View Single Post
  #3  
Old March 1st 05, 09:43 PM
Dudley Henriques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stay tuned! :-)
After all the legal hash is played out, the chief pilot at BA is going to
have to take a long hard look at this guy's judgment call. And after THAT,
there's a little something called "establishing precedent" that BA just
might not want to get involved with.
This type of thing in the industry is never "easy". You have a condition and
you make a call. That's the easy part, considering you get away with it as
this guy did. The devil is in the details however on situations like this
one.
If no violation, then it can go several ways at the front office.....odds on
bad for the Captain. The fact remains that this Captain made a decision to
continue that involved not only the engine scenario, but as well an ending
condition that involved an unscheduled landing due to conditions that would
not have been present without his having proceeded with the engine
condition.
It all came up roses, but it's the manure the roses were planted in that
will either nail this guy or let him off the hook.
We'll see!! :-)
I've been around this business all my professional career. I've seen this
type of thing nail some pretty good people....but who knows really. We'll
have to wait and see. Like I said, it's going to be interesting watching it
go down. :-)
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)

Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)



"Marco Leon" mmleon(at)yahoo.com wrote in message
...
It's going to be simple actually. It will all depend on BA's operational
policies. If he followed it, then he's safe--if not, then he's in trouble.
An airline's flight ops are approved by the various governing entities. As
long as they are followed, my impression is that the pilot would be
legally
safe.

Marco Leon

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
link.net...
This situation is going to be "interesting" as it plays out. I hate to
second guess a guy who isn't here so I won't, but as I said, this one

could
get VERY interesting before the fuzz is finished with it.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...
So, is this good or bad?

Mike
MU-2


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

Here's food for thought. The pilot chose to press on on three
engines, and then had to land for refueling ~100 miles short of his
transatlantic destination.



http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,2497317.story

March 1, 2005
By Eric Malnic and Hector Becerra, Times Staff Writers

Jet Flies On With One Engine Out
Despite LAX takeoff malfunction, British Airways pilot continues
nonstop trip to London. The 747 lands safely but short of its
destination.

A British Airways jumbo jet lost power in an engine on takeoff
from Los Angeles International Airport last month, but the pilot
elected not to make an emergency landing for repairs, deciding
instead to continue the 5,400-mile, transatlantic flight to London
on the remaining three engines, officials said Monday.

Because of unfavorable winds and inefficiencies resulting from the
engine loss, the Boeing 747-400 burned more fuel than anticipated,
and the pilot was forced to cut the nonstop flight short and land
in Manchester, England, the airline said. ...