British Airways Attempts 777 Soft Field Landing

[Prog 2/2]

My first thought was that it was an Autothrottle Failure......Does anyone know if it is BA SOP to use the ATs?....If it is 3 in the morning and I am brain dead I will use them but not anytime else. Anytime a mechanical/computer part has totally failed on my airplane the first thing the engineers will say is, "that shouldn't have happened". No S##t.....thats why I'm not a big AT fan below 5000'.....Peace Out..

The Autothrottle system on most Boeings is simply a motor (or two) that moves the throttle lever to a computed angle based on the inputs from a bunch of different sources. If you read the AAIB prelim, you'll find that the autothrottles were engaged and were commanding an appropriate increase in thrust that didn't come.

I can't speak for BA specifically, but I'm sure they follow the standard Boeing guidelines wrt autothrottle use. That being; autothrottles used all the time, with the recommendation that they be off for hand flying and prior to landing, when appropriate.

 

[Spooky 2]

My first thought was that it was an Autothrottle Failure......Does anyone know if it is BA SOP to use the ATs?....If it is 3 in the morning and I am brain dead I will use them but not anytime else. Anytime a mechanical/computer part has totally failed on my airplane the first thing the engineers will say is, "that shouldn't have happened". No S##t.....thats why I'm not a big AT fan below 5000'.....Peace Out..

Boeing SOPs require the use of AT for all landings, hand flown or otherwise. You can turn em off but that is operating outside the Mfg. procedures.

 

[F/O]

Boeing SOPs require the use of AT for all landings, hand flown or otherwise. You can turn em off but that is operating outside the Mfg. procedures.

Even for the classic 737? The delay in autothrust response to small pitch changes lags horrifically when handflying the old ones. More trouble than it's worth.

 

[epic!]

"Initial indications from the interviews and Flight Recorder analyses show the flight and approach to have progressed normally until the aircraft was established on late finals for Runway 27L. At approximately 600 ft and 2 miles from touch down, the Autothrottle demanded an increase in thrust from the two engines but the engines did not respond. Following further demands for increased thrust from the Autothrottle, and subsequently the flight crew moving the throttle levers, the engines similarly failed to respond. The aircraft speed reduced and the aircraft descended onto the grass short of the paved runway surface.
The investigation is now focussed on more detailed analysis of the Flight Recorder information, collecting further recorded information from various system modules and examining the range of aircraft systems that could influence engine operation."



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

 

[Prog 2/2]

Boeing SOPs require the use of AT for all landings, hand flown or otherwise. You can turn em off but that is operating outside the Mfg. procedures.

Sounds like you're thinking of the Bus.

A/T's are reqd for autoland, recommended for everything else, and reqd to be off prior to landing for non autolands.

 

[Spooky 2]

Even for the classic 737? The delay in autothrust response to small pitch changes lags horrifically when handflying the old ones. More trouble than it's worth.

This problem has pretty much been eliminated in the 777. They work very well and most if not all pilots follow the prescribed procedures and use them as directed.

 

[suupah]

"Initial indications from the interviews and Flight Recorder analyses show the flight and approach to have progressed normally until the aircraft was established on late finals for Runway 27L. At approximately 600 ft and 2 miles from touch down, the Autothrottle demanded an increase in thrust from the two engines but the engines did not respond. Following further demands for increased thrust from the Autothrottle, and subsequently the flight crew moving the throttle levers, the engines similarly failed to respond. The aircraft speed reduced and the aircraft descended onto the grass short of the paved runway surface.
The investigation is now focussed on more detailed analysis of the Flight Recorder information, collecting further recorded information from various system modules and examining the range of aircraft systems that could influence engine operation."



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

no mention here whether the engines were flamed out or not. That should be easy to discern and us inquiring pilot types are dying to know

 

[Peter Griffin]

He probably just forgot proper soft field technique and let the nose touch early...

 

[gump88]

They needed the GE engines instead of those old RRs!!!! Typical Brits! LOL

 

[Spooky 2]

They needed the GE engines instead of those old RRs!!!! Typical Brits! LOL

GE are great engines but if you were to compare the number of SB out for the GE's as compared to the RR and especially the P&W you find that the RR are way ahead with fewer SB and IFS. Both DAL and AA use the RR's and have great experience with these engines. I don't think this will be an engine problem as opposed to a fuel problem. Hell, they may never figure this one out.