BA diversion

[traveller5]

Anyone know more details about BA284 from SFO diverting into JFK in early hours? Flight still not left JFK. Not another 3 engine saga??

[Thunderbug]

Multiple Toilet snag! :ooh:

(Same) Aircraft due to leave JFK tonight (0200gmt) following crew rest.

BA.com says it will arrive LHR at 1005am local tomorrow.:ok:

T'bug

[Zulu]

Hmmmm....cue 45 page discussion whether it is safe to continue with a toilet failed on take-off...

...hence the expression "when the sh!t hits the fan"!

[frangatang]

Funny how if its anything to do with BA it hits the headlines but sodall happens when an A320 runs off in leeds.

[Ranger One]

Zulu:

Hmmmm....cue 45 page discussion whether it is safe to continue with a toilet failed on take-off...

If you're an American outfit and it's the single forward lav, it IS a no-go - crew only allowed to use forward lav due security! :confused:

R1

[Rainboe]

So a 747 failed its ETOPS (Enough Toilets OPs). I hope the FAA will be taking notes! Any toilet goes out, an immediate return to departure or emergency landing please!

[Bearcat]

Ah folks this is getting into a joke....the crappers fails..... divert/ an engine fails....shut down the noisey one...keep going! Farcical

[Irish Steve]

If I'm going to be SLF on a long haul, I'd rather be travelling with one fan shut down than with no crappers!

[Rainboe]

Bearcat- You wouldn't say that if you were on a busy aeroplane for 11 hours, and the vast majority, if not all your toilets went out! They use a vacuum system, and I think there are 3 tanks altogether. Even if you are down to 1/3 capacity, I think continuing would be rather more unpleasant all round than worth it.
As for losing one engine out of four so you have the capacity of a trijet...you have a problem with continuing?

[moo]

14 toilets on BA 747-400 both configs. 4 BIG tanks for it all to be sucked into! Shouldn't have been a problem to lose one toilet, but, as far as I can remember, you can actually lose around half of the toilets on board if their tanks get full (the flush motors actually stop working) also inhibited by a microswitch on the deck if the honey wagon is connected! :yuk:

[bugg smasher]

Maybe they forgot to disconnect the honey wagon before pushing back.

[Irish Steve]

Maybe they forgot to disconnect the honey wagon before pushing back.

Or the operator didn't get the flap closed correctly, so the switch thought it was still open, or the switch has succumbed to the unwanted attentions of racasan.

Then again, all too often, people put inappropriate things like disposable nappies in the bowl, and wonder why they won't clear afterwards.

I've seen engineers have to resort to all manner of devious procedures to get the pipes clear after even relatively short flights, depending on how much paper waste has been dumped with the crap!

[frangatang]

The crapper control system has a mind of its own and if a particular tank,which has a number of toilets emptying into it decides its full for whatever reason it will shut down those toilets,even if it may be half empty,Relays have also played up and no toilets after half an hour.For all you 400 jocks if there is a waste tank quantity indicator in the office on the plane,check it before departure,try the toilets(ok sometimes some of them dont work on the ground due a particular pump,ok in the air with differential pressure) and while your at it,make sure someone hasnt forgotten to put some water onboard.

[TURIN]

Or the operator didn't get the flap closed correctly, so the switch thought it was still open, or the switch has succumbed to the unwanted attentions of racasan.

No racasan involved on a vacuum system Irish Steve, It's raw sewage all the way!:yuk:

[iceman51]

In November 1996, I had an unforgettable non-stop flight form EZE to LHR on a BA 744 ...

At the time there was a dispute between BA and the handling agent (BA was heading for self-handling on 01.01.97, if I do remember correctly), so the workers did not fill the tanks with water, no one spotted it (is there on the check-list any check of the toilets tanks level?), and less than three hours into the very long flight toilet problems began, say ...to surface .

Then the CPT informed the SLF of the situation, and of the decision to continue the flight to its final destination (...we thank you for your understanding and cooperation :O ). So we crossed the Atlantic, and many more hours later we landed in LHR on time but with a very perfumed a/c (not Chanel n. 5, of course). It was really a s**t flight.

I do non know if at the time either CAA or FAA or any other authority showed any interest on the subject! :ok:

[Papa Owfa]

Three out of four engines I can live with.......but SFO - LHR with no crapper!!??.....you can't do it out the window now can you?

Well done Captain BA!

[frangatang]

Each of the waste tanks has a control module. Two of those modules played up en route to sfo. The serviceable modules were switched to work on the tanks that had more crappers emptying into them.
For some reason those modules packed up as well on the way back,which is extremely rare,so no choice really except to go somewhere.For those saying why werent the modules replaced in sfo,that sort of item isnt sitting aroundin someones office in sfo.
Moral of story,there are many ways to lose a crapper on a modern aircraft.

[Irish Steve]

No racasan involved on a vacuum system Irish Steve, It's raw sewage all the way!

From memory, which is a little less than perfect now, I seem to recall that a small quantity of Water with Racasan is put into even the vacuum systems, I suspect to try to keep things from growing in the tanks over time.

I don't recall any aircraft that we didn't put some in, although the 767-4's, 777's and similar only take a very small quantity, less than 10 litres if I remember it right.

It's not recycled on the newer aircraft, the flush uses the potable water from the main storage tanks, and uses very little, just enough to clear the bowl.

Either way, in every respect of the word, it's a sh:mad:y job to do :E