BA038 Crew get BA safety Medal
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I recommend you learn how to use a search engine. There are plenty of references to the qty of fuel remaining and comments by the AAIB on that as well.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: France
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn’t ask you to recommend something.
I am asking a simple question:
What was the exact quantity of fuel remaining on board at the end of this trip and available on each tank on short final?
Are you able to give me an accurate answer?
Initial report, 18 January 2008
“A significant amount of fuel leaked from the aircraft but there was no fire.”
This is not an accurate answer
Initial report update, 24 January 2008:
“Recorded data indicates that an adequate fuel quantity was on board the aircraft”
This is not an accurate answer
Special Bulletin, 18 February 2008:
- I read nothing about the exact fuel quantity remaining or may be I miss something
Special Bulletin, 12 May 2008:
- I read nothing about the exact fuel quantity remaining or may be I miss something
I am asking a simple question:
What was the exact quantity of fuel remaining on board at the end of this trip and available on each tank on short final?
Are you able to give me an accurate answer?
Initial report, 18 January 2008
“A significant amount of fuel leaked from the aircraft but there was no fire.”
This is not an accurate answer
Initial report update, 24 January 2008:
“Recorded data indicates that an adequate fuel quantity was on board the aircraft”
This is not an accurate answer
Special Bulletin, 18 February 2008:
- I read nothing about the exact fuel quantity remaining or may be I miss something
Special Bulletin, 12 May 2008:
- I read nothing about the exact fuel quantity remaining or may be I miss something
Last edited by Captain Coue; 5th Aug 2008 at 09:36.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I'll take pity on you and do a Google search. About 10.5 tonnes is the favourite answer, although what was in each tank isn't specified in any of what I looked at.
It really isn't hard to put "ba038 fuel remaining" into Google and skim through the results.
Why do you need to know the exact quantity? The fact that there was adequate fuel is enough to discount lack of fuel in the tanks as an option.
It really isn't hard to put "ba038 fuel remaining" into Google and skim through the results.
Why do you need to know the exact quantity? The fact that there was adequate fuel is enough to discount lack of fuel in the tanks as an option.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: France
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These are only rumours.
There is no information about the accurate quantity of fuel in any official report and fuel on board may be located on a tank which is not directly supplying an engine.
There is no information about the accurate quantity of fuel in any official report and fuel on board may be located on a tank which is not directly supplying an engine.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BA Safety Medal.
Be under no illusion this a BA PR exercise that is in place only to produce great publicity. Any major incident involving crew who complete their SOP's correctly are always labelled ''Hero’s'' in the BA news. Many intelligent ground staff have started to comment on this reference and frankly we are seeing it as a bit of a joke. The B777 crew did a great job but I would argue that many many pilots would have achieved the same result; after all with no power there is only one direction to follow...towards the runway. An incident happened two years ago that illustrates my point. This involved a fuel pump replacement that went badly wrong with PAX onboard. The mechanics and LAE involved attempted to re-insert the pump after the housing mechanically failed with the subsequent gushing of fuel from the wing. The guys literally were standing under a shower of fuel (which temporarily burns the skin) and refused to leave this position until the housing was re-sealed. Why? Because of the 130 plus humans on board. They are heroes because they had an option to run but refused too. BA news did not run an article and they received no BA safety medal. I believe the reason for this is because the publicity would be perceived as bad therefore it would be better not to give it any profile, which in my opinion makes a mockery of the whole principle of the award. When we read of heroic cabin crew looking after a heart attack victim we admire them but we also feel a little bemused.
Be under no illusion this a BA PR exercise that is in place only to produce great publicity. Any major incident involving crew who complete their SOP's correctly are always labelled ''Hero’s'' in the BA news. Many intelligent ground staff have started to comment on this reference and frankly we are seeing it as a bit of a joke. The B777 crew did a great job but I would argue that many many pilots would have achieved the same result; after all with no power there is only one direction to follow...towards the runway. An incident happened two years ago that illustrates my point. This involved a fuel pump replacement that went badly wrong with PAX onboard. The mechanics and LAE involved attempted to re-insert the pump after the housing mechanically failed with the subsequent gushing of fuel from the wing. The guys literally were standing under a shower of fuel (which temporarily burns the skin) and refused to leave this position until the housing was re-sealed. Why? Because of the 130 plus humans on board. They are heroes because they had an option to run but refused too. BA news did not run an article and they received no BA safety medal. I believe the reason for this is because the publicity would be perceived as bad therefore it would be better not to give it any profile, which in my opinion makes a mockery of the whole principle of the award. When we read of heroic cabin crew looking after a heart attack victim we admire them but we also feel a little bemused.
None but a blockhead
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London, UK
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The B777 crew did a great job but I would argue that many many pilots would have achieved the same result; after all with no power there is only one direction to follow...towards the runway.
The guys literally were standing under a shower of fuel (which temporarily burns the skin) and refused to leave this position until the housing was re-sealed.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Cue-fuel quantity
Wel said Captain Cue:
I asked this very question about midway through the numerous pages on the original thread and whilst not getting flamed, the mods saw fit to remove the post for what ever reason. Like you, I believe there has never been a definitive statement of the quantity aboard, only AAIB references to "indications of sufficient fuel" or similar words.
I just do not get why there so many on here who, even if they cannot answer someone's straightforward question feel obliged to give condescending instructions on search facilities etc. If you don't know, don't reply....at all....easy.
I asked this very question about midway through the numerous pages on the original thread and whilst not getting flamed, the mods saw fit to remove the post for what ever reason. Like you, I believe there has never been a definitive statement of the quantity aboard, only AAIB references to "indications of sufficient fuel" or similar words.
I just do not get why there so many on here who, even if they cannot answer someone's straightforward question feel obliged to give condescending instructions on search facilities etc. If you don't know, don't reply....at all....easy.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>Initial report update, 24 January 2008:
>Recorded data indicates that an adequate fuel quantity
>was on board the aircraft”
>
>This is not an accurate answer
Agreed, but I feel it fully addresses your implied criticism of the award.
It's reasonably safe to assume BA is involved in the investigation and they have had sight of the info the AAIB used to make that statement.
It's not clear that the exact quantity will ever be known due to the damage. This thread is about the award. Discussion on the cause has it's own rather larger thread.
>Recorded data indicates that an adequate fuel quantity
>was on board the aircraft”
>
>This is not an accurate answer
Agreed, but I feel it fully addresses your implied criticism of the award.
It's reasonably safe to assume BA is involved in the investigation and they have had sight of the info the AAIB used to make that statement.
It's not clear that the exact quantity will ever be known due to the damage. This thread is about the award. Discussion on the cause has it's own rather larger thread.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: France
Age: 74
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote Pontius
'We KNOW this was not 'pilot error' or caused by any misdeed by the flight crew.'
We know nothing of the sort, the official investigation reports have ruled nothing in or out and have revealed very little of the crews actions.
I dont want to cast aspersions on the crew who were very unfortunate to be faced with a desperate situation which any normal humans would have found very difficult to cope with no matter how good the training or the individuals concerned.
I sincerely hope this crew will finally be exonerated and that will be the end of the matter.
But I am very critical of this political award which tries to preempt the final report by making heroes of people just for being there in their normal job capacity. It devalues any award system and lowers the industry to the level of the sensational journalist who typically reports, 'The crew nursed the bird stricken jumbo onto the runway, narrowly avoiding schools and built up areas' - embarassing to any professional.
'We KNOW this was not 'pilot error' or caused by any misdeed by the flight crew.'
We know nothing of the sort, the official investigation reports have ruled nothing in or out and have revealed very little of the crews actions.
I dont want to cast aspersions on the crew who were very unfortunate to be faced with a desperate situation which any normal humans would have found very difficult to cope with no matter how good the training or the individuals concerned.
I sincerely hope this crew will finally be exonerated and that will be the end of the matter.
But I am very critical of this political award which tries to preempt the final report by making heroes of people just for being there in their normal job capacity. It devalues any award system and lowers the industry to the level of the sensational journalist who typically reports, 'The crew nursed the bird stricken jumbo onto the runway, narrowly avoiding schools and built up areas' - embarassing to any professional.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: West Anglia
Age: 54
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just read through this thread, and **** me, there are some bitter tw@ts out there, arent there?
Yes this medal has a PR side to it - in the worst era for air travel in a long time, any small reason to choose one company over another has to be capitalised upon. Messrs Branson, O'Leary and Stelios would have been all over this like a yeast infection if it had happened to their crews. Sadly, our glorious PR dept did their usual half-@rsed job and it was lucky if it made page 12 of the Pontefract Pig Breeders Gazette.
But whatever the reason, the crew did their job and made vital decisions which seem small in the cold light of day, but which stopped that 777 being part of Hounslow. Some pax didn't even know they'd crashed, for chrissake!! They could get any award in the world (always fancied the Order of Lenin myself), but I suspect the knowledge that they and their pax lived to tell the tale is all the thanks they care about.
Well done sirs and madams (ooer), I would tip my hat to you if I ever wore it.
And to all the 'they were just doing their job' and 'I wouldn't have done it like that' knobs: do try and be quiet, there's good chaps. They've done it, and done it well. You haven't, and hopefully will never have to.
Yes this medal has a PR side to it - in the worst era for air travel in a long time, any small reason to choose one company over another has to be capitalised upon. Messrs Branson, O'Leary and Stelios would have been all over this like a yeast infection if it had happened to their crews. Sadly, our glorious PR dept did their usual half-@rsed job and it was lucky if it made page 12 of the Pontefract Pig Breeders Gazette.
But whatever the reason, the crew did their job and made vital decisions which seem small in the cold light of day, but which stopped that 777 being part of Hounslow. Some pax didn't even know they'd crashed, for chrissake!! They could get any award in the world (always fancied the Order of Lenin myself), but I suspect the knowledge that they and their pax lived to tell the tale is all the thanks they care about.
Well done sirs and madams (ooer), I would tip my hat to you if I ever wore it.
And to all the 'they were just doing their job' and 'I wouldn't have done it like that' knobs: do try and be quiet, there's good chaps. They've done it, and done it well. You haven't, and hopefully will never have to.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
**** me, there are some bitter tw@ts out there, arent there?
It was predictable that my thread would be interpreted as bitter. I can assure you that the crew are very much admired by all BA staff, we are very proud of their achievement. The purpose of my writing was to illustrate the inconstancy of the awards role.
Nobody is bitter and we are not tw@ts …please save your crudeness for your drinking mates and not a professional forum.
It was predictable that my thread would be interpreted as bitter. I can assure you that the crew are very much admired by all BA staff, we are very proud of their achievement. The purpose of my writing was to illustrate the inconstancy of the awards role.
Nobody is bitter and we are not tw@ts …please save your crudeness for your drinking mates and not a professional forum.
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Coue
From page 2 of the report;
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/cms_resou...8%20G-YMMM.pdf
"The total fuel on board was indicating 10,500kg which was distributed almost equally between the left and right main fuel tanks with a minor imbalance of about 300kg."
Dave
From page 2 of the report;
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/cms_resou...8%20G-YMMM.pdf
"The total fuel on board was indicating 10,500kg which was distributed almost equally between the left and right main fuel tanks with a minor imbalance of about 300kg."
Dave
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: West Anglia
Age: 54
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flintstone
Quite correct, thanks.
***thread drift alert***
Another TD
Try and read and interpret posts properly - you'd see I agree with you. I didn't comment on your very justified annoyance at the lack of recognition in the incident you highlight because it isn't relevant here. Instead of pontificating about it anonymously on a 'professional' forum, why not do the 'professional' thing and push the case for an award with management?
3,2,1....and we're back on the thread.
Quite correct, thanks.
***thread drift alert***
Another TD
Try and read and interpret posts properly - you'd see I agree with you. I didn't comment on your very justified annoyance at the lack of recognition in the incident you highlight because it isn't relevant here. Instead of pontificating about it anonymously on a 'professional' forum, why not do the 'professional' thing and push the case for an award with management?
3,2,1....and we're back on the thread.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Up front
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Flintstone,
The non issue/recognition for Honours, Awards and medals.
Pop this up on the military forum and you will see that you are not alone. Make no mistake the "higher ups" will be much more condusive when they can gain something. How many VC`s at Rorkes Drift after Insandlwana?
Make no mistake I am not taking anything away from any of these gentleman! Thats just the way it is, I have received gongs because I was in the right place at the right time - or was that the wrong time at the right place seen by the right people....
.
If you feel strongly enough about it and you have all the details, put it in black and white and submit it.
The non issue/recognition for Honours, Awards and medals.
Pop this up on the military forum and you will see that you are not alone. Make no mistake the "higher ups" will be much more condusive when they can gain something. How many VC`s at Rorkes Drift after Insandlwana?
Make no mistake I am not taking anything away from any of these gentleman! Thats just the way it is, I have received gongs because I was in the right place at the right time - or was that the wrong time at the right place seen by the right people....
.If you feel strongly enough about it and you have all the details, put it in black and white and submit it.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: WGS 84
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the very few AAIB information we know that the crew did let the AP fly the aircraft without enough power. As a result the speed decayed until AP disconnection while it tried to keep the plane on glide. this was followed by a high fpm sink till the ground. I don't see anything to be rewarded since there is no mention of any crew action in here...
Any basic ppl student learns that on engine failure during final the best way is to go below the glide in order to keep speed and store kinetic energy since it the only way to control an aircraft and to flare with a low speed/fpm impact.
In the BA case there is obviously a very innovative way of managing dead stick landings since the "strategy" was to "burn" all of the available kinetic energy. As a result, with no more kinetic energy to control the path, the aircraft was controlled by its potential energy which threw it to the ground and resulted in substantial damages.
Can anybody elaborate on the advantages on keeping the AP fly the glide on a dead stick approach (which is opposite to the fundamentals taught in any correct flight school) ?
I'd bet the guys realized lately they had a lack of power and that when they tried to apply manual power the speed was already so low that it resulted in AP disconnection. They are not to be blamed at all, but I still don't see any heroes. To be a hero you usually have to perform an heroic act. What I'm just asking here is what could have been the possible heroic acts that this crew could have performed ?
Any basic ppl student learns that on engine failure during final the best way is to go below the glide in order to keep speed and store kinetic energy since it the only way to control an aircraft and to flare with a low speed/fpm impact.
In the BA case there is obviously a very innovative way of managing dead stick landings since the "strategy" was to "burn" all of the available kinetic energy. As a result, with no more kinetic energy to control the path, the aircraft was controlled by its potential energy which threw it to the ground and resulted in substantial damages.
Can anybody elaborate on the advantages on keeping the AP fly the glide on a dead stick approach (which is opposite to the fundamentals taught in any correct flight school) ?
I'd bet the guys realized lately they had a lack of power and that when they tried to apply manual power the speed was already so low that it resulted in AP disconnection. They are not to be blamed at all, but I still don't see any heroes. To be a hero you usually have to perform an heroic act. What I'm just asking here is what could have been the possible heroic acts that this crew could have performed ?
Last edited by sispanys ria; 8th Aug 2008 at 17:38.