Incident at Heathrow
Got to say that there is a serious amount of rubbish being talked about here with respect to diverting to another airport and avoiding built up areas.
On the basis of some of the contributions in this thread London's new airport will be built in the Outer Hebrides with a 16 hour bus transfer to the city.
Had the misfortune to have had far more than my fair share of jet engine failures over the years - the most difficult thing is finding out what the problem is and also the extent of it (the sitting on hands period) - in the meantime, there's a bit of aviating and navigating required and during this period you don't want to up the workload any more than you have to (thinking time) - turning up at a strange airfield who don't expect you whilst you try and find the charts sounds to me, in many cases, like bad airmanship.
The wonderful team at LHR ATC would have had their plan promulgated through LHR tower/app/ground and emerg services within a minute or two of the Airbus rotation and apparent problems.
Going back to understanding what you're problem is and gathering the information to take action - if you've never had a major emergency/failure with an EICAS or ECAM you're in for a shock - 20-40 warnings on the display constantly changing as the priority system keeps changing their order and, of course, what you don't get from reading the cockpit voice recorder transcript - the noise !! The funny thing is, you can have 20-40 warnings and you still don't know what the problem/cause is - the warnings displayed are, in most cases, just the symptoms !
If the guys had panels ripping off I'm sure that much of the information presented to the pilots would have been suspect due to the condition of the sensors.
Great job BA and LHR ATC.
On the basis of some of the contributions in this thread London's new airport will be built in the Outer Hebrides with a 16 hour bus transfer to the city.
Had the misfortune to have had far more than my fair share of jet engine failures over the years - the most difficult thing is finding out what the problem is and also the extent of it (the sitting on hands period) - in the meantime, there's a bit of aviating and navigating required and during this period you don't want to up the workload any more than you have to (thinking time) - turning up at a strange airfield who don't expect you whilst you try and find the charts sounds to me, in many cases, like bad airmanship.
The wonderful team at LHR ATC would have had their plan promulgated through LHR tower/app/ground and emerg services within a minute or two of the Airbus rotation and apparent problems.
Going back to understanding what you're problem is and gathering the information to take action - if you've never had a major emergency/failure with an EICAS or ECAM you're in for a shock - 20-40 warnings on the display constantly changing as the priority system keeps changing their order and, of course, what you don't get from reading the cockpit voice recorder transcript - the noise !! The funny thing is, you can have 20-40 warnings and you still don't know what the problem/cause is - the warnings displayed are, in most cases, just the symptoms !
If the guys had panels ripping off I'm sure that much of the information presented to the pilots would have been suspect due to the condition of the sensors.
Great job BA and LHR ATC.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I think you should try to think how you would cope at the B1 guy who has six or seven aircraft to ramp check, your help ranges from the guy just out of his appreniceship who is smart but inexperienced to the semi-skilled mechanic. It is the early hours of the morning when you circadian rythem is at its low, add to this its pi**ing with rain. The management are on your back needing all your aircraft serviceable, you are chasing spare parts and you are unable to get around the airport because you and three other B1 guys have one van between you.
Now do you get the line maintenance picture ?"
A &C - I hope I would manage to check vital aspects of the work before releasing the aircraft. Mistakes can be made, of course, but although you rightly observe it is not an excuse, it does read like it is.
If your description is the reality of how things are at BA, it is manifestly unsafe. It should be reported to the CAA and AAIB. If no-one wants to risk their jobs spilling the beans, get in touch with Channel 4's Dispatches programme...
Now do you get the line maintenance picture ?"
A &C - I hope I would manage to check vital aspects of the work before releasing the aircraft. Mistakes can be made, of course, but although you rightly observe it is not an excuse, it does read like it is.
If your description is the reality of how things are at BA, it is manifestly unsafe. It should be reported to the CAA and AAIB. If no-one wants to risk their jobs spilling the beans, get in touch with Channel 4's Dispatches programme...
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Away from home Rat
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great reactions from LHR and the two guys in the front. As for the rest of the people on here ranting about the locking mechanisms on A320 series fan cowls, the system isn't off a 747 or a 757.. Somebody is propably in a devestated mood with worry at the moment because he forgot to do a simple operation, for reasons we are all unaware of and a MEDA investigation will get to the cause with honest answers..
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: England
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a situation like they were in then disruption is not even considered. The pilots would need to decide what to do, where to divert etc. As it was a significant problem then disruption to LHR's passengers is irrelevant. Priority is get it on the ground safely. ATC don't tell the pilots where to divert, the pilots make the decision and they tell ATC where they are diverting. ATC can offer help (and in the UK are very good at doing so).
As for not flying over a populated city, losing both engines could happen at any time anywhere, it's just very unlikely. BA38 incident at LHR for example. The pilots would have been busy enough dealing with the ECAM and handling the aircraft, their priority would be to get it on the ground safely and keeping their passengers safe, as they weren't in a glider scenario then they wouldn't have been looking for a green field to land on. Perhaps it was considered, even momentarily, but given one engine seemed to provide thrust (fire included or not) meant they could land on a runway.
As for not flying over a populated city, losing both engines could happen at any time anywhere, it's just very unlikely. BA38 incident at LHR for example. The pilots would have been busy enough dealing with the ECAM and handling the aircraft, their priority would be to get it on the ground safely and keeping their passengers safe, as they weren't in a glider scenario then they wouldn't have been looking for a green field to land on. Perhaps it was considered, even momentarily, but given one engine seemed to provide thrust (fire included or not) meant they could land on a runway.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA could man up their maintenance tomorrow with dozens of experienced licensed engineer contractors, many including myself are ex-BA anyway.
But to get them, they'll have to pay a decent amount.
But to get them, they'll have to pay a decent amount.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see from the radar track that is now available on Heathrow WebTrak at WebTrak: Heathrow that on the aircraft's landing approach, there were a number of unusual deviations from the extended runway alignment. Between Battersea and Hounslow, it followed a sort of sinusoidal track, deviating to the north and south by up to about 300 metres, with a heading at one point that appears to be at least 25 degrees off course.
Would this indicate a handling problem, or would there be a reason for deliberately following such a course? Altitudes and speeds appear to have been normal.
For some reason, WebTrak have decided to censor yesterday's situation by removing all information of flight numbers, destinations, aircraft types. BA762 can be identified as the one that departs LHR at 08:17. Aircraft symbols are coloured according to their actual final destination, so BA762 is the departure that is coloured red as an arriving flight! There are also about 20 aircraft in the arrival stacks at that time which are coloured blue, because they later had to divert elsewhere.
Would this indicate a handling problem, or would there be a reason for deliberately following such a course? Altitudes and speeds appear to have been normal.
For some reason, WebTrak have decided to censor yesterday's situation by removing all information of flight numbers, destinations, aircraft types. BA762 can be identified as the one that departs LHR at 08:17. Aircraft symbols are coloured according to their actual final destination, so BA762 is the departure that is coloured red as an arriving flight! There are also about 20 aircraft in the arrival stacks at that time which are coloured blue, because they later had to divert elsewhere.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA could man up their maintenance tomorrow with dozens of experienced licensed engineer contractors, many including myself are ex-BA anyway.
But to get them, they'll have to pay a decent amount.
But to get them, they'll have to pay a decent amount.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reasonably obvious I'd have thought. 1 runway was closed as the aircraft was on it and the other because it was the runway it departed from and therefore did/may have had debris on it.
Perhaps, the other runway was closed while debris was cleared. Do you not think that an airfield licensed for dual runway operations does not have sufficient fire cover for both departures and arrivals? More ill-informed rubbish. Perhaps, and its been suggested before, that only professional pilots are allowed to post on certain forums.
Edited: beaten to it by Hotel Mode.
Edited: beaten to it by Hotel Mode.
Last edited by Megaton; 25th May 2013 at 11:29.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread
This thread is is most interesting because of the crystal clear way it shows who has been in the hot seat ether as flight crew or as the B1 certifier on a busy line station, some above have shown that they can walk the walk and others have shown that they can barely talk the talk.
What seems to be emerging over a number of posts is that BA maintenance is both under manned and under funded.
What seems to be emerging over a number of posts is that BA maintenance is both under manned and under funded.
Ham phisted
This is the sort of gratuitously rude contribution that gives Pprune such a bad name.
Heathrow seemed to be closed for much longer than would be necessary for a runway inspection - thereby causing massive disruption for thousands of passengers and major losses to airlines. The emergency was not as extreme as others which LHR has experienced so why was not more effort made to get the show on the road?
If Ham Phisted is indeed a professional pilot, I hope he is not so quick to leap to judgements in his job.
(It's really none of his business, but I operated out of LHR for 25 years)
Perhaps, the other runway was closed while debris was cleared. Do you not think that an airfield licensed for dual runway operations does not have sufficient fire cover for both departures and arrivals? More ill-informed rubbish. Perhaps, and its been suggested before, that only professional pilots are allowed to post on certain forums.
Heathrow seemed to be closed for much longer than would be necessary for a runway inspection - thereby causing massive disruption for thousands of passengers and major losses to airlines. The emergency was not as extreme as others which LHR has experienced so why was not more effort made to get the show on the road?
If Ham Phisted is indeed a professional pilot, I hope he is not so quick to leap to judgements in his job.
(It's really none of his business, but I operated out of LHR for 25 years)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Several posts talk about things being not spotted by the pilot's walk-around.
Wishful thinking!
The reality is that the walk-around happens typically at least twenty minutes before the doors close - there are one or two other things to achieve in the flight deck as well, after all. Twenty minutes prior to doors closing there are many things still going on: cargo doors are open, engineers are still doing their own tasks, refuelling is under way and so on. It's not possible in the real world to actually check many of the things that can and are omitted at that stage. The only way a walk-around could be said to be realistically useful is to do it when everything has been completed and only the one door is left open - the one the walkee will use to get back in.
Like so many other parts of the operation, many things have to be on trust in the real, as opposed to the legal, world.
Wishful thinking!
The reality is that the walk-around happens typically at least twenty minutes before the doors close - there are one or two other things to achieve in the flight deck as well, after all. Twenty minutes prior to doors closing there are many things still going on: cargo doors are open, engineers are still doing their own tasks, refuelling is under way and so on. It's not possible in the real world to actually check many of the things that can and are omitted at that stage. The only way a walk-around could be said to be realistically useful is to do it when everything has been completed and only the one door is left open - the one the walkee will use to get back in.
Like so many other parts of the operation, many things have to be on trust in the real, as opposed to the legal, world.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: London
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After the 4 chimes all comms to the flight deck must go via the sccm who will decide if the flight crew need to know or not. Once the engines roll up for takeoff to gear up there is no communication with the flight deck. Even if the sccm tried to call if the flight crew had an fire bell ringing they would not answer anyway.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the sort of gratuitously rude contribution that gives PPRuNe such a bad name.
I am sure it did not take long to inspect the runway (27L). I suspect the inspection found some bits
How long do you think it took to log / photograph their positions, and possibly get AAIB clearance to move them? And then thoroughly clear the runway. F1 illustrates how well (or not) CFRC stays intact when it takes an unintentional flight 
Or maybe they should have just sent more aircraft down the runway and just hoped an AF Concorde did not happen? After all:
thereby causing massive disruption for thousands of passengers and major losses to airlines
I am not sure how long 27L was closed, but I do not think it was very long. I think the major disruption was getting 27R open again, and recovering the diverisons.
Last edited by NigelOnDraft; 25th May 2013 at 12:10.
After the 4 chimes all comms to the flight deck must go via the sccm who will decide if the flight crew need to know or not. Once the engines roll up for takeoff to gear up there is no communication with the flight deck. Even if the sccm tried to call if the flight crew had an fire bell ringing they would not answer anyway.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can these things be designed so the airflow keeps them near closed and not flapping if they are left unlatched?
On the inspection front there are plenty of other environments where mirrors are used for both looking underneath things and acting as a prompt.
The cheapness of HD cameras and image recognition nowadays means you could even have the aircraft do certain basic/limited visual surface checks automatically. I want royalties if anyone nicks that idea.
On the inspection front there are plenty of other environments where mirrors are used for both looking underneath things and acting as a prompt.
The cheapness of HD cameras and image recognition nowadays means you could even have the aircraft do certain basic/limited visual surface checks automatically. I want royalties if anyone nicks that idea.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Malmo
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was a wise decision to return to LHR, i doubt they even declared an emergency. I just wonder why they continued to climb on the BPK SID when they lost the cowlings right after takeoff and at what point the starboard engine failed?
Scotbill
I think you're being very harsh on ham phisted. The reason, in my humble opinion, that PPRUNE has the reputation it has, among professional flight crew at least, is the uninformed nonsense that you see written from people who clearly are NOT pilots. I am not advocating that PPRUNE be restricted to pilots but it gets frustrating, at times, to see ill informed comments that indicate the poster's ignorance of modern airline operations.
There's nothing wrong with the general public asking questions and seeking to understand a complex subject but making judgements when they lack the facts is unwise - only my opinion of course. For example, the eye witness on the BBC who said the: "the plane was going in and out of cloud". What does that add to our understanding? However, a passenger on board who says he saw the cowling come lose at such and such time will be invaluable to the AAIB.
The discussion about whether to divert to STN/LTN is a case in point. I imagine that very few airline pilots will have problems with that because we understand the workload in a diversion to somewhere unfamiliar. Of course it may turn out that STN was an option but we don't have the facts yet. In this absence of good info I vote the crew a "well done".
I think you're being very harsh on ham phisted. The reason, in my humble opinion, that PPRUNE has the reputation it has, among professional flight crew at least, is the uninformed nonsense that you see written from people who clearly are NOT pilots. I am not advocating that PPRUNE be restricted to pilots but it gets frustrating, at times, to see ill informed comments that indicate the poster's ignorance of modern airline operations.
There's nothing wrong with the general public asking questions and seeking to understand a complex subject but making judgements when they lack the facts is unwise - only my opinion of course. For example, the eye witness on the BBC who said the: "the plane was going in and out of cloud". What does that add to our understanding? However, a passenger on board who says he saw the cowling come lose at such and such time will be invaluable to the AAIB.
The discussion about whether to divert to STN/LTN is a case in point. I imagine that very few airline pilots will have problems with that because we understand the workload in a diversion to somewhere unfamiliar. Of course it may turn out that STN was an option but we don't have the facts yet. In this absence of good info I vote the crew a "well done".
I am sure it did not take long to inspect the runway (27L). I suspect the inspection found some bits 
How long do you think it took to log / photograph their positions, and possibly get AAIB clearance to move them? And then thoroughly clear the runway.
How long do you think it took to log / photograph their positions, and possibly get AAIB clearance to move them? And then thoroughly clear the runway.
Out of interest, what happened in the immediate aftermath of BAW38? Were sufficient RFFS resources held in reserve to support an immediate switch to single-runway operations on 27R? Obviously there was no requirement on that occasion to inspect the other runway.