BA 777 "lands short" at Heathrow

[poppi]

Lack of fuel Very unlikely. A BA source says the plane landed with more than ten tonnes of fuel, more than normal after a 12-hour flight.

 

[Taildraggaah]

against[/I] stabilized approaches.

Yeeeaah, that is a great conclusion, let me know how that explanation works out when someone tries it on for size...

 

[tyuwerty]

Well, usually when there's a crash and no fire = no gas.

1. They landed it on wet rain soaked grass = not a lot of sparks

2. In a fuel starvation incident, it is astronomically unlikely that BOTH engines would quit at the EXACT same time.

3. Lots of talk about the APU, did it actually start?

 

[John Pennekamp]

1. They landed it on wet rain soaked grass = not a lot of sparks

2. In a fuel starvation incident, it is astronomically unlikely that BOTH engines would quit at the EXACT same time.

3. Lots of talk about the APU, did it actually start?

The right wing was nearly ripped off? No fuel spillage? Hmmmmm.

 

[tyuwerty]

The right wing was nearly ripped off? No fuel spillage? Hmmmmm.

Really?

From BBC Website:

"A significant amount of fuel leaked from the aircraft but there was no fire"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7197506.stm

 

[John Pennekamp]

Really?

From BBC Website:

"A significant amount of fuel leaked from the aircraft but there was no fire"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7197506.stm

Ok... Is the BBC reporter a reliable source on aviation technicalities? How much did they actually say? A large puddle? A hundred gallons?

I would think a 777 under normal conditions would land with at least a few thousand pounds on board. If that much fuel spilled on the grass those tree hugging Brits would be acting like the Exxon Valdez just parked at Heathrow. Yet you see no large containment or cleanup efforts.

 

[tyuwerty]

Ok... Is the BBC reporter a reliable source on aviation technicalities? How much did they actually say?

Since the reporter was quoting exactly from the AAIB (British NTSB) report, I don't think his reliabilty in aviation technicalities make a difference.

From the AAIB website:

http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_news/accident__heathrow_17_january_2008___initial_report.cfm

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

If that much fuel spilled on the grass those tree hugging Brits would be acting like the Exxon Valdez just parked at Heathrow. Yet you see no large containment or cleanup efforts.

Maybe they're waiting for that investigation thingy to move along?

Yeah, I personally don't trust any water table that doesn't have MTBE in high concentrations.

Now if you'll scuse me, I think I'll go shoot a bald eagle or two.

 

[Formula 1]

You don't know much about systems do you? Are you a pilot? I'm starting to think you are a poser

Generators stay on line at an N2 setting just bellow ground idle, they will not come off line until the N2's drop bellow this %of N2 wich is much lower than the flight idle setting. If the engines quit, the generators would have being powering the A/T system and the drop of N2 would signal the A/T to add power.(the engines are dead but during this period while the N2's are droping, there is still AC power on the A/C) Once the N2 would drop bellow the ground idle setting (well bellow the flight idle setting.) at that point is when the emergency lights would come on and the APU autostart would kick in.

So now the Gen was deffered Hum?

No I didn't say a GEN was deffered, I gave a possible reason for why the APU door was opened as you pointed out.

The passengers did not mention anything about a dark cabin just before impact. So your battery power theory has a few holes in it.

most sincerely,

Poser

 

[RJAA]

Lack of fuel Very unlikely. A BA source says the plane landed with more than ten tonnes of fuel, more than normal after a 12-hour flight.

10 tonnes =22000lbs = about 1:45 minutes remaining. Go missed, divert to alternate, hang out for 30 mins in holding pattern at 1500ft and 5% (or 10%) reserve. Normal desired and standard B777 fuel over destination with a close alternate like LGW on a VFR day.

 

[rfresh]

I'm watching a live feed from BBC, over here.

Evidently the BA Flt declared an emergency then turned toward the runway.

There is a lot of spectator eyewitness BS being spread right now, and no facts as of yet.

BBC is now interviewing a BA Captain, and he says this just doesn't happen to British pilots. Therefore, it must be a severe damage emergency or windshear or geese ingestion into the engines to cause the airplane to have a problem prior to touchdown. He said at least three times, "This just doesn't happen to British pilots. We are well trained. It had to be an aeroplane or weather problem."

Those BA pilots are still too much. I was working for Lockheed on their L-1011 program when BA bought a bunch of the TriStars. In those days in addition to the sim training, we did 25 hours training in the actual a/c. On my first training flight as part of the instructor crew, we had two BA Captains as our students. I was flying in the FE seat and we had an instructor pilot in the right seat and one of the BA guys in the left seat to start off.

I noticed a nose wheel steering wheel handle on the co-pilot side in addition to the normal one on the left side. I asked the instructor pilot what that was all about. He said BA insisted on Lockheed installing a nose wheel steering handle on the right side and it was cheaper not to remove the left one, so it remains.

Here's what surprised me: the BA student Captain said "Oh, BA Captains don't actually taxi the airplane, that's beneath us, that's what we have co-pilots for"!!

 

[Britpilot]

[John Pennekamp quote;

I would think a 777 under normal conditions would land with at least a few thousand pounds on board. If that much fuel spilled on the grass those tree hugging Brits would be acting like the Exxon Valdez just parked at Heathrow. Yet you see no large containment or cleanup efforts.[/quote]

It had 10 tonnes of fuel on board. The report does not state how much of that fuel leaked but some of it did.
You seem to have an issue with British people, why is that?
The aircraft is subject to an investigation so once that is complete I'm sure they will clean up the sight.
I think you will find that there are many more "tree huggers" here in the US than in all of the UK.
My dad used to say "engage brain before placing mouth into gear"
Good advice for you.

 

[Britpilot]

Duplicate post

 

[PAPA FOX!]

Also curious to see if there are any BS lawsuits like in the states here that come out of this.

Not likely. The British have a loser pays system, something we sure could use here in the USA.

 

[John Pennekamp]

It had 10 tonnes of fuel on board. The report does not state how much of that fuel leaked but some of it did.
You seem to have an issue with British people, why is that?
The aircraft is subject to an investigation so once that is complete I'm sure they will clean up the sight.
I think you will find that there are many more "tree huggers" here in the US than in all of the UK.

Oh please. Anybody who's been on this board for a while knows I'm one of the biggest left wing, socialist, tree hugging, wackos around. I just also like to bust people's balls. Even Brits. You do give us lots of material...

Edit: Cheers retracted. Go drink alone... you limeys have no sense of humor!

 

[John Pennekamp]

It had 10 tonnes of fuel on board. The report does not state how much of that fuel leaked but some of it did.
You seem to have an issue with British people, why is that?
The aircraft is subject to an investigation so once that is complete I'm sure they will clean up the sight.
I think you will find that there are many more "tree huggers" here in the US than in all of the UK.
My dad used to say "engage brain before placing mouth into gear"
Good advice for you.

I see you edited your post to make it even nastier.

I was just busting your balls, but if you want to take it personally, go for it. Apparently the stiff upper lip fades when you come over here and associate with us Yanks. I see you have an ex ValuJet plane as your avitar. Work for Citrus? Couldn't get on with BA eh? Sorry to hear that.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

I see you edited your post to make it even nastier.

I was just busting your balls, but if you want to take it personally, go for it. Apparently the stiff upper lip fades when you come over here and associate with us Yanks. I see you have an ex ValuJet plane as your avitar. Work for Citrus? Couldn't get on with BA eh? Sorry to hear that.

You're ragging on an AirTran guy about not being able to get hired at another company while you're a lifer at ASA?

Pot, meet Kettle.

 

[~~~^~~~]

It is unusual that the crew has been made available to the press in uniform. That fact alone would appear to indicate that BA's preliminary investigation has not indicated pilot error was a causal factor.

Anyone here up on how the 777's autothrottles work? Does the 777 still have cables to the ECC's?

From the interview I heard, it sounded like the engines did not respond to thrust lever commands.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

I have a belly button.

 

[John Pennekamp]

You're ragging on an AirTran guy about not being able to get hired at another company while you're a lifer at ASA?

Pot, meet Kettle.

*yawn*

ASA lifer? Couldn't get hired? How original. Same boring argument that's been rehashed here a thousand times. Which mainline carrier are you working for pinnacle boy? Do you routinely cruise your captain's RJ at .77 too?