Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

SriLankan/BA bent metal at LHR?

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

SriLankan/BA bent metal at LHR?

Old 16th Oct 2007, 10:01
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Missing winglet? Not even a grounding item. Then again - home base - maybe.

forget is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 10:07
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
27R new hold design

Have a look for yourselves at the diagram in the UK-AIP AD 2-EGLL-2-5.

If the BA 744 was on Link23 abeam the junction with Link 21 and the Sri Lankan A340 was attempting to use Link21; there is a loss of separation between these 2 taxiways for code 'E' a/c. Assuming Link 23 is code 'E' then I would guess that Link21/Link22 can't be any more than code 'B'. Is there a stop bar at Link 21? I can imagine the Sri Lankan should have been routing Twy Bravo for TITAN then left for AY3 then A3 but went straight ahead after TITAN and was trying for Link 22 and A2? The diagram doesn't have a route East from TITAN to Link 21. Is this an error on the diagram or can you ONLY turn left or right after TITAN? There aer no stop bars illustrated on the diagram.

All the above is speculation. Anyone else got a more informed view?

TOO
TheOddOne is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 10:07
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Nice to know that that ferking idiot simon calder managed to get his tuppence worth in on the debate on 5 live radio. Where would we be without him.
frangatang is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 10:12
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: LONDON England
Age: 52
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Slip and Turn,

Good point , also knew the gentleman you spoke of as I lived in Little Harrowden at the time, near Sywell.

It worries me whenever I see traffic manouvering in link 23,22 and 21 for A1,2,3.
autothrottle is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 10:14
  #45 (permalink)  

Controversial, moi?
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Apparently it didn't make enough difference to the fuel burn to make any adjustments necessary. I expect there's a difference in MEL for an outstation departure compared with base, on the basis that another a/c would be available and that the a/c can be fixed at LHR but not CCS.
If you don't know then why speculate?

A missing winglet is an allowable deferred defect, there is a fuel penalty and a weight penalty otherwise quite acceptable.
M.Mouse is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 10:15
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: LONDON England
Age: 52
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Most likely that BAW11 routed link 23 for A1 and Sri Lankan was routed Link 23 Link22 for A2. Yes there is a stop bar at Link21 , in fact there are numerous stop bars link21-B , Link21-A AND B-Titan. Remember the stop bars only provide separation if aircraft are fully over the bar and won't if the aircraft stops with part hanging over the bar.
Probably best wait for investigation to take place.

Last edited by autothrottle; 16th Oct 2007 at 12:03.
autothrottle is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 10:30
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Speculation

Monsieur Mouse says:

why speculate?


Why not? This is a rumour site; surely speculation goes hand-in-hand with that.

Actually, in regard to the CCS incident, I wasn't. My only speculation was on current BA policy at LHR, compared with outstation.

TOO
TheOddOne is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 11:02
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The world's biggest beach
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Odd One
I would definately caution speculation as to who is to blame, otherwise we lower ourselves to the dark depths that is Sky, BBC and the Daily Telegraph.
Yes the holding areas at LHR are badly designed, but in ATC we are aware of their limitations. If it was a situation of one holding L23 en route to A1 with another one being instructed to follow the greens L23-L22-A2, as is the the most probable route (Titan shouldn't have come into play for T4 outbounds), then we are trained to issue the taxi instruction to A2 with a caveat off 'when you have sufficient wing tip clearance, or something similiar, thus re-inforcing the ATIS message.
The only time we wouldn't bother with the caveat would be if it was obvious from the ground radar that the one ahead was fully over the stop bar and the one behind would have a full unimpeded route!
Whilst the tragedy off the incident in Paris where the skipper lost his life isn't lost on any of us, can we please excercise caution when comparing the two incidents. This was a very low speed scratch nowhere near a runway. We had one a few months ago when a BA 777 pushed into a unparked company airbus, and we've had plenty of similar incidents in the 27L RHA. Whilst, I'm not saying that any of them are acceptable, when you have an airport as small as LHR with as many movements there are bound to be a couple. These incidents happen at airports all over the world so to start slagging heathrow off as the cause, it's just jumping on the journo specualtion bandwagon. LHR is a stressful airport for a passenger, but it is getting better!
I'm quite frankly appalled at the over reporting by Sky news and other agencies on this and the fear mongering they generate.
Slow news day
Yellow Snow is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 11:18
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree with Yellow Snow - there is a huge difference in operational terms between dinking a wingtip on taxi, and runway and airborne safety. The midair's listed above are not caused by pilots trying to pass each other with visual separation. Similarly a runway incursion is a very different matter. Its not "splitting hairs" although I can see how the unknowledgeable public can't see the difference.

Paris and Heathrow are very different kettles of fish, and the causal factors of the tragedy at Paris are very unlikely to be causal factors in this incident.

I think the taxiways could certainly be better at LHR, but if in doubt, stop and wait. There are very few times when stopping and waiting until you are sure will cause any significant problem - having said that, I don't know the causes of this incident and so don't want to speculate or suggest what could have been done better to avoid it.
Jetstream Rider is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 11:24
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jetstream I can see how you prioritise. Dinking sounds like fun, but tell you what, you go your road and I'll go mine (and let's hope we are both on the one ball).
slip and turn is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 11:24
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Surprised this incident hasn't been blamed by the BBC on global warming/climate change causing the wings to expand in length due to the higher than normal temperatures.
skysod is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 11:38
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
No-blame culture

Yellow Snow,

I'm sorry if my speculation as to the circumstances surrounding this incident may be mis-interpreted as 'blame'.

We strove for many years to generate a 'no-blame' culture to encourage honest and open incident reporting, especially with regard to Apron incidents. Only the most blatant cases of recklessness should be subject to draconian disciplinary action.

I'm a fan of the 'Swiss Cheese' accident theory, line up the holes and it happens. Post-accident, find out where the holes were and fill 'em in, so it can't happen again.

Cheers,
TheOddOne
TheOddOne is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 11:46
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The world's biggest beach
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Odd one,

I fully agree with your last post!

I guess it's watching too much Sky news and the blame culture that exists in the media that has me particularly wound up at the moment.

Cheers YS
Yellow Snow is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 11:54
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Slip and Turn - I don't mean to sound as if this is not serious, neither do I suggest that the accident at CDG wasn't a very serious, tragic and avoidable accident. I was upset when I read the accident report and am still angry that CDG is such an awful place to operate an aircraft. However, what I'm saying is that runway incursions, the use of two languages, take off clearances and other runway related operational practices are very different from two aircraft hitting as they taxi.

I'm keen to avoid these things, I'm just saying that the parallels drawn by some above are not strictly appropriate. By that I mean the listing of the midairs, the fact that someone said we were "splitting hairs" about the reporting or runway and taxiway and the "thank god it didn't happen in the air". The accident to your friend is very poingant, and worth remembering in a situation like this - its not necessarily the same thing - but it does remind one how an escalation can become very serious indeed. I mean no hurt or insult and if you feel upset by it, I will remove my post.

I'm just saying some people seem to be escalating a taxiing accident to the importance of a runway collision - if one were to choose a risk factor for this incident it wouldn't be the same as a runway collision.
Jetstream Rider is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 12:28
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
JR, no need to remove your post. Your views are as airable as anyone else's ... I'm not upset by them. I just think that to deflect the seriousness based on some graduated spectrum of the relative hairiness of different bits of the live area and to stifle comparison by shooting a spoiling line indicating that unique external factors make all comparison invalid is not useful to anyone other than commercial risk takers with a need to justify expedience, and that I assume, Sir, is not what you is paid to be?

Aviation is supposed to be a non-contact sport. When 'certain types' of contact become generally acceptable/deemed minor by the players and commentators, then no-one can guess what factors will contribute next time nor how serious the next one will be. Surely the message is stay clear unless triple certain, not "oh well the worst I can imagine right here is a glancing dink".

Zero tolerance of potential conflicts is the rule and I don't see the usefulness or safety benefits of suggesting otherwise.
slip and turn is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 12:41
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Zero tolerance of potential conflicts is the rule and I don't see the usefulness or safety benefits of suggesting otherwise.
I almost agree - I would take out the "potential" as there is a potential for many things all the time, yet not necessarily in need of action. In my company, each accident or incident is assigned a risk factor or "seriousness" so for instance an aircraft pulling onto stand without guidance will be a lower risk factor than a full GPWS. My thoughts are that the CDG accident would get the highest "seriousness" as it involved loss of life and it could have been much worse. A taxiing accident would have a lower seriousness unless for instance an aircraft went full face into a terminal.

If you get a full GPWS flying into a hilly airport whilst following procedures to the letter - as an operator you might stop flying there until the problem is sorted out - with a clip of wings at the holding point you wouldn't stop operations until a fix was found. That's all - this accident doesn't need immediate and draconian fixes, but a runway incursion/rejected takeoff might. I just think the seriousness is lower than some of the comparisons stated above. What would you fix first, the clipped wings or the runway incursion? I'd go for the incursion first every time.
Jetstream Rider is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 12:42
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 84
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Photographs here on the Daily Mail website.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770
MReyn24050 is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 12:55
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Interesting shots in that Daily Mail article.

That said, they just couldn't help themselves, could they?

Passengers tell of panic as two planes collide on Heathrow runway

Passengers today told of the panic on board when their planes collided on the runway at Heathrow as they were waiting to take off.

A six-feet long wing section of a stationary British Airways Boeing 747 was sliced off
Not a wing, but a winglet. And looks like it lost less than six feet.

Rant selector switch moved to 'On' position

Clowns.

WHY do they do this?!

Moreover, why do people pay to read this drivel?!

If the free papers in London have proven anything, it's that print 'journalism' these days ain't worth paying for.

Rant selector switch moved to 'Off' position
Taildragger67 is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 13:04
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Ballymun
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The BBC news website has an article entitled "Two aircraft collide at Heathrow" It's currently the number 2 most read article.

The number 1 most read article is "Top Gear pipes anger anti-smokers"

Don't you just love it
Silver Tongued Cavalier is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 14:00
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 37
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts


Does my head-in reading stuff like this.

Since when did the 'runway' get involved!?

Idiots

FMS
FMSData is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.