BA 777 returned to LHR with gear trouble
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Far East
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA 777 returned to LHR with gear trouble
Thursday 10th June at 2105 a British Airways 777 landed back at LHR after a 40 minute flight following a take off with smoke coming from undercarriage. Plane was met on taxiway by emergency services with slightly smoking brakes despite using reverse thrust and after a few minutes taxied slowly back to T4.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: EGLL
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B772-BAW153-EGLL-FVHA
Aircraft departed approx 2015L with what appeared to be a thick "smoke" trail. Pilot reported no abnormal indications and elected to continue the SID. Many pilots on the ground reported the trail and a strong smell of fuel. Gatwick tower also reoprted the trail as did pilots in the air.
2025L Pilot still with no abnormal indications elected to return to EGLL after dumping fuel.
2110L aircraft lands 27L and was met by the Fire Service. Fire Service report possible smoke from main gear. Closer inspection shows small amount of smoke/vapour from 1 oleo. Pilot still with no abnormal indication was informed by Fire Service that they had recieved multiple calls from the public ref the "smoke". Aircraft then taxied to stand.
Full Emergency Over
Aircraft departed approx 2015L with what appeared to be a thick "smoke" trail. Pilot reported no abnormal indications and elected to continue the SID. Many pilots on the ground reported the trail and a strong smell of fuel. Gatwick tower also reoprted the trail as did pilots in the air.
2025L Pilot still with no abnormal indications elected to return to EGLL after dumping fuel.
2110L aircraft lands 27L and was met by the Fire Service. Fire Service report possible smoke from main gear. Closer inspection shows small amount of smoke/vapour from 1 oleo. Pilot still with no abnormal indication was informed by Fire Service that they had recieved multiple calls from the public ref the "smoke". Aircraft then taxied to stand.
Full Emergency Over
Last edited by Airline Tycoon; 10th Jun 2004 at 23:59.
Forewarned is Forearmed
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: uk
Age: 60
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing too unusual from a bit of smoke coming from the brakes after landing with an aircraft fitted with Carbon brakes. Seen it loads of times especially A320's without brake cooling fans.
I would expect it from a return after a fuel dump as the Crew would probably get it down to around the safe Max landing weight & return ASAP, so perhaps a touch more wheel braking than usual.
I would expect it from a return after a fuel dump as the Crew would probably get it down to around the safe Max landing weight & return ASAP, so perhaps a touch more wheel braking than usual.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mmmmm, not unusual to smell fuel behind a jet when the wind is blowing in the right direction on the runway, but since he wouldn,t have started dumping fuel there I doubt the significance of this, what went wrong is not as important to me as how he delt with it once it had.
Anyone know if he left the gear down when told of the smoke ?
Anyone know if he left the gear down when told of the smoke ?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dubai
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Done Airline Tycoon for some factual info on the B777 returning into Heathrow last night.
Just a few more points.
the aircraft was seen to get airborne with smoke from the location of the left main gear. This which was darker then the normal fuel colour when associated with venting. This was visible for about 10 to 15 mins as the aircraft flew south.
A runway inspection confirmed the extreme smell of fuel although no residue fuel was present on the surface apart from at SB1 where the aircraft was waiting prior to departure.
Reports were arriving all the time , not only from staff and flight crews at Heathrow but members of the public and although the flight crew initially had no abnormal indications BA were concerned enough to return the aircraft. After a short amount of time dumping fuel the aircraft returned on a Full emergency. A small amount of smoke was seen from the left main gear on vacating the runway but this was down to fuel contamination of the brakes.
Once on stand the undercarriage doors were lowered and the left side was totally smothered in fuel. Further investigations were taking place as initially the leak could not be found.
Intersting point of note . What would have happened if this had been in darkness ?? There would have not been any visible sightings from the ground !!!
Just a few more points.
the aircraft was seen to get airborne with smoke from the location of the left main gear. This which was darker then the normal fuel colour when associated with venting. This was visible for about 10 to 15 mins as the aircraft flew south.
A runway inspection confirmed the extreme smell of fuel although no residue fuel was present on the surface apart from at SB1 where the aircraft was waiting prior to departure.
Reports were arriving all the time , not only from staff and flight crews at Heathrow but members of the public and although the flight crew initially had no abnormal indications BA were concerned enough to return the aircraft. After a short amount of time dumping fuel the aircraft returned on a Full emergency. A small amount of smoke was seen from the left main gear on vacating the runway but this was down to fuel contamination of the brakes.
Once on stand the undercarriage doors were lowered and the left side was totally smothered in fuel. Further investigations were taking place as initially the leak could not be found.
Intersting point of note . What would have happened if this had been in darkness ?? There would have not been any visible sightings from the ground !!!
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nineiron - you are in danger of taking this thread off into yet another Pprune jungle where wild and unsubstantiated comments will degrade the value of a 'news item'.
Three assumptions you (appear) to be making/hinting at:-
1) The gear was retracted after take-off - do you KNOW that?
2) The crew knew about the smoke/???/fuel leak at the point where gear is normally retracted - ditto ditto!
3) The cause was a fuel leak - ditto ditto ditto
Can I plead for a little more FACT and less SUPPOSITION from all?
Three assumptions you (appear) to be making/hinting at:-
1) The gear was retracted after take-off - do you KNOW that?
2) The crew knew about the smoke/???/fuel leak at the point where gear is normally retracted - ditto ditto!
3) The cause was a fuel leak - ditto ditto ditto
Can I plead for a little more FACT and less SUPPOSITION from all?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing aircraft are all fitted with fire detectors within the landing gear bay so that if there is a fire (most likely hydraulic fluid spill on hot brake) then the captain can lower the gear.
So in this case the crew should have been alerted to the problem even if it was night
So in this case the crew should have been alerted to the problem even if it was night
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Ascot,Berks,Great Britain
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was landing on 27R as this aircraft climbed away from 27l. It had a very clear trail of what looked rather like smoke from the left side of the aircraft. The FO commented that it looked as if they were on fire...
Perhaps 30 secoonds after it was airborne there were reports on the ground from other aircraft of a strong smell of fuel. It seems likely the gear would be up as without any indications the crew would have retracted the gear normally after getting airborne. As someone has said a fire would have led to the gear being dropped again.
Looked dramatic but by the sound of things was not. Happily...
Regards
D
Perhaps 30 secoonds after it was airborne there were reports on the ground from other aircraft of a strong smell of fuel. It seems likely the gear would be up as without any indications the crew would have retracted the gear normally after getting airborne. As someone has said a fire would have led to the gear being dropped again.
Looked dramatic but by the sound of things was not. Happily...
Regards
D
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Far East
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can confirm that the gear was retracted as normal after take off as I watched it depart from where I was working.
It was not possible to tell precisely where smoke was coming from or whether it was leaking fuel or not. I did notice the disc brakes glowing red during the roll out though!
It was not possible to tell precisely where smoke was coming from or whether it was leaking fuel or not. I did notice the disc brakes glowing red during the roll out though!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you say the discs were glowing red was it just one brake or more?
If there was a dragging brake before take off you'd have thought the crew would have had visibility of this (brake hotter than the others) on the brake temperature page.
I'm thinking that this whole issue was likely fuel on hot brakes after taxi-out rather than a dragging brake, as I'm sure the crew would not have begun take-off if they suspected a brake(s) to be dragging
If there was a dragging brake before take off you'd have thought the crew would have had visibility of this (brake hotter than the others) on the brake temperature page.
I'm thinking that this whole issue was likely fuel on hot brakes after taxi-out rather than a dragging brake, as I'm sure the crew would not have begun take-off if they suspected a brake(s) to be dragging