BA 777 crash at Heathrow

Andy Hawkins wrote in
:

Hi,

In article ,
Bertie the wrote:

It's early yet. there will be more info as the weeks pass, but the
final report will tell the tale.

According to a BBC report I heard on the way home tonight (it's the
BBC, so it *must* be true!), the pilot (the Captain wasn't flying at
the time apparently) reported that the engines didn't respond to the
demand or thrust, so they're calling it 'engine failure'.

Yeah, saw the press conference the skipper had. Very strange.

Like I say, that's the initial report (and via a news agency, so might
need to be taken with a pinch of salt).

Well, yeah. The BBC is better than most ( I'm sure Sky have blamed it
either on the guv'mint or a Paedophile ring by now)
I just got off the phone with a friend of mine who's a 777 Captain. he
has no idea either. There isn't anything that strange on the airplane
that might cause that to happen. One winding down isn't unheard of at
all, but both is very strange indeed.
I don't know if the engines have a FADEC or one of the slightly more
traditional fuel control units ( they have various names, like
Electronic control unit or electronic engne control) but I've never
heard of one of these shutting an engine down. The start switches are
the closest thing to what you guys would call a mixture, and unless
someone went insane and pulled them both it's unlikely they would have
actuated whihc is not very likely.
I have to talk to him again later. I'll pick his brains.


Bertie

On Jan 18, 6:00 pm, Andy Hawkins wrote:
Hi,

In article ,
Bertie the wrote:

It's early yet. there will be more info as the weeks pass, but the final
report will tell the tale.

According to a BBC report I heard on the way home tonight (it's the BBC, so
it *must* be true!), the pilot (the Captain wasn't flying at the time
apparently) reported that the engines didn't respond to the demand or
thrust, so they're calling it 'engine failure'.

Like I say, that's the initial report (and via a news agency, so might need
to be taken with a pinch of salt).

Andy

Sounds like some design flaw thats emerging after 10 years of service.
Can't wait for those 787s to age and require new glue to seal the
"composite" joints. Being London, can't rule out islamo-fascists.....

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:43:36 -0800 (PST), wrote:



Sounds like some design flaw thats emerging after 10 years of service.

The accident airplane was only 6. G

On Jan 18, 11:42 am, wrote:
On Jan 18, 9:58 am, "Al G" wrote:

"Jay Maynard" wrote in message

m...

On 2008-01-18, wrote:
Boeing sent an AOG team
^^^
What's an AOG team?
--

"Aircraft On Ground"?

Al G

Yes, AOG is airplane on ground. Replacement parts marked AOG are
given the highest priority of any cargo by airlines when they are
shipped, even higher than medical. Keeping an airplane on the ground
costs $$$, and everyone in the business knows that.

Dean

It looks like that airframe is destined for the scrap heap, wings,
body all look shot.

wrote in
:

On Jan 18, 6:00 pm, Andy Hawkins wrote:
Hi,

In article ,
Bertie the wrote:

It's early yet. there will be more info as the weeks pass, but the
final report will tell the tale.

According to a BBC report I heard on the way home tonight (it's the
BBC, so it *must* be true!), the pilot (the Captain wasn't flying at
the time apparently) reported that the engines didn't respond to the
demand or thrust, so they're calling it 'engine failure'.

Like I say, that's the initial report (and via a news agency, so
might need to be taken with a pinch of salt).

Andy

Sounds like some design flaw thats emerging after 10 years of service.
Can't wait for those 787s to age and require new glue to seal the
"composite" joints. Being London, can't rule out islamo-fascists.....


Yeah, must be one of those things...


Fjukkwit.


Bertie

wrote in news:eaa459d0-359d-488c-831e-
:

On Jan 18, 11:42 am, wrote:
On Jan 18, 9:58 am, "Al G" wrote:

"Jay Maynard" wrote in message

m...

On 2008-01-18, wrote:
Boeing sent an AOG team
^^^
What's an AOG team?
--

"Aircraft On Ground"?

Al G

Yes, AOG is airplane on ground. Replacement parts marked AOG are
given the highest priority of any cargo by airlines when they are
shipped, even higher than medical. Keeping an airplane on the ground
costs $$$, and everyone in the business knows that.

Dean

It looks like that airframe is destined for the scrap heap, wings,
body all look shot.


I'd say it will be repeaired. It's amazing what they fix.


Bertie

On Jan 18, 6:25*am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:
Blueskies wrote:
What the heck happened? Fuel starvation? Doesn't sound like wind shear could have been an issue.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...30291_apbritai...

BBC America reported a second hand report that the pilot said that all
power was loss.


Here's a link I found that may give some insight... From my side, I'm
just glad that everyone made it off the plane okay.
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/...3-22365773.htm


Warmest Regards,

Jeff

On Jan 17, 4:49*pm, "Kloudy via AviationKB.com" u33403@uwe wrote:
Blueskies wrote:
What the heck happened? Fuel starvation? Doesn't sound like wind shear could have been an issue.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...30291_apbritai...

passenger hack into the entertainment system?

--
Message posted viahttp://www.aviationkb.com

It's comments like these that make me mad. Many of you have little
knowledge of the expertise resident in Boeing. Try to find some of
their best, and brightest. Attempt to attend a trade show. If you
want to know how Boeing thinks, send in an application and see if they
would hire you ... If you're really that impressive I believe they
will.

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:eaa459d0-359d-488c-831e-
:

On Jan 18, 11:42 am, wrote:
On Jan 18, 9:58 am, "Al G" wrote:

"Jay Maynard" wrote in message
...
On 2008-01-18, wrote:
Boeing sent an AOG team
^^^
What's an AOG team?
--
"Aircraft On Ground"?
Al G
Yes, AOG is airplane on ground. Replacement parts marked AOG are
given the highest priority of any cargo by airlines when they are
shipped, even higher than medical. Keeping an airplane on the ground
costs $$$, and everyone in the business knows that.

Dean
It looks like that airframe is destined for the scrap heap, wings,
body all look shot.


I'd say it will be repeaired. It's amazing what they fix.

FWIW, this comes from a BBC report:

Judging by the television pictures, it looks like a wreck, says Mark
Knight of AMS Systems Engineering, which supplies aircraft recovery
equipment to Heathrow Airport and British Airways.

"They will remove it as quickly as possible without much consideration
to secondary damage. I don't think it will be put back into service."

Had the wings been unscathed and there was a chance the aircraft could
fly again, a delicate recovery operation would begin, by lifting the
aircraft on airbags, he says.

The more likely scenario, he thinks, is the wings will be removed, the
fuselage lifted by crane on to a truck and taken away to be stripped.

wrote in
:

On Jan 17, 4:49*pm, "Kloudy via AviationKB.com" u33403@uwe wrote:
Blueskies wrote:
What the heck happened? Fuel starvation? Doesn't sound like wind
shear co
uld have been an issue.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...30291_apbritai
...

passenger hack into the entertainment system?

--
Message posted viahttp://www.aviationkb.com

It's comments like these that make me mad. Many of you have little
knowledge of the expertise resident in Boeing. Try to find some of
their best, and brightest. Attempt to attend a trade show. If you
want to know how Boeing thinks, send in an application and see if they
would hire you ... If you're really that impressive I believe they
will.


Some of the comments are harmless enough. others aren't. the thing is,
often speculative BS goes down as fact as the accident fades from view
after a few days. The "facts" remembered by even the pro community are
often blurred by these initial "monday morning piloting" sessions.
I don't mind people specualting, but I really object to them convicting
before the facts are in.

Bertie