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 17th Jan 2008, 18:47
  #41 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the shadow of R101
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the event of fuel being low enough for both engines to flame out, there would be ample time to declare a fuel emergency well before this occurred and so obtain priority approach clearance.

This doesn't appear to have been what happened today, so another mechanism is likely to have been in play.

As for ruptured tanks, I would expect the fuselage tanks to be empty after a long flight, and I assume that the u/c legs are designed to break free without major structural damage, particularly to the wing fuel tanks. I don't know how much fuel spilled and it's hard to tell from the photos I've seen.
Feathers McGraw is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 18:48
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rather strangely, a friend of a friend (stay with me) recorded the whole event on his video camera.

Long story short - said friend of friend was killing time at LHR with his camcorder while his missus was in an interview at BA, and by fortunate quirk of fate was in the right place at the right time and filmed the lot.

The 'authorities' have got his footage and he's going to be in the news tonight. He said News At Ten - which should be ITV, but not 100% sure.

Don't know if the news people have got the footage also.
harrogate is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 18:54
  #43 (permalink)  
Junior trash
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Given that the damage appears to have disrupted the fuel tanks and that there was no ensuing inferno...despite the sparks.....this coupled with the alleged glide approach points a finger very firmly in one direction. Fuel, or rather absence of it.
Classic piece of uninformed speculation there tinytim (nothing to do with your issues with BA obviously?)

1. Few sparks because they landed on sodden grass
2. BBC have been reporting that there was plenty of fuel in the tanks for several hours
3. Why would the fire brigade foam the broken wing of an unburning aircraft unless there was fuel in or around it.
Hotel Mode is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 18:56
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: land of the long BLUE cloud
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lack of fuel has got to be rubbish. That sort of emergency would have been declared long before.

LACK OF FIRE DOES NOT MEAN LACK OF FUEL!!

Very cold Jet-A1 wont catch fire very easily...
outofsynch is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 19:22
  #45 (permalink)  

Official PPRuNe Chaplain
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Both engines failed? On a 777? How many duplicated and redundant systems would need to fail for that to happen?

I've heard and read some wonderful speculation this afternoon. Who are these "experts" that keep getting drafted in? I worry that I may be missing out on a profitable niche as a self-appointed expert in something.
Keef is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 19:25
  #46 (permalink)  

PPRuNe Secret Agent!



Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe the PPRuNe server is saving us from silly speculation!

I agree with WWW, thought Mr Welsh came off incredibly well in his interview. Jim Mc from BALPA also came off quite well, I liked his comment "we should sit on our hands until we get the facts and not speculate"

I hope a certain LHR based B777 crew are enjoying a drink or two this evening...well done guys!
JB007 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 19:39
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern england
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Vortex wake may be in the frame as BAW038 was following another 'heavy' down the approach.
Rage is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 19:46
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Near sheep!
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anyone know if wind from 220 poses a turbulence threat on 27L??
As far as I was aware it was only when the wind crosses the main terminal areas towards the landing rwy that it occurs?

No doubt that would not be the cause, but weather has got to be the main player.....whats the chances of running dry on short finals??
WindSheer is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 19:53
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There's going to be loads of people practicing flight sims on their PCs tonight so we can have the definitive answers by tomorrow. (No I don't have one installed )

It'll be interesting to see the cause once the fog of disinformation has cleared.

I bet the pax in the seats next to the port undercarriage had a bigger shock than most, it looks rather close for comfort.

Interesting assertion from the local MP, who claims that had it lost power fifteen minutes earlier, it would have landed on central London. Methinks it would have had enough altitude for a decent glide out to open space.

Well done to all concerned for making a landing good enough to walk away from.
llondel is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:13
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BA LHR accident

Could have very well been catastrophic failure of power and avionics, and if so the pilot did extremely well. Media making a big deal out of the fact there was no mayday, but bearing in mind the failure probably only seconds before crash landing, this is not surprising.
Media 'bigging' it up once again - it would appear most the passengers didnt even know the flight had crash landed. Obviously a serious incident, but no need to make it so dramatic. Re the above comment, couldnt agree more - this 777 would have glided well clear of London.
Just spoken to friend at AAIB - still no decision been made yet about recovery and whether its heading off to F/b.
oliverpollard is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:18
  #51 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the flight crew

if anybody knows who was on the flight deck I would love to hear from you. please email [email protected] or ring my mobile 07769 977665.
best wishes
Ian Shoesmith
BBC News
shoey1976 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:31
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Regard remark above about APU door open, doesn't 777 APU autostart in these circumstances?
manrow is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:37
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here, there and everywhere
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BBC inaccuarcies...

Don't you just hate the news channels for their lack of facts and for over-cooking what facts they do have? Take one quote on the BBC news page about this incident:
Eyewitness John Rowland, who was driving on the nearby M4 motorway, said: "The plane's wheels collapsed, doors were flown open.
1. The M4 runs roughly east-west and to the north of 27R (yes there is the spur road, but even that goes nowhere near 27L). Therefore the aircraft would not have flown over the M4 on approach.

2. The taxi driver John Rowland has already said on Sky News when interviewed that he was on the Southern Perimeter Road - not really the M4 BBC is it?!

This is just one of many things being embellished by the various news channels and it really gets my back up...why on earth won't they just report the facts then wait for the conclusions? All this scare-mongering and sensationalistic journalism does my head in!!!

The over-exaggerations remind me of a BMA A320 at DTV in 2006 which had a compressor stall on applying takeoff power. There was a flame from number 2 engine and it stopped immediately....the local rag reported a "miraculous escape" despite it doing a whole 20-50kts max!! (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=240343).

Anyway, I venture off topic...rant at the media over. Well done to the crew for getting the aircraft down and getting everyone off safely. I'm very interested to hear what the cause(s) are of this.


-HD-

P.S. This post has taken best part of an hour to send due to "server busy"!!!
HeathrowDictator is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:39
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Love the way there's only 3 pages to this thread because no-one can get on pprune today due 'server too busy'!!

The best thing is it's stopped most of the bulls*** speculation we normally get. I trust no professional Pilot will respond to Ian Shoesmith's plea for the names of the Pilots involved. Last thing they need is press on their doorstep. LEAVE THEM ALONE!!
Propellerhead is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:41
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here, there and everywhere
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BBC inaccuarcies...

Agreed with WindSheer - Mr. Shoesmith, I suggest you focus on reporting the facts and not trying to name or contact the flight crew who I would imagine the last thing they would want to do is talk to the media!!!

-HD-
HeathrowDictator is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:47
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 722
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If both engines have flamed out, the APU will autostart. It takes about 1 minute to start.
the RAT does not seem to be deployed. view could be blocked by the slide at door 2R...
fox niner is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:56
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I have lots of questions, but suspect it's way too early to ask 99% of them.

As a carry over from the earlier thread discussions on all power lost etc.

I assume that if both engines go down then this aircraft immediately reverts to battery power for essentials.

Would these essentials include power for communication between the flight deck and the cabin crew of the state of emergency?

or: is it likely that the Flight crew priority would be totally devoted to a puckered checklist for achieving a runway landing?
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 20:59
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: A place with no name
Age: 46
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Right...

No speculation etc from me, just wondering why there aren't camera's filming approaches and take-off's given that most incidents happen at these stages of flight and that cost of storing these videos will not be prohibitive - nor would the equipment mind you.

Just glad this wasn't more serious!
SoundBarrier is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 21:03
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mr Shoesmith, whilst I applaud your honesty and transparency in your request for information, I don't think you will find anyone on here willing to divulge crewmembers names.

I'm sure BA's media department will arrange a full press call and photoshoot with the crew if the AAIB report shows they were in any way heroic.
luvly jubbly is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 21:04
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why is the server so busy today????


Whatever may have happened - it appears that at some point the crew made a reasonably good job out of a bad situation.
Lafyar Cokov 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.