BA038 (B777) Thread
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
preferrably taken from the rear in the direction of flight?
(and there must be a few 'matron' comments regarding that quotation too
)PS: regarding the 777 photo, what's Capt Cheapskate going to do now he's left his Holiday Inn pen behind
Let's hope he got a new pen on his IAD nightstop 
.
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at the graphs in the AAIB report, it would appear to me that if the crew had brought the flaps up to 20 and and accepted a speed close to the F30 bug speed (i.e the go around speed) with the remaining residual thrust there would have been a very good chance of getting the aircraft down in one piece. ( I write this as a retired 767 capt so am not familiar with the 777).
This is not a reflection on the crew of the aircraft but a suggestion for the future, has anyone tried it in the sim?
This is not a reflection on the crew of the aircraft but a suggestion for the future, has anyone tried it in the sim?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Subterranea
Age: 70
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at the graphs in the AAIB report, it would appear to me that if the crew had brought the flaps up to 20 and and accepted a speed close to the F30 bug speed (i.e the go around speed) with the remaining residual thrust there would have been a very good chance of getting the aircraft down in one piece.
Not sure if that factor would have influenced the circumstances on the already rollbacked engines in this accident. In other words, if it would have restricted the already limited fuel flow even more or not. Hard to tell as long as the cause of the restrictions has yet to be revealed.
Another recent rollback is under investigation:
NTSB investigates Heathrow-like Trent 800 engine issue
Green-dot
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jacksonville, Fl, US
Age: 84
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ba 038 777 Accident Remains Unresolved
It may be quite important that professional pilots continue to follow this thread. Yes, the AAIB and the NTSB have published information which will probably lead to a conclusion.
It should be very important to all who seriously contribute to this network that vigilance is important.
What happened to BA038 has not been satisfactorily explained. The corrective action makes sense. Nevertheless, the entire aviation community who live at high altitudes, in cold temperatures, for extended periods of time need to follow this thread.
I trust the official investigation teams and the people who support them. I also know from almost 80 years of experience in my family that truth follows examination.
What happened to BA038 is unacceptable. Stay on this thread and contribute.
The AAIB and the NTSB, Boeing and RR are to be trusted. We are the people who make that trust valid. Keep this thread alive.
Tom
It should be very important to all who seriously contribute to this network that vigilance is important.
What happened to BA038 has not been satisfactorily explained. The corrective action makes sense. Nevertheless, the entire aviation community who live at high altitudes, in cold temperatures, for extended periods of time need to follow this thread.
I trust the official investigation teams and the people who support them. I also know from almost 80 years of experience in my family that truth follows examination.
What happened to BA038 is unacceptable. Stay on this thread and contribute.
The AAIB and the NTSB, Boeing and RR are to be trusted. We are the people who make that trust valid. Keep this thread alive.
Tom
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sky9
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 961
Looking at the graphs in the AAIB report, it would appear to me that if the crew had brought the flaps up to 20 and and accepted a speed close to the F30 bug speed (i.e the go around speed) with the remaining residual thrust there would have been a very good chance of getting the aircraft down in one piece. ( I write this as a retired 767 capt so am not familiar with the 777).
This is not a reflection on the crew of the aircraft but a suggestion for the future, has anyone tried it in the sim?
Yes, you can make the runway in the sim.
Flaps 20 is half leading edge slats. Large drag reduction with small increase in approach/stall speed.
Residual thrust was greater than idle.
Slowing below Vref increases drag and decreases your glide performance.
We have 20/20 hindsight, crew had seconds to make the appropriate decisions.
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 961
Looking at the graphs in the AAIB report, it would appear to me that if the crew had brought the flaps up to 20 and and accepted a speed close to the F30 bug speed (i.e the go around speed) with the remaining residual thrust there would have been a very good chance of getting the aircraft down in one piece. ( I write this as a retired 767 capt so am not familiar with the 777).
This is not a reflection on the crew of the aircraft but a suggestion for the future, has anyone tried it in the sim?
Yes, you can make the runway in the sim.
Flaps 20 is half leading edge slats. Large drag reduction with small increase in approach/stall speed.
Residual thrust was greater than idle.
Slowing below Vref increases drag and decreases your glide performance.
We have 20/20 hindsight, crew had seconds to make the appropriate decisions.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: whisk'e'y
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What happened to BA038 has not been satisfactorily explained. The corrective action makes sense. Nevertheless, the entire aviation community who live at high altitudes, in cold temperatures, for extended periods of time need to follow this thread.
Thanks,
Tank
Guest
Posts: n/a
Correctives
Some action was taken by some Carriers within 60 days, and was mostly procedural and related to fueling; one can surmise water checks, dumping and test schedules, etc.My understanding is each Line reacted individually according to SOPS and modifications to station procedures. I haven't seen hard copy, and you may not either, then again, you might. In any case, everything is on this thread, so don't ask me to direct you to it, happy reading.
(You fly 135's or sumthin else?)
AF
(You fly 135's or sumthin else?)
AF
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jacksonville, Fl, US
Age: 84
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
USA FAA Contact URL re BA038 777 Accident
See following URL re USA FAA action re BA038
Justia Regulation Tracker Airworthiness Directives: Boeing Model 777-200 and -300 Series Airplanes Equipped with Rolls-Royce Model RB211-TRENT 800 Series Engines, - Federal Aviation Administration - 52909?52911 [E8?21138]
Justia Regulation Tracker Airworthiness Directives: Boeing Model 777-200 and -300 Series Airplanes Equipped with Rolls-Royce Model RB211-TRENT 800 Series Engines, - Federal Aviation Administration - 52909?52911 [E8?21138]
Last edited by precept; 6th Jan 2009 at 21:38. Reason: Spelling of word Accident
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Belgium
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did they really determine the causes?
Hello!
and later :
Emphasis of mine.
Virtually identical ice release both sides, causing virtually identical fuel restrictions?
I have the feeling that they do issue an AD, for the shake of "doing something" ...
Originally Posted by FAA Proposed AD justification
The investigation determined that over a long period of low power fuel flows and low fuel temperatures associated with cruise flight, ice can accumulate in the main tank fuel feed system and then release as a result of increased fuel flow when high thrust is commanded.
We have determined that the loss of engine thrust was likely due to ice accumulating in the main tank fuel feed system during long exposure to cold fuel temperatures and low power fuel flows. It is necessary to issue interim mitigating actions in order to prevent an additional accident.
Virtually identical ice release both sides, causing virtually identical fuel restrictions?
I have the feeling that they do issue an AD, for the shake of "doing something" ...
Guest
Posts: n/a
bis47
You are on the money. However, the FAA is doing what it does, mitigate challenges to safe flight. Any AD is almost always a compromise, based on real world factors. One could fault the Trent design and suggest swapping out that powerplant for another less sensitive to corrupted fuel.
Holy CRAP, can you imagine? The Trent isn't the problem; in this case it is merely involved in the solution.
Initially, the carriers reacted by massaging their fueling and sourcing dependencies, including emphasizing steps on the book but not being followed.
Missing from the AD, quite naturally, is the politics and economics of yiping about the true culprit. Here is where I find fault with the FAA.
"In Spec.?" A spec isn't arbitrary, but it makes compromises in the real world. "Ice in Fuel?" Not cute, but how much is too much? The triple 7 is a brilliant aircraft, the Trent, like everything RR is an exquisite engineering feat. Chinese Fuel? The Jury is still out. My 2 pence. AF
Aside: If you are still worried about how ETOPS breaks down into a "simultaneous fault", don't be, myself and others have tried to point out that a twin op ends up functioning in unity with late stage homogeneous systems. Making "identical" demands of two engines (autothrottles) operating in a wickedly similar ambient environment produces wickedly similar results, not rocket science. Sometimes, ETOPS isn't. That can't be AD'd. ETOPS solution? One Trent, one GE per a/c. Better solution? get the water out of the Fuel.
AF
Holy CRAP, can you imagine? The Trent isn't the problem; in this case it is merely involved in the solution.
Initially, the carriers reacted by massaging their fueling and sourcing dependencies, including emphasizing steps on the book but not being followed.
Missing from the AD, quite naturally, is the politics and economics of yiping about the true culprit. Here is where I find fault with the FAA.
"In Spec.?" A spec isn't arbitrary, but it makes compromises in the real world. "Ice in Fuel?" Not cute, but how much is too much? The triple 7 is a brilliant aircraft, the Trent, like everything RR is an exquisite engineering feat. Chinese Fuel? The Jury is still out. My 2 pence. AF
Aside: If you are still worried about how ETOPS breaks down into a "simultaneous fault", don't be, myself and others have tried to point out that a twin op ends up functioning in unity with late stage homogeneous systems. Making "identical" demands of two engines (autothrottles) operating in a wickedly similar ambient environment produces wickedly similar results, not rocket science. Sometimes, ETOPS isn't. That can't be AD'd. ETOPS solution? One Trent, one GE per a/c. Better solution? get the water out of the Fuel.
AF
Last edited by airfoilmod; 7th Jan 2009 at 11:35.
Guest
Posts: n/a
DC-8
Four engines over water, period? That's what I thought when ETOPS hit the pilot lounge, and I reacted the same way. I was made to feel like a reactionary and dinosaur. But that was also when four engines meant four hot pipes, loud flow through a single orifice. What calms my psyche when I fly twins over the Pacific these days, is that I'm flying two hyper dependable propellor engines. Basically, (very basically) ducted thrust turbo-props. I'm still a prop guy at heart, so call me old fashioned.
I'm not so sure Al wouldn't have preferred to have been flying over water when #2 exploded over Sioux City. Forced landings are exceedingly rare.
I'm not so sure Al wouldn't have preferred to have been flying over water when #2 exploded over Sioux City. Forced landings are exceedingly rare.
Guest
Posts: n/a
?
It only takes one. For what? I've had three, all involved still breathing and still flying. The DC-10 fireball at Indiana was survived by many. It had three engines, was flying over a number of suitable asphalt runways, was not ETOPS, (E-THROPS?) and yet 180 people perished. An uncontained Turbine failure. The old arguments were mooted long, long ago. Fuel? That can be a problem anytime. Simultaneous failure? likewise. I will emphatically agree that loss of two engines in ETOPS is doodoo land. It is also a forced landing in a four engined a/c, generally. Think about it. It is certainly a forced landing in a three engined a/c. AF
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"It only takes one. For what? I've had three, all involved still breathing and still flying. The DC-10 fireball at Indiana was survived by many. It had three engines, was flying over a number of suitable asphalt runways, was not ETOPS, (E-THROPS?) and yet 180 people perished. An uncontained Turbine failure."
It only takes one forced landing to ruin your day.
You've had THREE?!?! I'd be buying lottery tickets if I was you.
Are you talking about the UAL in IOWA (not Indiana)? That was kinda "close to home" (same company) so to speak.
It only takes one forced landing to ruin your day.
You've had THREE?!?! I'd be buying lottery tickets if I was you.
Are you talking about the UAL in IOWA (not Indiana)? That was kinda "close to home" (same company) so to speak.
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
misd-agin
I wasn't making any criticism of the crew, the incident was outside the knowledge of the crew and therefore they cannot be criticised for what they did. I was however asking if there was anything that could be learnt from the incident for the future.
We have 20/20 hindsight, crew had seconds to make the appropriate decisions.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Captain
Yes Iowa. Sorry. I think a forced landing has to do with an immediate and unavoidable landing, not whether it is survivable or not, and I don't think three of those is unusual in 40 years of flying. Without looking it up, I think it was Capt. Al Haines? Lots of help in the cockpit, and although the a/c was unflyable, people lived. The accident was powerplant related, the a/c had three engines (at least at T/O), and I think is instructive when discussing the "dangers" of ETOPS. By the way, I've always been fond of Douglas a/c, and if you fly (flew) the friendly skies, you remember my favorite, the DC-6. We may have some mutual acquaintances. AF
I wasn't making any criticism of the crew, the incident was outside the knowledge of the crew and therefore they cannot be criticised for what they did. I was however asking if there was anything that could be learnt from the incident for the future.
Again they certainly did their best but the BA public relation coup is really mind boggling
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Yes Iowa. Sorry. I think a forced landing has to do with an immediate and unavoidable landing, not whether it is survivable or not, and I don't think three of those is unusual in 40 years of flying. Without looking it up, I think it was Capt. Al Haines? Lots of help in the cockpit, and although the a/c was unflyable, people lived. The accident was powerplant related, the a/c had three engines (at least at T/O), and I think is instructive when discussing the "dangers" of ETOPS. By the way, I've always been fond of Douglas a/c, and if you fly (flew) the friendly skies, you remember my favorite, the DC-6. We may have some mutual acquaintances. AF"
Yes, it was Al. Are you saying HE had three forced landings, or you? I'm just thankful I never had ANY in 30 years.
Ah yes, the DC-6/7. First Type Rating. Great machine. Flew all seats. I was the last one off. I still prefer the Connie, but never got a rating in it. Probably why I liked the -8 so much; some similarities with the Connie.
Yup, we probably have some mutuals. I guess we're getting a little off course, however.
Yes, it was Al. Are you saying HE had three forced landings, or you? I'm just thankful I never had ANY in 30 years.
Ah yes, the DC-6/7. First Type Rating. Great machine. Flew all seats. I was the last one off. I still prefer the Connie, but never got a rating in it. Probably why I liked the -8 so much; some similarities with the Connie.
Yup, we probably have some mutuals. I guess we're getting a little off course, however.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jacksonville, Fl, US
Age: 84
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ba 038
This is a pro-forma entry.
Given no futher input from AAIB, NTSB, FAA or other authorities from 14 January 2009 regarding this thread, the members continue to await further science and knowledge.
The BA038 accident remains a serious and unacceptable situation. It is hoped the interim action required by the AD note eliminates the possibility for further issues.
Nevertheless, unresolved causes for accidents and appropriate final correcctive action must be the primary focus of this thread.
Given no futher input from AAIB, NTSB, FAA or other authorities from 14 January 2009 regarding this thread, the members continue to await further science and knowledge.
The BA038 accident remains a serious and unacceptable situation. It is hoped the interim action required by the AD note eliminates the possibility for further issues.
Nevertheless, unresolved causes for accidents and appropriate final correcctive action must be the primary focus of this thread.