BA-Questions, comments, bouquets & brickbats (Merged) I

[Dave's brother]

No biggie???

Compressor surge has been mistaken for blown tires or a bomb in the airplane. The flight crew may be quite startled by the bang, and, in many cases, this has led to a rejected takeoff above V1. These high-speed rejected takeoffs have sometimes resulted in injuries, loss of the airplane, and even passenger fatalities.

The above comes from the document that 'cough' refers to. Doesn't sound to me like this definition of an engine surge is, as Yellow Pen allegedly "correctly" put it, "no biggie"!!!

[Noah Zark.]

Dunno if I'm in the right place, but can anyone tell me the a/c type that will fly (or usually flies) BA0117 Heathrow-JFK, 08.30, June 15th., please?
Thanks.
N.Z.

[NorthernCounties]

A 747 is scheduled to operate that flight as per the BA website.

[wiggy]

I think the point that is being made is that in the grand scheme of nasty things that can happen during the take-off roll a surge, whilst certainly having the capacity to startle, is not in the same "biggie" league as , say, an engine fire or a catastophic engine failure. The engine will often recover after one/a few bangs, and may well continue to run quite normally once the conditions that have caused it, often disturbed airflow, have ceased. If the surge happens well below V1 it may well be prudent to abandon but near V1, if the engine is still producing normal thrust (which may be the case if the surge is a very short lived "pop" surge) it may well be just as prudent to continue the take-off.

[Yellow Pen]

Surges on RB211s are not uncommon, particularly those with Trent cores due to the problem known as 'bird lipping'. It's a known issue, it happens, you conduct the necessary inspections mandated by Rolls Royce and if it passes then away you go. I'd be more concerned about a tyre burst than an engine surge. I've had one. My mate has had one. You say "Oooh, what was that bang? I think we had an engine surge. Stop." Like I said, no biggie.

[YorkshireTyke]

and beware of other airlines ........

Checked in at Honolulu with a Southwest code-share franchise (ATA ??)early enough to get an A boarding pass ( i.e. the first few to run like hell down the boarding tube for free-for-all-seating) and changed aircraft, and service number, at Chicago around 0300 local time for the next sector to Tampa.

Disembarked, changed gates, first one there, no staff, waited 30 mins, gate agent appeared and gave me a C pass. Complained, had booked right through and checked in early enough at HNL to gain an A pass and was now the only one, therefore the first one, here - what gives ?

Last sector operated by another company on behalf of S'West, now all A passes given to earlier check-ins - ??? Who ? it's 0300, nobody here, what gives ??? They all checked in at one minute past Midnight, in bed probably - tough, you should have checked in at Midnight yourself. How the hell could I do that, I was encapsulated on YOUR bloody aircraft

Next time I flew S'West I checked in one minute past midnight - got a B pass. On boarding I asked one of the A pass pax. what time he checked in ? 23.55 he said, can't do that, can't check in until the day of travel. Correct he said, but you do it before Midnight and are rejected, so just keep hitting the "refresh" button constantly, and at 1 milli-second past Midnight they start accepting Online bookings, and if you are lucky you get your A seating pass!

Tried it next time, it worked !

O'course, having been up all night to do this, you arrive at destination knackered, but it is preferable to sitting down the back with all the screaming, undisciplined, kids.

[Noah Zark.]

N.C.
Thanks for the info.
N.Z.

[sealink]

747-400. 14 first, 70 club, 30 traveller+, 185 traveller.

[MUFC_fan]

If you're ever searching for a flight and their website doesn't specify aircraft type, quite an accurate tool is:

timetables.oag.com/XXX [LHR in this case]

[Noah Zark.]

Thanks again, guys.
N.Z.

[Blubell]

BA057

I was on BA057 on Sunday from LHR to JNB.

We were already delayed by 3 hours due to the plane we were supposed to fly on going tech and them having to wait for an aircraft to land at 20.30 from New York to be turned around for us to use. We eventually took off around 23.15.

I was sitting in a rear facing seat on row 14 and looking straight out at the engines. I would estimate that about a third of the way through take off there was a flash of yellow light from one of the engines I could see, a big bang and then lots of vibrations… though the vibrations could have been whilst we were braking rather fast and hard.

We sat stationary on the runway for about 5 minutes and some vehicles came out to the plane. We then returned to stand. We were kept on the plane for 2 hours on stand, given a drink and something to eat. I assume this was because they had to a) get staff back into the airport to deal with us, baggage and passport control and b) book us into hotels and they wanted to give us something to do. Unless there are regulations about how much food has to be eaten before passengers are allowed off a plane that hasn’t gone anywhere!!!

To add insult to frayed nerves, we were re-scheduled for Monday 17.00 (the crew had to be given sufficient time between shifts). We got on the plane (same crew, same passengers), started taxiing and then the engines were switched off. We went back on stand. The pilot said there was a warning light which the engineers would check but he was confident it was a computer issue, then he told it was a valve problem and we were going to be transferred and put onto another plane and then we were told that the engineers through they could fix the valve and were would stay on that plane.

At this point, I offloaded myself. As did several other people. 3 planes “going tech” in 24 hours on the same flight, one rather dramatically for us amateurs was just too much to take. I was lucky enough to have a flexible ticket and eventually flew on Thursday.

I would like to understand what happened – I have an irrational fear of take-off already so this hasn’t helped! I do have to commend the crew and staff though. They handled everything brilliantly and I believe efficiently. The only criticism would be that certainly up until I got off the plane, those passengers who wanted to get off and did not have flexible tickets were being told that they would have to buy a new ticket. I don’t know if that changed as things progressed as I was the 8th person to offload and the plane didn’t take off for another 2 hours.

[wowzz]

So, are you saying that it would be better if the pilot decided to take-off despite warning lights?
I fail to understand your problem - if in doubt, the flight-crew will err on the side of caution.
Please tell us what you think should have been done.

[Yellow Pen]

Please allow me to help as a BA 747 pilot.

We were already delayed by 3 hours due to the plane we were supposed to fly on going tech and them having to wait for an aircraft to land at 20.30 from New York to be turned around for us to use. We eventually took off around 23.15.

Firstly I am sorry you were delayed. Whilst the airline industry is recovering from the recession we are attempting to return aircraft from storage in the desert ASAP to meet the requirement of an increased flying program. Sometimes if an aircraft breaks during the day we are left short of an airframe for the evening. This sounds like one of those days. We're sorry about that.

I was sitting in a rear facing seat on row 14 and looking straight out at the engines. I would estimate that about a third of the way through take off there was a flash of yellow light from one of the engines I could see, a big bang and then lots of vibrations… though the vibrations could have been whilst we were braking rather fast and hard.

What you experienced was an engine surge. This occurs when the airflow through the engine is disrupted, leading to a quite spectacular but generally harmless light show. There may be vibration from the engine, but generally as the engine is set to idle power immediately after the surge has been recognised the vibration is from the brakes as the aircraft stops.

We sat stationary on the runway for about 5 minutes and some vehicles came out to the plane.

That's a bit of thinking time for the pilots to stop the plane, sit on their hands, work out what went wrong and decide how best to proceed from there. The vehicles are there to check there's nothing major wrong with the aircraft and that we're not dropping parts or fluids onto the runway.

We then returned to stand. We were kept on the plane for 2 hours on stand, given a drink and something to eat. I assume this was because they had to a) get staff back into the airport to deal with us, baggage and passport control and b) book us into hotels and they wanted to give us something to do. Unless there are regulations about how much food has to be eaten before passengers are allowed off a plane that hasn’t gone anywhere!!!

I don't know for certain but I suspect your assessment is correct!

To add insult to frayed nerves, we were re-scheduled for Monday 17.00 (the crew had to be given sufficient time between shifts).

That may just be coincidence in this case. The reschedule would also take into account when there was a free aircraft, and given the schedule doesn't really change from day to day the 1700 departure time was probably the earliest they could free up an aircraft rather than when the crew were free.

We got on the plane (same crew, same passengers), started taxiing and then the engines were switched off. We went back on stand. The pilot said there was a warning light which the engineers would check but he was confident it was a computer issue, then he told it was a valve problem and we were going to be transferred and put onto another plane and then we were told that the engineers through they could fix the valve and were would stay on that plane.

Ok, they wouldn't have switched off all engines or you would have been stranded on the taxyway! I can't say for certain but it sounds to me you had the valve fail after taxy and the aircraft is not permitted to take off with that defect. My money is on an engine start valve or an anti-ice valve failing. Neither are a major problem but Boeing says you can't fly with them and we follow their instructions.

At this point, I offloaded myself. As did several other people. 3 planes “going tech” in 24 hours on the same flight, one rather dramatically for us amateurs was just too much to take. I was lucky enough to have a flexible ticket and eventually flew on Thursday.

I do not blame you at all. Some people are happy flyers and accept that aeroplanes are just flying machines and things go wrong. Others are less comfortable with being airborne in an aluminium tube. Thats perfectly OK. I'm not a great believer in coincidence but sometimes you do just have 'one of those days'.

I would like to understand what happened – I have an irrational fear of take-off already so this hasn’t helped!

I hope I've explained some of what happened but am happy to elaborate as best I can if you still have concerns.

I do have to commend the crew and staff though. They handled everything brilliantly and I believe efficiently.

I am sure those concerned will be made aware of your thanks.

The only criticism would be that certainly up until I got off the plane, those passengers who wanted to get off and did not have flexible tickets were being told that they would have to buy a new ticket. I don’t know if that changed as things progressed as I was the 8th person to offload and the plane didn’t take off for another 2 hours.

I'm afraid this aspect is not one I can help with as I wasn't there. Normally if you choose to offload yourself from a flight I believe it does invalidate a non-flexible ticket but generally BA try to be sympathetic. Unfortunately I can offer no more as I wasn't part of the crew. Anyway, I hope this addresses some of your concerns regarding the flight and hopefully the whole incident hasn't put you off flying. Perhaps it'll make an interesting dinner party conversation piece!

[Blubell]

Yellow Pen - many thanks for your response. Its good to understand some of the more technical side of things. I am sure it will make for good dinner party story telling, though at the moment I still get anxious talking about it! That will fade and your explanations will help.

Wowzz - I apologise if my phrasing has offended your sensibilities - of course I wouldn't want a pilot to ignore a warning light. I fear my phrase "to add insult to frayed nerves" may have offended you - I was referring to fate, not to any human decision. I understand why the original flight was delayed 3 hours and have no issue with that, I understand why we did not take off on the 3rd plane and have no issue with that. I just couldn't deal with it emotionally by that point and therefore chose to remove myself from the situation. I went into alot of detail about what occured because Dave's Brother had asked if anyone knew what had happened and, unfortunately, I do. I was not complaining.

[TightSlot]

good answer YP - PPRuNe at its' best

[wowzz]

Hi Blubell

Sorry - I did not mean to be rude.
If you are a nervous flyer I can understand your concerns. From my point of view, if a pilot is happy to fly the plane, I am happy to be a pax.
There are a lot more experienced slf on this forum than me, but after more than 500 sectors, I still agree with those who say that the trip to and from the airport is the most dangerous part of the journey.

[Blubell]

Fear...

Thank you, Wowzz. I have to admit that on a bad day as I am being taken off with I do close my eyes and say "the pilot doesn't want to die" over and over (unless its an internal Russian flight!) .... most of the time distracting myself with sudoku or a crossword is enough to deal with the fear. What's weird is I only get fearful from pushback to the seatbelt sign going off - the rest is a breeze. But I don't analyse that too much in case I start having problems with the rest of it!

My fear is partly I don't like not being in control (I'll always drive a car rather than be a passenger!) and that if something happens flying it tends to be an "all or nothing" outcome.

At least I got to spend another 3 days at home in London before having to return to work.

[PAXboy]

Hi Blubell, welcome into the 'cabin' of PPRuNe. Occasionally we do get some 'turbulence' back here but, for the most part, it's a good ride.

Another problem for you on the JNB route (which I have been travelling for 45 years) is that the aircraft is going to be away a long time. Leaving LHR at, say, 20:00 Sunday, it will not be back at base until 06:00 on Tuesday. If your flight that had a problem had been going to New York, then the return time is much shorter and so the scheduling of another machine to replace the one that went wrong - is easier. NYC - turn - and back can be done in under 18 hours but the JNB example I use is about 34 hours.

Also, you have to have all the staff that are trained on that type and the number of seats. If the failed machine was a 747 and the only replacement is a 777, then you have a problem with not enough seats and you have to have a crew (flight and cabin) who are all trained, available and rested to jump on the new machine. Which in turn takes them out of their schedule and so the game of dominoes continues.

Lastly, the JNB run is always busy. Many routes have some lightly loaded departures, so the carrier can more easily move the displaced pax onto other flights of the same route, or share with other carriers to place pax using standard agreements and process' that are in place. Again using the comparison, On Monday 28th Feb, BA and their partner AA have 17 departures from LHR to NYC (JFK + EWR), whereas to JNB there only 2 of BA and 2 of SAA and one on their competitor VS. So, 5 against 17 makes it really difficult to get the displaced pax away to their destination. Lastly, JNB flights always leave in the evening (99%) if your flight that goes tech is the last departure of the day, you are already looking at a minimum 12 hour delay (if they can run one in the morning) or a full 24 hours.

In years gone by, a carrier could afford to keep more airframes on the books for such emergencies but the cost is just so high. It is cheaper for them (and thus for us) to have the occasional almighty clanx up when you have the very bad luck to have three problems in a row, as you have done.

In 45 years of paxing, I've never had more than one tech failure on a flight, so you must be very special ...

[GROUNDHOG]

Just looked at booking my next YVR flight and BA price seems to have rocketed for WTP - is it just me or is that general? Much prefer BA WTP to what was normally the slightly cheaper TCX ( Canadian Affair) premium cabin but the BA price is now nearly double for the dates I want!

[VintageKrug]

The sale ended about a month ago, and both APD (tax) and Fuel Surcharge (Libya/end of the recession) have both increased in recent months.

Best to wait for the next sale, and get in the habit of booking Dec26-Jan 26 when the sale usually happens.