BA B777 Incident @ Heathrow (merged)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On one of the engines the N-1 blades are broken off and appears to have been working.
Perhaps it started spooling up just prior to impact.
Both engines failing at the same time is a bit tough to believe provided there was fuel on board and being fed to the engines.
Something very strange here.
Perhaps it started spooling up just prior to impact.
Both engines failing at the same time is a bit tough to believe provided there was fuel on board and being fed to the engines.
Something very strange here.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080118...YeZpJ3TGFbbBAF
copilot hailed
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080118/.../britain_plane
engines failed
Great that all are ok.
copilot hailed
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080118/.../britain_plane
engines failed
Great that all are ok.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: London,England,U.K.
Age: 59
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
just a thought..
Each engine will be totally independant of the other, each has its own fuel suppy, fuel pumps, hydraulics, Engine computers (FADECs) etc.
a while ago i went to pick up an aircraft (executive jet) from servicing. it had just had two new fuel guages fitted but niether of them would work even though they each had their own electrical source and were reading from diferent tanks.. the engineers were scratching their heads! as the guages worked when bench tested.
we all know how engineers dont like us pilots to tell them why something isnt working but i sugested the only common factor these guages had was "earth"
they dissmissed my thoughts and sent me back to the hotel.
The next day a diferent engineer told me that it turned out the guages had not been properly earthed when initially fitted but all working now so off we went.
my point here is once again the only common factor these engines have is all their electrical components are earthed...
just a thought..
Each engine will be totally independant of the other, each has its own fuel suppy, fuel pumps, hydraulics, Engine computers (FADECs) etc.
a while ago i went to pick up an aircraft (executive jet) from servicing. it had just had two new fuel guages fitted but niether of them would work even though they each had their own electrical source and were reading from diferent tanks.. the engineers were scratching their heads! as the guages worked when bench tested.
we all know how engineers dont like us pilots to tell them why something isnt working but i sugested the only common factor these guages had was "earth"
they dissmissed my thoughts and sent me back to the hotel.
The next day a diferent engineer told me that it turned out the guages had not been properly earthed when initially fitted but all working now so off we went.
my point here is once again the only common factor these engines have is all their electrical components are earthed...
Not read the pages & pages of text here but..... i think a good place to look would be the fuel filters to each engine....are they full of water? The fuel would have been cold after a long sector and i don't know the fuel heat system on a 777 but i guess its the auto cycle type. If this failed the filters would gradually clog up with ice and restrict fuel flow. Just a thought.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my point here is once again the only common factor these engines have is all their electrical components are earthed...
Ummm... Taxi to Jet Blast!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Private jet, if the fuel filters become blocked they get by-passed.
26point2, I presume what your suggesting is maybe a possible surge of some sort, surely though all systems would be adequately surge protected, anyway, the reports from passengers is that everything in the cabin was working fine all the way down and the whole airframe should be electrically neutral. If your suggesting maintenance error of some sort then it's very unusual to say the least that two or more system would fail at the same time.
26point2, I presume what your suggesting is maybe a possible surge of some sort, surely though all systems would be adequately surge protected, anyway, the reports from passengers is that everything in the cabin was working fine all the way down and the whole airframe should be electrically neutral. If your suggesting maintenance error of some sort then it's very unusual to say the least that two or more system would fail at the same time.
Two engines being fed by one tank? It's possible on most aircraft and could certainly cause an accident like this. If this was the cause, I'm pretty sure the capt would not be on TV receiving applause.
Also, if fuel contamination/starvation was the cause, I reckon the flame-outs would have been separated by a significant interval, due to each engine having a separate fuel system, in effect.
Also, if fuel contamination/starvation was the cause, I reckon the flame-outs would have been separated by a significant interval, due to each engine having a separate fuel system, in effect.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AAIB preliminary report is out.
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_ne...ial_report.cfm
"Initial indications from the interviews and Flight Recorder analyses show the flight and approach to have progressed normally until the aircraft was established on late finals for Runway 27L. At approximately 600 ft and 2 miles from touch down, the Autothrottle demanded an increase in thrust from the two engines but the engines did not respond. Following further demands for increased thrust from the Autothrottle, and subsequently the flight crew moving the throttle levers, the engines similarly failed to respond. The aircraft speed reduced and the aircraft descended onto the grass short of the paved runway surface."
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_ne...ial_report.cfm
"Initial indications from the interviews and Flight Recorder analyses show the flight and approach to have progressed normally until the aircraft was established on late finals for Runway 27L. At approximately 600 ft and 2 miles from touch down, the Autothrottle demanded an increase in thrust from the two engines but the engines did not respond. Following further demands for increased thrust from the Autothrottle, and subsequently the flight crew moving the throttle levers, the engines similarly failed to respond. The aircraft speed reduced and the aircraft descended onto the grass short of the paved runway surface."
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Here
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
qoute:
Did anybody notice that the rudder on the wreckage is fully deployed to the right?
FLY SAFELY
DOVES
Well, with the fairly strong SW wind and, I would think, the hydraulic pressure zero, . . . . . . .
Did anybody notice that the rudder on the wreckage is fully deployed to the right?
FLY SAFELY
DOVES
Well, with the fairly strong SW wind and, I would think, the hydraulic pressure zero, . . . . . . .
Last edited by On GS; 18th Jan 2008 at 19:08.
With the benefit of the initial factual report
Both engines failed to repond at the same time in a critical flight regime from a presumably low power (flight idle?)
Additional unverified reports suggest that a loud engine running noise was heard before impact
Some have commented on the different conditions of the two fans (one with many broken blades, filled with dirt and one with much less damage and the dirt only seen in front of the fan)
Possibilities include a common cause associated with both engines (either at the engine level or the aircraft system level) and that one engine may have belatedly responded.
If the part in the bolded is correct than that area deserves the most attention in the next briefing
Both engines failed to repond at the same time in a critical flight regime from a presumably low power (flight idle?)
Additional unverified reports suggest that a loud engine running noise was heard before impact
Some have commented on the different conditions of the two fans (one with many broken blades, filled with dirt and one with much less damage and the dirt only seen in front of the fan)
Possibilities include a common cause associated with both engines (either at the engine level or the aircraft system level) and that one engine may have belatedly responded.
If the part in the bolded is correct than that area deserves the most attention in the next briefing
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alex
RR put out, I believe, a statement to clarify the engines had not (necessarily) "failed", just "failed to respond".
The system will be complex, no doubt more so than even the Flt Crew manuals will say. The TLs will be manufactured by Boeing, and the fuel injectors by RR. Between these 2 points will be numerous mechanical components, electrical boxes and wires, and fuel componenets. Some will be Boeing sourced, and common to all 777s, and some will be RR sourced.
The AAIB said as much
and without further info, one does not know if this is a RR 777 problem, a 777 problem or even lots of types 
What are the chances of the RR Trent fleet being grounded? (G-YMMA to G-YMMO)
The system will be complex, no doubt more so than even the Flt Crew manuals will say. The TLs will be manufactured by Boeing, and the fuel injectors by RR. Between these 2 points will be numerous mechanical components, electrical boxes and wires, and fuel componenets. Some will be Boeing sourced, and common to all 777s, and some will be RR sourced.
The AAIB said as much
The investigation is now focussed on more detailed analysis of the Flight Recorder information, collecting further recorded information from various system modules and examining the range of aircraft systems that could influence engine operation.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Possibilities include a common cause associated with both engines (either at the engine level or the aircraft system level) and that one engine may have belatedly responded.
#2's fan case, IMHO, may not have even been disturbed 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AAIB's initial report states that both engines failed to respond to commands for increased thrust. It doesn't say "the engines failed" or "the engines stopped". In other words the implication is that the engines were still running but were stuck at the settings applied prior to the 'fault(s)' occurring. All the continued talk on hear about blocked fuel filters/ice in the fuel and indeed, no fuel, would surely only be relevant if the engines had completely stopped - something the AAIB report does not state.
Also on the subject of fuel, I have seen/heard it stated several times (including on here) that at that stage of the flight all remaining fuel would have been in the wings and therefore with the fuel in each wing feeding its respective engine. If this is indeed the case, surely the subject of fuel cross feeding is not relevant?
Also on the subject of fuel, I have seen/heard it stated several times (including on here) that at that stage of the flight all remaining fuel would have been in the wings and therefore with the fuel in each wing feeding its respective engine. If this is indeed the case, surely the subject of fuel cross feeding is not relevant?
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What are the chances of the RR Trent fleet being grounded? (G-YMMA to G-YMMO)
This permitted the aircraft not to be grounded while checks were made and the requirement was then lifted. This sounds quite similar.
The photos of the wreckage show the right engine blades intact suggesting it subsequently completely ran down before impact, while the left engine blades are torn off but with little damage to the casing suggesting it was still running at impact but couldn't be accelerated out of sub-idle.
As regards the co-pilot continuing to fly the aeroplane, I think this was a good decision by the captain, enabling the more experienced pilot to try and find the root cause of the problem. Unfortunately there was just insufficient time remaining at such a low altitude.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vance, Belgium
Age: 62
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
3 Posts
B787 crashworthiness
Originally Posted by HeliCraig
Wonder whether the 787 airframe will be able to take that sort of abuse, and stay intact. Any materials engineers care to comment?
there has been a debate last fall about the 787 structural resistance in case of a crash landing.
The question has been triggered by a letter addressed to the FAA by a Boeing engineer with a long structural design experience.
The FAA rejected the engineer's criticisms in october.
The letter of the engineer: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABP...2003889769.pdf
A paper on FAA's rejection (sorry couldn't find the FAA's formal response) : http://www.asminternational.org/MSTe...ID=1247&News=1
If you are interested in that subject, I suggest you pursue it in the thread devoted to it:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=292713
Luc
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Valley Where the Thames Runs Softly
Age: 77
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like most people (even most Prune readers) I am not a pilot. I have nothing to add to what has been said about the accident but I must say how revealing it is when some people completely lose it because 'non-professionals' ask questions and, yes, speculate about the accident. More than 90% of people in any airliner are not pilots, but their a*ses are on the line just the same as the guys at the front.
The public want to know and are entitled to know what goes on. Deference is dead. If you are a pilot, the rest of us are customers. Allay our fears. Tell us what you know. Some questions will be stupid, some fears irrational, but the public are still entitled to courtesy and consideration when they ask for information or reassurance.
It's called professionalism actually. Doctors are used to dealing sensitively with the fears of their patients. try to emulate them.
The public want to know and are entitled to know what goes on. Deference is dead. If you are a pilot, the rest of us are customers. Allay our fears. Tell us what you know. Some questions will be stupid, some fears irrational, but the public are still entitled to courtesy and consideration when they ask for information or reassurance.
It's called professionalism actually. Doctors are used to dealing sensitively with the fears of their patients. try to emulate them.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: About 1 mile from WOD ndb
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sit back and relax.
PPRuNe is a great forum because it is, within limits, reasonably open to non-Professional Pilots. There are those like myself who have such a deep-seated love of flying that they will travel in back of a 101% loaded 747 and still smile at the experience.
But like others, I have a real connection with all this stuff. My software engineering company supplies software to Boeing: as soon as I see something like this, I really want to know more about what *may* have happened. It's almost certainly nothing to do with us, but we live and learn very quickly about doing things better. We are thirsty for knowledge, learning and correction, particularly where systems failure may have played a part.
We need our forum, and this really is an excellent one. Early speculation can be constructive, provided it is well-informed.
But like others, I have a real connection with all this stuff. My software engineering company supplies software to Boeing: as soon as I see something like this, I really want to know more about what *may* have happened. It's almost certainly nothing to do with us, but we live and learn very quickly about doing things better. We are thirsty for knowledge, learning and correction, particularly where systems failure may have played a part.
We need our forum, and this really is an excellent one. Early speculation can be constructive, provided it is well-informed.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not read all the posts but has fuel starvation due to water in the tanks been looked at??