I'm no "Sully-a-holic" like some, but guess the difference is (in metaphor format);

The US Airways crew were driving along and suddenly found themselves hurtling at a brick wall with 2 seconds to figure out what to do, yet managed to avoid it.

The LOT crew were driving along, just the same, and received a few text messages and roadside alert that there was a brick wall several hundred miles away and to be ready for it. Yet, somehow, they still managed to :ugh: right into it (as far as the initial report makes it seem at this time)

Just because they were LUCKY enough to not kill or injure anybody does not mean they did an excellent job. If so much as one person ended up in the hospital and/or died due to this landing their heads would be rolling over the CB instead of receiving "medals".

I am not so sure that "they avoided it", they went right through that "brick of wall"...
now if they were in IMC or if that "brick of wall" consisted of sparrows, okey.
but to hit the whole formation of huge geese ... on initiall climb speed.... in good VMC
I mean helloooo...!

I'm guessing you've never even flown a Cessna. Ding ding ding...back you go to the keyboard.

Oh, and by the way, what's a "brick of wall"?

Is the aircraft an economic write off or is it being returned to service?

Never heard of that one before. It's certainly not standard practice anywhere I've been.

Good idea though.

Normally if a breaker is pulled it is flagged and either a log entry made or job card raised to reset it.

But, as has been said, in the real world SOPs are not always adhered to are they.

According to this thread, there is a strong tendency towards scrapping.
Insurance value and repair cost calculations considerations made it unlikely that the 14year old airframe will return to the skies, if I conclude the polish translations correctly..

I'm not sure I understand why some say that this crew had lots of time to fix the problem. As I read this thread the crew didn't know that they were going to experience a problem with lowering the gear at WAW until they tried to do so on final. They then had only 1+ hour to try to solve this "new" unexpected problem because they ran low on fuel and were forced to land with gear up. Puzzled.

If you can't find a popped CB in one hour you must not be able to see anything past the tip of your nose.

TURIN,

In our company we have white circuit breaker labels (approx 2" by 1.5") which have cut outs to clip around the c/b when it is temporarily pulled for mx purposes. You can also write a name/reason on them and they can't really be missed.

Priliminary Report on LOT 767
 

Surprised this hasn't been posted yet. It seems that the alternate extension CB had popped.

http://www.transport.gov.pl/files/0/...0RWenglish.pdf

Check by post 317.

Interim Statement
 

The Interim Statement was published on SCAAI website.

So, it was a simply a switch in the off position. Now comes the hard question - Why?

Why some around can't tell a difference between a switch and a circuit breaker, was that a question?

Seems that contributing factors were checklist not calling for CB check and popped CB being unmonitored by EICAS. Take note and learn.

A little slack, eh?

Espada claims zero technical knowledge of a/c systems. This forum is open to all.

Semantically a CB could be defined as as 'switch' ie you can make or break the circuit with it.

Bigger fish to fry than a poster?

Clandestino -

Most CBs do look like switches - have you looked in your house's (inaccurately named) fusebox recently?

Of course it is open to everyone but it is still called Professional Pilots Rumour Network. Those having luck to fly last couple of years have emphatically being told that CB is not designed to operate as switch and must not be used as such - maintenance cutting the supply of the MELed item by collaring the CB notwithstanding. A little that I know about 767 enables me to categorically state that my house is nothing like it. Hopefully the final report will make it clear what was the position of popped CB, why it wasn't not monitored by EICAS, what was the LOT's policy regarding the CBs, how come no one either in the aeroplane or on the ground remembered to suggest checking CBs, why Boeing didn't include "check CBs" in checklist, etc.

Check CBs. It might result in large cost savings.

Interesting reading . Aside from the recommandations on the Check lists. the one (4) about protecting CBs from shoes , flight bags etc, is an old story . But in the aircrfat I flew at least , CBs were push/pull type .( you pull a CB to cut it off and for those that need to be off , a removable colored plastic ring prevents them to be accidentally pushed .)
Is this not the case in Boeings 767s ? just curious.

- I don't think there is much margin for confusion in the interim report on that? On a quick skim, however, I could not see an explanation as to why. I'm not sure we should expect CBs to be 'monitored' by EICAS on a/c of that vintage.

The RCD (CBs) in your house do look like switches but they bear no resemblance to an aircraft CB.

CB Image

Looks like one of Flightmech's CB tags too. :ok: