British Airways Incident at Johannesburg
THE FUB
For your information A B747-400 is operated by a 2 crew flight deck. The BA operation carries an extra crew member for in flight relief due to the Duty Period Jnb-Lhr, and may not have been in the flight deck at the time.
The BA 744 SOPs do not include another crew member in any operating drills, although any extra crew members are obviously useful as a extra pair of eyes when available.
The BA 744 SOPs do not include another crew member in any operating drills, although any extra crew members are obviously useful as a extra pair of eyes when available.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London Under EGLL(LHR) 27R ILS
Age: 31
Posts: 500
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the latest regarding the airframe involved - G-BNLL? I understand the process is taking it's time to assess if it can be repaired, I seem to remember this airframe has another 12,000 hours or so on it's clock as it recently had a D Check.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Italia
Age: 41
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess there are very few pilots who haven't at one time or another taxied not in accordance with their taxy instructions, you see it a lot in the real world and not just in LVP's either, in most circumstances its a non event, just red faces at worst.
I have never been to Jo Burg, nor likely too unless my company fit a load of drop tanks!! but these guys made a mistake, they didn't set out to make one, but it happened and we learn best from trying to understand why and how best to prevent it happening again.
There will of course be a full BA investigation and some lessons to learn, but barring intentional gross misconduct (very unlikely) then hopefully they can continue their careers with BA, but lessons for all of us, what ever we fly
Good luck
I have never been to Jo Burg, nor likely too unless my company fit a load of drop tanks!! but these guys made a mistake, they didn't set out to make one, but it happened and we learn best from trying to understand why and how best to prevent it happening again.
There will of course be a full BA investigation and some lessons to learn, but barring intentional gross misconduct (very unlikely) then hopefully they can continue their careers with BA, but lessons for all of us, what ever we fly
Good luck
It is true. I agree a human mistake can be experienced . It quite clear it was better to avoid this kind of situation but it may happen.
so they are weighing up the economics of repair versus scrapping
I'd be extremely surprised if it flies again.
Mistrust in Management
My Son tells me that it will be repaired. He is an Engineering Apprentice with BA.
I am surprised that this decision has been made (if true) as I would of thought a repair would not be cost effective based on the damage we see.
Oh well, time will tell.
Regards
Exeng
I am surprised that this decision has been made (if true) as I would of thought a repair would not be cost effective based on the damage we see.
Oh well, time will tell.
Regards
Exeng
I think the wildcard in this is the recent D check - that's a good chunk of time and money (plus it may have also included interior upgrades if the plan was to keep the airplane in service for several more years). Basically, if it'll cost less to fix it than to D check a different 'soon to be retired' 747, then it probably makes sense to fix it. And it shouldn't cost much for most of the necessary parts to repair it - just rob them off a recently retired airplane.
I'm just surprised at how long it's apparently taking to make a decision.
I'm just surprised at how long it's apparently taking to make a decision.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it possible that they are considering their safety record by not having a writeoff. I seem to remember that sort of talk about the QANTAS 747 damaged in Bangkok.
Some companies might consider this if only cost a very few million extra.
Some companies might consider this if only cost a very few million extra.
QANTAS was a special case - IIRC they'd never had a hull loss accident, so there was considerable incentive to keep it that way.
OTOH, I doubt BA or Boeing would see much shame it writing off a 100,000+ hour airframe after a collision with a brick building
OTOH, I doubt BA or Boeing would see much shame it writing off a 100,000+ hour airframe after a collision with a brick building
I'm just surprised at how long it's apparently taking to make a decision.
I can't see BA putting out a Press Release saying "we have decided to [scrap]/[repair] one of our aircraft," thereby drawing the media's attention once more to what has been an extremely embarrassing incident.
Instead, the world will simply be left to infer what has been decided, when either a repair team from Boeing/BA arrives on the scene, or alternatively the aircraft gets towed to a remote corner of the airfield and the process of salvaging engines, rotables and other re-usable components begins.