Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Oops! BA804 LHR>BLL slight mishap taxying in this morning ...

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Oops! BA804 LHR>BLL slight mishap taxying in this morning ...

Old 7th Feb 2017, 20:19
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Didn't BA already write off a 747 which according to answers to my queries, did not have a moving map airport display installed in an OPT which could have, and in my opinion, most likely would have enabled the crew to avoid leaving BA with a hull loss on their records.
depending on the method of compliance, and device used in any Portable EFB set-up, it's damned near impossible to get AMMD (Airport Moving Map Display) approved with the likes of a portable EFB, say using AMC 20-25 as method of compliance, and then satisfying the ETSO-C165a....needs at least an external aerial I would suggest for the accuracy needed for a decent idea of position without any "furyness" or dilution of aircraft actual position. Installed EFB might be tad easier, although guessing that isn't an option fitted for the older 747-400's??.
First.officer is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2017, 20:25
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The sky
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
JammedStab,

This crew knew where they were, they could see the taxi way, they just couldn't stay on it. I reckon there's a very high chance it was a technical failure combined with a slippery taxiway. It had nothing to do with having a moving map available.
Locked door is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2017, 21:02
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by First.officer View Post
depending on the method of compliance, and device used in any Portable EFB set-up, it's damned near impossible to get AMMD (Airport Moving Map Display) approved with the likes of a portable EFB, say using AMC 20-25 as method of compliance, and then satisfying the ETSO-C165a....needs at least an external aerial I would suggest for the accuracy needed for a decent idea of position without any "furyness" or dilution of aircraft actual position. Installed EFB might be tad easier, although guessing that isn't an option fitted for the older 747-400's??.
Flew the 744 with retrofitted EFB with accurate moving map display.

Check other remarks about the conditions. Perhaps inside info. Still would be curious to know if BA has Airport Moving Map Display on all their aircraft.
JammedStab is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2017, 21:14
  #24 (permalink)  
Nyx
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mcdhu View Post
It's only a guess, PF has selected reverse with spoilers armed so Gnd Splrs pop out. Green and Blue hyds dissipate, but Yellow doesn't for some obscure reason so Yellow spoilers (2&4) remain deployed.
Well it is only a guess.
How about yellow system failure - 2&4 spoilers drop plus nws failure?
Nyx is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2017, 21:34
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London,England
Posts: 1,356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Still would be curious to know if BA has Airport Moving Map Display on all their aircraft.
No they don't.
Max Angle is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2017, 21:36
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by airbubba
And, for the 4:30 pm ground school question, why are some, but not all of the spoilers still up?
Alternate spoilers deployed and not deployed - could indicate hydraulic loss. Image pinched as a still from the news report at the start of the thread.

Fargoo is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2017, 23:52
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 14,421
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by slip and turn View Post
Also interesting same aircraft two last year, including one less than 4 months ago?:
www.aeroinside.com/incidents/reg/G-EUPM
So these things still occur in threes ...
There's no obvious connection between the two prior events, other than the fact that they involved the same aircraft.

The June 2016 incident was a return to Heathrow following failure of the landing gear to fully retract (not specifically the NLG). The problem was resolved in time for the aircraft to return to service later the same day.

The October 2016 event is the subject of a current AAIB investigation and involved the NLG torque link detaching during the landing rollout, resulting in the aircraft being AOG at Manchester for several days.

I suspect that the Havarikommissionen investigation won't find much in common with either of the above events.

Last edited by DaveReidUK; 8th Feb 2017 at 07:26. Reason: spelling
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 00:50
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Didn't BA already write off a 747 which according to answers to my queries, did not have a moving map airport display installed in an OPT which could have, and in my opinion, most likely would have enabled the crew to avoid leaving BA with a hull loss on their records.
Calling it a hull loss could be stretching it a bit. That aircraft could have been repaired but given that BA were in the process of retiring multiple aircraft from the fleet it was cheaper to use in-house engineering resources to D check an older airframe in the UK and keep it in service than pay someone to repair the aircraft in Jo'burg. They could have gone the Qantas route and paid a huge amount of money to fix a bent airframe just for the sake of statistics but they're running a business and it made more financial sense to retire the broken aircraft in situ.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 07:39
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: hector's house
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
it made more financial sense to retire the broken aircraft in situ
This would be termed a "constructive total loss" which like a "hull loss" is an insurance industry definition, the structure of an aircraft is an airframe, only flying boats have hulls.
hec7or is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 11:36
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: London
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How about yellow system failure - 2&4 spoilers drop plus nws failure?
Might be onto something here. Unless it's an older 319 model, where the NWS was powered by the Green system. But it's a good educated guess, which is rare to see on PPRuNe these days
Permafrost_ATPL is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 12:14
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Do the swirls of snow on the runway indicate the a/c made a 180 for back track? If so, and the taxiway is to right, on the photo, the curious thought is how they ended up at 90 degrees to the runway BEFORE the runoff. The centre 30m of the runway looks clean.
But the tracks from the runway through the snow appear to be just less than 90 showing the a/c was turning left off the runway not right. In that case it is PAST the turnoff.
I apologise if I've missed a previous full description of the landing roll & turnoff.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 14:19
  #32 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's a little difficult to visualise RAT 5 unless you know the airport

As SLF at this airport and someone who has parked his car in the Long Term car park behind the aircraft tail a number of times, as far as I can make out, the aircraft did not move between the photo in NutLoose's post #2 and Fargoo's video snapshot in post #26.

That means the swirls you can see in Fargoo's pic are on the taxiway which runs parallel to the runway which is approximately 150m from the runway.

It is possible of course that having reached the taxiway, then being faced with whatever weather effect they reckoned out of their windscreen at the time, the crew may have decided a return to the runway was a more reliable route to the terminal. Although they were right on the tail of FR5172 coming in, no-one was on theirs. The airport is relatively quiet so a backtrack request would have been a fair shout.

Fact is though, whether they were intending to return to the runway or not, they sadly ended up off piste - Denmark is very flat (highest mountain no more than about 150m!) - but very few airports anywhere are wall to wall seamless smooth concrete every way you turn.

If they wanted to do it, the crew would have had to stop to liase with the tower before attempting such, having already vacated once after landing! Maybe they intended turned 180 in what they thought was all still part of the exitway, and intentionally stopped deliberately abeam the 'M' boards before calling Tower, but they were by then on the wrong (western) side of the boards ... and er ... stuck!

Maybe ... all these maybes! ... it's definitely all a bit odd.

738 FR5172 landed just two minutes ahead and exited at the same spot and used the same taxiway, apparently without incident.
slip and turn is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 14:24
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 2,618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I see a BA 767 positioned to BLL late last night, presumably in some connection to this incident?
Wycombe is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 14:28
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Braintree
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Evanelpus View Post
Why even quote FR24 when it's been said many, many times the information isn't accurate. You even eluded to that in your sentence.
Alluded :-)
Unclarth is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 14:54
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Blighty (Nth. Downs)
Age: 76
Posts: 2,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote from Permafrost ATPL:
"Unless it's an older 319 model, where the NWS was powered by the Green system."

Can't comment on later hulls in the A320 family, but G-EUPM is an A319-100 series with L/G and NWS powered by the Green hydraulic system.

Ground-Spoilers 1 & 5 use Green, 3 use Blue, and 2 & 4 use Yellow.

Slats use Green and/or Blue; Flaps use Green and/or Yellow.

Green system is pressurised by #1 engine ED pump or the PTU (RMP) from Yellow.
Blue system is pressurised by an AC pump or, in emergency, the RAT.
Yellow system is pressurised by #2 engine ED pump, the PTU (RMP) from Green, or an AC pump.
Chris Scott is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 15:08
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An unfortunate victim ice

One more time the unfortunate victim is thrown to the wolves by people who are too stupid to know better I doubt if most of them have ever taxied the Microsoft sim on ice let alone a real aircraft.

The crew of the aircraft have my upmost sympathy as a very uncomfortable felling of there but for the grace of god go I. Having operated in the frozen north for a few years now I have on atleast three occasions while taxiing very slowly when without a hint of warning I become a passenger on a jet that a split second ago I was controlling. The worst of it is there is not a clue when the combination of ice, taxiway slope, and wind forces combine with the lack of friction and the inertia to take control from you.

I now taxi on snow & ice like I'm driving miss daisy ( much to the annoyance of Aeroflot) as that way I might just yet get to retirement without sliding off the taxiway, but one thing is for sure I will as some time in the near future slide on ice but if luck and my lack of speed holds I might just stay off the green stuff.

If I was these guys DFO I would ask them to write a very frank report about the incident for publication to warn the pilot community of the hazards of taxing on ice and sent then back to flying without further action, they are neither incompetent or negligent.......... just unfortunate.
A and C is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 15:14
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This airframe has a history of NWS problems as proved problematic at MAN a little while ago. The crew vacated the runway onto the parallel taxiway by making two left 90 degree turns to go to the terminal. Unfortunately directional control was lost during the second turn and the aircraft continued to turn left onto the grass. Any available braking was greatly reduced by snow/ice towards the taxiway edges. A probable NWS or BSCU fault is being investigated. They were very unlucky to get that just as they were turning... There but for the grace of God go the rest of us....
Magplug is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 16:00
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wonder? Considering the weather and snow/slush on the ground. B738 after pushback the bypass pin was removed. However the steering tiller did not connect to the nose wheel. A little piece of snow/ice was found blocking the gizmo widgety thingie that should have released and allowed my left hand to offer some encouragement as to where we wanted to point the nose of our steed; but it didn't and we couldn't.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 16:23
  #39 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It was 'dry' snow and not much sign of slush even on the second day of it here in Denmark.

But yesterday with G-EUPM - no sign of any braking skids whatsoever, just fresh tyre tracks down to the bare earth??

Now Denmark isn't actually the frozen North. Billund is actually further south than Edinburgh (just!).

I was out on my trusty Raleigh in falling snow earlier today, and even on snow covered cycleways and crossing main highways ... I didn't slip or slide even once, even on my summer City Bike tyres, or encounter anything I'd yet call "slush". After I had passed, my trusty bicycle had in fact wet its tyres all the way through to the tarmac leaving a meandering tarmac trail for all to follow, a bit like FR5172 did yesterday, perhaps, two minutes before BA804 arrived, except with less meandering?

So whats this greatly reduced braking at taxiway edges stuff? Did G-EUPM even actually attempt any serious braking before it came to rest? The tracks shown in NutLoose's photo don't show any sign of braking skid, do they?

I remember may moons ago a lowly DR400 cleared customs at Biggin Hill. Not its passengers and crew, but the whole nose and powerplant and one wing of the aircraft whilst under quite some power during an attempted turn on the apron in front of the customs building (failed turn obviously)! Someone said it was Butch Cassidy's hole in the wall gang, but we knew better ...

A steering problem known only to those familiar with the potential antics of a weird system of springs and dampers used on that particular type was at the root of it ... no hydraulics to speak of.

But this A319 ... what exactly is the real story? Of course we sympathise with the crew because there but for the grace etc., which is why I exclaimed 'Bugger' in the first post, but let's not dress it up in tones more mysterious than it needs to be. I bet the private BA Pilots forum contains the answer - oh wait a minute - they haven't got one on PPRuNe anymore ...

So as PPRuNe's just a rumour mill for the initiated, we'll have to do our best to guess. Is it then that the thing
  • Got out of control in a taxiway turn due to an unlucky dusting of the wrong type of snow, or
  • Got out of control in a taxiway turn due to a mechanical or hydraulic steering (and braking?) failure
  • Didn't get out of control, just ended up in an unlucky less than ideal controlled state off piste with feathers (spoilers) ruffled?
That suggestion that the snow caused braking action problems is surely wobbly? Have a look again at the webcam just outside the airport and compare snapshots of today's snow with yesterday's whilst you still have the chance. (You can only look back 48 hours or so). It's colder today than yesterday, but starting overnight 6.-7. Feb, I suggest the snow and wind has been pretty piffling so far cf. real frozen North standards!
slip and turn is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2017, 16:30
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I bet the private BA Pilots forum contains the answer - oh wait a minute - they haven't got one on PPRuNe anymore ...
I hate to disappoint you but even the non-Pprune union hosted private top secret Tufty club eyes only BA pilots forum has not got the answer- discussion of this incident was locked down by the mods very soon after this happened (and so as not to add to the rumours I'll mention that such action is SOP there for any high profile incident, and done for lots of good reasons).

Looks like we will have to wait a few days for credible rumours from credible sources.

Last edited by wiggy; 8th Feb 2017 at 16:46.
wiggy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.