire onboard other than a single AFT Cargo Smoke.... Indeed to form a conclusion of imminent peril based solely on that would be faulted. To throw the passengers down the chutes is rather premature given those circumstances.

A big chuck-up to the CC however who got all the pax off safely when ordered to do so

[kaikohe76]

Crosswind,

You are absolutely right, Iv'e had smoke in both situations, fortunately only a very little in flight on one occassion. Certainly conentrates the mind somewhat.
Regards K 76

[mercurydancer]

Fifteen people needed hospital treatment after the evacuation, 14 of them for suspected fractures.

Suspected is the operative word. A displaced or compound fracture would have been instantly apparent. AFAIK there were no compound fractures reported. Suspected fracture? Yes of course. Anywhere which has the simplest of x-ray facilities would be able to determine if a fracture has occurred. Triage would identify the potential for a fracture and direct the casualty to the appropriate place. Tooting would have been well able to deal with that. London Ambulance did triage and effectively so.

[MoreComfortableSeat]

Just came upon this thread and was interested by some of the input. From a 744 point of view, and the A330 may be different in detail but not the philosophy, could we agree:

Assuming an "Aft Cargo Fire Warning" at approx 25000ft the Emergency Checklist would require firing at least one bottle into the aft hold, the second being discharged just before touchdown.

Once again apologies for not being type specific but the 744 cargo hold fire detector is in fact a device that measures the visibility between two lenses to detect smoke (no smoke without fire is the theory). This has proved to be slightly unreliable when carrying fruit from a hot climate which has caused misting when the cargo temperature cooled in flight, clearly not an issue here.

Firing the bottle actually creates a mist and the fire detector will now continue to indicate a fire as the visibility has now been severely reduced by the discharge.

Only indication now as to whether you actually have a fire in the hold is the temperature in the hold and you can bet that all eyes were on that gauge and cabin crew were feeling the floor temp of the aft cabin.

25000ft/ 75-80 track miles to touchdown without speedbrake so LGW is perfect, lets forget about other suitable airports.

Touchdown at LGW and Captain orders an emergency evacuation, slides deployed and he would expect the Cabin Crew to do the evacuation to the max, there really are no half measures, either an orderly rapid disembarkation down the steps or an emergency evacuation down the slides.

Congratulations to all for getting the ship home, it really is more complex when you are in that situation.

[Dubaian]

A rumour heard from an Easyjet CC that there was no fire. Some idiot had loaded dry ice and the 'smoke' triggered the hold alarms. Anybody know if this is true or urban legend. Presumably the fire crews know if there really was a hold fire or not by now?

[View From The Ground]

Packed properly and in limited quantities dry ice is allowed in the holds of aircraft under DGR. So some idiot may or may not apply depending on how and of course if it was loaded. Not sure that Easyjet CC would be a more reliable source than the AAIB

[Dubaian]

View From The Ground Thanks - I'm only passing on a rumour - not saying it's correct. :rolleyes: But that apparently is the current scuttlebutt round LGW.

[View From The Ground]

It is however possible I believe for dry ice to activate the alarms. If so would be interesting to know if correct loading procedures were followed. Take many years of a loader's salary to recover those costs!! All supposing it was dry ice AND an error.

[scoobydoo44]

At this particular incident the slides were manned at the bottom by afs rescue crews. while the idea of passengers helping sounds good, in reality the speed and number of passengers coming down made this a very difficult situation to control even for experienced rescue crews. An improvement would be to have a tapered run off at the end of the slide so that the passenger does not hit the floor at speed , which in some cases is what happened at lgw

[Basil]

scooby,
There is a deceleration strip for the last couple of metres to slow evacuees.
To use a slide you exit at a brisk walking pace and jump and sit on the slide - it's nice and soft. Do NOT stop and gently lower yourself to the edge of the floor - if you do that the cabin crew will push you out.
You will be decelerated to a very moderate running pace before you hit the ground (running).

[Kingfisher]

This was on the news and the crew did a great job. Why has this thread been moved to spectators gallery?

[Magplug]

Why has this thread been moved to spectators gallery?
Because PPRUNE is very 'Virgin Friendly' and you know much Branson hates bad publicity.

Particularly when.... It may transpire that the evacuation and injuries in this incident were entirely unnecessary. The crew had no confirmation of any fire in the hold but elected to send a planeload of passengers down the slides regardless. In any evacuation it is enevitable that there will be casualties. The crew were aware of that, and this evacuation proved no exception.

Of course this thread got moved from R&N. This post will be deleted shortly :mad:

[vs69]

Maybe it got moved because of the usual uninformed speculation and hindsight club which had started to take hold as is the case with every incident regardless of which airline is involved. Maybe the crew elected to evac because maybe despite discharging both bottles there was still a fire/smoke warning?
Better a couple of sprained ankles than 300 corpses. Not an easy call to make but easier to justify an evac than a fatality.

[scoobydoo44]

Basil i can assure you that having being at the bottom of one of the said slides on the day , they didnt deaccelerate and in fact came down at speed and at all different sorts of angles. however as said in previous posts , with full evac procedures the idea is to clear the aircraft as quickley as possible and it is enevitable that some injuries will be sustained.

[Magplug]

Maybe the crew elected to evac because maybe despite discharging both bottles there was still a fire/smoke warning?
Let's set this straight - The warning is [AFT CARGO SMOKE] and not a fire warning. Engines have fire warning systems with firewires that act as heat sensors. Arcraft holds are completely different in having smoke detectors similar in principle to your domestic smoke detector, although a little more sophisticated.

And there lies the first clue... You have flooded the confined space of the hold where the suspected fire lies with BCF.... yet the SMOKE (not fire or heat) warning persists Aside from that warning there is a complete absence of other information that suggests immediate danger to the passengers.

It is very well known that other things set off SMOKE alarms - dry ice vapourising, over ripe fruit. Although it is sensible to get back on the ground ASAP it requires a rather more enquiring mind before sending everyone down the chutes where injuries are 100% guaranteed.

I think Virgin are going to have a few lawyers knocking on their door shortly seeking compensation for those injured in a premature evacuation.

[vs69]

My apologies for the use of the word Fire, I stand by my previous statement. PS It's Halon, not BCF...

And I daresay the ambulance chasers will be queueing up, to comment further may be saying more than I should.
Safe flying.

[Kingfisher]

Odd the publicity from this seems to be positive.

[Divet II]

I think we might be forgetting something here...

Opening the cargo doors is a no no before pax are off if fire suspected incase it makes it worse with the added oxygen. Fire crews are aware if this and so should pilots. Therefore, if there is doubt as to whether its on fire inside, the safest option is to evacuate before it gets worse. 300 minor injuries is still better than any deaths. If you can confirm that its not on fire then better to allow fire crews to inspect and safely disemark pax normally. Its already been stated here that its difficult to be sure but if that red smoke light is still on and theres doubt, its safer to evacuate rather than risk the fire worsening whilst pax still on board. Imagine the panic and injuries then, and also what we know it alls would be saying about why the hell didnt they evacuate earlier...

A320 TT 4500

[frangatang]

How curious , l couldnt see 4 ENGINES FOR LONG HAUL plastered down the fuselage! Wonder why!RB= prat.

[TurboTomato]

I think Virgin are going to have a few lawyers knocking on their door shortly seeking compensation for those injured in a premature evacuation.

If this is the case then I think I'd lose faith in humanity. If this was successful then it would encourage crews to not evacuate in 50/50 situations, which cannot be a good thing surely?

[dozing4dollars]

Knowledge is knowing it's a one way street,
Wisdom is looking both ways anyway.

You may know there is smoke, but no fire... but the law of unintended consequences will pass judgment quicker on the participants than the spectators.

[scoobydoo44]

vs69 bcf is a halon. in this case it was btm which is also a halon

[MoreComfortableSeat]

There is no right or wrong answer and it is an ever evolving situation. I did the same emergency many times on recurrent checks and the basic do's and don't were always hammered home and that stayed with me. I did experience a similar situation and eventually we moved away from evacuating down the slides and even steps on the runway.
Only indication now as to whether you actually have a fire in the hold is the temperature in the hold and you can bet that all eyes were on that gauge and cabin crew were feeling the floor temp of the aft cabin.We got an "Aft Cargo Fire" warning in a 744 600NM west of the Irish coast whilst heading home from Miami in 2004. I was looking at the overhead panel at the time and the First officer was checking the window heat on the side panel so it came as quite a shock. We completed the checklist items (basically reduce airflow and fire the first bottle), declare an emergency, leave the NAT Track system and headed for the nearest suitable airport, Shannon in this case, at max warp factor and then woke up the relief pilot who was on scheduled rest.

"Aft Cargo Fire" did not go away and we did not expect it to as we had blasted the first bottle and it would have been quite a fog in there which would keep the warning on as the fire detection system merely detects reduced visibility.

After 15 mins, Aft Cargo temp remained absolutely constant (low) and as there was no sign of heat on the aft cabin floor it persuaded the three of us that perhaps there was less of a chance of a fire in there.

We ran the DODAR* again and the last is R is Review, our first DODAR had us going flat out to Shannon and an emergency evacuation down the slides with the prospect of a ditching if things detiorated, the subsequent reviews over the next 60 mins gently downgraded the situation to steps at the end of the runway in Shannon and the ultimate one was disembarkation down steps close to the terminal after a Fire crew inspection.

We landed in Shannon having fired the second bottle on approach. On landing there were steps at the far end of the runway and fire crews all down the runway and we came to rest by the steps. Even evacuating down steps in the dark at 5.00 in the morning out on the runway has its problems as people go walkabout so after a chat and cursory inspection with the Fire Crew (touching skin of rear hold to gauge temp and looking for smoke) they accompanied us on out final plan, passenger disembarkation down the steps in an orderly fashion 20M out from the normal jetty and then up the steps to the terminal building. This was followed by opening the hold surrounded by all the fire appliances available within 30 miles of Limerick.

It was a false alarm, there was no fire and we knew 30 mins into the emergency that the cargo manifest showed some pallets of fruit so we always had our suspicions. All the cargo was removed, the bags were removed, the First Officer did the refuelling and we got the pax back on board and flew home to Heathrow with empty holds. We got in our cars and went home having filed just an Air Safety Report, the company sent an aircraft to collect the bags and cargo from Shannon. Never heard a word from the company or anyone else ever again.

* DODAR. Works for just about any situation, aviation related or not.
D: Diagnosis O: Options D: Decisions A:Actions R: Review

[dozing4dollars]

BBC News - Virgin plane in Gatwick Airport emergency landing (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-17730154)
...
Passenger Tom Alridge: "I could smell fuel - it smelt like a barbecue"
...

[wiggy]

I was looking at the overhead panel at the time and the First officer was checking the window heat on the side panel so it came as quite a shock.

:D :D :D

Interesting story, glad it worked out ok......

[Basil]

scoobydoo44,
That's probably WITH the deceleration strip; without it you wouldn't have seen them flash past ;)
I think they should have them set up at airports for pax practice; kids would love it and LCY could have one as a raft :ok:

[The_Lynchster]

I was a passenger onboard the VS27 on Monday. I know only a little about planes and how they work etc so the majority of this has been interesting. I did not know that this aircraft could not 'dump' fuel or that the reason we went back to Gatwick was due to runway length and capability of emergency services. To be honest, I didn't question why we did not land at an alternative airport. Unfortunately I work with Tom Aldridge and Mark Bell.

I would like to give you all my version of events. After approx 15 minutes, the pilot requested 'please can the cabin crew on the left side of the aircraft come to the cockpit immediately'. I imagine he then briefed them and they began checking everyone had seatbelts on and that all luggague was under seats etc. The pilot then announced we would return to Gatwick. I do not remember if he said to make an emergency landing. I believe he may have cut the engine on the left hand side of the plane as when we were turning to line up with the runway, the right engine was making much more noise than normal as I guess it was powering the plane.

We came in to land extremely fast and the emergency services were present. As soon as the engine had fully powered down, we were told to 'Evacuate Now'. I exited the plane quickly and with only a grazed elbow. I have no recollection of a screaming crew and was caught by a fireman at the bottom of the slide and told to 'get away from the plane, now'.

Once we had been collected by coaches, we were taken to the gate, necessary paperwork completed, fed, watered (children were being provided with colouring books and pencils, clothing was provided etc), we were then police escorted to the Hilton once approval had been given by immigration where a buffet was laid on for dinner and breakfast. We completed forms in order to retrieve hand lugguage which we had back by 8pm. Virgin picked up the cost of mine and my colleagues dinner at the hotel. We have also been provided with a free flight anywhere with the exception of Australia.

We were informed that there would be a flight at 3pm the following day and specifically that it was a Boeing not an Airbus. On board the captain was speaking with passengers during the flight and they were running competitions to distract people.

On my flight back from Miami on Sunday, I was provided with another letter at checkin asking for my correct contact details as Virgin want to write to all passengers. Unfortunately a passenger was taken seriously ill on this flight and we we're prioritised for landing at LHR as the paramedics had been called. Captain informed us we would have to have a 'fast' landing. Again this was executed perfectly.

The last time I flew with Virgin prior to this trip and on my return from Cuba, we had a 'flyby' at GTW but again we're kept informed of the situation and landed safely. Apparently there was a plane on the runway and it was apparent the captain had interviened during our descent.

IMHO, The Captain, Crew and Emergency Services did an amazing job in respect of the VS27 and should be highly commended. So too should Virgin for the after care provided. Afterall, I got on the plane the following day!

Hope this helps clear things up for you all.

[mickjoebill]

After 15 mins, Aft Cargo temp remained absolutely constant (low) and as there was no sign of heat on the aft cabin floor it persuaded the three of us that perhaps there was less of a chance of a fire in there.

Would a camera in the hold have helped in this case as well as VS27?


Mickjoebill

[scoobydoo44]

great post lynchster

[scoobydoo44]

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/AAIB%201-2014%20G-VSXY.pdf