BA 777 Crashlanding
01-17-2008, 06:50 AM
#1
Prime Minister/Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,262
BA 777 Crashlanding
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe...ent/index.html
Airplane looks wrecked, but fortunately only minor injuries.
I'm starting to believe that all that pax safety stuff really works.
Airplane looks wrecked, but fortunately only minor injuries.
I'm starting to believe that all that pax safety stuff really works.
01-17-2008, 07:52 AM
#3
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Be interesting to hear the rest of this story. The article quotes BA Management praising the crew. Passengers say the pilots did a great job.
But, it also sounds like an unstable approach that got out of hand. Be interesting to read what really happened.
As far as structural integrity, we were told in training that our 777's had less structural margins engineered into them. A result of engineers better able to design an aircraft which meets the requirements while being as light as possible. Looks like the airplane will be salvage.
But, it also sounds like an unstable approach that got out of hand. Be interesting to read what really happened.
As far as structural integrity, we were told in training that our 777's had less structural margins engineered into them. A result of engineers better able to design an aircraft which meets the requirements while being as light as possible. Looks like the airplane will be salvage.
01-17-2008, 08:55 AM
#5
Prime Minister/Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,262
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
But, it also sounds like an unstable approach that got out of hand. Be interesting to read what really happened.
I think there's more to it than that...I can't imagine a professional airline crew allowing an unstable approach to end in the dirt short of the runway. It's almost always an overshoot, not an undershoot. Rapidly approach dirt would have triggered a go around, unless there was some mechanical issue.
I guess LLWS is always a possibility.
01-17-2008, 08:56 AM
#6
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Rick, you are right. It doesn't truly fit that profile. I was just commenting on the reports of low altitude jocky'ing which is not typical of BA777 operations.
Rumors on PPRUNE is that this was a deadstick landing following fuel exhaustion
Rumors on PPRUNE is that this was a deadstick landing following fuel exhaustion
01-17-2008, 09:19 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 30 West
Posts: 417
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Rick, you are right. It doesn't truly fit that profile. I was just commenting on the reports of low altitude jocky'ing which is not typical of BA777 operations.
Rumors on PPRUNE is that this was a deadstick landing following fuel exhaustion
Rumors on PPRUNE is that this was a deadstick landing following fuel exhaustion
The news I've read suggests a total power loss for what ever reason coupled with control problems. If the engines both failed the fly by wire should have still worked, but anything is possible. The witnesses on the ground reported big pitch changes on short final. Sounds to me like the crew had their hands full and I want to get more information before I begin to speculate.
01-17-2008, 09:40 AM
#8
APC co-founder
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Airplane looks wrecked, but fortunately only minor injuries.
Here's a video with a shot of the witness marks at about 1:30, seriously short, I'm glad everyone appears to be OK.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe...ml#cnnSTCVideo
Last edited by HSLD; 01-17-2008 at 09:48 AM.
01-17-2008, 09:47 AM
#9
Prime Minister/Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,262
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Rumors on PPRUNE is that this was a deadstick landing following fuel exhaustion
01-17-2008, 10:03 AM
#10
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 66
As aviation professionals, I think we should adhere to the 5 seconds rule. That is after a big accident like this one, you should be able to summarize what happened in 5 seconds with factual information. Example “a British Airways Boing 777 crashed in London this morning, of a crew 16 and 135 pax, only 6 minor injuries”.
Anything beyond that statement is speculation, and speculation is in my opinion the worst enemy of aviation safety activism.
And I quote my aircraft safety teacher “airline accidents are usually multi-causal, complex puzzles that demand time and attention detail to solve” and “almost all initial theories proposed during an accident investigation are flat-out-wrong”.
Anything beyond that statement is speculation, and speculation is in my opinion the worst enemy of aviation safety activism.
And I quote my aircraft safety teacher “airline accidents are usually multi-causal, complex puzzles that demand time and attention detail to solve” and “almost all initial theories proposed during an accident investigation are flat-out-wrong”.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
