777 Death Dive over Atlantic

Stiff upper lip and all that. I'm sure the marine life in the Tampa
area appreciated not getting thousands of pounds of jet-a dumped on them.

Mike wrote:
Bonehenge wrote:

On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:02:38 GMT, john smith wrote:

Another story where British pilots encounter a situation and decide
to fly all the way to the UK before landing!!!


My thoughts exactly.

My God, they were 15 minutes out of Tampa! What's that make them 7
from Miami or Melbourne? G

What I like that 'low-key' description of the event and how obviously
accurate it is.. Like starting off describing "packed" British Airways
Jet, then mentioning the "175 terrified paddangers"... Let's see not,
175 passangers on a 777 ?? Wow.. that is really packed!! What's that,
somewhere around half filled? Yeah, right...

Jim Macklin wrote:
BFD and you snipped the copyright info. Plunged a whole 600
feet? My God, that is about like straight and level flight
for a poor pilot.


You can easily have 600' in a short time in turbulance.

Robert Chambers wrote:
Stiff upper lip and all that. I'm sure the marine life in the Tampa
area appreciated not getting thousands of pounds of jet-a dumped on them.

I don't know about the Brits but few U.S. carriers would dump fuel on a
777 with everything working. They would simply use pilot's emergency
authority to make an overweight landing.

That is the norm.

"JesusLives" wrote in message
. ..
A packed British Airways jet was just seconds from disaster after
plummeting out of the sky in a dramatic near miss over America, it has
emerged.

Enquirer version snipped..


BA said: "We have filed a report with the US Federal Aviation Authority
which is investigating."




From ANN:

Officials: BA Plane, King Air Had Close Call Near Tampa
Mon, 23 Oct '06

When Is A Near Miss, Not?
Everyone's OK after a British Airways 777 and a privately-flown Beech King
Air got a bit too close in the skies
around 50 miles north of Tampa, FL earlier this month. The planes did not
collide, and the BA pilot did not report
a near-miss to the FAA... but six people were injured when the big Boeing
suddenly descended 700 feet to avoid the
turboprop twin.

The Orlando Sentinel reports on October 10, the British Airways airliner
with 175 aboard had just taken off from
Tampa to London. As it was climbing to its assigned altitude of 26,000 feet,
the Traffic Collision Avoidance
System suddenly alerted when the aircraft was at 16,800 feet, said a British
Airways spokesman.

The TCAS directed the plane to descend, which the pilots did very quickly...
so much so that two passengers and
four crew members were sent to the ceiling.

An FAA spokesman said the King Air was still at least 1,400 feet higher than
the 777, and its pilot claimed that
he was aware of the location of the British Airways jet.

Despite the injures, the British Airways 777 did not officially report the
apparent near-miss and its sudden
descent, and continued on to England.

Several critics told the Associated Press this incident illustrates the
problem with the antiquated air traffic
control system in this country, but as yet, it is unclear if the near-miss
was actually a close-call, or one
pilot's overly enthusiastic cooperation with a TCAS alert.

In any case... since injuries were minor, and no official report was filed,
the FAA will not be investigating.

Al G wrote:
control system in this country, but as yet, it is unclear if the near-miss
was actually a close-call, or one
pilot's overly enthusiastic cooperation with a TCAS alert.

I thought in most of airlines' operation manual, a TCAS's manuever
instruction is a mendatory command that the crew must follow
immediately after its issurance.

jbskies

An FAA spokesman said the King Air was still at least 1,400 feet higher than
the 777, and its pilot claimed that
he was aware of the location of the British Airways jet.

I've been told by the FAA at safety seminars (pertaining to the NY
Bravo) that if a nearby plane climbs or descends more than 500 fpm, it
triggers an RA much farther away than a near miss would. Perhaps that's
what happened?

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Where the hell was Jesus when all this was going on?

"JesusLives" wrote in message
. ..

"Jim Burns" wrote in message
...
Where the hell was Jesus when all this was going on?

Someone interrupted him about the Mets!

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

Al G wrote:
I thought in most of airlines' operation manual, a TCAS's manuever
instruction is a mendatory command that the crew must follow
immediately after its issurance.

This rings a bell with me too. It may have come about as a result of a
collision between a Tu154 and a B757 over Germany a few years back. The TCAS
said one thing, and the controller said another; it seems that although both
pilots obeyed the TCAS in the first instance, the Tu154 pilot changed his
mind and obeyed the controller instead. Thus both aircraft descended, and
the collision occurred - but it wouldn't have if TCAS had been obeyed in
both instances.

D.

In article ,
"David Cartwright" wrote:

Al G wrote:
I thought in most of airlines' operation manual, a TCAS's manuever
instruction is a mendatory command that the crew must follow
immediately after its issurance.

This rings a bell with me too.

complying with a TCAS Resolution Advisory is indeed mandatory.

it may have come about as a result of a
collision between a Tu154 and a B757 over Germany a few years back.

Nope. This was the case from the beginning of TCAS II.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate