Does anyone know what is going on at BHX. NOTAM'd closed until 2359 with flights being diverted

Thanks

Aircraft landed with undercarriage problems, believed right side main gear retracted. Rwy covered in foam plus disabled acft. Awaiting AIB clearance to move it.

Jolly quick (but pessimistic?) NOTAM.

Many thanks for info. Any idea what a/c type involved?

OO-TNB STN-EDI

J01

Airport are saying it was the Liege - Stan sector. Would make sense for a div to Brum.

I am confuxed.....if stan was dest and closed, and I expect Lut closed too...and now B Ham closed toooooo...

Bumz

Glad it got down safely.

OOI in the UK would TNT pay compensation to BHX and the operators for all the inconvenience and cost.

Maybe BHX should have a nother runway.

Can any of their smaller operators use CVT or is it EMA ?

Stansted operating reduced distances so better not land there with any doubts about your ability to stop before the JCB overrun arrestor.

Luton night closures, should be open again by now but its only scheduled to open about 6am local and is often later than this as they landed Brum at 0606 it makes sense.

As a matter of interest, don't cargo a/c have slides?

A/C was actually OO-TND LGE-STN-EDI

J01

Some like the A300 do, others - the 757 for instance dont. Just depends on the mod. The advantage of slides is large numbers of people can quickly get down them. Freighters are only have a few seats and for the smaller ones it is practical to put "descent assistance" think death slide meets car seat belt meets parachute trainer - grab one and step out the door.

Not last week: I operated into STN at about 3z and out again 4 ish its just shorter than normal, Luton is deffo closed nights and thus there is always a chance it wont re-open on time or that when it does the ILS is U/S or similar. So sensible planning would use somewhere else as an alternate, EMA which is a TNT gateway and was probably their "commercial" alternate was giving visibility of less than a couple of KM so Brum is the obvious choice. Though from a disruption point of view Gatwick might be better as they could have still operated from their spare runway/taxiway while the 737 was recovered. Perhaps there is an argument for a similar facility in the midlands.

Wouldn't a military field such as Brize or Fairford have been more suited for this particular problem as they have long runways?

This is probably whey they went elsewhere so as not to screw up their own schedules

Rumour has it that they did pay a brief visit to EMA prior to BHX but unfortunately left some little bits there that make landing all that much easier.

The reduced distances;
REDUCED DECLARED DISTANCES, RWY 15 AVBL FOR DEPS ONLY. RWY 15 TORA 1650M TODA 1775M ASDA 1650M LDA NIL. DEP ACFT REQUIRED TO BACKTRACK RWY 15 VIA HOLDS E1 OR T1. 15 JUN 07:46 UNTIL 15 JUN 15:00 ESTIMATED

would their choice of landing location have had anything to do with the RFF level available, and the ability or otherwise to foam the runway?

Seeing the info about reduced take-off distances, I'm a little confused as to where exactly the a/c came to rest. Looking at the photo, I thought it was the intersection of 15/33 with 06/24. Or is it opposite K1?

Handsfree, your post seems to have been overlooked.

I have also heard that a part or all of the RIGHT gear was in East Midlands, with the rest of the aircraft on the runway in Birmingham.

Seems absurd. I assume the aircraft was planned to EMA, being a TNT base.

We await further details with some interest.

JMC-man

edited by JMC-man due not looking before typing

Wouldn't be suprised if they find a chock from point of departure in the gear bay - it's happened before with 737s!