BA emergency landing 1st Sept at LHR
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
*** edited ***
I've just found myself writing a flame back to this. There's no need (on RP) . The reasonable people watching the thread know what I mean.
If anyone comes up with more data, I'll be happy to listen.
I've just found myself writing a flame back to this. There's no need (on RP) . The reasonable people watching the thread know what I mean.
If anyone comes up with more data, I'll be happy to listen.
e28 driver
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It sounded like a perfectly reasonable question but then what would I know eh Notso? I'm only a turboprop F.O. in the franchises (read: underclasses).
How exactly would one (not being 744 type rated) know what the implications of a no. 2 hydralics system pressure loss were if they didn't ask? Assuming they didn't have access to the emergency or abnormal checklist or MEL??
How exactly would one (not being 744 type rated) know what the implications of a no. 2 hydralics system pressure loss were if they didn't ask? Assuming they didn't have access to the emergency or abnormal checklist or MEL??
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This really is 'the thread that wouldn't die', isn't it?
I think any comment about your station in life is superfluous. Don't worry, I was once a 'turboprop F.O.', but life improved!
I would have thought when you were told quite positively what theimplications were of #2 Hydraulics by obviously a 400 pilot, to ask for confirmation elsewhere was a triffle OTT? To explain 'wet' power to someone and have them ask for confirmation elsewhere might insult you too.
Once again, please let's stop wasting space on this one. Some people seem dead set to make out an emergency occurred. A relatively minor non-event handled without drama, followed by a tech log entry sorted it. Let's move on people! Air France is out, someone is rumouring Ryan Air in trouble, share prices on the down again.....let's bury LN and it's potty little defect that really should not have been brought up in the first place!
I think any comment about your station in life is superfluous. Don't worry, I was once a 'turboprop F.O.', but life improved!
I would have thought when you were told quite positively what theimplications were of #2 Hydraulics by obviously a 400 pilot, to ask for confirmation elsewhere was a triffle OTT? To explain 'wet' power to someone and have them ask for confirmation elsewhere might insult you too.
Once again, please let's stop wasting space on this one. Some people seem dead set to make out an emergency occurred. A relatively minor non-event handled without drama, followed by a tech log entry sorted it. Let's move on people! Air France is out, someone is rumouring Ryan Air in trouble, share prices on the down again.....let's bury LN and it's potty little defect that really should not have been brought up in the first place!
Last edited by Notso Fantastic; 6th Sep 2002 at 11:25.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Anywhere that pays
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"This really is 'the thread that wouldn't die', isn't it?"
Oh dear! NSF - the obvious answer is surely staring you in the face if only you could see! Could someone PLEASE put him out of his misery before we all die from congestive laughter failure?
It is SUCH fun!
Walt
Oh dear! NSF - the obvious answer is surely staring you in the face if only you could see! Could someone PLEASE put him out of his misery before we all die from congestive laughter failure?
It is SUCH fun!
Walt
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having just read all this, thought I'd give a little ATC insight although I'm not linked to either Cardiff or LHR.
When an aircraft says it has ANY problem, we think a little different about it no matter what has happenned, due to the 'what if' factor. Caution has to be given generously, and we would rather be safe than nieve. In this case I would expect the Tower controller to put on a 'local standby' where all emergency services are ready to go, but not required to convene at the RVP points in the airport. The Heathrow Fire Service may decide to greet the aircraft, thats their perogitive. And if fluid was definately dripping visibly, the runway on which the aircraft landed would most certainly have to be temporarily shut for a full surface check, so in our respect, it is a kind of 'emergency' even if not directly life threatening, and our workload obviously increases.
When an aircraft says it has ANY problem, we think a little different about it no matter what has happenned, due to the 'what if' factor. Caution has to be given generously, and we would rather be safe than nieve. In this case I would expect the Tower controller to put on a 'local standby' where all emergency services are ready to go, but not required to convene at the RVP points in the airport. The Heathrow Fire Service may decide to greet the aircraft, thats their perogitive. And if fluid was definately dripping visibly, the runway on which the aircraft landed would most certainly have to be temporarily shut for a full surface check, so in our respect, it is a kind of 'emergency' even if not directly life threatening, and our workload obviously increases.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Anywhere that pays
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like greatorex, I'm confused by your posts, NSF.
I too am not quite clear about this - are you saying there was no emergency or what? Was an emergency checklist used? Was a mandatory safety report filed? Please define what your airline classifies as 'an emergency'
(PS: Tip to ppruners - to avoid upsetting NSF with a post, put 'ATPL' and CAPTAIN 747 in your profile. It doesn't matter whether you are a toilet cleaner or journo - this should avoid the moving of your thread out of RP by NSF).
I too am not quite clear about this - are you saying there was no emergency or what? Was an emergency checklist used? Was a mandatory safety report filed? Please define what your airline classifies as 'an emergency'
(PS: Tip to ppruners - to avoid upsetting NSF with a post, put 'ATPL' and CAPTAIN 747 in your profile. It doesn't matter whether you are a toilet cleaner or journo - this should avoid the moving of your thread out of RP by NSF).
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
'NotsoFantastic' is quite right,
This should have been mentioned in the Tech Log, at the conclusion of the flight,
that's it!!
But, then again, it's not a Classic, is it!!!
Cheers
'NotsoFantastic' is quite right,
This should have been mentioned in the Tech Log, at the conclusion of the flight,
that's it!!
But, then again, it's not a Classic, is it!!!
Cheers
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An emergency is if you are on fire, just about anything else is 'non normal' in Boeings phraseology. Thus we use non normal checklists. The term emergency should be banned in aviation, it is applied to any non routine matter and the press love it.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bit like ythe expression 'Airmiss'! The press see it as 2 aeroplanes taking violent avoiding action, screaming in the cabin, stewardesses upside down on the ceiling, pilots putting their Telegraph crosswords down for a moment. The reality is usually nobody notices. Even renaming it hasn't really taken the drama away. Some people will see an 'emergency' there even if there isn't one! (woops- shouldn't have said that!)
