Very Lucky Heathrow Crash

codprawn · 17 January 2008, 13:09

Not lucky to be in it but a miracle nobody was hurt.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7194086.stm

Listening to the comments of the press their ignorance is incredible!!!

Most of the passengers reported nothing seemed amiss so it's a bit of a strange one to land so short.

bogib · 17 January 2008, 22:28

This accident did affect me a lot, we had to wait in the aircraft for two hours before we where granted slot to start engine and take off, then once we landed on Heathrow we where sent on sightseeing tour on taxi runways as there where no available gate for us..... so my journey that normally takes less than 3 hours took altogether 6,5 hours

Bogi

codprawn · 17 January 2008, 22:33

You seem to spend more time over here than you do in Iceland - you must prefer our beer!!!

bogib · 18 January 2008, 06:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

You seem to spend more time over here than you do in Iceland - you must prefer our beer!!!

That what my wife says anyway......

- last time I had beer is back in 1978..... but I am told I am a good holding beer for others.... as I take no tax

Bogi

matt h · 18 January 2008, 07:49

before you hail the pilot as a hero, twins just dont fail at the same time, and there are 2 main safety back up systems on each engine, plus an Auxilary Power unit in the tail, in addition to that, there is a wind vane located in the in the forward section of the 777, which will deploy if all else fails,(operate hydraulics only) and looking at it, it hasnt deployed, which means no failure,
it is possible that Flameout occured in both units, and the craft was too low to re-start, will have to wait and see!!

DJL · 18 January 2008, 09:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt h

... in addition to that, there is a wind vane located in the in the forward section of the 777, which will deploy if all else fails,(operate hydraulics only) and looking at it, it hasnt deployed, which means no failure...

I believe the RAT is between the main undercarriage on the 777 - with the plane sitting on its belly it’s a bit hard to tell whether its deployed or not. I'm sure its not just hydraulics either, it powers vital electronics as well.

havener · 18 January 2008, 09:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt h

before you hail the pilot as a hero,

Understand all the backups, but why not still call the guy a hero?

Are you suggesting it was pilot error that caused it in the first place?

Anyone who can do what that flight deck crew managed under the circumstances deserve praise, especially when most of the country can't even drive a car without cocking it up or being a menace!

Not having a go at you, just curious as to why to hold back on the praise?

codprawn · 18 January 2008, 11:34

It is way too early to comment accurately on anything until the FACTS are known.

Pilot error looks possible but there is the report that the plane lost all power just before it happened. They prob mean electrical power. Yes they have all sorts of backups but when everything is computer controlled I get worried. If it all went wrong seconds before landing there wouldn't have been time to do anything.

Remember most of the passengers weren't aware of a problem until they hit and then they thopught it was just a hard landing - I would love to have seen their faces when they got out!!!

One thing that does stand out is that BA haven't grounded the fleet - i know it's early but they prob already know the cause. Wasn't it a BA jet that almost ran out of fuel before???

Maybe he did it for a bet - to see if you could put a modern airliner down on a small grass strip - he almost did it!!!

Of course another possibility is weather. My house was hit by a sudden massive gust of wind yeasterday - literally out of the blue. It then mentioned the possibility of tornados hitting Britain.

matt h · 18 January 2008, 11:48

i guess we must wait untill the CAA do there findings, its only YET AGAIN the press and Media that are having a field day at the Mo,
Guess what, if the pilot was to Blame, in some way,they will be the first to Slate and harass the Pilot.
they still havent said whether or not the 777 had fuel in it,?They havent shown the tankers removing any yet, bit early i know!
I remember going to Liverpool airport to fill up a twin, I specifically asked for 230 litres,When checked i actually had 180 Total on Board, !! could this 777 situation be fuel related,
Its happened many times to the very largest Commercial aircraft.

havener · 18 January 2008, 12:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt h

I remember going to Liverpool airport to fill up a twin, I specifically asked for 230 litres,When checked i actually had 180 Total on Board, !!

Up there, you were lucky to leave with wheels

(Only joking folks before I get shot to pieces...Dad's a scouser...)

Rogue Wave · 18 January 2008, 12:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by havener

Understand all the backups, but why not still call the guy a hero?

yeah the guy did well, but unless I am mistaken he had a vested interest in getting the plane down safely, namely that his arse was inside the fuselage. In those circumstances I'd do everything I could to survive.

glad It all ended up safe and sound

Bigmuz7 · 18 January 2008, 12:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

Of course another possibility is weather. My house was hit by a sudden massive gust of wind yeasterday - literally out of the blue. It then mentioned the possibility of tornados hitting Britain.

Well most reports do say 'loss of all power' which I take it means electrical aswell, however, I have experienced the above scenario on a flight into Toronto on the hottest day of spring they had had, where the plane fell suddenly as it was about to land. It was a 777 too, and it flew into some sort of void, where there was no lift what so ever until it was almost on the ground, scared the sh*t out of me.. although the kids loved it

havener · 18 January 2008, 14:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogue Wave

yeah the guy did well, but unless I am mistaken he had a vested interest in getting the plane down safely, namely that his arse was inside the fuselage. In those circumstances I'd do everything I could to survive.

glad It all ended up safe and sound

Very true - I suppose the difference is between those that are in that situation and s**t themselves, and those that remember their training and do the job.

Hopefully I'll never have to find out which type I am !

matt h · 18 January 2008, 14:34

could possibly be a case of wind shear where turbulent air goes down, and fast causing the aircraft to drop heavily,

DJL · 18 January 2008, 17:35

According to the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) at about 600ft "autothrottle demanded an increase in thrust from the two engines". After continued demands for increased thrust, and the "flight crew moving the throttle levers, the engines similarly failed to respond", the report indicated.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7196962.stm

codprawn · 18 January 2008, 17:48

I was just reading that!!!

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/latest_news/a...ial_report.cfm

Dirk Diggler · 18 January 2008, 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by havener

Hopefully I'll never have to find out which type I am !

Cool, your a pilot, what do you fly?

Matt · 18 January 2008, 19:56

It says his occupation is search and rescue. Mebbe he's the pilot of India Juliet.

codprawn · 18 January 2008, 23:01

Latest rumour is that it could be contaminated fuel. Quite how it managed to fly so many thousands of miles without a problem is still a mystery but it's not impossible I suppose.

Poly · 18 January 2008, 23:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

Latest rumour is that it could be contaminated fuel. Quite how it managed to fly so many thousands of miles without a problem is still a mystery but it's not impossible I suppose.

Well one hypothesis might be "the shit collects at the bottom of the tank then blocks the filters gradually over time and thus a problem is more likely to present after a period of usage rather than immediately after refuelling".