Heathrow Incident.

[cva1077 68]

 

 

Depends on the airline in question, it's not in the minimum training required so many airlines wouldn't train for it as it's not worth it to them.....

Thanks Ró.

 

 

 

according to avherald the aircraft returned after 26 minutes to the airport

 

That might seem like ages, but I think its actually quite fast, considering they had to pass through some really congested airspace, as well as running CLs and following procedure all while dealing with a situation that could have turned out a lot worse.

[NGXfanatic 85]

When Ro first mentioned birdstrike, and the fact that both engines exhibited anomalies, I first thought of Captain Sully's A320 in the New York Harbor in 2009.   But it does appear to be an engine cowling issue, it's just strange that it happened on both engines.  What are the odds, unless it was sabotage?  How could someone screw up in securing both independent engines' latches prior to startup???

[japascoe 98]

according to avherald the aircraft returned after 26 minutes to the airport. i wonder what could be the reason for not returning earlier. i know there are checklists and procedures to be followed, but isn't this a situation where you want to land as soon as possible? i mean with cowling doors missing in both engines, and one engine trailing smoke, isn't this a bit too much precious time spent in the air? i'm not trying to blame the crew as i have limited knowledge of what it takes to go through an emergency, also there is little information available yet, too many variables might be involved. just got curious about this little detail.

 

i think this is the flight track: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW762/history/20130524/0655Z/EGLL/ENGM

 

Cowlings are secondary structure, which means they're only there to keep the aerodynamics guys (and by extension the bean counters) and the passengers happy, you don't really need them. Note: I'm a structures & materials engineer, so I might be slightly biased .

Despite Hollywood's insistence that all problems in the world are solved by square-jawed steely eyed heroes taking split-second snap decisions, in reality it often pays off to take some time to understand the situation before rushing in.

Better to spend a few minutes at a safe altitude in a holding pattern to work out what happened and which systems are and aren't working, before setting up for a nice stable approach than to nose-dive for the nearest piece of flat tarmac that looks like it might be long enough to land on. Even if you lose both engines, from an altitude of say 8,000' you should still be able to glide about 13-20 nm in a modern airliner.

[mgh 89]

The AAIB ha determined that:

 

...the fan cowl doors on both engines were left unlatched during maintenance and this was not identified prior to aircraft departure

 

.

 

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/special_bulletins/s3_2013___airbus_a319_131__g_euoe.cfm

[ichundu 10]

Cowlings are secondary structure, which means they're only there to keep the aerodynamics guys (and by extension the bean counters) and the passengers happy, you don't really need them. Note: I'm a structures & materials engineer, so I might be slightly biased .

Despite Hollywood's insistence that all problems in the world are solved by square-jawed steely eyed heroes taking split-second snap decisions, in reality it often pays off to take some time to understand the situation before rushing in.

Better to spend a few minutes at a safe altitude in a holding pattern to work out what happened and which systems are and aren't working, before setting up for a nice stable approach than to nose-dive for the nearest piece of flat tarmac that looks like it might be long enough to land on. Even if you lose both engines, from an altitude of say 8,000' you should still be able to glide about 13-20 nm in a modern airliner.

 

you are probably right, after reading the aaib bulletin it is clearer now what happened. my (wrong) impression when i first read about the incident was that the right engine caught fire shortly after the cowl panels detached, maybe on the initial climbout. that's a mayday case and you want to land as soon as possible. it actually caught fire while approaching to land. if it had happened before they would have probably landed earlier.

regarding the cowling panels being secondary structure, you are right but when they detach violently from the engines they can hit the fuselage, wings, tail etc and can cause severe damage to the aircraft.

anyway i'm noway in a position to judge the actions of the crew from my armchair, i just got curious because usually, from the incident reports i've read, they return earlier in cases of engine fire/failure after take off, add to that the cowlings detaching. (that was my reasoning).

 

all clear now, cheers