Whats so different from this particular flight, to any other commercial flight?
As far as I can remember early comments :
- Multiday rather cold winter operations
- Fuel tank icing messages
- Actual flight much higher than initial operational flight plan (to satisfy ATC request) => hence extra landing fuel.
- Very low OAT at a given time (- 76°c = ISA - 20). What was the TAT at that time ?Somewhere around minus 50 °c ? Quite a cold spot ... for how long?
- no descent to lower altitude over Germany while many other commercials were requesting FL 250 that day.
- no "low fuel temp" warnings, while other airliners got that same warning ...
So ... each fact not exceptionnal. But the whole set still quite infrequent ...
The culprit might be a deficient fuel temp warning system ... and crew putting too much confidence in that system, instead of "crosschecking" fuel temp information with indicated TAT and met temperatures forecast.
As far as I know, Boeing and BA have issued NO change to operating procedures on the B777 (I stand to be corrected if they have)... Would Boeing have grounded the B777-RR powered, if anyone had lost their lives
I guess (see previous post a few pages above) that crews didn't wait for Boeing or the CAA to take extra margins ... Any captain worth his pay would not want to replay that scenario !
Actually, the operational flight plan was calling for lower altitudes, avoiding very low temperatures ... Is the program already including some margins against limitating low temps? Perhaps ... BA knows the answer.