Airliner crash lands at Heathrow

[RadioGAAGAA]

It might be a software problem. The trouble with new technology is that while it solve a whole host of old problems it also creates many new ones. You mention the probability of getting fuel problems as the same time as being practically zero. The thing is the FADECs are fully independent. The odds of both causing a shut down at the same time are probably even longer that the fuel theory for the simple reason that the fuel is likely to have come from the same source (in China) even if the systems are split on board and it seems impossible that it would cause both to fail at the same time.

Initially I though a combination of events such as a single engine failure not well handled, with a bit of windsheer and a crew who had been flying all night throw in with another malfunction of some sort as a distraction but there is no evidence to support any of that so we will have to wait and see.

I agree completely that Boeing top brass will not be sleeping well, the same with Rolls Royce.
   

Not so sure - they are computer programs after all - what caused the first to crash could (and perhaps should) cause the 2nd to crash.


This would also account for the seeming inability of the multi-channel redundancy to kick-in.


It may be that the fault lies in a sensor common to both systems not so much failing, as sending erroneous readings confusing all the electronics.

[muppet]

Not so sure - they are computer programs after all - what caused the first to crash could (and perhaps should) cause the 2nd to crash.

They are dual channel FADECs located on each engine and are isolated from each other. In theory all four (2xdual channels) computers should not fail and certainly not at the same time. But then nothing in this accident should have happened.

As you say Boeing and RR will be trembling. Imagine the cost if they find a serious fault that requires grounding all 800 odd 777s not to mention the potential imapact on 787 orders.

[Chrisowc]

So youve just survived a plane crash. Would you complain about a lack of tea and coffee and counselling provided by the BA ground staff? Id have lost the temper with this eejit.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7196128.stm

What's the first thing Peggy Mitchell does after Phil has 'sorted' a crisis?

Makes a cup of tea

[Bud Wiser]

Bud they would have known within hours of the accident if it had been due to zero fuel. The tanks would be dry.

Well be jaysus muppet, you hit the nail on the head.  

Allow me a second theory then, mabye yer man, the 6'8"  Donaghy , the Kerry man was on the plane and heard the announcement, "we will be landing in five minutes"   and stood up to grab his bag and the head went through the roof, nobody has evaluated the roof yet.

On a serious note, I don't like how Brits do things, I don't  like how they shifted Dt Insp Marshall who handled things concerning Omagh into a nice little office.   One of the comments that sticks out in my mind about the landing in the car park is this,

The Captaine said, (When the yoke hit the ground) that "I admiredmy Co-Pilot for how he handled the whole situation, all my staff and crew did everything right"

I have been in Nasa , (4 times, been in Buzz Brownes pub in Titusville, the guy who suited up Buzz Aldrin on the Apollo Mission) saw a shutle launch, met an astrounaut, and at one stage in my haste arrived in K.S.P, in a leather jacket in blazing sun to arrive in Lake Buena Vista i n Florida to see Challenger go up like a Dub's dream.

In relation to what happened last week here is what the "Captain" said :
"No commendations can be awarded to anyone without considering that when the chutes were launched  thiat (xxx) "Crew Member" refused to slide down the chute until she came back into the cockpit and was happy that the captain was OK.

[muppet]

Bud they would have known within hours of the accident if it had been due to zero fuel. The tanks would be dry.

Well be jaysus muppet, you hit the nail on the head.

1. No dry tanks.
2. Fuel spillage, see firemen spraying foam around aircraft in photo.
3. Flight data recorder.
4. All the above confirmed by crew.
5. Mdern aircraft communicate, independent of the pilots, unusual engine parameters with their maintenance bases so it is possible that BA would have known straight away.

As for the Captain's comments I hate the way the media got access to a crew who had just been invloved in an accident. It is nuts. They are in no fit state to comment. Given that they are by default suspects how can their solicitors (or pilot's union) allow them to be so loose lipped in public. When the serious hunt for a scapegoat starts they might regret a careless comment.

[Aerlik]

Bud they would have known within hours of the accident if it had been due to zero fuel. The tanks would be dry.

Well be jaysus muppet, you hit the nail on the head.

1. No dry tanks.
2. Fuel spillage, see firemen spraying foam around aircraft in photo.
3. Flight data recorder.
4. All the above confirmed by crew.
5. Mdern aircraft communicate, independent of the pilots, unusual engine parameters with their maintenance bases so it is possible that BA would have known straight away.

As for the Captain's comments I hate the way the media got access to a crew who had just been invloved in an accident. It is nuts. They are in no fit state to comment. Given that they are by default suspects how can their solicitors (or pilot's union) allow them to be so loose lipped in public. When the serious hunt for a scapegoat starts they might regret a careless comment.

I was a bit surprised about that too.  Here in Oz you will very, very rarely if ever see/hear any of the flying crew talking to the meeja.  Our company has a strict "No comment" policy.  Double-edged sword I suppose; silence implies guilt etc.

Muppet how come you know so much about 777 engines and FMS?  Also, does Heathrow Tower (not approach) have radar?

[muppet]

Bud they would have known within hours of the accident if it had been due to zero fuel. The tanks would be dry.

Well be jaysus muppet, you hit the nail on the head.

1. No dry tanks.
2. Fuel spillage, see firemen spraying foam around aircraft in photo.
3. Flight data recorder.
4. All the above confirmed by crew.
5. Mdern aircraft communicate, independent of the pilots, unusual engine parameters with their maintenance bases so it is possible that BA would have known straight away.

As for the Captain's comments I hate the way the media got access to a crew who had just been invloved in an accident. It is nuts. They are in no fit state to comment. Given that they are by default suspects how can their solicitors (or pilot's union) allow them to be so loose lipped in public. When the serious hunt for a scapegoat starts they might regret a careless comment.

I was a bit surprised about that too.  Here in Oz you will very, very rarely if ever see/hear any of the flying crew talking to the meeja.  Our company has a strict "No comment" policy.  Double-edged sword I suppose; silence implies guilt etc.

Muppet how come you know so much about 777 engines and FMS?  Also, does Heathrow Tower (not approach) have radar?

Not familair with 777 but had chat with a BA co-pilot last weekend and he filled me in on some details. I am familar with other engines that use FADECs. Latest word I've heard is that it was a double engine failure, but not only that it seems they suffered a total electrical failure also. This is also very odd as you would expect 30 minutes emergency power from one or more batteries. If that were true (a big if) it is even more incredible they all survived as they would have had no instruments. This could be a long investigation.

Heathrow approach, tower and even ground (ground movement radar) all use radar. BTW I earlier mentioned that they occasionally used a PAR (Precision Radar Approach) when that should have been an SRA (Surveillance Radar Approach).

[heganboy]

I flew out of heathrow Friday night and as we taxied past the massive cranes at the crash site I was pleased to be in an Airbus. There were a lot of uncomfortable looking people I can tell you...

[Aerlik]

Muppet you know any other airports worldwide that have radars in the tower?  Very rare, in fact I think only Sydney maybe has it in Oz.  I don't even have the luxury of bloody area radar where I work.  Taking off in the schmoo  at night...pucker factor...all character building.

If there was no electrical power then surely the gens (3 or 4?) mustn't have been functioning beforehand if the backup supply failed.  Hmmmmmm ... Rolls Royce engines?  Oh dear.  Not good if so.

[muppet]

Muppet you know any other airports worldwide that have radars in the tower?  Very rare, in fact I think only Sydney maybe has it in Oz.  I don't even have the luxury of bloody area radar where I work.  Taking off in the schmoo  at night...pucker factor...all character building.

If there was no electrical power then surely the gens (3 or 4?) mustn't have been functioning beforehand if the backup supply failed.  Hmmmmmm ... Rolls Royce engines?  Oh dear.  Not good if so.

I'd be surprised if the 777 had gens 3 and 4. I'd expect gen1, gen2, standby (RAT), APU gen and battery. Look at the photo you can clealy see the APU inlet door is open. That would not be normal on approach particularly with the high fuel prices. On the 777 the APU autostarts in flight when A/C power is lost.

Of course it is possible the pilots manually started it but I cant see it happening considering how busy they must have been.  

[Bud Wiser]

Investegators have said today that the problem with the plane was fuel.  Now aint that amazing.  They said the fuel pumps are most likely the area they must now concentrate on.  Translated that means the yoke was filled up with sludge and dirt in the fuel, but then we knew that all along anyway -didn't we 

[Hardy]

You should never let the juice get too low in the tank. All sorts of muck get sucked into the pump and the carburettor and it can turn out very costly, especially with the new electronic pumps. Bucky Reilly below in the garage could have told them that.