Heathrow "incident"?
 

Any idea what caused Heathrow to go to single runway ops today (just before 1200 UTC today)?

09L was allegedly blocked by a BA a/c who had "trouble" with landing; forcing single ops on 09R, with all the hassles that entails.

Weather was atrocious - probably a factor?

From Ananova

BA jet in emergency landing

A British Airways jet with 140 passengers on board was forced to make an emergency landing at Heathrow Airport. An airline spokeswoman said it developed a hydraulic problem believed to affect the steering.

Flight 1483 was flying in to the London airport from Glasgow when the pilot became aware of the problem in the hydraulics system. He radioed ahead and fire engines were scrambled to the runway as a precaution, the spokeswoman said. The plane landed safely and on schedule around 12.55pm but remained on the runway for around 20 minutes until it was towed off.

The BA spokeswoman said: "Pilots are trained for this eventuality and carried out an emergency landing. "The fire engines were called as a precaution and no-one was injured." The runway was closed for around 20 minutes causing minimal delays to other flights, a spokeswoman for Heathrow said.

Story filed: 15:34 Monday 9th September 2002

Thanks - surprised to hear that the delays were "minimal" though. We were next in line for 09R when it happened and we had to wait for 5 planes to land. Such is life, but the queue behind really built up!

There's this strange phenomenon concerning aviation and journalism. As soon as any aircraft is reported about in the press, no matter how complex the type, greater than 5,700kg MAUW, requiring two flight crew, whatever, as soon as a journo writes about it, it automatically becomes a single pilot operation.

I can't fathom it myself. Can journalists count beyond one? One... Two... There. Easy.

And of course it's always an EMERGENCY

Might have been nice if the pilot HAD radioed ahead saving the 4 aircraft established behind him from being sent around and the subsequent delays while they, and the other 6 or so already off the stacks, were landed.

"The plane landed safely and on schedule around 12.55pm but remained on the runway for around 20 minutes until it was towed off."

While I only visit LHR occasionally, I am puzzled why it would take 20 minutes to tow the aircraft clear of the runway.

Seems to me that

prior coordination with company could have made a tug ready and available;

coordination with airport emergency services could have placed the tug in close proximity to the runway; and

coordination w/ ATC could have put the a/c in holding until all was ready

resulting in a runway closure of less than 5 minutes to get the a/c clear and on the way to the gate - and probably no news story as a consequence...

...or am I being unrealistic?

Are you being serious? Do you really expect BA at Heathrow to be able to co-ordinate anything that has more than two factors?

That would be too easy. They prefer to complicate matters beyond reasonable belief, just to get up the ire of the rest of us.........it's like BA claim that Heathrow is theirs and no-one else's sometimes!!

And yes, 747 400CA, I also don't understand why the Airbus didn't stay in the stack for a while longer whilst simple issues on the ground were co-ordinated.

I remember a few years back when the night curfew at LHR meant that aircraft arriving before 06:00hrs had to shut down engines immediately upon exit from the runway and be towed by tug to the terminal. This happened to me several times when arriving from Asia on SQ, VS and even BA. And it could be done in much less than 20 minutes.

Nice idea but as I said before the first anyone knew of a problem, at least from an ATC point of view was after the guy had landed and couldn't turn off of the runway, hence the delays.....

Now let me see the crew thought 'Well lets land and block the runway, stuff everybody else', because that is what is being implied.

I wasn't there but whatever you all might think I don't believe any of my colleagues would deliberately land and cause massive disruption if it could have been avoided.

And to answer the ridiculous assertion that it must be possible to organise a tug to go half way across the airfield in under 20 minutes, I would like to see any airline try it.

This board becomes filled with more and more uninformed, prejudiced and stupid speculation by the hour.

Hmmm, seems many here believe Superior Airways have stuffed it up, once again...hardly surprising, with BA's generally condecending attitude. :rolleyes:

411A - I think that you've just proved M.M's last point!

Oh I'm confused!

The news reports say the pilot radioed ahead and fire engines were waiting. Others say the pilot [singular] didn't radio ahead. Perhaps he called the fire services direct and bypassed ATC? If not, then who lined up four aircraft behind an aircraft that couldn't vacate the runway? Could somebody who actually knows the facts please elucidate?

a few points- firstly, it was a 737-400, not an airbus. Secondly, apparently Hyd System A lost pressure after they were already fully configured - gear down, Flap30 - at around about 1000'radio.
Therefore everybody involved had very little notice as to what was going on - and i imagine the guys were pretty busy troubleshooting the problem. Give 'em a break! Okay? Or how about job well done guys!

Regardless...........

Well done to all those concerned

C.N.

Lordy Lordy! PPrune AGAIN succumbs to the idiots, the 'shoot from the hip' opinion makers, the 'anti- anything BA does is wrong' brigade, and those of all three classifications (411A)! What a dreadful reflection on Pprune this thread is! I think it has reached the stage where Professional Pilots will be turned off this bulletin board because of all the idiots spouting off about things they know nothing about, or the alleged 'experts' with chips (heavy chips!) on their shoulders!

I agree Notso
 

Whenever an incident or accident happens, this forum is full of those with 'bright' ideas with little or no background information.

Before making these comments think about what you as the pilots on this aircraft would think if you were reading this thread.

I am sure that the crew did the best they could and if flying the aircraft comes before thinking about those that are waiting to takeoff then, well done to the crew for getting their priorities right.

Having flown for BA on the 737 I know most of the crews, I have no doubt they did their best. Why is it that some people insist on slating BA pilots, from the ones that I have met they are all generally good blokes with good intentions and dont deserve the crap dealt out by those that dont know them.

Before anyone asks, I left BA because I was bored and wanted a new challenge, I now fly the BBJ privately so I do know what it is like on the other extreme of flying a 737. If I was pushed to say what I missed most about airline flying it would be the people I used to work with!!!

Blah Blah Blahdy Blah,

Whiney Blahdy Blah !!!

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :cool: :rolleyes:

Well, thank you for those comments Mr. Ballantyne! You appear to be trying to illustrate my point! I note YOUR connection with Professional Pilots is that you have probably, at some point in time, taken pictures of aeroplanes.

Precisely what are you trying to convey with that posting in the PROFESSIONAL PILOTS RUMOUR NETWORK ?

Nothing against BA pilots in general, Notso Fantastic, as long as they remain in BA.
BUT, get some of them after early retirement from BA with another aircarrier, the situation generally changes.
If I had a dollar for every time i've heard...."but we would never do it THAT way in BA...." from these folks, would be able to afford the JetStar that sits in the next hangar.
OK guys in the bar you understand...just get 'em in a slightly different company with local F/O's and the situation rapidly goes downhill...and I have watched this "beaks well above ground effect" phenomenon since 1978.
My opinion anyway...don't suspect you will agree, but hey, that's OK.