Air France Boeing 777
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bali H'ai
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AFR 066 Paris to Los Angeles
Appears to have turned round South of Leicester, proceeding at 18,000ft over La Manche towards Rouen.
Landed back in Paris 1008 UTC
Landed back in Paris 1008 UTC
Last edited by Sultan Ismail; 6th Jun 2021 at 10:09.
This was one of the 10% ... it was an engine issue.
When they turned back over the midlands they were reporting it as a minor issue and wanted to descend but did not want to declare an emergency.
A while later, somewhere to the NW of London they upgraded to a 'Mayday' call and were given a 7700 squawk; they said that wanted to land at Heathrow and would require assistance upon landing as they had shut down an engine.
Somewhere to the SW of Heathrow, and still at FL180 they asked about dumping fuel. I never heard the outcome of that, but they did continue until over the Channel, where they may have done so.
Once over the Channel they continued south and eventually landed at Paris/CDG.
As all ended well (none of this 'bravely avoided landing on a school' tosh!) it is a 'non-story'.
When they turned back over the midlands they were reporting it as a minor issue and wanted to descend but did not want to declare an emergency.
A while later, somewhere to the NW of London they upgraded to a 'Mayday' call and were given a 7700 squawk; they said that wanted to land at Heathrow and would require assistance upon landing as they had shut down an engine.
Somewhere to the SW of Heathrow, and still at FL180 they asked about dumping fuel. I never heard the outcome of that, but they did continue until over the Channel, where they may have done so.
Once over the Channel they continued south and eventually landed at Paris/CDG.
As all ended well (none of this 'bravely avoided landing on a school' tosh!) it is a 'non-story'.
Only half a speed-brake
Really asked to squawk 7700 by ATC?
How come an engine fail on an ETOPS twin is a Mayday?
Does the AIP UK say LHR is not to be used for emergencies if practicable?
What is the distance (in terms of time) from the decision point to MAN, compared to CDG?
silly questions, are they.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/f.../af66#27f4b698
How come an engine fail on an ETOPS twin is a Mayday?
Does the AIP UK say LHR is not to be used for emergencies if practicable?
What is the distance (in terms of time) from the decision point to MAN, compared to CDG?
silly questions, are they.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/f.../af66#27f4b698
Only half a speed-brake
Well, no. While the EU legislation does not spell thou shall (the FAA does verbatim), land at the nearest means exactly that.
It might be OK not to pick the geographically closest, provided a "no increased risk" evaluation is done. Crossing the Channel does not really cut it, FWIW for an AF bird returning to CDG reeks of a simple choice for the home-base port.
Not a madman's stunt like that not-so-smart 737 over the Balkans two years ago, but not right either.
It might be OK not to pick the geographically closest, provided a "no increased risk" evaluation is done. Crossing the Channel does not really cut it, FWIW for an AF bird returning to CDG reeks of a simple choice for the home-base port.
Not a madman's stunt like that not-so-smart 737 over the Balkans two years ago, but not right either.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 22nd Jun 2021 at 17:05.
Only half a speed-brake
Fixed, packet loss at translation interface and thank you for the alert indeed. Missing 'the" did the damage.
Let's imagine for a moment the 737 only passed Thessaloniki, Skopje, Sarajevo, Sofia and landed at Beograd. Would the outrage be any different or less appropriate?
Exactly what the T7 managed here.
Let's imagine for a moment the 737 only passed Thessaloniki, Skopje, Sarajevo, Sofia and landed at Beograd. Would the outrage be any different or less appropriate?
Exactly what the T7 managed here.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, no. While the EU legislation does not spell thou shall (the FAA does verbatim), land at the nearest means exactly that.
It might be OK not to pick the geographically closest, provided a "no increased risk" evaluation is done. Crossing the Channel does not really cut it, FWIW for an AF bird returning to CDG reeks of a simple choice for the home-base port.
Not a madman's stunt like that not-so-smart 737 over the Balkans two years ago, but not right either.
It might be OK not to pick the geographically closest, provided a "no increased risk" evaluation is done. Crossing the Channel does not really cut it, FWIW for an AF bird returning to CDG reeks of a simple choice for the home-base port.
Not a madman's stunt like that not-so-smart 737 over the Balkans two years ago, but not right either.
Only half a speed-brake
