View Full Version : Crash landing at Heathrow
tooquicktostop
17-01-08, 14:44
Looks like they were very lucky to all escape
Major disruption
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7194086.stm
Quick!! Someone press the big red button!!!
Cue conspiricy theorists for the next 5 pages...
EDIT: Glad no-one was hurt though, could have been a hell of a lot worse
Looks like it just missed that road!!
Yeah just listening to them saying about that on Radio. :blink:
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 14:51
Oooh exciting :)
tooquicktostop
17-01-08, 14:54
14:45 AA6635 PRAGUE CANCELLED Terminal one
14:45 BA189 NEWARK SCHEDULED Terminal four
14:45 BA856 PRAGUE CANCELLED Terminal one
14:45 BD151 BRUSSELS SCHEDULED Terminal one
14:45 KU101 NEW YORK SCHEDULED Terminal three
14:45 LH4775 STUTTGART CANCELLED Terminal two
14:45 LH6703 BRUSSELS SCHEDULED Terminal one
14:45 NZ4441 BRUSSELS SCHEDULED Terminal one
14:50 BA1448 EDINBURGH CANCELLED Terminal one
14:50 QF3465 EDINBURGH CANCELLED Terminal one
14:55 BA942 DUSSELDORF CANCELLED Terminal one
14:55 EY020 ABU DHABI SCHEDULED Terminal three
14:55 QF3449 DUSSELDORF CANCELLED Terminal one
15:00 AA6369 ABERDEEN CANCELLED Terminal one
15:00 AA6616 LYON CANCELLED Terminal four
15:00 AC889 OTTAWA GATE OPEN Terminal three
15:00 BA1312 ABERDEEN CANCELLED Terminal one
15:00 BA362 LYON CANCELLED Terminal four
15:00 BA568 MILAN-LINATE CANCELLED Terminal one
15:00 BD4889 OTTAWA GATE OPEN Terminal three
15:00 CY347 LARNACA SCHEDULED Terminal one
15:00 LH4793 HAMBURG CANCELLED Terminal two
15:00 QF3357 ABERDEEN CANCELLED Terminal one
15:00 QF3533 LYON CANCELLED Terminal four
15:00 SK3817 OTTAWA GATE OPEN Terminal three
15:05 AA6611 HAMBURG CANCELLED Terminal one
15:05 BA113 NEW YORK SCHEDULED Terminal four
15:05 BA734 GENEVA CANCELLED Terminal four
15:05 BA966 HAMBURG CANCELLED Terminal one
15:05 QF3519 HAMBURG CANCELLED Terminal one
15:05 QF3592 GENEVA CANCELLED Terminal four
15:10 AA6440 GLASGOW CANCELLED Terminal one
15:10 AA6458 PARIS CDG SCHEDULED Terminal four
15:10 BA1486 GLASGOW CANCELLED Terminal one
15:10 BA269 LOS ANGELES SCHEDULED Terminal one
15:10 BA316 PARIS CDG SCHEDULED Terminal four
15:10 CO8243 LOS ANGELES BOARDING Terminal three
15:10 EI035 BELFAST SCHEDULED Terminal one
15:10 QF3419 PARIS CDG SCHEDULED Terminal four
15:10 QF3509 GLASGOW CANCELLED Terminal one
A few people going to be fed up today :(
I love the eyewitness reports- from a plane taxing ready to tkae off. "Errrr I've changed my mind!!!"
I love the eyewitness reports- from a plane taxing ready to tkae off. "Errrr I've changed my mind!!!"
Yeah but you would wouldn't you lol.
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 14:56
I love the eyewitness reports- from a plane taxing ready to tkae off. "Errrr I've changed my mind!!!"
:D
With the landing looks like the pilot of the plane landed in the right spot, I shudder to think what would have happened if he actually landed on the runway.
I have just come back.
Went over and had a quick look, looks like it dropped down just after the fence, skidded along the grass and then turned sharply at the beginning of the runway. Front wheel looks ok but couldnt see the back wheels, the area where it dug in would suggest they were also down.
supra steveo
17-01-08, 15:13
bloody hell, ive got the news on now
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 15:26
Wayne wasn't working on that one was he? ;)
It's the same flight number that I went on to China. May even be the same plane! That was a 777.
Major nightmare...... glad it wasn't gatwick :)
That runway will be closed for a week then!! Hope nobody's flying from Heathrow this week?
777 is a notoriously poor plane .
My mums just telling me how much everyone hates working on them - wonder what this is gonna cost heathrow ! Millions !!
777 is a notoriously poor plane .
My mums just telling me how much everyone hates working on them - wonder what this is gonna cost heathrow ! Millions !!
Probably about 2-3 million a day. At least they still have one runway working!
they are a crap airline ba, not so long ago one of their pilots clipped the wing with another aircraft, not only that they have lost so many customers luggage
One of the worst pieces of parking I have ever seen!!:)
H.
Dragonball
17-01-08, 16:00
they are a crap airline ba, not so long ago one of their pilots clipped the wing with another aircraft, not only that they have lost so many customers luggage
I'm selling my shares :)
Oops - dont have any
Friend of mine is on the long hauls with them - will find out the gos later!
cheekymonkey
17-01-08, 16:00
Apparently the pilot says he lost all power and all electronics... scary...
I bet they were using shiny aftermarket battery terminal clips and they fell off!
supradibbs
17-01-08, 16:01
777 is a notoriously poor plane .
My mums just telling me how much everyone hates working on them - wonder what this is gonna cost heathrow ! Millions !!
And where do you get that info from, i have worked on 777s as a engineer for nearly 8 years and is probably the most reliable and safe aircraft in the sky
And Gaz no i work for American not BA but Tucky40 is a first officer for them on 777s
And where do you get that info from, i have worked on 777s as a engineer for nearly 8 years and is probably the most reliable and safe aircraft in the sky
:yeahthat:
I have a number of friends here who are either engineers or pilots, it's the Airbus planes they all complain about.
6 injured.... I bet most of them were cut by their duty free bottles breaking as they took them down the emergency chutes :)
they have lost so many customers luggage
They not lost :D
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 16:12
And Gaz no i work for American not BA but Tucky40 is a first officer for them on 777s
That explains everything ;) :D
tooquicktostop
17-01-08, 16:12
They not lost :D
Wonder if my golf clubs are in there??
And where do you get that info from, i have worked on 777s as a engineer for nearly 8 years and is probably the most reliable and safe aircraft in the sky
And Gaz no i work for American not BA but Tucky40 is a first officer for them on 777s
My Mums a purser(long haul) , she's been with BA for...christ about 20 odd years . Works out of the compass centre in Heathrow . I work for the BAA and i've heard a good few problems with the 777 through colleagues and friends who work on them .
Well im glad to say i wasnt me.........as wayne says its an excellent plane with an excellent safety record. The 777 is the newest and most modern aircraft boeing have made.
As for lost baggage, thats the airport operator 'BAA' to blame.
Well im glad to say i wasnt me.........as wayne says its an excellent plane with an excellent safety record. The 777 is the newest and most modern aircraft boeing have made.
As for lost baggage, thats the airport operator 'BAA' to blame.
Isnt the lost baggage the airline handling company ? Servisair etc ?
Supra Pilot
17-01-08, 16:32
And where do you get that info from, 777s is probably the most reliable and safest aircraft in the sky
:yes: Spot on.... Dam good Aircraft...
I'll put money on the usual suspect... 'Pilot error!'
;)
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 16:33
Well im glad to say i wasnt me.........
Nice one mate :)
As for lost baggage, thats the airport operator 'BAA' to blame.
I disagree :D
How is it that BA lose so much luggage yet all other airlines out of the same terminals do not. Not BAA`s fault or any others airport operator.
In my opinion its due to disgruntled BA baggage handlers having to work extra shifts as BA have cut staff.
they are a crap airline ba, not so long ago one of their pilots clipped the wing with another aircraft, not only that they have lost so many customers luggage
Do you mean this rather stationary BA plane which was hit by a moving Sri Lankan one?;)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7046931.stm
I disagree :D
How is it that BA lose so much luggage yet all other airlines out of the same terminals do not. Not BAA`s fault or any others airport operator.
In my opinion its due to disgruntled BA baggage handlers having to work extra shifts as BA have cut staff.
I didn't think actual airlines had baggage handelers - thought they were all just BAA?
You have a good point Wez.........BAs lost baggage numbers are so high for the simple reason that they have more passegers going through Heathrow and Gatwick than any other airline.
Heathrow and Gatwick are the homes of BA.........these airports are run by the BAA.
Faye is right.........it was a stationary BA plane that got hit by the sri lankan. See BA are great;)
I didn't think actual airlines had baggage handelers - thought they were all just BAA?
BA have there own ground services as do other airlines, there are also other ground services companies like ground star which are contractors for the airlines.
BAA provide the facility.
Do you mean this rather stationary BA plane which was hit by a moving Sri Lankan one?;)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7046931.stm
Jazz, I think you had better leave this conversation to the grown ups mate. :)
You have a good point Wez.........BAs lost baggage numbers are so high for the simple reason that they have more passegers going through Heathrow and Gatwick than any other airline.
I disagree with this as well :D
The BA bags use the same sortation and scanning systems as all other airlines yet less BA bags get to the plane.
Seen the pics on BBC. Looks like the pilots did a good job!
In the end it was a successful landing as everyone walked away :)
Did the same myself a few years back.... landed short in the rough & damaged the landing gear. It was in one of these though:
http://www.aeroclub-bad-neustadt.de/gallerie/Ka8_am_Boden.jpg
As a Frequent traveller on most carriers....I have no complaints of BA or BMI; in fact I find the service of BA much better than BMI.
supradibbs
17-01-08, 17:41
My Mums a purser(long haul) , she's been with BA for...christ about 20 odd years . Works out of the compass centre in Heathrow . I work for the BAA and i've heard a good few problems with the 777 through colleagues and friends who work on them .
Wow your Mum is a Air Hostess well you should of said they always think they know everything
supradibbs
17-01-08, 17:43
Well im glad to say i wasnt me.........as wayne says its an excellent plane with an excellent safety record. The 777 is the newest and most modern aircraft boeing have made.
As for lost baggage, thats the airport operator 'BAA' to blame.
Lost all Electrical power by the hair of my chinny chin chin, it will be good to see if the RAT was deployed hey mate;)
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 17:45
RAT was deployed hey mate;)
Ram Air Turbine ?
supradibbs
17-01-08, 17:45
Ram Air Turbine ?
correct
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 17:46
correct
I was thinking of modifying planes soon so need to know these things ;) :p
correct
Aparently the APU door was open???...... I didn't think APU's had doors :search: unless they actually mean the RAT?
supradibbs
17-01-08, 17:50
I was thinking of modifying planes soon so need to know these things ;) :p
how did you know that
supradibbs
17-01-08, 17:53
Aparently the APU door was open???...... I didn't think APU's had doors :search: unless they actually mean the RAT?
The APU has basically 4 doors for servicing inspection etc two main doors and two smaller doors aft off the main that act as a means of venting the pressure that builds up in the APU compartment, we always open these doors first otherwose you end up with a very big headache
As it was coming in to 'land' a witness asid the APU door was open.
I'm guessing they actually mean the RAT. That would fit in nicely with the passengers saying they came in VERY fast.
Possibly the pilot was indeed working with a total power failure and had deployed the RAT to gain limited electrical and hydraulic power (and at least have some control of the hydraulic surface pairs?).
High speed = RAT keeps working.
Possible scenario Wayne?
gaz_turbo1
17-01-08, 17:58
believe it or not but i seen this plane come in, i was sitting at lights and come pass me and the front was sticking up and arse end low down, which make's sense as he lost power and done this to get a bit of hieght and distance, i did'nt no it crashed untill i got a phone call 10 mins later asking if i had seen anything, and then i knew it was that plane
supradibbs
17-01-08, 18:01
As it was coming in to 'land' a witness asid the APU door was open.
I'm guessing they actually mean the RAT. That would fit in nicely with the passengers saying they came in VERY fast.
Possibly the pilot was indeed working with a total power failure and had deployed the RAT to gain limited electrical and hydraulic power (and at least have some control of the hydraulic surface pairs?).
High speed = RAT keeps working.
Possible scenario Wayne?
If he had lost all power the RAT deploys automatically and will supply some flight control surfaces and emergency electrically buses only is enough to keep it in the Air this would mean the engines had flamed out so can only be fuel other wise he would have cranked the APU to gain electrical power, got to be honest makes no sense to me
supradibbs
17-01-08, 18:03
believe it or not but i seen this plane come in, i was sitting at lights and come pass me and the front was sticking up and arse end low down, which make's sense as he lost power and done this to get a bit of hieght and distance, i did'nt no it crashed untill i got a phone call 10 mins later asking if i had seen anything, and then i knew it was that plane
Not allways the case he could of been to fast on the approach so was stalling the A/C to dump speed i.e high angle off attack, which would make no sense if he had no power, would like to off sign flap and slat position on approach
Wow your Mum is a Air Hostess well you should of said they always think they know everything
Ahh your right working on them she wont know fu*k all i bet .
I have no idea what it is you guys are talking about, but do carry on, I'm picking up bits and pieces and working it out. Fascinating stuff. :)
supradibbs
17-01-08, 18:06
Ahh your right working on them she wont know fu*k all i bet .
Pretty much mate
I work these airplanes i know the systems i know how they work, am sorry to be rude but i work with air hostesses all day long and they think they know it all mate i should know am bractically married to one
not saying they know nothing i.e all brain dead but they not pilots or engineers
If he had lost all power the RAT deploys automatically and will supply some flight control surfaces and emergency electrically buses only is enough to keep it in the Air this would mean the engines had flamed out so can only be fuel other wise he would have cranked the APU to gain electrical power, got to be honest makes no sense to me
Hmmm, strange, a friend mention something along the same lines. That he had run out of fuel on approach. No engines = no control. My assumption would be without engine power, the hydralic system wouldn't lock the wheels properly, or would they just be sheered off from the force on the ground and the grass/gravel.
supradibbs
17-01-08, 18:08
Hmmm, strange, a friend mention something along the same lines. That he had run out of fuel on approach. No engines = no control. My assumption would be without engine power, the hydralic system wouldn't lock the wheels properly, or would they just be sheered off from the force on the ground and the grass/gravel.
free fall should be enough not lock in position would have to check on that i will have a lock at the scymatic tomorrow
Complete loss of Fuel at the moment seems the only real answer be intresting to see what tucky40 or privite pile has to say about that
i thought you were a baggage handler:search:
Lol wayne say it how it is!! Chris your mum would know a hell of alot about the plane but only from a customer service and security point of view. What wayne is saying is she would know nothing at all about the mechanics and flying of the plane which is true.
I'm thinking maybe they hit a flock of birds on final aproach and lost both engines!
tooquicktostop
17-01-08, 18:11
There is more detailed info on this thread on the crash than on sky news, very interesting, but OMG someone is for the high jump if they ran out of fuel ??
Pretty much mate
I work these airplanes i know the systems i know how they work, am sorry to be rude but i work with air hostesses all day long and they think they know it all mate i should know am bractically married to one
not saying they know nothing i.e all brain dead but they not pilots or engineers
I know what you mean as i said i work for the BAA and to be honest cant stand hostesses and they're snobbery . She can be a pain in the a**e but its my mum you know !!
i thought you were a baggage handler:search:
:rlol:
Nah, Wayne's not a thief!!
supradibbs
17-01-08, 18:16
Lol wayne say it how it is!! Chris your mum would know a hell of alot about the plane but only from a customer service and security point of view. What wayne is saying is she would know nothing at all about the mechanics and flying of the plane which is true.
I'm thinking maybe they hit a flock of birds on final aproach and lost both engines!
Ahhh thats a good point never thought about that mate would explain lack off time to start APU
There is more detailed info on this thread on the crash than on sky news, very interesting, but OMG someone is for the high jump if they ran out of fuel ??
With the price of fuel at the moment, probably only stuck a fiver in it at the pump. Just kidding. :p
In all seriousness if it is something as simple as that then it would be a good thing, because joe public will be jumping to all sorts of conclusions.
Complete loss of Fuel at the moment seems the only real answer be intresting to see what tucky40 or privite pile has to say about that
They should have called low fuel WAY before approach..... Get it soemetimes at Gatwick & they call full emergency half an hour before it lands.
Sudden fuel supply failure? Wierd.
Edit: Seen Tucky40's post. Multiple bird strike? Say Geese?
Fueling of aircraft is not taken lightly, there are various weight and balance processes used which take into account lots of variables including enough fuel to circle and divert etc.
If it did run out of fuel then someone could be looking at a prison term.
I would put my money on it being anything but running out of fuel. Unless they had some sort of fuel system failure which i doubt
On the average day a 777 from somewhere like the far east will be landing with about 4-6 tonnes of fuel.......about 3tonnes of that being the legel 'reserves' minimum.
a tonne equates to about ten minutes flying time.......
supradibbs
17-01-08, 18:25
I would put my money on it being anything but running out of fuel. Unless they had some sort of fuel system failure which i doubt
On the average day a 777 from somewhere like the far east will be landing with about 4-6 tonnes of fuel.......about 3tonnes of that being the legel 'reserves' minimum.
a tonne equates to about ten minutes flying time.......
Unless some fly boy jettisons all the fuel lol
I agree fuel loss does seem unlickly but just cn think off anything else at the momoment remember Air transat
cheekymonkey
17-01-08, 18:58
Anyone remember the Gimli Glider incident? Fascinating story.
http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html
Anyone remember the Gimli Glider incident? Fascinating story.
http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html
Christ on a bike! I never was a fan of crossing the controls to side slip, but in an unresponsive 132 ton 767???? That takes some balls :respekt:
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 20:41
Anyone remember the Gimli Glider incident? Fascinating story.
http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html
Great story :)
ive been talking to a female friend today who has just passed as an air hostess with BA and her first flight is tomorrow to bombay. she was nervous as it was before todays events!
SUPRASUZUKI
17-01-08, 20:52
Lack of a fire at the crash could indicate a lack of fuel, maybe?:search:
Supra Pilot
17-01-08, 21:18
Lack of fuel is not at all likely... there are too many fail safe features for this to occur.
AFAIK there was not a PAN(emergency call). Tower or no one was informed of any abnormalities, they were not priority to come in either.
So all parameters on approach and Finals were normal.
Had to be Jockey error, serious Windshear, Auto Land Command fault, or combi of both very late on.
Not even convinced they had a double flame out as apparently the flare was fine and if they had no throttle power so late in the roll out they would of hit the deck so frecking hard it would of been far worse!
Something caused them to fall short very very late on.............
feckin 'ell im flying into heathrow tomorrow - is this still likely to effect flights on friday? ime not,any heathrow workers feedback would be helpful
SUPRASUZUKI
17-01-08, 21:24
Lack of fuel is not at all likely... there are too many fail safe features for this to occur.
AFAIK there was not a PAN(emergency call). Tower or no one was informed of any abnormalities, they were not priority to come in either.
So all parameters on approach and Finals were normal.
Had to be Jockey error, serious Windshear, Auto Land Command fault, or combi of both very late on.
Not even convinced they had a double flame out as apparently the flare was fine and if they had no throttle power so late in the roll out they would of hit the deck so frecking hard it would of been far worse!
Something caused them to fall short very very late on.............
Wouldn't you expect a fire though, from ruptured tanks? (Just guessing.....):search:
Wouldn't you expect a fire though, from ruptured tanks? (Just guessing.....):search:
Like in Die Hard 2 :D
SUPRASUZUKI
17-01-08, 22:03
Like in Die Hard 2 :D
Yippee-ki-yay, motherf**ker." :D
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 22:04
Like in Die Hard 2 :D
Yipeekiyay :D
supradibbs
17-01-08, 22:09
Lack of fuel is not at all likely... there are too many fail safe features for this to occur.
AFAIK there was not a PAN(emergency call). Tower or no one was informed of any abnormalities, they were not priority to come in either.
So all parameters on approach and Finals were normal.
Had to be Jockey error, serious Windshear, Auto Land Command fault, or combi of both very late on.
Not even convinced they had a double flame out as apparently the flare was fine and if they had no throttle power so late in the roll out they would of hit the deck so frecking hard it would of been far worse!
Something caused them to fall short very very late on.............
would have to been a aircraft issue then as everyone else using coupled approch np strikes me for what ever reason he stalled be that engine faliure whatever
I think by the apu doors, they meant the air inlet on the top of the fuse, as this was open on the ground in the news footage.
Also I first thought that they had run out of fuel as apparently they had all ready had a go and completed one go around.
Its quite possible that they were put into a holding patten for sometime due to others having difficulty landing and then one go around later they ran out....
But like previously stated there would have been a emergency call in...
Very fishy
feckin 'ell im flying into heathrow tomorrow - is this still likely to effect flights on friday? ime not,any heathrow workers feedback would be helpful
The affected runway is back in use during the day, although not the full length of it, so only smaller aircraft will use it. That will cause a bit of disruption as normally one runway is used for landings and the other takeoffs. Large aircraft will have to land on the takeoff runway, which will cause all sorts of hassle routing the aircraft around the taxiways. Also they have had to revert to single runway operations at night as the runway lights are out of action. So there will be quite a lot of disruption, they will cancel some short haul flights at the very least.
Supra Pilot
17-01-08, 22:49
With regard to the APU doors being open, I can't see that as being abnormal.
As a matter of fact while typing here my collegue has just informed me that it is in fact part of their SOP (start APU before landing.) ;)
So that is a non starter! (or not, lol)
I have more info now but unfortunatly cannot disclose on a public forum.. sorry.:(
Oh, and no PM's please... (it may just be rumours)
With regard to the APU doors being open, I can't see that as being abnormal.
As a matter of fact while typing here my collegue has just informed me that it is in fact part of their SOP (start APU before landing.) ;)
So that is a non starter! (or not, lol)
I have more info now but unfortunatly cannot disclose on a public forum.. sorry.:(
Oh, and no PM's please... (it may just be rumours)
grr i won,t sleep now :p
With regard to the APU doors being open, I can't see that as being abnormal.
As a matter of fact while typing here my collegue has just informed me that it is in fact part of their SOP (start APU before landing.) ;)
So that is a non starter! (or not, lol)
I have more info now but unfortunatly cannot disclose on a public forum.. sorry.:(
Oh, and no PM's please... (it may just be rumours)
Tease!!
Anyway, you can tell me. I have full security clearance LOL :D
Gaz Walker
17-01-08, 23:03
Thats what rumours are for, to be spread around? ;)
Gaz.
It is not normal procedure to start the APU before landing so you can tell your mate to stop talking out of his ar@se.:D
Supra Pilot
17-01-08, 23:20
Sorry guys but it is pure speculation and nothing more at this time.
But lets keep all the theories coming!
:confused:
Supra Pilot
17-01-08, 23:21
Whats your SOP's on the 77 then?
Actually with regard to use of the APU....
As late as possible...........one of the biggest costs to an airline is fuel( no more running out of fuel jokes). Makes no sense starting the APU before landing. It can take 30mins or more to get to stand some days.
Normally 2 or 3 mins before parking and shutting engines down is a good time to start to old APU uo
I'm thinking maybe it was a flying pig that took an engine out!
I'm thinking maybe it was a flying pig that took an engine out!
:ban: :D
Supra Pilot
17-01-08, 23:38
Flying pig it could be indeed....
What are your thoughts........ I see you mentioned Bird strike on approach.. hmmm, taking out both engines, it will take a hell of a lot of birds to stop a Trent 800... 2 for that matter!
But then again a couple witnesses claimed the engines were roaring...?
Sudden power(elec) failure I would suspect.... if it were an Airbus that is... lol
Lets see what Wayne can share, I think he's fully rated on the 77
Really dont know supra pilot.......time will tell.
Supra Pilot
17-01-08, 23:55
Dam sorry sight unfortunatly....
Hope it does not kick BA in the balls!
supradibbs
18-01-08, 07:06
Dam sorry sight unfortunatly....
Hope it does not kick BA in the balls!
Hopefully find out more today
very fishy this one beginning to think it is a case of serve windshear
SUPRASUZUKI
18-01-08, 09:40
Shouldn't be too hard to find the cause, with the plane, pilots and black box all readily available.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7195298.stm
Supra Pilot
18-01-08, 22:57
Just spoke to a collegue thats assisting with the A/craft out there and it seems there was an apparent 'lack of power' when coming in 'late' on the final approach.
Auto Throttle(auto pilot system) commanded some more thrust(juice) on the final but the Engines did not respond.. even when the Pilot manually moved the throttles for full guns.. 'nothing'... :(
So they started to drop like a stone (well at that stage of flight/approach you will)... So apparently the Jockeys really did a pretty good job of at least getting her down inside the park..
I can say that luck was with them as if they had managed to put her down with that much force on the Tarmac rather than the grass... then it would of been a disaster....
The grass being soaked(winter) acted like a cushion and took some impact as well as absorbing the spilled fuel and liquids.
Because Fuel and Sparks on the Tarmac would not of been nice. :conf:
With the landing looks like the pilot of the plane landed in the right spot, I shudder to think what would have happened if he actually landed on the runway.
Some pilots skill and proffesionalism is simply mindblowing. Have a lot of respect for guys like that.
Supra Pilot
19-01-08, 17:49
Official.......
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_news/accident__heathrow_17_january_2008___initial_report.cfm
Now to confirm if or what exactly caused this problem... :sly:
SUPRASUZUKI
19-01-08, 17:58
Official.......
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_news/accident__heathrow_17_january_2008___initial_report.cfm
Now to confirm if or what exactly caused this problem... :sly:
Any idea when we'll get something a bit more conclusive?:search:
Most of this we already know.
supradibbs
19-01-08, 18:11
Official.......
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_news/accident__heathrow_17_january_2008___initial_report.cfm
Now to confirm if or what exactly caused this problem... :sly:
Yeah was reading this report earlier
Engines failed to responed, humm i wonder A/T not armed maybe??
miko_supra
19-01-08, 19:17
Yeah was reading this report earlier
Engines failed to responed, humm i wonder A/T not armed maybe??
whats this an abbreviation of?
everyone in engineering talks in abbreviations, i struggle to keep up lol
whats this an abbreviation of?
everyone in engineering talks in abbreviations, i struggle to keep up lol
Auto throttle I think ;)
Surely the in flight data recorder would have the a/t parameter recorded, its not mandatory for it to be recorded but Virgin's black boxes record a lot more than the 'minimum'...
miko_supra
19-01-08, 22:40
Auto throttle I think ;)
Surely the in flight data recorder would have the a/t parameter recorded, its not mandatory for it to be recorded but Virgin's black boxes record a lot more than the 'minimum'...
ah is that what they were saying when the throttle wouldn't automatically come on during flare? i heard that the pilot could not adjust the throttle manually either though (haven't read the full report yet.) sounds like an lazyonics problem to me:p
was at work today and right opposite the plane the engines fooked wheels are still there aswell as engine bits on the grass, my mate saw it crash as he was on that post and has to write a report
Aparently they are going to move it this morning.
Aparently they are going to move it this morning.
well i watched them for 5 hours and not much was done:rolleyes:
well i watched them for 5 hours and not much was done:rolleyes:
the bbc website suggested that they are going to move it tomorrow between 8-11am. ;)
totally random, but in 2005 me and my family were nearly in a plane crash while flying over the caribbean sea, was at 30,000ft and all off a sudden the plane (AIRBUS A340-300) stanrted to go nose down, with the engine starting to make that noise of speeding up and loud rattling, after a few mins the nose lifted up, pilot came on a said 'LADIES AND GENTLE ME, WE HAVE LOST CABIN PRESSURE, AS A RESLUT OF THIS WE WILL HAVE TO RETURN TO TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO' pretty scary stuff, since then ive been a little freaked out by getting on a plane:D
miko_supra
20-01-08, 09:47
totally random, but in 2005 me and my family were nearly in a plane crash while flying over the caribbean sea, was at 30,000ft and all off a sudden the plane (AIRBUS A340-300) stanrted to go nose down, with the engine starting to make that noise of speeding up and loud rattling, after a few mins the nose lifted up, pilot came on a said 'LADIES AND GENTLE ME, WE HAVE LOST CABIN PRESSURE, AS A RESLUT OF THIS WE WILL HAVE TO RETURN TO TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO' pretty scary stuff, since then ive been a little freaked out by getting on a plane:D
nah...you'll be fine!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7198598.stm
Auto throttle would definately have been on wayne. Its armed before flight and remains on till it automatically disengages on landing. If it had of disconnected in flight there would have been a visual and oral warning.
It also wouldnt explain why there was no affect from manual imputs
I see that the 1st Officer was the one who landed the plane. Is that normal? I would have thought it would have been the Captain - or is it different aboard an aircraft?
I get the impression most people think the captain flies and the first officer reads the newspaper. This is partly true;)
But its normal practice in every airline for each pilot to take it in turns........i.e they decide between them at the beginning of the day that the first officer will take the plane to the destination and the captain will fly it back to base or vice versa.
Things are a little more complicated in BA but basically it looks as though it was the First officers sector back from beijing. As he was in control and the incident happened so close to the ground it was probably easiest and safest for him to remain in control and land it.
I learn something new again ;)
well i watched them for 5 hours and not much was done:rolleyes:
You busy at work then?
I'm flying out on Sunday...no doubt Jazz will still be sat there watching the weeds grow :p
You busy at work then?
I'm flying out on Sunday...no doubt Jazz will still be sat there watching the weeds grow :p
depends what post im on:)
No matter what mechanical/electrical problem caused the crash - just goes to show you the abilities of the pilots to bring it home. Seemingly some of the passengers didnt even know that the plane had crashed !!
Gives you confidence in flying. Knowing quite a few of BA's pilots it just goes to show that all the training and reassessments that they go through are well worth while. For such a major problem to have so very few casualties was extremely remarkable - testimony to the flight and cabin crews training.
Cheers
Ian
Any comment on this theory read on another board?
"It could be that the crash was caused by fueling procedures in China (this is supposedly from a BA pilot). Apparently planes are suppose to be filled as soon as they land to stop condensation building up in the fuel tank, in china they don't (apparently).
So why is condensation bad? Well at altitude its pretty cold -50oC or was it -150oC wind chill cant remember, something like that anyway. Anyway the water from the condensation freezes and turns to ice if ice gets jammed in the fuel lines no fuel gets to the engines and you've got a big brick falling from the sky.
Apparently there have been three similar incidents in china last year alone."
Surely the effect of any iced fuel lines would have been felt much earlier on?
Surely the effect of any iced fuel lines would have been felt much earlier on?
Not if the ice was floating on top of the fuel, and as the fuel level dropped at some point when the fuel got low enough it was close enough to the fuel pickup to be sucked in??
Sorry to bring this up again, but it looks like they've made some modifications to the runway now:
http://www.supermotors.net/getfile/603849/fullsize/runway.gif
Gaz Walker
02-02-08, 16:57
:rlol:
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.