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

BA B777 Incident @ Heathrow (merged)

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

BA B777 Incident @ Heathrow (merged)

Old 18th Jan 2008, 01:56
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From what I could make out today, the fan blades didn't seem to be significantly dammaged.

I was having a chat with an engineer from my company and he informed me that, had the engines been running at the time of impact, most if not all of the fan blades would have shattered. Flameout?
Wonder Boy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:02
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: bush
Age: 48
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
http://aviation-safety.net/database/...?id=20080117-0


some video footage of the accident.

Waddya think of there was a bet to see if the PF could pull it up by the first taxi way

You are correct sir!!
strobe12 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:09
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
one witness said

one witness indicated that the engines came up to full power as the plane hit.

if this is true, could the engines have relighted?

in a post which may have become lost in space, I asked 777 guys if there is a "ground idle" engine range that might be commanded by a ground shifting mechanism (WOW, squat switch, what have you).

also, could a lack of selecting engine anti ice while descending through clouds, followed by a quick melting of ice, sending a stream of water through the engines.

both engines quitting at 400 feet simply does not happen, and if it does, the thinking behind long range or any range twinjets might just go out the window.
sevenstrokeroll is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:11
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A Restless Spirit on an Endless Flight!
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Engine Failure on Short Final?

Having just seen the You Tube clip, the high AOA is clear, leading me to suspect the following possibility:

1) A/C begins approach fully configured with all engines operating (including full landing flaps, landing gear down, etc) for normal two-engine approach in accordance with BA SOP criteria.

2) Sometime after that, anywhere from the FAF to short final, one of the two engines experiences significant power loss (either mechnical, possibly injestion of flock of birds, fuel problem, etc)

3) "Engine Failure on Final" checklist attempted, including:

a) resetting and acheivement of higher airspeed target due to imminent use of lower flap setting (to lessen drag)

b) actual resetting of flaps to lower setting

c) resetting of ground proximity warning system due to use of alternate flap setting

d) possible securing of inop engine depending on time left and nature of problem.

The acheivement and maintainance of a higher approach speed with an inoperative engine at the same time one is attempting to maintain LOC and G/S while the flaps are being reconfigured (requiring an increase in pitch attitude) all while on final approach, IMHO, is quite a busy time. Any slight distraction can lead to exactly the nose high, high power setting on operative engine, flattened approach that we see on the You Tube clip. Perhaps following that with too high a sink rate once the road was cleared lead to the undershoot.

In other words, it's a handfull of airplane and procedures in the most critical of flying environments for which, IMO, there is barely adequate training for in the simulator. Engine failures in the traffic pattern miles outside the final approach are one thing, and practiced to a great extent. This kind of emergency, however, is quite a different breed.

In any case, my thoughts are with all involved.

RF
RetroFire is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:14
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: No. Cal, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did you watch "Fate is the Hunter" last night?

Student pilot here. The one remark that I can make is that this is a perfect example of flying a presumeably broken plane down to the ground and landing it in the lowest possible energy state. Lots of broken aluminum, but everybody gets to tell the story to their kids.
grumpyoldgeek is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:26
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BGQ - post 141 and
Tigs2 - post 177


BRAVO! You two gentlemen are the grand prize winners. It's to early to congratulate the crew because none of us know if their actions lead to the situation in the first place!

Patience. We'll know the facts in due time.

The one video, if it's even of the accident a/c, does appear to show a high pitch attitude which we tend to link with a high AOA. But does anyone know exactly what a 777 approach looks like from that exact spot, at the exact weight and flap configuration the a/c was in? If you can't answer the question with 100% certainity you're speculating which isn't helping anyone.

Patience.
misd-agin is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:29
  #187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
While some regulars are clearly getting annoyed with the level of speculation, I have to say this thread has a great deal more credibility than anything the media has come up with. Obviously the facts are not out - obviously therefore speculation will ensue. For those people who have posted useful information, thank you. For those of you who think the industry learnt nothing from Kegworth, please consider the plausibility of this! Are you Australian?
Ian G is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:30
  #188 (permalink)  
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 84
Posts: 3,270
Received 33 Likes on 16 Posts
Speedrestriction. I entirely agree, that is when you say.
I shouldn't be here
...and this includes any other low post Ppruners that think they have the right to tell us that we shouldn't discuss this matter -- until it has been fully investigated.

So what the blazes is the purpose of R&N?

Oh, and by the way, Don't shout...especially in red.




What have we got?

No communication from the flight-deck? Well, hardly surprising...they were busy.

High energy met conditions? It's the middle of winter, rough days at this time of year are rather more obvious.


Low fuel? He would have had to be gambling on not telling anyone. No reason to take a great risk hiding the fact, low-fuel calls happen all too often these days.

Birds? I bow to Danny's senior knowledge, and indeed recency, but why wouldn't the Captain have said as much when he reported the dead-stick to ground staff? He (or his colleague) would have surely been looking ahead at that time, a flock big enough to stop thoes donks would have almost certainly been very apparent.



NOT fly-by-wire.
Would someone be kind enough to give a simple description of the 777's control system?

I have the uneasy feeling that if this aircraft had denied the PF the power to drag in with an extreme nose up attitude, they would have almost certainly ploughed through road traffic, or even houses before arriving at LRH.

It's possible that that contol authority saved a lot of lives today.


Another question. Supposing he had 7 tonnes on board, and something caused a major wing drop/stall. And supposing, just for a moment, the ball slipped hard over. With that side g and that level of fuel, would the scavenge system fail for a moment?
Loose rivets is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:31
  #189 (permalink)  
dns
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South East
Age: 42
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's to early to congratulate the crew because none of us know if their actions lead to the situation in the first place!
Can we perhaps congratulate the cabin crew? We know for a fact that they evacuated the aircraft without serious injury or loss of life...
dns is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:33
  #190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1998
Location: Where the job is!
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quotes from above:
‘BBC inaccuarcies...’
‘BBC also referred to him as "the pilot". Maybe the incident happened because the 777 should have had more than one pilot ...’
‘Multiple bird strike on short finals?’
‘Loss of power on finals etc.....’
‘.....whats the chances of running dry on short finals??’
‘I would guess the a/c entered the most dangerous tailwind portion on short finals.’

There has been much criticism of the accuracy of the BBC and other members of the media. How about certain presumed pilots applying the same level of accuracy to their own posts? How many runways do they think the aircraft was trying to land on at the same time? To those fully familiar with both aviation and the English language the four legs of a circuit (pattern for Yanks) are crosswind, downwind, base and final (or final approach). Note that all are in the singular! Are there many pilots who do not know the difference between singular and plural or is it fairly common to hear some pilots advise that they are on crosswinds, downwinds and bases?

‘The double standards and ignorance of some of the posters on this site never ceases to amaze me.’ ‘You are as bad as the Journo's.’ Interesting comments! Perhaps those who live in glasshouses should not throw stones.
Carrier is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:40
  #191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: usa/asia
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wink Very close call, no doubt!

Under the weather conditions at the time, it is pretty certain to assume that the crew added the close to the Boeing maximum 20 knot wind additive to their Vref. That extra energy was probably to thank that they made the field at all if indeed they experienced a double engine failure on final. With the gear down and locked as well as the final landing flap setting, the drag is so big without power that they must have been quite close when the power loss happened. With the flight data and voice recorder it wil be possible to recreate exactly what happened to them and we'll be reading about it in FI or another industry periodical soon enough.
XTRAHOLD is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:44
  #192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Apparently

Apparently any landing you can walk away from is a good one. Hence this was a good landing. The ships had a bit of a ding, nothing a few coats od paint and a hammer wont fix.. I don't see what all the fuss is about.

Do I know what happened?..mm no. Will we know what happened eventually..yes. So in the meantime out of all the folks in the tin tube, all walked away and have a story to tell down the pub. That fact alone, is the real story. What an amazing job done by the crew.
boardpig is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:55
  #193 (permalink)  
&&&
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Under the weather conditions at the time, it is pretty certain to assume that the crew added the close to the Boeing maximum 20 knot wind additive to their Vref.
Not necessarily, they wouldn't need to add anything (above ref plus +5) if they were using autothrottle.
&&& is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:56
  #194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So from the above it pitched rather than 'banked heavily' and can someone please clarify for me what is 'a textbook crash landing' that he referred to?

Furthermore chaps in an emergency evacuation both engine fire switches are pulled which amongst other things depressurises the hydraulics, and for farrari the APU fire switch would also be pulled which obviously would shut that down.
The Messiah is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 02:57
  #195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: asia
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
400ft question

Not a pilot, so hope you don't mind me asking a couple of questions (and i don't have flight sim on my pc either)

what would be the horizontal distance from the piano keys at 400 ft vertical on a normal approach - ie how far were they from the end of the runway in distance?


What would be the normal time from 400ft alt to touchdown - ie how far were they from the end of the runway in time?

Thanks
stickyb is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 03:04
  #196 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,484
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not necessarily, they wouldn't need to add anything (above ref plus +5) if they were using autothrottle.
Need some info here please - does the autothrust cater to headwind component to maintain the energy level of the aircraft in much the same was as Groundspeed-Mini on the 320/340 type aircraft? If not, then the crew would have to manually change the addition to Vref (above the usual 5kts). Just a point of info, nothing else - thanks.

PJ2
PJ2 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 03:05
  #197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@stickyb

Assuming a 3 degree glideslope, 400ft high would be about 7500ft back. Glide path intercept point is nominally 1000ft down the runway, so that would make 400ft AGL just over 1nm from the end of the runway. With a 20:1 ratio, any small error in that 400ft number makes quite a difference, of course. And I don't know the specifics for the runway in question re glideslope angle and GPIP.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 03:15
  #198 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,484
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not necessarily, they wouldn't need to add anything (above ref plus +5) if they were using autothrottle.
Need some info here please - I don't believe the autothrust caters to headwind component to maintain the energy level of the aircraft in the same was as Groundspeed-Mini on the 320/340 type aircraft does. I understand that thrust response is higher in gusts but the target speed is always the commanded speed. I ask for this clarification because if it does not, then the crew would have to manually change the addition to Vref (above the usual 5kts). Just a point of info, nothing else is suggested here - thanks.

PJ2
PJ2 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 03:18
  #199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Gone from the FL sun to the desert Oasis
Age: 60
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To all that are speculating that wind shear or a microburst could not
bring down a 777 sized aircraft, I need only to point out DL191 which
flew into a mircorburst at DFW. The plane,Tristar-L1011, was forced down short of the runway but was intact until it hit the water towers.
Whatever caused today's incident will come out in due time, but let's
all be thankful the headlines dont read BA jet plows into busy roadway
or bursts into flames on landing. A great job to both cockpit and cabin
crew.
Sleeping Freight Dog is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 03:25
  #200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: callifornia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No fire NO gas ????
dl540 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.