Incident at Heathrow

[ILS27LEFT]

Both latches left unlocked

If the latches theory will be confirmed why Airbus does not consider adding a sensor to warn if latches are not locked, even the cheapest car has got these sensors on all doors nowadays, unlocked latches seem a frequent occurrence on this type and it could easily end up in tears. One pax saw case detaching on take off, no birds reported. Early speculation but birds seem not involved this time then it can be only latches left unlocked on both engines

[Captain Radar....]

Engine Cowl unlocked indication...............

If latch security is a known problem on this type would it be beyond the wit of safety system man to fit a 'Cowl Unlocked' indication system?
I feel sure there must be cabin/cargo door unlocked warnings..................at least I hope there are!
You can't even start a microwave oven if the door's not locked!
What price a wiring mod against a potential disaster?

[Agaricus bisporus]

I'd be interested to a hear credible theory on how unlatched cowls might cause engine failure and fire...
Perhaps those proposing this scenario could suggest a feasible way?

Or do they mean unlatched owls?

[Captain Radar....]

Timing is everything

ILS27LEFT
Great minds think alike! Or someones going to come with a really good reason why they can't fit unlocked sensors!

[Hand Solo]

You don't need to be down on your knees, there's a ruddy great indicator you can see if they're not latched. Just bend over and have a look.

[Fargoo]

Any news if the cowls have been found yet? Typically they come off on rotation or shortly after take off if not all the latches are done up.

As for looking on a walkround, it's easily missed if one latch is done up and not the rest.

Airbus really need to concentrate on either a secondary locking system or some sort of indicator that is visible at eye level. The numbers of cowl loss alone shows this is a problem that needs to be engineered out to prevent it happening again.

Procedures and paperwork wont do it unless they are rigidly followed and still allow for human error.

[williekp]

BA policy

Blame down the line but no senior management accountability. Tell as little of the truth publicly as possible.

[mog1098]

Agaricus Bisporus wrote: "I'd be interested to a hear credible theory on how unlatched cowls might cause engine failure and fire...
Perhaps those proposing this scenario could suggest a feasible way?"

How about the metal engine cowls becoming detached in the airflow and impacting at high velocity against pipes carrying fuel and oil, not to mention cutting through live wires?

[Captain Radar....]

Manual Unlocked Indicators

You don't need to be down on your knees, there's a ruddy great indicator you can see if they're not latched. Just bend over and have a look.

True, but it seems that this check is somehow being missed, by pilots and personnel who have either closed the cowlings or those who are near them during engine start and see off.

We had manual wing unlocked indicators on the top of Phantom FGR2 wings. It wasn't even necessary to bend down to see them, at about eye height all you had to do was look across the top of the wing.
We lost an aircraft on take off when the wings folded. Pre flight groundcrew checks missed the ruddy great indicators. Pre flight aircrew walk round missed the ruddy great indicators. Start crew missed the ruddy great indicators even though they had to walk round running their fingers along the top of the wings feeling for boundry layer air within inches of the ruddy great things.
A cockpit warning caption would have saved us the loss an aircraft (assuming the crew didn't ignore it of course!)
They got out by the way, it could have been a lot worse. My point is that we often see what we want to see and don't see what we should.
There seems to be a problem with the current system, perhaps it should be revised.

Cost benefit of an electronic warning system? mmmmmmm

[SeenItAll]

Of course, these points all seem to be counted not significant for the substantial number of following aircraft which had to be subsequently diverted to Stansted, without seemingly any of the concerns above.

It would also have avoided the gross interruption to BA's business for the rest of the day.

At the risk of being flippant, not only would a diversion to Stansted have "avoided the gross interruption to BA's business for the rest of the day," it would also have had the (possibly salutary to BA) effect of mucking up the operations of competitors Easy and Ryanair for the rest of the day.

I'll get my coat now ...

[Yaw String]

And, would have beaten PIA B777, by a wide margin!
The anoraks would have been orgasmic!

[Krystal n chips]

Watching the BBC News at lunchtime, and the fearless reporter duly informed the world that, regarding aircraft safety, they can fly, land and.....take off.... on one engine.

True, if the aircraft has one engine that is. A minor detail I suppose.

And since when, or with which operator, has a duplicate inspection been required after routine oil replenishment?.

Back to the sensible comments.... and the pure speculation, always ans interesting combination after any incident.

[DaveReidUK]

I'd be interested to a hear credible theory on how unlatched cowls might cause engine failure and fire...

Not quite as far-fetched as it sounds - that's more or less what happened to a Canadian A320 in 2000, though fortunately only to one of the engines on that occasion.

[wild goose]

Imagine if this had been a 787...

[DrGitfinger]

German tabloid Bild has this photo I hadn't seen before.
Bigger version here.

The caption translates as:

"Engine on fire - emergency landing!"
"The Airbus shortly after take-off from Heathrow – flames can clearly be seen shooting out of the engine"

I'm only SLF, so what do I know, but I can't see any flames, just smoke. Do they mean the landing lights?
And the photo must have been taken shortly before landing.

[avoman]

Krystal, a duplicate inspection is indeed routine if oil has been replenished on more than one engine. Which is most days.
Oil caps have been left off engines before.
A duplicate inspection is required after any fan cowl disturbance on an Airbus narrowbody. At least in my company and I guess in most others. Multiple previous incidents being the reason.

[Alber Ratman]

I have seen one maintenance organisation that does have duplicate inspections on oil tank filler caps..

Maintenance error in BA.. Let us see if a Just Culture does exist.

[aeromech3]

If the ATC did advice the crew of a visual along the lines "LH engine cowl missing" then, as that engines fire protection would be invalid, the crew might have elected to shut it down, unaware that the RH engine would soon suffer a similar cowl loss!

[EGCA]

Passenger interviewed on the BBC News at six said that he saw an engine cowl start "flapping" as the aircraft gathered speed on take-off.

EGCA

[NigelOnDraft]

If the ATC did advice the crew of a visual along the lines "LH engine cowl missing" then, as that engines fire protection would be invalid, the crew might have elected to shut it down

Is this a published procedure? I'm not sure any crew would shut an engine down on a 4 engine aircraft, let alone a twin, for lack of fire protection? Not sure you'd even divert? Willing to be corrected...