Crossing Atlantic Engine Out To Save Money

[Spooky 1]

Yeah, now you have gone from forgeting more than I ever knew, to "knowing a little about the 76ER." Again, you make assumptions concerning the type of flying I am doing and have done. Stand by your ETOPS statement, I never stated that it made sense, just that it will happen. I'll keep you in my "I told you so" folder for later posting when it does occur.
If you display the same lack of tact and argumentative skills with your flying buddies as you do here, I'm sure that you are real hoot to fly with.
Oh, and if you take the time to read and comprehend the posts, you will note that I never questioned the BA crew's decision, nor commented on it in any way. So if your only intent from the beginning was to defend them as you say, there was no need for you to reply to my post, or respond with your amount of overwhelmingly greater knowledge than mine.

Thanks for your insight.

 

[8vATE]

Hey spooky...


I guess we'll just disagree on this one..

We can agree on something...
As you said... it's not fair to second guess the BA crew...

They are an extremely experienced group of professionals.... And I seriously doubt anyone here wants to disparage them..

However..

The EU is treading on thin ice when they start imposing extraordinary fines on uncontrollable delays...

seems maybe a reasonable compromise would have been to take the LAX aircraft to JFK and accomodate the pax there.... ?????? maybe???

oh well..

the SD3 is the Irish Concorde.... or more commonly known as the Shorts...
Before you laugh too hard.... I did my 5 years of 900 hour years of hand flying below 10,000 feet in the northeast.... so it was great experience..
especially the birdstrikes from behind..

happy trails and keep and open mind...

 

[bocefus]

AirSafety week is reporting that there was a fuel transfer issue in addition to the secured engine. The landing at Manchester was a result of the inability to transfer fuel rather than increased consumption due to performance issues. There was adequate fuel onboard to reach the destination with reserves.

 

[klhoard]

.
.
.
Well, that makes it much better. . . .
.
.
.
They're still idiots. . .
.
.
.

 

[Spooky 1]

AirSafety week is reporting that there was a fuel transfer issue in addition to the secured engine. The landing at Manchester was a result of the inability to transfer fuel rather than increased consumption due to performance issues. There was adequate fuel onboard to reach the destination with reserves.

Thanks.......!

 

[bocefus]

No postulations from the -400 systems experts as to what might have been the problem?

 

[Spooky 1]

Tail Tank fuel

Wonder if BA has the tail tank fuel option. I would have imagined that they do, but don't know for sure. If they could not access this fuel, then there may have been problems. Pure speculation on my part.

 

[G4G5]

U.S. plans to act after 'careless' BA flight
By Don Phillips International Herald Tribune

Tuesday, March 8, 2005


FAA weighs steps over 747's long route with one engine out

WASHINGTON Federal Aviation Administration officials said on Monday that they were preparing to take strong action against British Airways, including a charge of "careless and reckless operation of an aircraft," because of the airline's decision to allow a Boeing 747 to fly from California to England with one engine inoperable. Under normal circumstances, the United States would not take action against British Airways because such issues would be handled by Britain.
.
But senior U.S. aviation officials have become so concerned about the actions of the flight crew and its supervisors in London that they were preparing direct action.
.
"We will pursue every legal option available to us," said an FAA spokeswoman, Laura Brown.
.
British Airways expressed surprise over the developments.
.
"I am surprised that anyone at the FAA would make such statements," said Steve Shelterline, general manager for the 747 program with British Airways.
.
Shelterline said it was clear that even the portions of the federal aviation rules cited to a reporter by the Federal Aviation Administration would not prevent a four-engine airplane like the 747 from continuing flight with one engine out.
.
"The 747 is fully certificated to operate on three engines," he said. "There is no requirement to land."
.
Based on their investigation so far, U.S. aviation officials said they doubt that the crew's decision had anything to do with new European Union rules on monetary compensation to passengers for canceled flights and lengthy delays.
.
"It is our understanding of the rules that they would not apply in a situation like this," said an official who requested anonymity. That may make the decision even more difficult to comprehend, the U.S. officials said.
.
BA Flight 268 took off from Los Angeles on Feb. 19 and quickly developed trouble with one engine. Shelterline said this was caused by an engine surge.
.
Such surges sometimes happen in jet engines when the mixture of air and fuel is suddenly incorrect. The crew considered attempting to restart the engine, but decided instead to shut it down and continue to London.
.
However, partly because the plane could not climb to its planned altitude with one engine out, it used extra fuel in the thicker air at 29,000 feet.
.
As the fuel level decreased approaching the English coast, the crew decided to declare an emergency and land early in Manchester.
.
Senior U.S. aviation officials, who asked not to be quoted by name because they would be directly involved in legal actions against the airline, said the actions would be based on sections of U.S. aviation law dealing with careless and reckless operation of an aircraft and continuing operation of an aircraft in an unairworthy condition.
.
"There was an absence of judgment," said a senior official. "This is an indictment of the safety culture of British Airways."
.
Shelterline said a careful reading of the regulations cited by the Federal Aviation Administration to a reporter show that the British Airways pilot took actions that are specifically allowed.
.
Senior officials said the United States always has the right to block entry to the United States by British Airways, but that action is unlikely. Instead, a heavy fine seems more likely, they said. The U.S. agency was still considering its penalty options on Monday.
.
The officials said there is simply no way the airline could claim that continued operation of the flight was safe. The crew could not determine whether there might have been other damage in the area, the officials said.
.
"The crew could not assess why the engine failed, nor could they determine damage," said an official. In addition, with only three engines operating, the plane was forced to fly at lower altitudes in more dense air.
.
"You are sucking fuel like you are Exxon itself," an official said.
.
It is clear that the crew should have dumped fuel and returned to the airport in Los Angeles, the official said. On Feb. 25, six days later, the same BA 747 flew 11 hours on three engines when an engine gave out on a flight from Singapore to London. However, in that case, the aircraft had been in flight several hours before the engine stopped functioning.
.
.
.