BA247 return to LHR last night
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: bedlam
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA247 return to LHR last night
Another case of RR B744 engine trouble...
Folks, BA B744 on the LHR-GRU service returned back to the Row with an engine shut down.
Pax put up overnight in Hilton & Park Hotels. I just happened to be around in T4 last night when this kicked off.
A/C was over Southern Spain at the time. Some pax reported vibrations as aircraft took off from LHR.
Which one was this?
Folks, BA B744 on the LHR-GRU service returned back to the Row with an engine shut down.
Pax put up overnight in Hilton & Park Hotels. I just happened to be around in T4 last night when this kicked off.
A/C was over Southern Spain at the time. Some pax reported vibrations as aircraft took off from LHR.
Which one was this?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Driving back from Hammersmith I saw a BA 747 on approach around 01:15am....and it was very noisy. Presume it was the BA247 then!! What's the issue with their 744s?? After the LAX incident I'm guessing they daren't just continue on 3 engines, despite numerous claims on this forum that it was a just decision to do so! Once bitten.....
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the issue with their 744s??
come on people, this is getting silly!! It's madness to get these pointless threads going without some substantive info about the actual reason for the aborted flight and even then, frankly it's all a bit of a non-event. Surely this is for spotters corner? Leave the BA bunch alone, with a fleet that size it's hardly a major shock if they have periodic engine or other engineering problems.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chertsey, Surrey
Age: 41
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jerrystinger,
The 744 from LAX chose to continue as maintainance was available upon arrival in LHR. In this case it would have made no sense to continue to Sao Paulo, only to have possibly had the company fly an engineer out to Brazil to sort the problem out there, plus the cost of delaying the flight by a substantial amount. In this case I would imagine it is BA policy to return the aircraft to LHR to sort the problem out, minimise the knock-on effect and minimise the disruption to passengers.
The 744 from LAX chose to continue as maintainance was available upon arrival in LHR. In this case it would have made no sense to continue to Sao Paulo, only to have possibly had the company fly an engineer out to Brazil to sort the problem out there, plus the cost of delaying the flight by a substantial amount. In this case I would imagine it is BA policy to return the aircraft to LHR to sort the problem out, minimise the knock-on effect and minimise the disruption to passengers.
Agree with Nigel on Draft. Although I don't consider the previous decision to carry on from 100ft over west coast USA across the Atlantic with an engine shut down as being particularly clever, the return-to-launch-site of an aeroplane from Europe is hardly Shock! Horror! news given the mutliplicity of available bolt holes en-route.
Plus, as Nigel has said, an airline with quite a large number of aircraft of a specific type will, statistically have its associated share of tech problems. Nothing unusual about that - it's when that ratio becomes disproportionate that people should perhaps feel concerned. And I doubt whether ba have had that!
Damn - sounds like I'm sticking up for them for once....
Plus, as Nigel has said, an airline with quite a large number of aircraft of a specific type will, statistically have its associated share of tech problems. Nothing unusual about that - it's when that ratio becomes disproportionate that people should perhaps feel concerned. And I doubt whether ba have had that!
Damn - sounds like I'm sticking up for them for once....
Last edited by BEagle; 30th May 2005 at 19:55.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA LAX-LHR presses on for LHR - a main maintenance base for BA and their oh so rare RR 744s.
BA LHR-GRU presses on for that well known BA hub GRU? Our survey says -uh uh-
Move along trolls.
BA LHR-GRU presses on for that well known BA hub GRU? Our survey says -uh uh-
Move along trolls.
So.....seemingly a Thrust Reverser Unlocked . Good , so I for one would rather return than vibrate over the ocean for another how many hours . Right decision , that's what you people are up front for .
Usual disclaimers apply!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: EGGW
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to set the record straight, the aircraft in question did not have an engine failure on take off or at any other time. The aircraft generated ENG 4 REVERSER and ENG 4 REV LIMTD status msgs and the associated EICAS advisory messages. After consultation with maintrol it was decided that a precautionary shut down and return to LHR would be the carried out.
The cause of the messages was damaged wiring to the thrust rev motor, caused by a failed airmotor shutoff valve. The integrity of the T/R was not compromised and it was still locked in the fwd thrust position on arrival. So NO it had NOT deployed in flight!
The cause of the messages was damaged wiring to the thrust rev motor, caused by a failed airmotor shutoff valve. The integrity of the T/R was not compromised and it was still locked in the fwd thrust position on arrival. So NO it had NOT deployed in flight!
