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 20th Jan 2008, 02:59
  #941 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,187
Today, 13:20 #729 Seggy
Instead of being 'just another number' I could order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, NY
Age: 25
Posts: 9


It is going to be interesting to see the FINAL accident investigation report. There is going to be a lot of 'politicing' going on behind the scenes with this one.

Great job to the flight and cabin crew.
Last edited by Seggy : Today at 13:35. Reason: typo



Well, I find it interesting that you comment about the 'behind the scenes politicing' that will go on and then contribute to what can cause it... by praising people before the facts are known. If the facts don't support the public praise it certainly puts the investigators in a tough spot, doesn't it?

U.S lead safety investigator - "we have to be careful how we handle this. The press has made a hero out of this guy." This after finding some unexplainable behavior during the investigation. Yes, they're aware of public sentiments and pressure.

The comments about 'speed reduced'(AAIB), 'stickshaker'(London Times), and 'dropped in from 10 feet'(pprune post allegedly quoting news report), could be spun to make a complete different story. Until the facts are released I think we should wait before we start cheering or pointing fingers.

None of us know what really happened. The investigators aren't talking. Give it time....
misd-agin is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 03:02
  #942 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Helsinki
Age: 43
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by slink View Post
From the AIP: 27L PAPI 420M in from THR, MEHT 65ft.

So, the PAPI (roughly in the middle of the touchdown zone, TDZ), is inset 420 metres from the painted threshold (not necessarily the end of the tarmac). The glidepath will "aim" at the same point, being calibrated to achieve this.
If with "glidepath" you also mean the ILS glidepath, this doesn't appear to be so for 27L according to the PATC, the Aerodrome Chart and the actual runway markings as visible from satellite pictures.

The PACT lists the threshold altitude as 56 ft from the runway surface (as opposed to 65 ft for PAPI).
56 / tan(3) = 1068,5 ft = 325,7 m

Also see the AC and the Google Maps picture. The PAPI line (the western white north-south oriented line drawn on the southern edge of the runway) is about 100 m from the eastern line which marks the position of the ILS GP antenna and aimpoint in relation to the runway). The PAPI line mark is at the start of the visual aiming point markings on the junction with taxiway Victor.

Not that this would make any difference to how much the aircraft fell short, because when flying manually in good weather you would aim more towards the PAPI line and touch down a little bit even after that with a good flare, but just to be really anal about the numbers.
EFHF is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 03:11
  #943 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 100
Watcher Zero, where did this information come from?

You mention "published", but by whom and what was the source?

It is worthless unless the source is credible, and I'd have to suggest that the investigators wouldn't be releasing bits and pieces at this stage.
KaptinZZ is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 03:25
  #944 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 324
Fuel Icing Inhibitor Uplift

It's likely that this paragraph from Belgique's linked article (post 940) will be the operative issue:
.

"Overall, it's shades of the previous GE90 "rollback" and IFSD's (inflight shutdowns) from earlier days. The only difference was in those cases, it was in cruise and was caused by moisture freezing in the P3B and PS3 lines to the FADEC, and it was resolved by increasing the tubing diameters."

.

Methinks that frozen fuel pressure reference lines identically influencing each FADEC's outputs would stand the best chance of uniformly affecting both engines (for identical reasons - and perhaps related to Beijing's fuel quality and the amount of FSII icing inhibitor included in the fuel uplift being inadequate).
Those reference line thickness parameters are unlikely to differ overmuch between engine types.
UNCTUOUS is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 03:27
  #945 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3
The AAIB had a press confrence and released their "preliminary findings" to the media.
WatcherZero is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 03:41
  #946 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 4
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_ne...ial_report.cfm

Funny that the AAIB have a press conference that gives details that confict with their official report. If they made a press release, a transcript would be available.
lesthegringo is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 03:52
  #947 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 474
Does anyone know if the fuel source in Bejing has yet been tested and any findings?
Shore Guy is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 04:04
  #948 (permalink)  
The Reverend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Shore Guy,

ZBAA is the second busiest airport in Asia with some 1,100 movements/day. The fuel is international standard A1. I think you can forget the contamination theory. A lot of aircraft would have fallen out of the sky on January 17th, if that was the case.
HotDog is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 04:05
  #949 (permalink)  
Location, Location, Location
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If it moves, watch it like a hawk: If it doesn't, hit it with a hammer until it does...
Age: 57
Posts: 142
None of us know what really happened. The investigators aren't talking. Give it time....
Best Fuggin' post in 48 pages. I'm with you mate.....
mocoman is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2008, 04:21
  #950 (permalink)  

aka Capt PPRuNe
 
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Thread closed to due to unwieldy nature of such a large amount of amateur hypothesising interspread with some real knowledgeable nuggets.

Initial report out and new thread started. Hopefully we'll be able to keep the pretenders and dipsticks more at bay on that one.
Danny is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.