Virgin Atlantic A330 precautionary evacuation at LGW

[Kestrel_Stu]

The landing distance available on BOH 08 is 1,800m. It has a significantly displaced threshold. This A330 could easily have weighed 210+ tonnes = not really enough room (yes, I do fly them for a living).

Also the aircraft was at around FL210 I believe when the turn-back occurred (just south of BOH/SOU over the channel). To divert to Bournemouth they would have needed to circle overhead to lose height and meanwhile plan an approach into an unfamiliar airfield, which I suspect would have taken about the same amount of time as turning back for a straight in to LGW 08R (also a fair amount of height to lose from that distance).

[Sky Wave]

Not to mention the fact that they know LGW, it was possibly already in the secondary flight plan, they'd already know they didn't have a landing distance issue so no calculations to run and it probably made very little difference to the airborne time. If LGW & BOH had a very definite Westerly wind they may have elected to go to BOH. They would of obviously considered their options, weighed up the pro's and cons and elected to return to LGW. It looks like a job well handled to me.

[lederhosen]

Ironically the 737 at Kegworth was in the overall scale of things pretty much overhead the airfield it chose to divert to. Nearest suitable airfield includes factors like familiarity of the crew with the aerodrome as well as length of the runway and fire cover. It looks like a good job was done here, although as with Sullenberger's Hudson ditching no doubt a few monday morning quarterbacks will pipe up.

[xtypeman]

Good SOP's based on the experiences of the Airtours 737-200 at MAN.

[BBK]

Most of us will never have to deal with a full evac. Well done to the crew. Save the analysis until some hard facts are available.

Ps where did I put that wasp spray

[jhpic]

Good job

Good job. At the end of the day they successfully dealt with whatever the problem turns out to be...

[i_like_tea]

Is the 330 like the 320 in this situation? I.e emergency elec config styleeee or do they have a different way of working?

Sorry to the 330 drivers if thats a dunse question!

[dkatwa]

computers

I have been reading the chain and confess I know nothing about flying jets...I am a PPL (C152) so that is the extent of my knowledge of flying...

However, I do work it IT and was wonder if it is possible to automate the emergency landing decision (which airport to land at), in the sense that the aircraft knows how much fuel it has on board, how high it is, how much fuel to dump, runway lengths, time to airport (straight in approach, no waiting) etc....

Or is it not possible due to number of variables...?

[KTF]

Out of interest why do the VS 330-300 not have the facility to dump fuel? Is this for all A330 or just the VS ones?

[gem380]

The most important thing is that the crew made a successful emergency landing, and everyone is safe.

Well done to all the crew!!!

[Kestrel_Stu]

In my previous airline our A330-200s did have fuel dump capability, but the A330-300s did not.

In my current airline none of our A330s (all -200s) have fuel dump capability (all 233,000kg MTOW aircraft).

Basically, it's a customer option. Like any airliner, the aircraft can be landed up to MTOW in an emergency.

[vulcanised]

A bit more here

Emergency landing disrupts flights - Yahoo! News UK

[mixture]

Each slide costs upwards of $50k

Erm... surely they get serviced and re-packed rather than chucked in the nearest skip ? Or is that the servicing cost ?

[JCviggen]

Another passenger, Mark Bell, from Bracknell, said: "I knew something was wrong when we took off.
"The plane was really wobbly. The cabin crew made things worse. They were all really panicked.
"We weren't told anything other than we had to go back to Gatwick and make an emergency landing.

[vancouv]

Gatwick now seems to be open and using the standby runway (as they refer to it on their website) - does that restrict operations in any way?

[A and C]

Slides

There is some doubt in posts above as to what happens with the slides after they are deployed.

These slides will be inspected, if required repairs will be made and then they will be repacked for return to service.

It is common for quality control that a number of slides are deployed each year as a random test, if Virgin maintenance are sharp ( and I have no reason to think otherwise) these slide deployments can be used as part of the statistical analysis saving them from having to deploy more slides for maintenance.

Finally I would like to add my congratulations to the whole crew of the aircraft for a job well done.

[Case One]

Well done to the crew.

dkatwa, interesting suggestion, don't know if its been tried. I am sure most of us can think of more than a few problems with it though. Also, I suspect that the aeroplane's "vote" may be a case of too many cooks or jumping to conclusions, depending on the implementation.

Wasp . . .

On second thoughts I don't think I'll bother.

[Iwashere]

Northern rwy is 2565m, main rwy is 3316 so indeed could be more restricted for a heavy as an example. We use the northern on week days now (when no lvo's) due to resurfacing/wip of the main overnight and the swapover is sometimes delayed for heavy's departing.

[Old King Coal]

Whilst I appreciate that this was an Airbus, here's what a Boeing 'Quick Reference Handbook' (aka, in layman's terms, the checklist that is used when the aircraft is in a 'non-normal situation') has to say about the phrase "Land at the Nearest Suitable Airport" wherein the guidance for a twin-engine aircraft type will, necessarily (and is Regulated as such), be very very similar regardless of whether it's an Airbus or a Boeing, etc:

There are some situations where the flight crew must land at the nearest suitable airport. These situations include, but are not limited to, conditions where:

• the non–normal checklist includes the item “Plan to land at the nearest suitable airport.”
• fire or smoke continues
• only one AC power source remains (engine or APU generator)
• only one hydraulic system remains (the standby system is considered a hydraulic system)
• any other situation determined by the flight crew to have a significant adverse effect on safety if the flight is continued.

It must be stressed that for smoke that continues or a fire that cannot be positively confirmed to be completely extinguished, the earliest possible descent, landing, and evacuation must be done. If a smoke, fire or fumes situation becomes uncontrollable, the flight crew should consider an immediate landing. Immediate landing implies immediate diversion to a runway. However, in a severe situation, the flight crew should consider an overweight landing, a tailwind landing, an off-airport landing, or a ditching.

And here's what the Boeing 'Flight Crew Training Manual' has to say on matter (and, again, the Airbus version will, necessarily, be very very similar in its content and message):

A suitable airport is defined by the operating authority for the operator based on guidance material but, in general, must have adequate facilities and meet certain minimum weather and field conditions.

If required to divert to the nearest suitable airport (twin engine airplanes with an engine failure), the guidance material also typically specifies that the pilot should select the nearest suitable airport “in point of time” or “in terms of time.”

In selecting the nearest suitable airport, the pilot-in-command should consider the suitability of nearby airports in terms of facilities and weather and their proximity to the airplane position.

The pilot-in-command may determine, based on the nature of the situation and an examination of the relevant factors, that the safest course of action is to divert to a more distant airport than the nearest airport. For example, there is not necessarily a requirement to spiral down to the airport nearest the airplane's present position if, in the judgment of the pilot-in-command, it would require equal or less time to continue to another nearby airport.

For persistent smoke or a fire which cannot positively be confirmed to be completely extinguished, the safest course of action typically requires the earliest possible descent, landing and evacuation. This may dictate landing at the nearest airport appropriate for the airplane type, rather than at the nearest suitable airport normally used for the route segment where the incident occurs.

Herein end'th a lesson, for a few of you supposed 'Professionals' !

Well done the crew !!

[jameslon]

Is that photo caption from the Mail story correct??

Crisis: Firefighters used powerful jets to douse the flames as evacuation slides were deployed to allow passengers off

???