BA aborted takeoff at Pisa?
...the thin end thereof
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 1998
Location: London
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think it was A300man who was interested in the flight number but thanks anyway 24R.
Have since found out this happened on Saturday (21st Sept) - BA2601 1240 dep. Presume Arr time about 1340 BST.
Cheers
Have since found out this happened on Saturday (21st Sept) - BA2601 1240 dep. Presume Arr time about 1340 BST.
Cheers
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello all,
Can confirm aircraft was a 737-300. Registration was G-LGTH or G-LGTI, can't remember which one.
Can also confirm RTO was performed but there was nothing wrong with the aircraft at all. No warning or caution was received in the flight deck. If that has been reported, then it was probably told to pax to keep them quiet.
I am crew at LGW, and from what I have heard, there was a mix up between crew at V1, resulting in a very high energy RTO. Not very pleasant.
Consequently, BA flew a B777 to Pisa with parts and engineers.
Definately tea no biscuits for the Captain, who is 'well known' amongst crew at LGW.
Can confirm aircraft was a 737-300. Registration was G-LGTH or G-LGTI, can't remember which one.
Can also confirm RTO was performed but there was nothing wrong with the aircraft at all. No warning or caution was received in the flight deck. If that has been reported, then it was probably told to pax to keep them quiet.
I am crew at LGW, and from what I have heard, there was a mix up between crew at V1, resulting in a very high energy RTO. Not very pleasant.
Consequently, BA flew a B777 to Pisa with parts and engineers.
Definately tea no biscuits for the Captain, who is 'well known' amongst crew at LGW.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the greatest respect I would attach no credence whatsoever to any reports by cabin crew on this matter. They don't have the technical expertise to understand the situation, they are unlikely to have been on the flight deck at the time and so rely on dumbed-down info from flight crew, chinese whispers and second hand gossip.
As for the character assasination of the captain in question, I suspect if this incident did occur in the bizarre and unlikely fashion claimed here then the captain is entirely free of blame. Having called 'rotate' one would question why the FO chose to reject the take off without the standard instruction being issued.
As for the character assasination of the captain in question, I suspect if this incident did occur in the bizarre and unlikely fashion claimed here then the captain is entirely free of blame. Having called 'rotate' one would question why the FO chose to reject the take off without the standard instruction being issued.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry you seem to have misinterpreted my reply. I am flight crew at LGW and not cabin crew.
Hand solo, I may be wrong but I believe you also work for BA, so you should be able to confirm the events from within. As you say, it was bizarre and unusual, but that's what happened. There was no master caution approaching V1, and even if one occurred, you should know BA SOP's dictate not to stop on a master caution at that speed unless it is serious serious stuff.
Anyway that's the story, discard it if you wish, but try chatting to others within the company. You'll soon be able to verify it.
Mary
Hand solo, I may be wrong but I believe you also work for BA, so you should be able to confirm the events from within. As you say, it was bizarre and unusual, but that's what happened. There was no master caution approaching V1, and even if one occurred, you should know BA SOP's dictate not to stop on a master caution at that speed unless it is serious serious stuff.
Anyway that's the story, discard it if you wish, but try chatting to others within the company. You'll soon be able to verify it.
Mary
...the thin end thereof
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 1998
Location: London
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to say I didn't know why Solo had assumed you were cabin crew Mary.
Seems to attach more credibility to that version of events, it was 'The controlller' who first voiced that rumour here.
If true sounds like a very strange incident indeed.
Seems to attach more credibility to that version of events, it was 'The controlller' who first voiced that rumour here.
If true sounds like a very strange incident indeed.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having just worked out your user name maryhinge I'm sure you're not cabin crew! The jungle telegraph has today confirmed a most bizarre turn of events. I'm off to eat a large portion of humble pie!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Pub
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First day back today.
Well I can confirm that EVERYTHING that Mary Hinge as posted is 100% right
Hand mate...it's not always what you know...it's WHO you know. (Obviously cannot reveal my sources though)
Want a bit more "juicy" info?
Stupid company suspended pilots imeaditately as is proceedure in an incident like this - BUT - relalised they didn't have any spare pilots to fly the plane back from Pisa - SO - reinstated them so they could fly plane back - THEN - suspended them at LGW.
More stupid than the cock up that awaitted me at LGW is evening, and that was good enough the ruin a really good day!!
Well I can confirm that EVERYTHING that Mary Hinge as posted is 100% right
Hand mate...it's not always what you know...it's WHO you know. (Obviously cannot reveal my sources though)
Want a bit more "juicy" info?
Stupid company suspended pilots imeaditately as is proceedure in an incident like this - BUT - relalised they didn't have any spare pilots to fly the plane back from Pisa - SO - reinstated them so they could fly plane back - THEN - suspended them at LGW.
More stupid than the cock up that awaitted me at LGW is evening, and that was good enough the ruin a really good day!!
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would I be right in saying that in BA the F/O is allowed to make the go/no go decision on his/her take-off? In my company only the captain can make the decision, who guards the thrust levers on every T/O until V1. I'm all for F/O's being allowed to do stuff, but I personally think our policy is better.
The Go/No Go decision is the most critical decision that can be made, and has very grave consequences for geting it wrong. Many, many accidents have been caused by RTO's above V1.
It may be the F/Os decision, but the Captain can still over-rule him/her with a verbal command or taking control, whereas if it is only the Captain's decision, there is less ambiguity and there should be less chance of a mis-understanding. An inexperienced F/O with an over-bearing Captain in particular could be suseptible to following a mis-heard call from the LHS (I'm not saying this happened here, I know nothing about it).
The report on this one could make interesting reading. Bit like the legend of the F/O under training who was told to 'chear up' on the T/O and put the gear up!
The Go/No Go decision is the most critical decision that can be made, and has very grave consequences for geting it wrong. Many, many accidents have been caused by RTO's above V1.
It may be the F/Os decision, but the Captain can still over-rule him/her with a verbal command or taking control, whereas if it is only the Captain's decision, there is less ambiguity and there should be less chance of a mis-understanding. An inexperienced F/O with an over-bearing Captain in particular could be suseptible to following a mis-heard call from the LHS (I'm not saying this happened here, I know nothing about it).
The report on this one could make interesting reading. Bit like the legend of the F/O under training who was told to 'chear up' on the T/O and put the gear up!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would appear that this was a not a case of confusion between the crew. Rather a mistaken call of 'Stop' by the Captain at V1/Vr instead of rotate . Same skipper allegedly had an embarrassing incident the week before which resulted in a slide being blown after pushback.
One of those nightmare weeks where nothing goes right for you I guess.....
But makes one wonder whether the symptoms of rock bottom morale, crap scheduling, feeling like you're banging your head against a brick wall and constant apologies for the chaos at the Gatwick operation are beginning to manifest themselves.
Happy pilots = better performing pilots
One of those nightmare weeks where nothing goes right for you I guess.....
But makes one wonder whether the symptoms of rock bottom morale, crap scheduling, feeling like you're banging your head against a brick wall and constant apologies for the chaos at the Gatwick operation are beginning to manifest themselves.
Happy pilots = better performing pilots
Last edited by Bumblebee; 30th Sep 2002 at 23:05.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
warning or caution??
I am not too sure of the 737 systems, but a red "warning" light is usually a stop item! If it was a "warning" then I would have thought they were correct to stop! I think a little confusion has crept in here between "caution" and "warning"! In my aircraft type, the brief states that you should plan to stop for any "red warning"??!!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prophead you are correct that in BA the FO can reject a take off, but only in a limited number of clearly defined circumstances. As most short haul aircraft generally have the same Vr and V1 theres little chance of a rejection beyond V1 as the first call will be 'rotate'. Furthermore company SOPs are such that nobody will have their hands anywhere near the throttles beyond V1 so it'll take a conscious effort to reject beyond V1. If anything I think your policy of allowing only captains to guard the thrust levers on take off is more likely to cause the confusion you speak of as it does give the captain the authority to override a 'stop' decision, leading to the confusion you want to avoid. By our SOPs it would take a quite remarkable amount of confusion to reject the reject by overriding the autobrakes and reselecting TOGA after the FO has brought the throttles to idle!
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand Solo, when i was talking about the Captain over-riding the F/O I was talking about the other way round! eg) F/O decides to continue, but Captain calls stop.
The Captain always guards the thrust levers, and always makes the decision whether to stop or go, regardless of who is flying. This reduces confusion and gives the most critical and dangerous decision any pilot is ever faced with to the Captain alone. An inexperienced F/O stopping for a loud bang and swing which is actually down to a tyre burst could be disasterous.
Also, I think you'll find that many people have abandoned T/O after V1 because the event has occured below V1, and by the time the assessment has been made the a/c has accelerated well beyond V1, with both pilots distracted and neither a V1 or rotate call being made. You'd be amazed how many people have stopped over V1 for loud bangs, going through water patches etc.
I've got a whole booklet full of examples which you really ought to read if you think your SOPs make it impossible for someone to end up stopping over V1.
The Captain always guards the thrust levers, and always makes the decision whether to stop or go, regardless of who is flying. This reduces confusion and gives the most critical and dangerous decision any pilot is ever faced with to the Captain alone. An inexperienced F/O stopping for a loud bang and swing which is actually down to a tyre burst could be disasterous.
Also, I think you'll find that many people have abandoned T/O after V1 because the event has occured below V1, and by the time the assessment has been made the a/c has accelerated well beyond V1, with both pilots distracted and neither a V1 or rotate call being made. You'd be amazed how many people have stopped over V1 for loud bangs, going through water patches etc.
I've got a whole booklet full of examples which you really ought to read if you think your SOPs make it impossible for someone to end up stopping over V1.
