BA Delay due wrong map

[Longtimer]

British Airways flight from London to New York grounded in Ireland after engineers download the wrong map
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2845213/british-airways-flight-from-london-to-new-york-grounded-in-ireland-after-engineers-download-the-wrong-map/
Bungling BA engineers assumed the New York-bound BA1 flight was headed for Europe as it was a small A318 Airbus

Exclusive
By ELLIE FLYNN
12th February 2017, 1:11 pm
A BRITISH Airways business class plane was left stranded in Ireland after engineers downloaded the wrong map.

Bungling BA engineers assumed the New York-bound BA1 flight was headed for Europe as it was a small A318 Airbus.

A British Airways plane was stranded in Shannon after engineers downloaded the wrong map
But the plane was actually the all-business London City – JFK service that runs once a day.

It is the only A318 that makes the transatlantic crossing.

The flight stops in Ireland to fuel up and for passengers to pre-clear US immigration before heading on to New York.

But on Friday pilots stopped off in Shannon, Ireland and realised only Europe maps had been loaded on the aircraft.

Crew tried to download the correct mapping data but were unable to, leaving a couple of dozen passengers stranded in Shannon.

The airline put customers up in a hotel overnight and the New York flight was finally en route the following day
While stuck on the ground in Shannon, one passenger said: “Trying to find a way to explain this rather funny situation!!…

“We can’t fly back to city as we have too much fuel, we can’t fly to JFK as we have no map… So we are all stranded in Limerick Ireland!!!”

A British Airways spokesman said: “We apologised to customers and provided them with accommodation following an overnight delay to their flight.”

[Basil]

Oh buggah! :O:O

[Airbubba]

They still appear to be totally screwed up on this A318 flagship flight number. :eek:

They took off out of Shannon at about 1450Z. Then they held at the oceanic boundary for 90 minutes before starting the crossing at FL 350.

Now, they are going into Gander, maybe for fuel. Or perhaps for directions. :confused:

Will the crew have duty time left to go to JFK today? Or will this be a two-layover crossing LCY-SNN-YQX-JFK?

Time to spare go by air...

Take a look:

https://www.flightradar24.com/BAW1/c70629b

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW1/history/20170212/1445Z/EINN/CYQX

[Icelanta]

What?!

Oh,come,on.
If they mean that the EFB did not have the right charts, Just send jepp. plates to the local ground handler, print them out and off you go!
And if the airports are not in the FMCdatabase, well, ask vectors and programme the necessary points if needed as a reference.

[anson harris]

Just send jepp. plates to the local ground handler, print them out and off you go!
And if the airports are not in the FMCdatabase, well, ask vectors and programme the necessary points if needed as a reference.

I've got a much better idea - don't bother about what it says in the Ops Manual, log into PPRuNE and ask the luminaries there for ideas...

[Piltdown Man]

I don't fully buy the reason behind the delay but I do respect the decision not to fly and the PR machine coming clean about the wrong data being loaded in the aircraft. These are the actions of a proper airline.

[DaveReidUK]

Not quite as far-fetched as it sounds.

The LCY-based A318 in question had been on maintenance at Heathrow for three weeks before positioning to City on Friday morning to operate the lunchtime BA001 departure.

Presumably the charts would have been loaded by BA engineers at LHR who see an A318 on average about once a year.

[Right Engine]

Some points needed to be clarified here.
1.The FMGC database was for Europe instead of Europe/N.America.
2. This incident was last week
3. The second post mentioning 90 minutes holding west of SNN is for tonight's BA1 SNN-JFK, which is currently en-route to CYQX for reasons as yet, unexplained.

Whoever posted the Flight Radar links, thanks but wrong thread!

It wasn't the wrong 'charts' last week. BA pilots have up to date charts (LIDO) via their iPad. It was the FMGC.

Top pprune :mad: guys!!

[Deep and fast]

And the ginger beers didn't notice the odd seating arrangement?
And it's not a normal 318 either, let's hope they don't update the FBW software from a 380!

[Airbubba]

Looks like BA1 is now going into St. John's, vectors to ILS 11.

BA1 says a fuel stop, no assistance required, just check with maintenance about some things. ;)

[DaveReidUK]

2. This incident was last week

Last Friday, in fact.

As I think a couple of posters may have mentioned.

[Right Engine]

Yes. But no one appeared to be explaining that the 2 events (YQX/YYT diversion and 'wrong map') were unconnected. Which, is rather important don't you think?
But thanks for that Dave.
:rolleyes:

[Airbubba]

Yep, so the plane with the bad database went to JFK yesterday. This is a different aircraft that didn't make it to JFK out of SNN on the first try. Thanks for the correction. :ok:

I don't even have a dateline on this side of the world to blame it on. :ugh:

Today's arrival in YYT seems to be unplanned, the plane and the tower are trying to figure out who is handling the plane and whether customs and immigration are required. The duty manager is making some calls to try to sort out the diversion. After checking the tower says it looks like Air Canada is going to do the handling. Air Canada says they had absolutely no notice about the arrival until the tower called to say that the plane was on the ground.

[Longtimer]

Flight status

BA0001 - Shannon to YYT
Arriving Sunday 12 February
Last updated: 21:44 GMTRefresh page
Flight diversion
We’re very sorry, this flight scheduled from Shannon to New York, has been diverted to St Johns.

[Airbubba]

BA1 airborne again, YYT-JFK. They called Air Canada ops and thanked them for the efficient fueling and turn, said they wish it was that way in London. :D

[wiggy]

RIght Engine

Thanks for clarifying matters, the subsequent debate does indicate how times have changed.....

....I suspect the phrase "FMGC/FMS database" isn't cuddly enough for the PR and jurno types so they've used "maps" as a shorthand....and off we've gone on a classic Pprune tangent.

FWIW as has been mentioned the BA crew iPad(s) are personal issue, have nowt to do with engineering or the engineers and contain a worldwide database of airports and charts.. so regardless of what was done to the airframe the crew themselves will have had so many electronic maps and airfield plates on board that could have plotted a route to Hawaii if they so wished, it sounds to me like the problem was with where the aircraft itself could legitimately and sensibly go.


No criticism of the guys involved, but it does seem a shame if the powers-that-be now prevent a crew from using a computer flight-plan to construct a route in the FMGS using Lat/Long-defined waypoints on NAT Tracks and then airways - like we used to do before the advent of FMS.

Chris S, I'm an FMS rather than a FMGC user, but I'm guessing the crew may well have been able to load lat/longs for the ocean and construct airways, again using lat/longs etc. However if they only had a European database loaded in the FMGC they won't have had any US navaids, SIDS and STARS, instrument approaches, possibly even the airport position in the database, and that can get very limiting these days, not just from a navigation POV but it can also impact aircraft systems (e.g only a possibility for the bus but based on another type there can be implications for EGPWS, pressurisation)..... I know there will no doubt be further comment about the youth of today along the lines of "When I was a lad I used to fly the Canarsie upside down, all engines out," but for example you can't legitimately "hand build " the likes of the increasingly common RNAV STARS and RNAV approaches in the FMGC or FMS...they have to be extracted from the database.

So please Gents don't blame it all on the youth of today, even those ""youths" like myself who are over 60, who started on paper charts, Dalton computers and the 1 in 60 rule back in the day; times have changed and these days you really are very limited if the aircraft "box" isn't loaded properly.

[CSman]

There was a time where the F/O carried a black bag with all the letdown books, heavy when also carrying ones own Nav bag complete with airtours computer [wizz wheel]

[RAT 5]

the 1 in 60 rule back in the day; times have changed

I still use it in B737 TR training when asking the students what their drift angle might be in various cross winds. They look aghast, yet they've come from spam cans. What are they teaching these days. Basic physics doesn't change with time.

Recently had a pilot student ask me what a sextant was ?

Could be an incestuous relative and get you into a heap of trouble.

I know this is a slight drift, but amusing. In the early days of LNAV & NAT tracks one guy, when inside the NAT system, called up to say he had an FMC failure. It was daylight VMC and he was west bound. ATC asked if he could see an XYZ a/c 1000' above him and possibly 5nm ahead. Yes they could. Well he's going to the same airport as you so follow him. Job done.

[Uplinker]

Thank you wiggy #23.

To all the oldies; yes, yes, but would you actually want to go back to using charts and sextants or manual chokes on your cars, or no remote control for your TV's etc?? :ok:

We had this database situation on some of our Airbusses a few years back. It arises because there is not enough memory in the FMGC to hold all the required databases, so we had to load Europe Central and East, or Europe Central and West, depending where we were going.

Ridiculous in this day and age, but the real question for me is why extra or larger capacity memory chips cannot simply be plugged in by the engineers like some of us do with our PC's or laptops.

[Jo90]

Are all the Nigels on BA's 318/19/20 fleet qualified for crossing the pond and the steep approach into LCY or is just a select few?

[Hawker 800]

Are all the Nigels on BA's 318/19/20 fleet qualified for crossing the pond and the steep approach into LCY or is just a select few?

No, just a few fly the 318.

[Pinkman]

Just 27 at the time this was filmed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noAyUIk89AU

[DaveReidUK]

Are all the Nigels on BA's 318/19/20 fleet qualified for crossing the pond and the steep approach into LCY or is just a select few?With 130 shorthaul Airbuses in BA's fleet, and only 2 operating from LCY, crews would never get enough experience of flying from there if it was a common pool of pilots.

[suninmyeyes]

If you want to fly on the NAT tracks across the atlantic you have to be CPDLC equipped. This rule came in a year or so ago. (CPDLC is a more sophisticated version of ADS position reporting.)

An atlantic waypoint of say 53 degrees North, 30 degrees West is encoded in the FMS as 5320N. Without the database covering the atlantic you can construct the waypoint using lat and long but it would have a different appearance in the FMS (remember the early FMS "Green Goddess" atlantic waypoints of Wpt 01, 02 etc?) and the position report would not be recognised by Shanwick/Gander. Therefore the CPDLC data would not be valid and the aircraft would not be CPDLC compliant. So that means no atlantic crossing unless you go above or below the NAT tracks and I doubt the Airbus would have the performance or fuel capability to do that.

[Chris Scott]

Quote from wiggy:
"However if they only had a European database loaded in the FMGC they won't have had any US navaids, SIDS and STARS, instrument approaches, possibly even the airport position in the database, and that can get very limiting these days, not just from a navigation POV but it can also impact aircraft systems (e.g only a possibility for the bus but based on another type there can be implications for EGPWS, pressurisation)...
"...for example you can't legitimately 'hand build' the likes of the increasingly common RNAV STARS and RNAV approaches in the FMGC or FMS...they have to be extracted from the database."

Yes, all very good points. I was rethinking this overnight. Another thing is that, in the (admittedly unlikely) event of complete GPS failure, no radio-updating of FMGS PPOS (present-position) would be available, due to the absence of DME station frequencies and positions. (Not that that would make any difference in mid-Atlantic, of course.) So you'd be stuck with the Mix-IRS position plus any residual bias correction.

I wonder if database content is included in the MEL (DDM).

Quote from suninmyeyes:
"An atlantic waypoint of say 53 degrees North, 30 degrees West is encoded in the FMS as 5320N."

Can you explain the "5320N", or is it a typo? Must admit I'd never heard of CPDLC... :O

[Airbubba]

Looks like BA1 is now going into St. John's, vectors to ILS 11.

BA1 says a fuel stop, no assistance required, just check with maintenance about some things. ;)

From The BA Source webpage:

British Airways A318 G-EUNB BA1 St Johns Technical Diversion.

February 12, 2017

British Airways A318 G-EUNB operating the Shannon – New York JFK sector of BA1 London City – Shannon – New York JFK diverted via St Johns, Newfoundland this afternoon due to a technical issue. The aircraft was able to continue after 90 minutes on the ground.

The BA Source | (http://thebasource.com/)

Anybody know what the issue was? I've made a crossing or two, can't think of a situation where I would hold for 90 minutes and then proceed across. The only similar case I can remember was holding for an overflight clearance number for the subcontinent decades ago.

G-EUNB was ferried empty JFK-LHR today according to BA Source.

[TopBunk]

Chris

5320N is a naming convention for latlong waypoints used on the North Atlantic. It fits in with the usual 5-character format (like REFSO, etc).

5320N is 53 deg North, 20 deg West ( the West is assumed, hence 5320N)

These waypoints are all stored in the FMC/FMGC database, so you enter them as 5320N giving less chance of entry error etc.

An Atlantic routing may be from domestic routing to xxxxx (Oceanic entry point) to 5315N, 5520N, 5730N, 5840N, 5750N, 5660N, yyyyy (Oceanic exit point) then domestic routing to destination.

The 747-400's didn't have CPDLC when I retired in 2009, but basically it replaces the need for HF reports/requests every 10 degrees with automated data reports.

[wiggy]

TB

You are of course right about the naming convention, I nearly replied with similar, then realised that Chris was very specifically asking why suninmyeyes wrote:

An atlantic waypoint of say 53 degrees North, 30 degrees West is encoded in the FMS as 5320N."

;):ooh: .......Chris I suspect it was a typo.

[kcockayne]

I have no idea of the technicalities of loading maps & nav.data int the a/c systems but, how long have BAW been operating this flight through EINN ? - & the ground crew suddenly think that the a/c is on a European service & load the wrong data ?! It seems rather too simplistic an excuse, don't you think ?

[UnderneathTheRadar]

I have no idea of the technicalities of loading maps & nav.data int the a/c systems but, how long have BAW been operating this flight through EINN ? - & the ground crew suddenly think that the a/c is on a European service & load the wrong data ?! It seems rather too simplistic an excuse, don't you think ?

I think you're misunderstanding what happened when. The maps were uploaded at LHR by gingers who possibly never looked right when getting on and so didn't notice the J config (didn't even notice they were on a A318). The euro maps got them happily to EINN when the crew noticed the wrong maps - it wasn't ground crew at EINN who uploaded the wrong maps.

[wiggy]

Sorry to sound like the old f**t that I am but please, please - in order to stop the thread degenerating again into stories about plotting can we stop using "map" (unless it is a techie term) when it seems the problem was an seemingly an incorrect nav database. AFAIK the aircraft didn't have a built in Electronic Flight Bag, maps/charts would have been carried on the crew's own iPads, as discussed earlier

....but yes, rumour has it the problem was generated in London, not at EINN.

[TopBunk]

Thanks Wiggy

Hadn't noticed that!

[kcockayne]

I think you're misunderstanding what happened when. The maps were uploaded at LHR by gingers who possibly never looked right when getting on and so didn't notice the J config (didn't even notice they were on a A318). The euro maps got them happily to EINN when the crew noticed the wrong maps - it wasn't ground crew at EINN who uploaded the wrong maps.

As I say, I don't have a great understanding of what went on. Just found it surprising that this confusion " apparently " occurred. Thanks for the explanation. I know a little bit more, now !

[yotty]

I've had a trawl through the A318 MEL and there is no reference to dispatch with incorrect database. There is a mention in the FCOM about operations with an outdated Nav Database. In the 777 DDG There is a specific requirement for both Nav Databases to be installed and in date, DDG 34-61-01-03 to be precise!

[wiggy]

Not sure about the bus/FMGC but would be interested to know how easy or difficult it is to check which database is installed and active on a 'bus". Certainly according to our FCOM the database check (preflight, Boeing) is simply:

"Verify that the navigation data base ACTIVE date range is current.".

That is it, no check of database ident....then again perhaps there's no danger of getting the wrong "sort" of database on a "worldwide type".

[DaveReidUK]

Looking at the history of BA's two A318s, between them they have had 5 spells at LHR on checks of 3 weeks' duration (I don't think they call them Majors any longer).

It could be that G-EUNA's most recent check is the first to have straddled a 4-weekly AIRAC update (2nd February in this instance), necessitating a database load, or maybe they just got it right on previous occasions.

G-EUNB should be due for a similar check shortly, I think we can be confident that we won't see a repetition of last week's incident. :O

[Denti]

For the MEL check MEL-Mi-22-70-02.

Thats what my A320 MEL says:

One may be inoperative or out of date provided that:
1)
The operative database must be up to date for routes, departures, arrival and approach procedures that require the use of Navigation Database for RNAV/RNP, and
2)
The operative database is available and used by the flight crew member(s) responsible for navigation, and
3)
Radio navigation aids, which are required to be flown for departure, arrival and approach procedures are manually tuned and identified.

Ther is an operational procedure attached to that, that quite clearly states that RNP 4 and RNAV 10 operations are not permitted in that case.

If both are out of date or inop one has to check for every used RNAV/RNP procedure way point used that there haven't been any changes from the installed database to the current AIRAC cycle.

[yotty]

Big Air MEL Item 22-70-02A states with regard to Navigation Databases, Number installed 2, Number Required 2, Must Be Installed And In Date. A database Which Is Out Of Date Is Considered To Be Inoperative. Just different company requirements perhaps.

[suninmyeyes]

Chris

Yes sorry it was a typo. 53 degrees north 30 west is encoded as 5330N

[Airbubba]

The 747-400's didn't have CPDLC when I retired in 2009, but basically it replaces the need for HF reports/requests every 10 degrees with automated data reports.

I remember crossing in the military in the 1970's. The guy in the left seat told me 'Son, in five years these position reports will all be on the satellite, we won't have to do HF anymore.' :D