Air France Boeing 777

[effortless]

paris to LAX Seems to be returning to paris. Anyone know why?

[effortless]

Squawking 7700

[Sultan Ismail]

Appears to have turned round South of Leicester, proceeding at 18,000ft over La Manche towards Rouen.
Landed back in Paris 1008 UTC

[The AvgasDinosaur]

Big 180 near rugby!
Down to FL180 and holding that level

[DaveReidUK]

effortless

"Squawking 7700"

Statistically, around 90% of 7700 squawks are medical emergencies.

[Geezers of Nazareth]

This was one of the 10% ... it was an engine issue.

When they turned back over the midlands they were reporting it as a minor issue and wanted to descend but did not want to declare an emergency.
A while later, somewhere to the NW of London they upgraded to a 'Mayday' call and were given a 7700 squawk; they said that wanted to land at Heathrow and would require assistance upon landing as they had shut down an engine.
Somewhere to the SW of Heathrow, and still at FL180 they asked about dumping fuel. I never heard the outcome of that, but they did continue until over the Channel, where they may have done so.
Once over the Channel they continued south and eventually landed at Paris/CDG.

As all ended well (none of this 'bravely avoided landing on a school' tosh!) it is a 'non-story'.

[FlightDetent]

Really asked to squawk 7700 by ATC?

How come an engine fail on an ETOPS twin is a Mayday?

Does the AIP UK say LHR is not to be used for emergencies if practicable?

What is the distance (in terms of time) from the decision point to MAN, compared to CDG?

silly questions, are they. :ouch: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/af66#27f4b698

[effortless]

If you have to burn fuel, I guess using it to get somewhere is as good an option as any.

[FlightDetent]

Well, no. While the EU legislation does not spell thou shall (the FAA does verbatim), land at the nearest means exactly that.

It might be OK not to pick the geographically closest, provided a "no increased risk" evaluation is done. Crossing the Channel does not really cut it, FWIW for an AF bird returning to CDG reeks of a simple choice for the home-base port.

Not a madman's stunt like that not-so-smart 737 over the Balkans two years ago, but not right either.

[FlightDetent]

Fixed, packet loss at translation interface and thank you for the alert indeed. Missing 'the" did the damage.

Let's imagine for a moment the 737 only passed Thessaloniki, Skopje, Sarajevo, Sofia and landed at Beograd. Would the outrage be any different or less appropriate?

Exactly what the T7 managed here.

​​​​​

[EcamSurprise]

Well, no. While the EU legislation does not spell thou shall (the FAA does verbatim), land at the nearest means exactly that.

It might be OK not to pick the geographically closest, provided a "no increased risk" evaluation is done. Crossing the Channel does not really cut it, FWIW for an AF bird returning to CDG reeks of a simple choice for the home-base port.

Not a madman's stunt like that not-so-smart 737 over the Balkans two years ago, but not right either.

Unless you have to head over channel to fuel dump anyway.

[FlightDetent]

Unless you have to head over channel to fuel dump anyway.Which they neither needed nor did?