BA B777 Incident @ Heathrow (merged)

[Sunfish]

I'm a low time PPL with some airline engineering experience but some of the speculation here is mind bogglingly stupid. For the record, the autothrottle system will probably be made by Honeywell.

Ferchrisake fergetaboutit until the authorities provide a report or accept my interim explanation - it was ice on the points.

[bus me in]

BA777 BA SOP's

Is there a Nigel out there that can clarify BA's monitored approach handover stage from PF to PNF? Well done to all the crew involved, esp the SFO who landed! We all know any landing you can walk away from is a good one.

[H.Finn]

Many, many years go, when I was a young pilot, there was an incident in where I live, with Airbus A300's. Company was Karair, at that time a charter subsidiary of Finnair, they had two A300's, with highest utilisation of the type then, basically flying non-stop between Finland and the Canary Islands. About 18 hours airborne per day per aircraft, if I recall correctly. At some point, it was discovered that there was a huge chunk of ice floating in the fuel tank of one of the aircraft, as the condenced water never had time to melt, and thus had never been drained from the system between the flights. The aircraft had actually been very close to fuel starvation because of this. Of course, about 20 years have passed, lessons have been learnt, and this could not happen again, couldn't it...?

[Green Guard]

#401 #419 too
apron :
not read all the posts but has fuel starvation due to water in the tanks been looked at??

Well if you fly inverted in this part of world (or if you fly not inverted in Oz), you may get a problem with a water in fuel tanks AT THE END OF FLIGHT !

[ILS27LEFT]

How to land a 767 without both engines.

Excellent team, both in the flight deck and in the cabin.
Gliding down a 767, without both engines from 2 miles away, it is not as easy as it sounds. Obviously the weather helped, the wet grass and soft mud helped, the visibility helped, the type of aircraft helped, but it could have all gone terribly wrong. Just a tiny mistake could have meant disaster.
Same type of incident on 27-right could have had totally different results as well, with the same crew, but we cannot ignore the objective fact that the two men in uniform at the front did an incredible job, they performed the best possible landing for the given conditions. They deserve a huge medal.

We also have to thank the extremely professional BA Cabin Crew who have again demonstrated how essential good training and skills become in case of a real emergency.
This should put a bit more into prospective the attitude of those moody passengers who often enjoy to treat Cabin Crew with disrespect, especially those in the Premium Cabins.
Yesterday they were all saved, also by the Cabin Crew, and this was the team's aim whatever their behaviour had been on board during the previous 12 hours.

This is a lesson for all.

Somebody here has even criticised the pilots for not advising the Cabin Crew of the impending crash-landing, but we all know well that in those precious seconds the main priority was to bring the machine down in the best possible way. Any distraction would have proven fatal.

Well done to all BA crew, you have demonstrated again that "serious training" is essential when you have to effectively deal with emergencies. Cabin Crew is essential too.
But lets' remind to all involved that in all fields, in all industries, we should never become too slave of our own procedures, e.g. if the pilots would have wasted time on "formal procedures" (e.g. "announcements") therefore under-estimating the real danger, everybody would have possibly died.


Looking back they have done a perfect job. : a perfect landing of a 767 without both engines, on the grass.

Why both engines failed?..think: what is the only bit they have in common?...

[eagle21]

When they say there was no response from the engines does it mean the engines did not react to the demand?

[Jumpseat777]

Unbelievable as said many times...

I cant believe all the horse%$^ that is put on here...I mean seriously if you dont know what you are saying and no one knows everything then please go ahead and say it first...Now I am not going to speculate at all on the crash..but please some simple facts on the 777 as someone who works on it everyday..
1.B777 is a fly by wire aircraft..it is not as simple as a wire to an engine..please
SYS involved include AIMS CMCS Arinc 629 OPAS FADEC

Throttle inputs go to an AIMS(Airplane Info Mngmnt Sys..and vice versa
Engine is managed by a dual channel FADEC system. The EEC is part of this system(the heart).The EEC ctrls
Engine Systems
Starts and Autostarts
T/R operation
Power to the EEC is thru dedicated alternator via PCU(Power ctrl Unit)

The Trent 884 is growth version of the RB211 developing @84000lbs of thrust
Fuel supply to this engine from airplane fuel system thru eng fuel pump(two stage) Pump supplies fuel to Fuel Metering Unit and servo fuel for actuators.Fuel flow tx and thermocouples supplies fuel flow and temp readings to cockpit via EEC.

APU is a electric and pneumatic power source both on ground and in air.
Also has a FADEC.In Air mode APU started by loss of power to both electric buses
A cold start APU would require approx 45 sec to strt from start command to being online functionally.that is able to supple electrics and pneumatics. Dual starting sys electrics and pnuematics if air px available air starter used. APU can start upto cieling for this aircraft 43100 ft for this aircraft. It is routinely done a s a test procedure during flights. APU has a an APUC for ctrl.

Fuel SYS
One ctr and two main tanks later version has larger tanks not more .At low fuel in center tanks automatic fuel feed from main tanks, and center automatically feed wing tanks.The FQIS( fuel quantity indicating system) uses ultrasonic probes not capacitor type. Same also used to detect water!
Ans also sends maintenance alert if water detected. Low fuel quantity also shows as an alert this time on EICAS and tank readout if particularly low on one.All dark panel involes all buttons and valves in for flight unless isolating for trouble.

Electrical Power
NBPT(no break power tx principle)
ELMS (Electrical Load Mngmnt Sys) This ctrls distribution of power on aircraft
Hardware includes the obvious
1 IDG 120Kva each per engine
1 Genny on the APU also 120kva
2 BUGs(backup generators) 20kva each variable freq converted to constant by backup convertor
5 TRU (Transformer rectifier unit) make dc power
1 RAT supplying 7kva
Main and APU batteries
Power sys normally operates as two independent channels Each channel one bus each bus supplied by onside genny.Apu can supply either or both with load shed coming in on overload.
Ground handling bus supplied by APU
Hot battery bus supplied by ground service bus via main and APU battery chargers
Stdby bus rcvs power from left tx bus or from stdby inverter if loss of power
BUGS are always running unless INOP and will supply pwr if main ac bus looses pwr.
BUGs not available then RAT will supply power to Flight instrument buses
ELMS GCU and BPCU montor ctrl and distributed electric power.

Now thats just an overview...just to correct some of the $%$ written here, I am sorry but by mouthing off people here are no better than those overpaid idiots on TV who then mouth your words.

The informed people here who have held off judgement before final analysis is available bravo.... but one thing I was told through school would be that no one thing can bring down an aircraft its always a chain of events not immediately visible to general eye. Crash scene footage or the way certain items are after the fact can say or do nothing this isnt CSI lol!!!

If any facts above are untrue please do correct me.

Thanks

[asuweb]

It means simply that the engines did not respond to a demand for increased thrust. The reasons for this will be the focus of the investigation.

[Pancake]

Eagle21

When they say there was no response from the engines does it mean the engines did not react to the demand?

From the AAIB today:

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.

So the answer is 'yes'.
P.

[Luc Lion]

Originally Posted by H.Finn

...
At some point, it was discovered that there was a huge chunk of ice floating in the fuel tank of one of the aircraft, as the condenced water never had time to melt...

Ice floating on Jet A1, I'm having problem understanding this.
Ice has a density of 0.9167 kg/L at 0°C
Jet A1 has a density of 0.775–0.840 kg/L at 15°C (ref density being 0.81)
Their density will increase at lower temperatures with some differential, but not to the point of inverting their 10% difference...

[interpreter]

Getting to the root cause.....

Jump Seat 777. Well you certainly gave it to us. Well done - and thanks for taking all the time to put that lot together. I must confess that as a mere ex-RAF and now PPL the shear/vortex theory met the description of violent banking and porpoising on late finals with high engine noise. Just goes to show how wrong one can be. Obviously the old adage "convert speed to height" whenever you can worked and full marks to the officer with hands on.

Looking forward to hearing the full story, especially what steps the flight deck took to remedy the problems as they arose arose. One question: was the lower than normal glide path due to reduced power or was more power demanded as final flap selected? Is final flap selected on the 777 earlier than 600 feet - especially in gusty conditions?

[PlatinumFlyer]

Possible A/T problem? The report says the A/T tried twice, then the crew pushed the throttles. What would have happened if they disconnected the A/T, THEN pushed the throttles. I realize time was short.

[BGQ]

B777 Autothrottle

PJ2 the B777 does not have an equivalent for the airbus min groundspeed function

[frangatang]

Now perhaps the cabin crew can stop yapping away to each other when coming into land and bloody well pay attention in the last moments of flight. Brickbats to my cabin crew who were in great celebration at this event when we arrived some time later and spent an hour waiting for stand,which gave the precious dears a box4 plus overtime. Certainly know where their priorities lie!

[jwcook]

First off - well done ...

Now can anyone tell me if both the power buses failed if that would effect the engines in this way?.

As I understand it and please correct me if I'm wrong, the 777 FCS reverts back to a secondary mode then fails over to a very basic mode then finally to a last cable and pulley system for a few selected control surfaces.

If this was the case then I agree with the guy who said the pilots\crew deserve medals as big a as fryingpans....

Cheers

[BGQ]

Cockpit communications

Lets just get one thing right please. Every pilot professional or not is taught to Aviate (fly the plane) Navigate and then communicate in that order. With any low level emergency it is extremely likely that the flight deck crew are not going to get as far as communicate that is why we have highly trained professionals in the cabin who are trained to act on their own initiative in this type of circumstance.

[Clandestino]

It already did. There was fuel in the tanks - untill they ruptured following hard landing, that is.

[fox niner]

To Flip flop flyer and others who think pprune sucks bigtime: take it easy. If you really want to know what happened, log on to this site. Just take a look at the Gol-embraer accident in brazil and the ensuing thread. or take a look at the Congonhas 737 overrun thread. There are a lot of real professionals on this planet, and somehow they all meet here. That is a great resource! It is free, accessible to everyone and 24/7.
Sure, there will be sub-standard remarks by some.
But also remarks by people who actually know a lot of stuff. And they will keep the quality of the discussion in check.

When they say there was no response from the engines does it mean the engines did not react to the demand?

That is correct. The engines did not react at all (apparently). It is like flooring the pedal in your car and nothing happens.
---------------------------
Now, I have been thinking...... What strikes me as possibly relevant is that both engines failed to respond to A/T input simultaneously. What makes these two engines, fitted on this 777, not unique?

1. they are/have been in the same, identical ambient conditions from PEK to LHR. ---- cold soak problem of some sort?
2. they are consuming the same fuel.---- bad quality uplifted in china?

I would discount fuel starvation. It says in the AAIB preliminary report that a lot of fuel was leaking from the plane. So evidently there was some on board. Also, suppose the crew left the crossfeed open and forgot to close it, when balancing fuel. And thereby depleting one wing tank. This I find very unlikely. Because if that is what happened, one engine would quit before the other one does. This is because the engine, which is further from the wing tank that is being used, gets to consume the fuel that is in the crossfeed. It will give you about a minute's worth of additional fuel.
So in my more or less educated opinion, no fuel starvation. Not from one wing tank, and also not from both wing tanks. (i.e. 0000 kgs on board)

Bad fuel quality is always a possibility.
Also, some computer glitch. I have no clue at all.

Once again, two engines don't fail at exactly the same time. To me that sounds relevant.
Anyone else?

[Bill.Martin]

Electrical Power Failure Question (#461) Followup

Now can anyone tell me if both the power buses failed if that would effect the engines in this way?.

I can't claim any B777 specific knowledge, but interesting question nonetheless as we are talking about an aircraft with FADEC.

So, at the risk of starting a Red Herring swimming, it's worth noting that there have been at least 12 reported incidents of power supply disruption on type, 3 of them classed as Major by Investigators, as detailed in AAIB SB/2007/2 ...

[AirScrew]

I want to join those ahead of me on this thread and say that I am very dismayed at the content of this thread.

PPrune founders and moderators. You have a great forum.

To the Professional Pilots on this thread, and the amateur pilots behaving professionally: Congratulations on trying to keep a level head when all around you are losing theirs.

To the myriad of other pilots, amateur, pro, whatever, I am disconcerted and disgusted at your lack of professionalism.

I cannot imagine another profession/industry where such uninformed nonsense is pedaled in public. As a rough estimate, more than 50% of respondents who look like professionals' and quote facts, are so inept and wide of the mark, that they show their professional and industry in a very poor light. This can do nothing more than give the press on this forum the impression that there sporadic and patchy training and no SOP's.

It also worries me greatly when I ask myself how many of the 'pilots' on this forum could have coped with such a circumstance. Whatever the cause, it has to be handled. The lack of clarity, thoughtful analysis, and consistency is astounding.