BA 2166 from Tampa

[lomapaseo]

Originally Posted by outofsynch

I would think the 'injured' may well have been consulted on the decision, and agreed they would much rather get attention at home... I see it more their decision than anyone elses - isnt it?

I agree, with any knowledge of the triage system in the emergency rooms of US hospitals, it would have been quicker to take the service of onboard paramedics and continue the flight to home base. Their call, obviously and I would have done the same thing. As far as the safety of the flight, that's the captains call.

[SuperBoy]

Originally Posted by sinala1

Forget: There is much more to CC's job than safety during take-off and landing. Inflight medical emergencies, inflight fires etc - these are all part of the safety aspects of the role of CC.

Very true but only a few of the crew were injured, thus I'm sure the remaining crew would've been able to deal with whichever incidents arose. If not I'm sure alternative arrangements would've been made.

Originally Posted by sinala1

What type of A/C crewed this flight, and how many crew do BA usually have on said type?

777 at present there would be 11 crew operating the flight so even if 3 members of crew were injured there would still be enough crew onboard to operate based on min crew numbers. It can be further reduced as you only need 1 crew member per 50 pax so 6 members of crew would suffice ( I know there are a vast number of variables to concider but it is possible)

[jondc9]

jerrystinger


we now have a plane with injured people on board...while a paramedic is nice to have, it is not a full diagnosis.

we have a plane that could potentially (as any plane might) suddenly need an evacuation and now 4 people who are in charge of evacuation cannot respond to an emergency.


as to triage in an american hospital, I've gone and signed my name and been in a bed in less than 5minutes...


In america, we have a radio patch to medical advice from doctors on the ground, does BA have that option?

having seen seemingly small injuries turn into career ending injuries, I agree with jerry stringer.

I would have gone back to get real medical help...someone may have a subtle spinal injury that will only get worse.

A captain is paid to make decisions...the conservative decision was to get medical hep from a doctor and a well equipped hospital as soon as possible.

jon

[Pigsfly]

At a first glance, one could be excused for suspecting BA is suffering from no-turnback-itis. The famous 3 Eng LAX to MAN and now long flight with injured crew. Thats if the facts are as stated.

[forget]

Originally Posted by Pigsfly

At a first glance, one could be excused for suspecting BA is suffering from no-turnback-itis. The famous 3 Eng LAX to MAN and now long flight with injured crew. Thats if the facts are as stated.

I don't understand. Surely a flight only turns back if circumstances require this.

[wow400]

Guys, there was no conspiricy theory, no push-on itis, just an airborne incident that was dealt with by all the crew with the utmost professionalism.
'It was a TCAS RA passing through 16.4k, ATC told a/c to level off at 16.5k (not much use when you're doing 2000fpm climb!) & then went into 'descend descend'.
Felt like turb in club cabin but of course the poor guys & girls at the back got their freefall experience.
None of the injurys life threatening etc, were assessed using on board paramedic/medlink & continue descision made. Flight was up the east coast of the US (not straight over the oggin) so looked like a million & one places to jump into if the injured started feeling a lot worse.
Rest of the crew did a sterling job doing the service with 4 down without any complaints etc - and there were a lot of very complimentary words said to the crew as everyone got off.

Wow

[ornithopter]

wow400 seems to have it spot on. It is amazing how many people hang others out to dry without any facts at all. For those who keep bleating about 3 engine 747's, perhaps you might like to look at the facts of the story. Not worth listing them here, but the fact of the matter is that the crew followed BA and CAA procedures, were taken to task by outside agencies and found that they had acted CORRECTLY. What more could you want?

This TCAS incident is similar, the crew made a good decision which is only challengable in Newspaper headline fashion, rather than head thinking fashion.

Do any of you out there think a BA Captain would continue with serious injuries on board? What sort of idiots do you think we are?

[SADDLER]

Grow Up

Thanks 400 for bringing a bit of sense into the nursery.

[peeteechase]

Not involved personally but I can assure you that on any BA flight the well-being of all on board is first priority.

The comments otherwise on this Forum are childish, mis-informed and quite probably journalistic, get a life guys
ATB,
ptc

[Pax72]

Thanks for all your comments, my folks did say that they thought the whole thing was dealt with fantastically well, and that they were well-informed. However, it has shaken them up a bit. They were in Club (a one-off treat, not their usual situ) and they did think it was turbulence at first, but at the end of the day the passengers were the lucky ones.
I think it's important to remember (certainly from a Pax pov) that the fact the flight arrived safely and comfortably at its destination is really a credit to all on board and their professionalism. It certainly won't prevent them flying BA again as they were impressed by the handling of the situation.
My intention when starting this thread was to get some info on what happened to cause the event, thanks for those insights!
Get well crew!
Pax72

[Mr Pax]

I would like to add my congratulations to all the flight crew an the excellent way in which they handled the situation
I sincerely hope the injured crew are all ok.
Thanks WOW its interesting to know what the cause of the incident was.
MP

[overstress]

Agree totally, 'chase.

The 'zero g' experience cannot be pleasant for crew down the back but it's a lot better than the potential alternative in this case.

Just curious: what is going on with the current trend on these forums for Monday-morning quarterbacks to wibble on and on about the flight 'turning back'???

In civil aviation, you press on to destination unless, considering all circumstances, it's better to divert. This decision is made in the air, by professionals, with all the information at their disposal.

To some on here it may come as a surprise that we don't consider the potential fallout on PPRuNe as part of our decision-making process!

[Lucifer]

Originally Posted by jerrystinger

I'm sorry, but this is simply incredible! Evasive action, followed by serious injuries and yet the flight crew continue? First a BA 747 loses an engine, but goes on and then this....You may have serious injuries, but hey, the crew need to get home.
Doesn't say much about BA's incident procedures. What other serious things happen that passengers are powerless to do anything about at 37,000ft? I'm truly surprised.

Jerry Stinger, your post is uninformed tosh. With the exception of the comment that "passengers are powerless to do anything", your post is otherwise rubbish and implies that professional aircrew are operating like cowboys. This is simply not true, and is - I think - more a reflection of your ignorance of the decisions that are made by professional crew, and a somewhat typical inability to accept that there are many situations in which you as a passenger will never be in control, often displayed by armchair commentators with little or no aviation experience.

After appropriate medical advice, a decision was made. What more can you ask from a professional crew?

Though the thread was started by a reasonable question, I am unable to see why every single aviation abnormality requires a comment from the uninformed who think they can do the job better.

[RoyHudd]

Everyone knows better than pilots

Lucifer, you are correct. Cabin Crew, Pax, ground staff, journos; you name them, they think they have a better grasp of the overall situation! (And just to be fair, they may often have one snippet of info which could be needed by the Flight Deck for a better decision to be taken. But never the whole picture, how could they?)

Imagine if surgeons had a professional forum open to the public. Every opinionated person who had ever had an operation would be shooting from the hip, with their ill-informed views. Same stuff here, sadly.

Keep the punters out, I say!

[Flying Fred]

Originally Posted by jerrystinger

I'm sorry, but this is simply incredible! Evasive action, followed by serious injuries and yet the flight crew continue? First a BA 747 loses an engine, but goes on and then this....You may have serious injuries, but hey, the crew need to get home.
Doesn't say much about BA's incident procedures. What other serious things happen that passengers are powerless to do anything about at 37,000ft? I'm truly surprised.

Jerrystinger,
Your post illustrates the worst excesses of this forum. You jump to amazing conclusions with no access to the facts.

Evasive action, followed by serious injuries

The crew were responding to ATC instructions followed by a TCAS RA. What do you expect them to do? Carry on as they were and risk a collision? Who mentioned serious injuries? For your information it is standard procedure to get a paramedic out to assess injuries before people are moved from the aircraft. The last time I had to do this, it was for a cabin crew member who had slipped on a wet floor and twisted his knee. According to your instant analysis of the situation, should we have diverted for that?

You may have serious injuries, but hey, the crew need to get home.

That comment is cheap and contemptible

Doesn't say much about BA's incident procedures

I'm sorry to disagree but it says completely the opposite. The crew reacted correctly to ATC and subsequent TCAS instructions. They then assessed the situation, using the onboard medical professional and Medlink (a dedicated team of doctors based in Phoenix Arizona who BA contract to supply expert advise for airborne medical problems) via satcom plus talking to the injured themselves. Only then did they make the decision to continue.
You owe a big apology to that crew and to BA.

[Pigsfly]

D`Pig is far from silly, he is well aware of the capabilities of a 747 to continue flight one engine out, he is well experienced in pax ops, he is well experienced in how commercial pressures can influence crews. This is neither good nor professional operating. And while you guys pat yourselves on the backs saying well done, I say ....commercial pressures ruled....

[Carnage Matey!]

Originally Posted by Pigsfly

D`Pig is far from silly....... This is neither good nor professional operating.

So the cabin crew got off safely, the paramedics were satisfied with the decision to continue, Medlink were satisfied with the decision to continue, the company got the aircraft where they wanted it, the passengers got where they wanted and seem to be full of praise for the crew and you think that is neither good nor professional operating? Heaven knows what you consider good and professional operating to be.

[Flying Fred]

Originally Posted by Pigsfly

D`Pig is far from silly This is neither good nor professional operating. And while you guys pat yourselves on the backs saying well done, I say ....commercial pressures ruled....

Pigsfly, so you would have dumped 30T of fuel and returned to TPA would you? Just what were the crew's injuries? I don't know and you don't either because nobody on here has given those details. And you call the BA crew unprofessional! You clearly have no knowledge of BAs operating procedures. Read again what I said about Medlink and obtaining professional advice.

Last year I diverted into a Canadian airfield after a female passenger complained of chest pains. We rang Medlink on the satcom, described in detail her symptoms and were advised that we should divert. This we did, no commercial pressure to continue. Pax was met by paramedics and hospitalised in the shortest time possible time. We then departed for our final destination in the southern US, arriving 1.5 hours late. This happens about once a week in BA but you don't read about it on here. By the way, it turned out she was having a panic attack - c'est la vie

The crew on the Tampa used the same process but this time the advice from the medical professionals was to continue. End of story. I know you as a 747 pilot sitting in your armchair are obviously more qualified than the Medlink doctors but, hey, you weren't on board. How about trusting it to the folk who were?

[mini]

If we can move on from the usual bunfight, what caused the TCAS RA?

[Danny]

Thank you to all those professional pilots who have clarified the reasons for the incident and the subsequent decision to continue to destination. Those posters who insist on 'quarterbacking', very obviously with no real experience of our jobs, only serve to show themselves up with their ill thought through posts and lack of real knowledge other than that gleaned from computer games, books and Discovery Wings.

I am very tempted to introduce a rating system. This system could be applied to individuals which will show the readership whether the poster is considered to be knowledgeable, if not experienced in airline operations and procedures. There could also be another rating for posters who are some of the many pretenders who voice off on here with their ill informed and very obvious, to us airline pilots and crews, arguments based on nothing but ill informed speculation and PC simulator 'experience'.

The vast majority of people quite rightly enter the discussions with questions as many of the more obscure and mundane aspects of our jobs are not that obvious. It is the few amateurs or those posters who have ego's that can't be satisfied because whilst their claims to members of our fraternity ring hollow, they remove all doubt as soon as they click the 'submit' button!