British Airways another inflight smoke event!

[BlueRay]

The third emergency landing by a British Airways aircraft in just one week! This is now way beyond a joke, there must be something very serious going on at that airline.

As for all the BA PR bunch who will jump on this thread, for the sake of public safety, lets discuss this building safety issue.

Read article at; LINK (http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/priority-landing-for-ba-jet-in-fumes-alert-959506.html)

2. British Airways to Delhi (11th October 08) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7666236.stm)
3. British Airways 777 to Denver (5th October 08) (http://avherald.com/h?article=40dd2704&opt=0)

[Tandemrotor]

Yawn! :rolleyes:

[HZ123]

It states fumes not smoke. Blue Ray you really do seem to have a problem with BA as you take every oppertunity to criticise them for virtually everything I hope you not blaming us for the banking crisis.

[Artificial Horizon]

Now Blueray you do suprise me, fancy you being anti-British Airways. It does make me wonder just what British Airways has done to you in the past, rejected at interview?? Wife run off with a BA Pilot?? Dumped by one of our Crew?? or maybe coming from Manchester one of the staff who were made redundant at that base?? I would love to know the motivation for your constant attempts to bring this airlines reputation into disrepute. Once again another non-story, pilots were made aware of an electrical fault en-route, decided it was safer to get it looked at so landed at an airport that has British Airways engineering cover. No great suprise that the usual 'Passengers in mid air terror' headlines have surfaced. Blueray, who do you work for, I am proud to work for British Airways, how about telling us who you work for and then we can scrutinise thier operations as well. In the interests of fairness of course:}

[keel beam]

Blue Ray

Have you only done 36 postings? It seems so much more.

In a social gathering, your one party trick would have worn off ages ago.

How about a bit of constructive criticism, do comparisons with other airlines with meaningful statistics. You might, just might, get a more positive response from fellow contributors!

[BlueRay]

It says fumes not smoke! Oh that's ok then, how I'm happy your not commanding my flight anytime soon. Don't worry folks, its only fumes in the cabin.

As for tandem - I would agree BA's current safety record is becomming quite a yawn. Must be terribly boring to have this repeated 3 times in 1 week. Instead of yawning, you would hope those responsible for safety at BA would wake up and do something.

Artificial horizon - there is no need for me to bring British Airways into disrepute (and not my intention,just reporting a growing adverse safety trend). British Airways have become expert at the art of disrepute all on their own.

[Locked door]

The 757 has a know problem with fumes from engine oil getting into the packs. Every operator has problems with them.

Bluray, run the number of sectors flown by BA compared to the number of events they have. Then do the same for the other major airlines. I don't think you realise how many sectors a day they fly.

Get a life

[Thunderbug]

Blue ray

Calm down Bro.......

These are 3 precautionary landing that the flight crew have decided to make in the interests of safety. These sorts of events are surprisingly frequent among ALL airlines around the world. The only special thing about these particular ones is that despite global economic doom and gloom it has been a quiet day for news and the media have run with it.

A newsworthy story would have been if there were smoke / fume events and the aircraft didn't divert!


T'Bug

[Locked door]

PS Mods can't you ban this idiot? I can't be the only person getting irritated by his senseless ramblings

[Bongodog1964]

Blue Ray; where are you coming from ?

To summarise:
Number of planes affected 3
Number of planes seriously damaged 0
Number of passengers injured 0
Number of sensible decisions made 3

Would you prefer a pilot who ignored fire warnings, or reports of fumes ?

[Coleman Myers]

When one considers the size of BA's fleet, it's suprising this does'nt happen more often. I am much happier with a crew calling in a problem rather than overlooking potential trouble for reputations sake. I have flown hundreds of flights on BA and their pax saftety culture is first class even if their service is not !.

[Mshamba]

In Germany they say "electrical problems", no smoke/fume whatsoever at all?!?

[yamaha]

I think blueray has a point and a quick look elsewhere seems to support the notion that things possibly aren't quite right at BA.

Qantas have always maintained that they are incredibly safe and standards were second to none (just as BA do) until the recent incidents and now we have CASA stating that things could be better.

XL flew over an hour on one engine when the nearest airport was 20 minutes away. I raised the issue of xl, their financial stability and the fact that maintenance was available an hour away but not 20 minutes. Despite the outcry defending the crew, I rest my case. Too many companies have cut back too far. Those who praise BA and its ability to make money should take a look at the broader picture.

If they have made so much money, why so many cancelled flights, why so many lost bags and what else are they cutting. Profit yes, at any cost...NO

IF and I say IF there are issues you do nobody any favours by bleating on about journo's and claiming everything is OK. Let the issues come out, let BA deal with them.

Personally I suspect the truth in this case lies somewhere in the middle, just like Qantas. There are issues, they need addressing but otherwise everything is fine.

[BlueRay]

Bongo, where is it that I have said a bad decision by the pilots???? I would agree the professionalism of the BA flight crew is second to none. The issue is here that 3 times in one week, British Airways pilots have had to take evasive emergency action.

We all know about the Swiss cheese model for disasters. Also the more high level incidents an airline has the more it courts those loss of life/hull events. And i haven't seen any other such events reported in the news for other airlines. Seems a very BA peculiar situation.

[raffele]

BlueRay - you need to get your facts right!

First incident was burning smell from an IFE display.

Second incident was electrical fault alerted to the crew by cockpit alarm (again in connection with IFE system)

Recent incident is fumes event.

It's also worth reiterating that the IFE problems this week are relatively insignificant (although based on the Swissair accident, the actions are quite understandable). The media are just stuck on two stories at the moment. Air travel and economic failure.

Edit - Also, where in that article from the Independent, or this one from the BBC, does it specifically say "emergency landing"?
BBC NEWS | England | London | BA flight makes priority landing (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7666873.stm)

[Parapunter]

Blue Ray - 5 threads started, all highlighting alleged failures/problems on the part of BA. You look like someone with an axe to grind.

[Locked door]

The first two events were IFE faults in seats. These are non maintained systems (as in every airline) provided by a 3rd party. The IFE in most BA aircraft is almost brand new as they have just installed a new video on demand system.

The third event is a known problem with the type (with every airline with the same engines).

I don't see a trend the airline is responsible for.

Quit grinding that axe or there'll be nothing of it left!

[BlueRay]

what becomes increasingly worrying is how all the BA bunch come out defending a safety record only a third world operator would be proud.

I just spoke to a friend who wORKS at ba, admittedly he's unhappy there, but he did say this. BA have about 2yrs ago increased the intervals in their maintenance schedules, particularily on the 777. This means things like ife go longer without being looked at. They think it was introduced as a cost cutting measure.

Locked door- your incorrect about the ba IFE system being new, just the players are new, my friend at ba has reliably informed me. All the seat units are the same. You could be right about these systems not being maintained, hence the problem. And for a ba person to say anything on an aircraft has no maintenance plan shows your lack of knowledge. Oh one last thing i did laugh when you said as the system not made by ba your not responsible for it going wrong. You said the same thing about the bag system at terminal 5! Maybe when the aircraft goes wrong you can blame boeing or airbus!

Remember, fly british airways, the responsible airline. Anytime anything goes wrong, they're not responsible!

Could that explain these events? Could these events be the effect of this increased interval in maintenance checks?

[raffele]

How is making an emergency landing to prevent another Swissair accident mean an airline has "a safety record that only a third world operator would be proud"??

You really are an idiot...

[BUS319]

BlueRay, with the exception for a ryanair post you only seem to have commented on the following threads :


British Airways another inflight smoke event!
BA flight to Delhi diverts into Berlin due technical problems
BA rocked as 500 top bosses quit
British Airways 777 routes
BA staff arrested
BA038 (B777) Thread
The trouble with British Airways
BA 777 evacuates at KORD
Porridge for BA manager

You have no credibility. What's your problem? Have you failed a BA selection in the past? If so, that proves the selection works - we don't need a bitter, twisted person like you working at BA. Nor does any airline for that matter.

Regarding BA's safety record, I'm not even going to get into a discussion here. Suffice to say that anyone who's opinion counts (BA employee or not) KNOWS that BA's safety record and standards are second to none.

[NOLAND3]

Guy's I really don't understand why you are even humoring blueray, he is your typical forum troll. Just ignore his posts and he will eventually go away......:ugh:

[greatorex]

Mr Ray,

As I said on the other thread about this: If you are a member of, or do have links to the press would you kindly educate them and indeed yourself as to the difference between an 'Emergency Landing’ and a ‘Precautionary Landing’; the two really are quite distinctly different creatures.

It really would make all our lives easier if the phrase 'Emergency Landing' would cease to be bandied about by the media with such gay-abandon.

Cheers

[Artificial Horizon]

Blueray,

Once again, if you are so happy to talk about airline safety records then please do state who exactly you work for??? I can almost guarantee that I could dredge up untold numbers of incidents for almost any UK operator. BA is my third airline job, withstanding the very public PR disasters (T5, Baggage etc..), I can safely say that maintenance and safety culture is the best I have seen it at any airline I have worked for. I have not had any maintenance related issues in the course of my working life at BA, not something I could say at my previous airlines.

[BlueRay]

artificial horizon, no maintenance issues while you've been at ba! I suggest your start reading your aaib reports!

Plenty of material theie. What about the maintenance manager who used someone elses authorization to clear aircraft while he was on holiday! Or the 777 leaving gatwick losing a panel, causing severe damage. Why? Because of what they called blind stamping, clearing a job they had never seen! I could go on, but please don't say there are no maintenance issues at ba.

Getting back to that institutional delusion i mentioned in a previous thread.

[raffele]

BlueRay - why are you now deviating completely from your topic? You need to return to preaching to us all about these three smoke filled, emergency landing BA flights!

[Artificial Horizon]

Blueray, you really are a complete tool. I didn't mean in the airline, I meant that I had been personally exposed too (anyone who could actually read would see that I said 'I have not had any inncidents whilst working at BA) . Question still stands, who do you work for??

[Aerospace101]

BlueRay: :mad: OFF!!

[BlueRay]

handbags gentlemen! Now your friend and colleague carnage matey! Has used anger management training to good effect, well so he says. Give him a nudge and he might give you the name of his councilor.

Worryingly, your supposed to be professional pilots. With outbursts like that i don't think so.

As for my occupation, free lance dear chap.

Back on subject we're discussing the 3 emergency landings by ba aircraft in the last week. Polite comments anyone?

[Dream Buster]

No one was hurt or taken ill and passengers were able to disembark normally after the flight

Fume events can cause serious ill health for both aircrew and passengers.

The following is a testimony of a passenger who experienced a single fume event:

Re: Exposure to toxic substances on commercial aircraft.

I was a passenger on Flight XYZ. The flight originated from ABC and was en route to DEF. The passenger cabin filled with noxious fumes right after take off. All I had was my leather coat and placed this over my face to act as a filter.
The pilot came over the speaker after 40 minutes or so and said that he was aware of the odour and was contacting ground control for help in determining its origin. Another hour went by and the pilot came on again and said that they could not determine the cause of the odour and would be landing at GHI. He turned us around and it took another 40 minutes before we landed in GHI. What happened next was even more appalling.

After nearly three hours of being subjected to fumes, the airline did not de board us in GHI but made us wait another 45 minutes on the plane while they tried to fix the problem (apparently they didn’t want to deal with the problem of de boarding and re boarding us). I still had my jacket over my face and was extremely tired, dizzy and having difficulty breathing – it was horrible. Finally, someone made the decision that the plane could not fly and we were released from the cabin. I was so sick upon de boarding that I cancelled the rest of my business trip and requested a flight back to my hometown of JKL.

Little did I know that my health in the next year and a half would continue to degrade to more frightening levels.

Upon my return home, I spent the next day sick in bed. I called the airline to enquire as to what chemicals I was exposed. They stated that I needed to write them a letter or e mail to get any information. I did so asking for an explanation of what happened and an MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) for the chemicals I was exposed to.

I went to the doctor and was diagnosed with an extreme respiratory irritation. A month later I began getting dizzy spells. Two months later these turned into involuntary shakes through the head and chest, associated with difficulty breathing and gasps for air. I called the airline again and finally they sent a letter explaining that there had been an oil leak, but no MSDS. Instead they sent me a voucher for $150 (that I never used – I haven’t flown since and never will again).

The symptoms have worsened since then. In addition to the difficulty in breathing, I now have food intolerances, difficulty concentrating, chronic fatigue and cognitive dysfunction. I was not able to perform in my job – which I have since lost – and still sleep 10 – 12 hours a night, waking up exhausted. I was a top runner before this incident and can barely exercise now.

No doctor seems able to help me. I’ve been to the emergency room several times, thinking I was having a heart attack. I’ve seen pulmonologists, cardiologists and rheumatologists and now have seen a neurologist and an occupational health specialist.

Finally after 14 months after the incident, the airline has sent me an MSDS for XXXXX turbo oil and said that there had been an oil leak in a pressure regulator shut-off valve, but that what I was exposed to was similar to smelling engine oil while driving a car. I’ve tried to get more information from the FAA, but have had no luck. The airline will no longer talk to me and has told me to contact a lawyer.

As I am sure you are aware, numerous reports and legal proceedings have occurred over the issue of jet engine oil toxicity in aircraft.

I, along with many scientists and medical professionals, am convinced that the toxic effects of exposures of jet engine oil and hydraulic fluids are serious issues that need to be addressed. I am one of the many victims who have come forward, only to be ignored by the airline industry and the FAA.

I suggest anybody who has been exposed to oil fumes in the confines of an airliner reads the recently published (August 2008) 'Exposure to aircraft bleed air contaminants among airline workers Protocol' - 'A Guide for Health Care Providers' (http://www.ohrca.org/Medicalprotocol080808.pdf) and face up to the reality of serious ill health that often results.

A Fume event could wreck YOUR health permanently - Denial is neither responsible nor intelligent from potential victims and actively prevents known technical solutions from being implemented.

DB :ok:

[bvcu]

Think one of the industry problems is that operators such as BA and QF are operating in environments where everything is openly reported normally so ends up in the public domain , which isnt good for PR . If one looks at all the overseas carriers flying into LHR for example , how many of them get the same negative PR ? So because its not in the public domain does that mean its not happening ? The fumes issue and the IFE issues are an industry problem at the moment . Its a very close call between saying fumes/smell is ok or warrants a diversion , especially as most of the time we engineers end up finding no faults at the time . The usual works perfectly until airborne problem! But at the end of the day the inconvenience and hassle of a diversion can not be criticised if it prevents another SR tragedy . These decisions arent taken lightly as the present state of the industry means everyone is under incredible commercial pressure , so i for one am happy to see these incidents in the open as it puts pressure on the vendors to resolve the technical issues that are affecting everone . Alot of the IFE issues are boxes overheating which will only be picked up by a failure or smell ! Shorter maintenance intervals will have no effect on this .

[NOLAND3]

Yawn......:zzz: Another 10 minutes of my life wasted on a pointless thread. Back to the Tech forum, Guy's stop feeding the troll...

[raffele]

I agree, particularly as he still can't read as the recent event wasn't an emergency landing.

Lets all go find something more interesting to read elsewhere on PPRuNe! Hopefully without any input from him...

[Hass]

Somebody please ban this clown. He's obviously got nothing better to say or debate unless it's involving BA. He's like a broken record!

[AirLCY]

BlueRay,


Which perfect organisation is it you work for? Why do you only look for issues with BA? I think you'll find plenty of other companies have issues also, but its boring the way you focus on just BA!

[PPRuNe Pop]

PS Mods can't you ban this idiot? I can't be the only person getting irritated by his senseless ramblings


Ummmm! It is certainly heading that way, snd since the thread is now relegated to spotter activity it may well go.

[mitzy69]

I bet he works for the Daily Mail

[JugglingSpence]

Aviation incidents are the hot topic in the news at the moment so every little problem gets reported.

Which reminds me, I had an alternator fail on a PA28 on Saturday, does anyone have the number for the BBC news desk? There weren't any death plunges or screaming passengers (it was only me and the CFI on board at the time) but we did have fire trucks following us to the stand. Not much of an event probably newsworthy if the BBCs latest offerings are anything to go by!

Maybe I could start my own thread, 'Pilot lands aircraft with slightly discharged battery', then I could have a whole team of armchair technicians diagnose the fault and what went wrong along with a load of professional pilots patting me on the back for 'a job well done'...

[yamaha]

and the point of your pathetic attempt to be humourus?

The real threat here is not blueray or any other journo. The real threat lies in the blinkered approach that nobody is allowed to make a critical post.

For an industry that has done so much to rid itself of self defeating behaviour many of you need to re-examine your motives for always trying to imply nothing is wrong. Ye right.

Open reporting and cultures will achieve far more than the closed shop prevailing here at the moment.

BA are fair game just like any other airline

Wake up...please

[BlueRay]

For those who say I'm a journo from the Daily Mail, I am not. Carnage Matey! suggested I must be from the Daily mail as I knew more about the content of tonights programme on Despatches (Channel 4 at 8pm). I can tell you that the only reason I know anything is I'm interested and I can use google and read my results.

There is a strange thing though, the initial dailymail article published night changed rather quickly. The first offering showed a more indepth description of the programme content. It did mention safety culture and maintenance.

There is still evidence of this 'footprint' on the net as follows;

British Airways is under fire for having one of the worst records for cancelling flights (http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTTkrWYPNI_uIAuhhQBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTBjcXBoZjEwBHBvcwMzB HNlYwNzcg--/SIG=14bfjnrh0/EXP=1223995990/**http%3a//www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1076886/British-Airways-having-worst-records-cancelling-flights.html%3fITO=1490) http://1.2.3.13/bmi/us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/sch/bn/nw2.gif (http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTTkrWYPNI_uIAuxhQBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTBjcXBoZjEwBHBvcwMzB HNlYwNzcg--/SIG=14bfjnrh0/EXP=1223995990/**http%3a//www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1076886/British-Airways-having-worst-records-cancelling-flights.html%3fITO=1490)
Daily Mail - 12 Oct 06:37PM
British Airways is under fire on Monday for having one of the worst records in Europe for cancelling flights and losing bags - with its safety and maintenance regime also questioned in the wake of the recent Heathrow crash-landing.

So I think the programme is going to have a little more than a few lost bags. I think this maintenance issue, fits hand in glove with the three inflight emergencies BA have experienced this last week.

I would also say that the abuse from the BA participants on this site is aimed to drive this topic off the more public areas. They have succeeded in their aim. I do request the PPRUNE moderators actually return this thread to a more suitable place for serious (not abusive) debate.