British Airways Airbus A320 Airborne return due to smoke in the cabin
 

BA370
G-MIDX
LHR-MRS
SUNDAY 17 FEB 2013

Smoke in the cabin. Mayday call for immediate return. Crew on oxygen. Autoland carried out, fire services inspected aircraft. Aircraft had No.2 engine changed.

Is there a requirement to pose a question?

Thank you for doing that, W C.

Two more:
Why has this not appeared on Av Herald?
Why are BA pilots suddenly hyperventilating so much in flight? (refer Dr Bagshaw)

I should imagine that raised awareness is a factor? Historically, pilots may have smelt something odd and thought nothing of it. I guess now, they may be thinking it could be something more.

And yet no.2 engine was changed. Presumably they didn't change it to get the practice, so there must have been something amiss with the aircraft.

Air Accidents.com
 

BOAC,

I am also concerned that certain 'mayday' incidents don't seem to be reported, although they can be found by other means.

It makes one realise that information 'out' is only as good as information 'in'.

Hence it is easy for airlines to say 'There is no evidence'.

Here is a new site with a special section for fume event flights.

Air-Accidents.com | Antonio Bordoni

:confused: They certainly are.

Indeed so. Just not in AvHerald. :*

It always amuses me when people who should know better assume that AH has access to everyone's ASRs.

Is that the third occurrence with a BA flight within a week ? Different types and circumstances but still perplexing.

Also wondering if auto land is the preferred response in such a case ? Unless you have positively identified the fire not being avionic related I would not put too much trust into those pesky computers...

Does anyone know how thick the smoke was? Was it just fumes or was the visibility inside the aircraft affected? And were there any fire warnings? There is big difference between smelling fumes and believing there is a fire on board.

DB, Wiggy,.DRUK

I would have assumed that a Mayday would qualify for inclusion on AvH.

Why? AFAIK AvH isn't an official flight safety publication or organisation. If I fill in an Air Safety Report and/or a Mandatory Occurence Report I follow the official channels, I don't "CC" it to AvHerald (or "Bcc" it to Pprune for that matter :}).

Since neither of us know from whence Simon gets his information, there is little point in discussing your point. I would however observe that, as I'm sure you know, a few more people then you and BA 'notice' a Mayday so the aviation world does not hang on your 'cc'.

I'm certainly glad about that.

Given that nobody else "noticed" this incident maybe the OP should tell us more?

The OP's summary pretty well said it all. The report of smoke (in the rear of the passenger cabin, it seems) must have been during or just after takeoff, because the aircraft made an immediate right turnout onto a downwind leg and subseqently landed on 09R, squawking 7700, after less than 15 minutes airborne.

Given that, as BOAC has helpfully pointed out, the incident must have been apparent to anyone who was monitoring departures at the time, or indeed the world and his wife looking at WebTrak in retrospect, why it didn't make AvHerald is one of life's mysteries that will doubtless never be explained.

I need to apologise to West Coast, I deleted a post between his and the original poster by mistake last night and it totally changed the context of his reply.

I was questioning why this wasn't in the spotters forum given that it was a report of a defect that would normally not get a second glance.

Is it purely because it was fumes and that is a hot topic for a couple of people on here?

Sounds textbook to me. Good job!:D:D
I have no idea if this a/c was overweight, (occasionally tanking fuel is carried) however I believe overweight autolands may not have been demonstrated on A320???

Today Feb 21!
 

A BA A319 (320?) emergency landing, Lisbon, cockpit smoke! 08:30

If I understand it, the latest BALPA belief is that fumes do not really do us any harm and that we are all hyperventillating. Why is that British Airways seem to be going through a week of hyperventillating?

I am astonished that BAPLA have taken this view especially since two BA pilots have recently died with more than a suspicion of aero-toxicity involved.

Something does not add up in this argument.

Why are BALPA so keen to avoid the possibility of toxic poisoning?

Are they possibly being paid by the other side?

This morning's BA499 from LIS is showing as cancelled on the Heathrow website. Due to have been operated by A320 G-EUYA, which is presumably the aircraft involved.