Airbus A330 emergency Landing at BRU
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Mexico
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus A330 emergency Landing at BRU
A A330 made an emergency Landing at BRU at 12:15 pm (local) because one of the engines run out.
Le Soir news in French: http://www.lesoir.be/actualite/belgi...zaventem.shtml
Some peoples saw the plane fly at 200 m. above urban zones several times. SNBA says that no risk where taken during the emergency procedure.
Mayors of two cities are in desagree with the utilization of runway 20, too short in there opinion and are not agree with the Anciaux plan (despetion of flight).
Sorry for my bad english.
Le Soir news in French: http://www.lesoir.be/actualite/belgi...zaventem.shtml
Some peoples saw the plane fly at 200 m. above urban zones several times. SNBA says that no risk where taken during the emergency procedure.
Mayors of two cities are in desagree with the utilization of runway 20, too short in there opinion and are not agree with the Anciaux plan (despetion of flight).
Sorry for my bad english.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before there is the usual outburst of wild guesses, let's remember eyewitnesses are totally incapable of determining the altitude of an aircraft with ANY degree of accuracy.
With the usual "1000ft above highest feature" rule, 500 m sounds more likely.
With the usual "1000ft above highest feature" rule, 500 m sounds more likely.
Last edited by ChristiaanJ; 31st Aug 2006 at 16:51. Reason: Note added
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: London
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to make everyone's blood boil, let me translate this little gem in the article:
"[talking about runway 20] this runway is shorter than runway 25 by 991 meters and some say the engine failure might have been caused by the use of full thrust to allow the aircraft to take-off on a runway that is too short".
The whole situation around BRU is particulary moronic. Mostly caused by about 100 families who bought cheap houses near the airport and constantly petition the government to do something about aircraft noise
P
"[talking about runway 20] this runway is shorter than runway 25 by 991 meters and some say the engine failure might have been caused by the use of full thrust to allow the aircraft to take-off on a runway that is too short".
The whole situation around BRU is particulary moronic. Mostly caused by about 100 families who bought cheap houses near the airport and constantly petition the government to do something about aircraft noise
P
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Belgium
Age: 71
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello,
Seem's you don't know exactly the politic situation in Belgium..and particulary in Brussels.....
Will be short......
First..it's not 100 families...but a greatest number....
Secondly the fight is on two fronts....security and language aera probs..old probs in Brussels and suburbs....
Security about the healt of ppls (sounds..) and the problem of planes flying over very dense populated aeras after take off.
The french part want send the flights over the flamish part..and vice-versa.. .you see the problem...(discussed by the BE Govt..from ages..!!)
Sorry for derail a little from the main topic..but it's the reality of the problem of Brussels International Airport ...and the city.....
I'm sure...this problem will be cured rapidely....after the crash of a plane in the city........
Free translation from "Le Soir" article......
Regards. 
The whole situation around BRU is particulary moronic. Mostly caused by about 100 families who bought cheap houses near the airport and constantly petition the government to do something about aircraft noise
Seem's you don't know exactly the politic situation in Belgium..and particulary in Brussels.....
Will be short......
First..it's not 100 families...but a greatest number....
Secondly the fight is on two fronts....security and language aera probs..old probs in Brussels and suburbs....
Security about the healt of ppls (sounds..) and the problem of planes flying over very dense populated aeras after take off.
The french part want send the flights over the flamish part..and vice-versa..
.you see the problem...(discussed by the BE Govt..from ages..!!) Sorry for derail a little from the main topic..but it's the reality of the problem of Brussels International Airport ...and the city.....
I'm sure...this problem will be cured rapidely....after the crash of a plane in the city........
Free translation from "Le Soir" article......
Should the accident be awaited? The minister inhabitant of Brussels of the Environment, Evelyne Huytebroeck (Ecologist), wants to challenge the Federal one about the emergency landing, this Thursday with the airport of Brussels-national, an Airbus which flew over the common neighbors at low altitude, it declared. Should it be waited until occurs a plane crash to approach the policy of Brussels-national in a rational and nonpoliticking way, is questioned it. If the minister inhabitant of Brussels refuses to decide in precipitation on the reasons of the incident, it estimates that he causes new concerns on the risk of a possible plane crash engraves on zones densely populated. For it, this incident gives in light the problems of the Anciaux Plan, of which it judges that it poses problem as well as regards sound harmful effects as of safety, by its too great dispersion of the flights. Serious deficiencies and irresponsible inertia For the CDH, the emergency landing of A330 clarifies the serious deficiencies and the irresponsible inertia of the federal government in the management of the file of the air harmful effects. MR. and the PS must require federal, qualified government in this matter, which it takes his responsibilities before the incidents become accidents, claims the CDH in an official statement. The CDH urgently claims a plan which holds account of measurements of reduction of noise and the density of population, but which redefines also the track 02/20 like subsidiary, which restores standards of wind in conformity with the international recommendations and which respects the recommendations of the independent international experts as regards safety.
Last edited by TheSailor; 31st Aug 2006 at 19:35.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
v[QUOTE"[talking about runway 20] this runway is shorter than runway 25 by 991 meters and some say the engine failure might have been caused by the use of full thrust to allow the aircraft to take-off on a runway that is too short".
What rot - Full power T.O. is a standard procedure often done as an Engineering requirement as well as for many other reasons and it does not matter what you do with the thrust levers you cannot exceed the designed full power (unless there is a fault of course).
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: the twilight zone
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think Brussels is the only city in the world who's airport is surrounded by densely populated areas. If every city was to ban flying over populated areas because of the one in a million chance of a crash, we'd all be driving 2hrs or more to the airport everyday.Why don't you close your airport and take the train to the nearest city with an airport.All the risk....GONE!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Americas
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uhhh...no.
Speaking of Rot. - "You cannot exceed the designed full power." Talk to a any SWA mechanic about how many engines they repair weekly because of their pilots using your theory. 
What rot - Full power T.O. is a standard procedure often done as an Engineering requirement as well as for many other reasons and it does not matter what you do with the thrust levers you cannot exceed the designed full power (unless there is a fault of course).[/quote]
What rot - Full power T.O. is a standard procedure often done as an Engineering requirement as well as for many other reasons and it does not matter what you do with the thrust levers you cannot exceed the designed full power (unless there is a fault of course).
[/quote]
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Building Site
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not going into this whole Brussels airport discussion.. It's all Belgian politics, which are (luckely) part of my past. Just ask the DHL (EAT) guys what their plan will be once DHL will move to former East-Germany.
Grunner - You CAN NOT exceed designed full power on an airbus. The TOGA detend is just that, and you can use it whenever you want. It's different to a Boeing where you can firewall the engine and go over the maximum parameters, but I think this is such a basic knowledge for any pro pilot.
I do agree the wear and tear on engines will be greater by using TOGA, hence the reason why we all use FLEX or Derated TO technique.
MR8
Grunner - You CAN NOT exceed designed full power on an airbus. The TOGA detend is just that, and you can use it whenever you want. It's different to a Boeing where you can firewall the engine and go over the maximum parameters, but I think this is such a basic knowledge for any pro pilot.
I do agree the wear and tear on engines will be greater by using TOGA, hence the reason why we all use FLEX or Derated TO technique.
MR8
Not going into this whole Brussels airport discussion.. It's all Belgian politics, which are (luckely) part of my past. Just ask the DHL (EAT) guys what their plan will be once DHL will move to former East-Germany.
Grunner - You CAN NOT exceed designed full power on an airbus. The TOGA detend is just that, and you can use it whenever you want. It's different to a Boeing where you can firewall the engine and go over the maximum parameters, but I think this is such a basic knowledge for any pro pilot.
I do agree the wear and tear on engines will be greater by using TOGA, hence the reason why we all use FLEX or Derated TO technique.
MR8
Grunner - You CAN NOT exceed designed full power on an airbus. The TOGA detend is just that, and you can use it whenever you want. It's different to a Boeing where you can firewall the engine and go over the maximum parameters, but I think this is such a basic knowledge for any pro pilot.
I do agree the wear and tear on engines will be greater by using TOGA, hence the reason why we all use FLEX or Derated TO technique.
MR8
I wasn't aware that there was a difference like this between Boeing vs Airbus designs. I always thought that any differences were ascribable only to the technolgy differences in engine designs.
Do you by any chance have an example of similar age-model engines being able to be operated over maximum parameters on a Boeing but not on an Airbus
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Age: 45
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasn't aware that there was a difference like this between Boeing vs Airbus designs. I always thought that any differences were ascribable only to the technolgy differences in engine designs.
Do you by any chance have an example of similar age-model engines being able to be operated over maximum parameters on a Boeing but not on an Airbus
Do you by any chance have an example of similar age-model engines being able to be operated over maximum parameters on a Boeing but not on an Airbus
Come on Tropo! We're talking about normal ops here - you get in a hole and firewall the thrust levers. Unless you do some switching first, what you get in the modern Boeings is rated thrust.
Now, on the classic B747 etc. it was possible to overboost. That was an advantage of the design to me - when the sh1t hits the fan you can get all she's got and maybe fly away. Sure, the engines might be shagged, but the airframe is still OK, not to mention the occupants. Nothing buggers up a nice engine like whacking it with a hill!!!
Now, on the classic B747 etc. it was possible to overboost. That was an advantage of the design to me - when the sh1t hits the fan you can get all she's got and maybe fly away. Sure, the engines might be shagged, but the airframe is still OK, not to mention the occupants. Nothing buggers up a nice engine like whacking it with a hill!!!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Age: 45
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on Tropo! We're talking about normal ops here - you get in a hole and firewall the thrust levers. Unless you do some switching first, what you get in the modern Boeings is rated thrust.
Now, on the classic B747 etc. it was possible to overboost. That was an advantage of the design to me - when the sh1t hits the fan you can get all she's got and maybe fly away. Sure, the engines might be shagged, but the airframe is still OK, not to mention the occupants. Nothing buggers up a nice engine like whacking it with a hill!!!
Now, on the classic B747 etc. it was possible to overboost. That was an advantage of the design to me - when the sh1t hits the fan you can get all she's got and maybe fly away. Sure, the engines might be shagged, but the airframe is still OK, not to mention the occupants. Nothing buggers up a nice engine like whacking it with a hill!!!
.
