BA867 BUD-LHR emergency landing

[liteswap]

Just spotted this (http://timesonline.typepad.com/formula_one/2009/07/an-unnecessarily-scary-experience-on-ba867-from-budapest-to-london.html) on the Times F1 blog. The writer reckons the crew got forgot about the SLF when a crew member fell ill.

Mildly interesting story or wrong end of stick error?

[bigjames]

if this is a true account of events, then it is indeed surprising that there was no announcement. however, as we have seen from the BA incident in Phoenix, some pax heard announcements while others claimed not to have.

[Basil]

there was a trace of anxiety in my mind as we took off, knowing we were in a plane that had gone "technical"
Happens all the time in all airlines.
showed our plane describing a corkscrew in the sky
What precisely does that mean?
To make matters worse the cabin crew started moving around quickly
They do when they have to prepare the cabin for landing at short notice.
the pilot turned off onto a taxi-way without slowing down fully on the runway
Wonder if this chap knows the max speed for vacating on a high speed exit?


So what is Mr Gorman reporting? I'd say that he feels that due to a sudden emergency which produced a very high workload for the pilots and cabin crew, communication and reassurance to the passengers fell below the usual high standard to be expected from the airline. It is also considered A BAD THING to permit oneself to be sidetracked from the ALL IMPORTANT handling of the aircraft.

[M.Mouse]

I thought his account was factual and to the point. I have made one or two rapid diversions in my career but there is nearly always time to make a short PA to reassure the passengers. Not top of the list of priorities but as long as the aircraft is not burning uncontrollably it seems a little remiss of the flight crew not to have done so.

[skyboy1919]

Gone are the days when the cabin has ample numbers of crew to manage the service let alone any external factor that might occur. If a quick decision was made the crew could have genuinely been pushed to complete their duties in both the cabin and flight deck. The fact the aircraft had also had technical issues was likely not even on their mind. Safety is so important to the industry that technical delays are somewhat frequent, so when one happens it does not raise major concern for crew; its a part of the job as such. If the incident in-flight was related to a medical emergency only then the aircrafts operation would not of been a major concern in my mind of the crew. Short sectors can be challenging at the best of times and a sick colleague not only removes that person from the equation but also the people treating him or her. Not enough hands + not enough time + not enough information = meltdown :rolleyes:

All this said I am still surprised not one person out of the remaining crew could pick up an PA and form five reassuring sentences to keep a cabin full of passengers informed.

I hope the person who was sick is OK.

[fly_ebos]

We had BA867 under our control in Maastricht. Well before the diversion started we were asked by BA flight ops for the best routing as the crew was tight on hours. I was in the midst of enquiring whether this was true when suddenly he declares medical emergency followed by 'Pan Pan'. Squawk 7700 was given as this facilitates coordination with Brussels ACC and in no time the plane was on the ground.

Congrats to a very professional crew!

[Faire d'income]

Most of the media bashing on this site is at least partially warranted but I'm at a loss to understand the criticisms of this piece.

It avoids sensationalism and methodically points out his version of the sequence of events. He even allows for the cockpit crew being busy during a diversion even if his instincts as to what they might actually be doing is slightly off (the slightly refers to the evident ATC injured pride as it is hard to see how a pilot could have a problem with his surmising).

He concludes that maybe a CCM could have told the passengers that the unscheduled and very noticeable early descent was for a medical emergency. What is so wrong with that?

[Basil]

I wasn't irritated by the blog and didn't mean to 'media bash' but merely to point out to passenger readers that the events described = an annoying day in the office and, when they thought it was all finally sorted out, another problem arose, the chosen solution to which entailed a safe but high workload.

[Paradise Lost]

Well Basil, since most of the readers are probably "professional" aircrew, I personally thought your first reply was terse, testy and quite rude.
If the crew can get an aircraft from the cruise back to the ground and not find 15 secs to brief the pax, then they should have asked the CSD to do so.

[anotherthing]

Fly EBOS wrote

We had BA867 under our control in Maastricht. Well before the diversion started we were asked by BA flight ops for the best routing as the crew was tight on hours. I was in the midst of enquiring whether this was true when suddenly he declares medical emergency followed by 'Pan Pan'. Squawk 7700 was given as this facilitates coordination with Brussels ACC and in no time the plane was on the ground.

The cynical amongst us might say that given the alleged fact the crew were 'tight on hours' it was fortuitous that a crew member fell ill, thus enabling more direct routeing and priority approach at EGLL... :hmm:

[Carnage Matey!]

The cynical amongst us might say that given the alleged fact the crew were 'tight on hours' it was fortuitous that a crew member fell ill, thus enabling more direct routeing and priority approach at EGLL...

The more analytical amongst us might say that if you are tight on hours then diverting to EBBR doesn't get you to EGLL a whole lot faster.

[anotherthing]

That'll teach me to read the article before posting... :(

[cwatters]

Doesn't sound like a particularly bad flight. Had worse. Hope the crew member is ok.

[Dani]

Looks like a very difficult flight with three independant problems:

1. technical
2. crew duty problem
3. medical emergency

Every single one of the three wouldn't be a problem, but all together are a real trouble. I think that they handled it very well. The only thing that wasn't perfect was obviously the pax treatment: They should have informed early, often and honestly. That starts with the real reasons and the background information. It starts with something like "now we have a different problem, which is..." So passengers would keep track on what happens. Only uninformed passengers are afraid passengers.

Dani

[Carnage Matey!]

Tail wind limitations are defined using the manufacturers criteria in BA. Is there another way of defining them?

[Basil]

PL,
What can I say?
I'm sure you would have coped much better at handling the situation, writing the blog and commenting upon it; no doubt simultaneously. :)

since most of the readers are probably "professional" aircrew
Wouldn't bet on it, even with the " ".

[BOAC]

DownThreeGreens - hopefully the mods can split this off from the current thread:

No doubt JT and others will tell you about 20 or so other considerations, but here are a few to be going on with:. Max tailwind is determined by:

Max 'demonstrated' by manufacturer and therefore a manufacturer's 'limit'

Vmbe

Engine response for g/a when throttled back in tailwind

Tyre speed limitations

G/a gradient achievable

How much the company wishes to pay its performance 'provider' to produce tables for different tailwinds at different airports

[AMF]

Very bad form for the Captain not make a quick PA to the pax informing them of a diversion due to a medical emergency. Takes 10 seconds maximum. Everyone in back gets it, and allays the fears the diversion is due to the aforementioned "technical problem".

Anyone who cant handle a quick PA during a diversion flying a perfectly good aircraft might be more suited flying cargo instead of passengers.

[grimmrad]

"Anyone who cant handle a quick PA during a diversion flying a perfectly good aircraft might be more suited flying cargo instead of passengers."

Maybe he considered SLF as cargo...

[Basil]

Yes, as I said in #3:
<communication and reassurance to the passengers fell below the usual high standard to be expected from the airline>
. . but are we sure that it did and, if so, why?
Fly with you guys any time; I do like to have top quality drivers flying me around;)