Flapless in FACT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hoerikwaggo
Age: 88
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flapless in FACT
An incident on a British Airways flight from Johannesburg to Cape Town had passengers praying to the heavens when the flaps used to slow the aircraft down during landing malfunctioned, according to a passenger.
Leon Ganswyk, one of the passengers, said the incident happened on Thursday on British Airways flight 6409 from Johannesburg.
"On final approach, the pilot aborted the landing due to what he called 'flaps not being able to be extended fully'. We re-routed over Robben Island for nearly 40 minutes while they tried to address the problem. To no avail, the problem persisted and the pilot indicated that all emergency facilities were to be deployed prior to the landing as a precautionary measure," said Ganswyk.
He said the pilot indicated that the plane could still land but at a much higher speed than normal.
"He (pilot) indicated nearly 50 to 60 knots (93 to 111km/h) faster."
Ganswyk said he was sitting at a window seat and could see fuel being dumped over the ocean on approach the second time.
"Although we landed safely, the general mood on board was sombre and I saw many people praying. Once we touched down, the passengers burst into spontaneous applause, possibly more in relief than anything else," he said.
Ganswyk claimed there seemed to be a general cover-up with airlines who have these types of incidents.
"They see this as not life-threatening - if one reads the websites, I am not so sure. How often do these incidents happen and not get reported - it seems to me that they are trying to protect their reputation," Ganswyk said.
He said the first line in Comair's response to him was "an absolute gem".
"They didn't even know about the incident."
In its response to Ganswyk, Comair's Farahna Noordien from customer relations said the company's aviation safety manage told her that events of this nature do get reported to the Civil Aviation Authority on a monthly basis.
"They do not place non-events on their website as it is not classified as an incident because there was no injury or damage to anything or anybody. As per feedback received from the air safety report filed by the captain, the flaps worked correctly on the previous flight," wrote Noordien.
She said the incident was not life-threatening so no trauma counselling was provided.
"We can assure you that the safety and security of our customers and crew is of paramount importance and we will not put either at risk."
Leon Ganswyk, one of the passengers, said the incident happened on Thursday on British Airways flight 6409 from Johannesburg.
"On final approach, the pilot aborted the landing due to what he called 'flaps not being able to be extended fully'. We re-routed over Robben Island for nearly 40 minutes while they tried to address the problem. To no avail, the problem persisted and the pilot indicated that all emergency facilities were to be deployed prior to the landing as a precautionary measure," said Ganswyk.
He said the pilot indicated that the plane could still land but at a much higher speed than normal.
"He (pilot) indicated nearly 50 to 60 knots (93 to 111km/h) faster."
Ganswyk said he was sitting at a window seat and could see fuel being dumped over the ocean on approach the second time.
"Although we landed safely, the general mood on board was sombre and I saw many people praying. Once we touched down, the passengers burst into spontaneous applause, possibly more in relief than anything else," he said.
Ganswyk claimed there seemed to be a general cover-up with airlines who have these types of incidents.
"They see this as not life-threatening - if one reads the websites, I am not so sure. How often do these incidents happen and not get reported - it seems to me that they are trying to protect their reputation," Ganswyk said.
He said the first line in Comair's response to him was "an absolute gem".
"They didn't even know about the incident."
In its response to Ganswyk, Comair's Farahna Noordien from customer relations said the company's aviation safety manage told her that events of this nature do get reported to the Civil Aviation Authority on a monthly basis.
"They do not place non-events on their website as it is not classified as an incident because there was no injury or damage to anything or anybody. As per feedback received from the air safety report filed by the captain, the flaps worked correctly on the previous flight," wrote Noordien.
She said the incident was not life-threatening so no trauma counselling was provided.
"We can assure you that the safety and security of our customers and crew is of paramount importance and we will not put either at risk."
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hoerikwaggo
Age: 88
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 1,479
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
2 Posts
Should be placed in the ambulance chasing scuzzball section (read the profile). Oh sorry we haven't got one and for a bl**dy good reason.
Non event, no story, more imporrtantly no claim.
Non event, no story, more imporrtantly no claim.
Planes are very, very dangerous---
flapless, split flap, alternate flap/ gear extension/ overweight landing, all in Chap/sec/vol # 3 of the flight manual or written in the abnormal procedure section of the QRH
Also 737's, 757's, and most 767's can't dump fuel --they probably just saw some chemtrails ---
We crash; you die
Lester
flapless, split flap, alternate flap/ gear extension/ overweight landing, all in Chap/sec/vol # 3 of the flight manual or written in the abnormal procedure section of the QRH
Also 737's, 757's, and most 767's can't dump fuel --they probably just saw some chemtrails ---
We crash; you die
Lester
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: OXF
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love claims like "ZOMG, the airlines are all hiding things from us!" *rolls eyes*
Yes, there's a worldwide conspiracy to fool the pax into believing they've flown safely because really... flying is soooooooooo dangerous.
Sorry. I'll sit on my hands now.
S.
Yes, there's a worldwide conspiracy to fool the pax into believing they've flown safely because really... flying is soooooooooo dangerous.
Sorry. I'll sit on my hands now.
S.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arrr Pugilistic Animus, so slopily (if thats a word) written,
* I often see the QRH called the Vol.3 (where did that come from)
* don't you mean the Flight Crew Operations Manual (not flight manual - quite another book, I think!)
* not all 737s are devoid of a fuel dump system.
* "chemtrails", don't you mean contrails?
thanks Lester
* I often see the QRH called the Vol.3 (where did that come from)
* don't you mean the Flight Crew Operations Manual (not flight manual - quite another book, I think!)
* not all 737s are devoid of a fuel dump system.
* "chemtrails", don't you mean contrails?
thanks Lester
A couple of years ago I was on a BA 757 into LHR. We went into a go-around and the pilot announced some spurious reason for it. I was sitting by the wing and had already noticed that the flaps weren't extending. On our next approach he executed a normal flapless landing and I'd be surprised if more than three or four pax had any idea what had gone on.
Perhaps I should have started a round of applause as we taxied to the stand and then called the press!!
Perhaps I should have started a round of applause as we taxied to the stand and then called the press!!
I often see the QRH called the Vol.3 (where did that come from)
* don't you mean the Flight Crew Operations Manual (not flight manual - quite another book, I think!)
AFM is a generic term due to the large multitude of types discussed here
I didn't know that about the 737 never rated on it [I should have-though
] -but from my limited knowledge of it they USUALLY don't ---"chemtrails"---just utter sarcasm -never heard those conspiracy theorist?
'google it' you may have a laugh
they believe that jets are:
1. either changing the wx
2. dousing folk with government chemicals---
I can be a bit flippant at times
PA
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: North America
Age: 64
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not an emergency
Last winter we had a flap failure on the Boeing 737 we were flying. Having experienced a similar failure, as the pilot in command, I offer several observations. By definition a flap failure is an abnormal condition not an emergency. You will find the flight control failure in the abnormal section not the emergency section of our Quick Reference Handbook. I will make this concession that mishandling any problem could lead to an accident. Some things are real emergencies: uncontained fire in the cabin, rapid depressurization at altitude, total electrical failure at night in IMC with no VMC available but most problems encountered are really not dire emergencies. With only a simple flap failure you still have two wings, all your engines and you have trained for this failure multiple times. Passenger’s perception in the cabin may be entirely different but the reality is you have a simple abnormality that is well understood, exhaustively researched and thoroughly trained for. This is not a crisis.
Get the airplane someplace safe and keep it there while the following steps are executed. While one pilot concentrates on flying the airplane safely the other pilot correctly accomplishes the appropriate check list, coordinates with the company and the overseeing air traffic control. As a crew, using all the recourses available to you, pick out the safest available runway. In most cases, with a 737, you are going to have enough available pavement to bring it to a stop. Call out the emergency equipment as a precaution. Coordinate with the cabin crew. Reassure the passengers and bring it to a safe conclusion. Once the jet is on the ground take care of the passengers and crew then check in with the company to answer any questions. Get some rest and then fill out the appropriate paperwork with the governing agency that has jurisdiction. Case closed, it’s all in a day’s work.
If you would have called the company representative the next day they, in fact, would not even know about the incident. As a company have over a thousand takeoff and landings every day. Our flap failure was brought to a successful conclusion-exactly what we are paid to do and is what is expected of us as flight crew. A flap failure is not, in and of itself newsworthy.
Get the airplane someplace safe and keep it there while the following steps are executed. While one pilot concentrates on flying the airplane safely the other pilot correctly accomplishes the appropriate check list, coordinates with the company and the overseeing air traffic control. As a crew, using all the recourses available to you, pick out the safest available runway. In most cases, with a 737, you are going to have enough available pavement to bring it to a stop. Call out the emergency equipment as a precaution. Coordinate with the cabin crew. Reassure the passengers and bring it to a safe conclusion. Once the jet is on the ground take care of the passengers and crew then check in with the company to answer any questions. Get some rest and then fill out the appropriate paperwork with the governing agency that has jurisdiction. Case closed, it’s all in a day’s work.
If you would have called the company representative the next day they, in fact, would not even know about the incident. As a company have over a thousand takeoff and landings every day. Our flap failure was brought to a successful conclusion-exactly what we are paid to do and is what is expected of us as flight crew. A flap failure is not, in and of itself newsworthy.
