Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Plane 'Seconds from Disaster' Over London

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Amish RakeFight

Registered Loser
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Posts
8,006
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/...seconds+from+disaster'+over+London/article.do

Passenger plane 'seconds from disaster' over London

27.09.06


A packed jumbo jet was forced into a series of steep dives over London by instrument failure.
The aircraft dropped to its minimum permitted altitude of 1,200 feet meaning it was seconds from a major disaster.

There was panic on board among more than 450 passengers and crew as the plane began its landing approach 10 miles east of Heathrow. The pilot had to disconnect the autopilot of the Boeing 747 and put it into a climb to 1,800 feet.

He re-established control with moments to spare and had to switch to manual to land. A report today into the incident says the jumbo's control panel was showing "progressive fly down commands and the autopilot was attempting to pitch the aircraft's nose down to follow these indications".

Seconds later a warning of "glide scope failure", which gives the height of the jet, appeared on the cabin screen with the warning "no auto land".

The co-pilot immediately tried to contact air traffic control to find out if there was a fault with the glide scope - but he could not get through because of radio congestion.

The air traffic controller had also noticed the "unusually low altitude" as the plane dropped and immediately ordered the Boeing to climb again.

The official report into the incident by the Air Accident Investigations Branch says that as the flight crew taxied the jet towards its parking stand they reported to air traffic control that the glide scope "had fluctuated".

A warning was immediately sent out by air traffic control to other approaching aircraft to see if they were experiencing similar problems but none did. The incident happened on 10 January just after midday.

The report concludes that "available evidence" suggested there was an error in glide scope signal. However, monitoring equipment on the ground showed no fault and no cause could be found for the error recorded on board the aircraft.

The Investigations Branch says it was not aware of any similar dramas immediately after the event.

Two years ago Prince Charles's plane was involved in a near-miss with an Airbus. Charles was flying in his private jet to Spain when it came within 900 feet of an Airbus A321 with 186 passengers on board. Aer Lingus said the Airbus had been flying under the control of London air traffic control at the time.
 
OMG! He had to disconnect the Autopilot and climb 600 feet?! Unbelievable. Why didn't they go missed, were they on an ILS in IMC?
Gotta love the news,
 
That's WHY ! (pilots are needed)

I remember hearing snyde remarks made by PAX and specifically by one disgruntled A/C Maintainer..

A group of us (pilots) were waiting for the employee as I over heard the MX guy saying, "there's another one standing there, damn waste of my airline's money....these planes can fly themselves"

Anyway, glad the crew managed to avert disaster...kudos!
 
It's like a weather scope...only bigger.
 
Not to get to far off topic. Glide slope errors have caused a lot of deaths; we all check the loc freq. But how many times have we ignored the crossing height at the dme/marker? Compliancy can kill you faster than a gun.
 
Not to get to far off topic. Glide slope errors have caused a lot of deaths; we all check the loc freq. But how many times have we ignored the crossing height at the dme/marker? Compliancy can kill you faster than a gun.
A gun kills pretty fast. Exaggerating a little, are we?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top