Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
btacon

British Airways in hot water over 3-engine flight...

Recommended Posts

Here is 24 pages of Posts, with over 340 replies on PPruNe Regarding this.http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=164208Basically what is says is this:Unless you were the actual captain on this ship, you have no rights to any opinions at all, acccording to some of the holier than though crews out there. Hogwash......Sorry, But I disagree, I am entitled to opinions and reserve the right to fly with whomever I choose.Some even questioned any of the passengers even being told about the Engine or the Fuel Problem. yeah, we'll tell you about it when we're going into ditch mode. Pathetic.....Given a Choice in the Future, BA is off the list, and Yes, I have considered the facts that have been talked about thus far. revenue was the most important driver in this flight, IMHO, and passengers were placed a lot lower on the chain after the Companies choices, IMHO.Sonar5 ****************Grab My FREEWARE Voice recognition Profiles here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=58334]Cessna 172 Voice Profile[/a][a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=60740]FSD Avanti Voice Profile[/a].You will need the main FREEWARE Flight Assistant program to use it, get it here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=genutils&DLID=39661]Flight Assistant 2.2[/a]


CryptoSonar on Twitch & YouTube. 

Share this post


Link to post

You're absolutely right, it is your opinion and nothing more. Whatever the facts are, whatever the rules are, whatever the risk assessements are, whatever is right or wong, whatever is true or misconception, are all really quite irrelevant, since it is just your opinion that really matters. At least you realize that. Yes, opinions are like....

Share this post


Link to post

Kevin...without being too glib Can't give you a pass on this one. Geographical fact:* Most of the land mass in US and Europe has cities, airports spaced closely together* Most if not all of the Atlantic is covered with water, therefore we find little or no cities and airportsSeems to me that an overland flight is a safer bet from an alternate airport point of view. Perhaps that is why overwater flights have some different requirements?Cheers,bt

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Kevin,You said:"You're absolutely right, it is your opinion and nothing more. Whatever the facts are, whatever the rules are, whatever the risk assessments are, whatever is right or wrong, whatever is true or misconception, are all really quite irrelevant, since it is just your opinion that really matters. At least you realize that. Yes, opinions are like...."I caught an equal amount of crap right after the Shuttle Went down, and my theories less than 24 hours after that incident proved out to be 100% CORRECT.You don't need a PHD, or an ATP, to have common sense and be entitled to a common sense opinion. :-)I am pretty darn good at research, common sense, and cause and effect. I am not an expert, but on things like this, I am more often correct than incorrect. I have enough facts to form my opinion, and yes, I am entitled to it. Feel free to disagree with that opinion, but I am not out there telling you you're not entitled to your opinion, I am commenting on the facts as I know them, and limiting my comments to the crew involved and leaving the members here out of it. Why can't you & others here give the same amount of latitude.Why don't you concentrate on that instead of concentrating and diverting the topic to my right to have an opinion.I guess guys like Barry Schiff are not allowed to have opinions either. Here is what he said:From:http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1109635...9666421,00.html"One former pilot questions the decision to proceed with an ailing airplane. "Continuing on after an engine failure on takeoff is nuts," says Barry Schiff, a retired 747 captain with Trans World Airlines who has written books on proper flying procedures and has received a congressional commendation for his work in aviation safety."And for those who do not know who Barry Schiff is, see here:http://www.barryschiff.com/schiff_info.htmYou folks are attacking anyone with an opinion, and I am attacking the facts as we know them and the procedures that are in question.And I suggest you go read the 24 pages of threads (ALL OF THEM, Like I did) where there are also 747 Drivers and other pilots, engineers, etc... That agree with what I am stating, as well as an alleged passenger on that flight.And since US based Airlines travel on stricter rules regarding an engine failure incident, I'll also stick to those airlines.And while you are over at PPRuNe, take a look at the threads about BA Fuel Policy, and the prediction of a Mayday in the future written well before this incident.Than take a look at the Newly enacted procedures regarding compensation of delayed passengers, and see if that may have been a potential factor.And then take a look at fuel transfers using pumps on 747's, as well as looking at what passengers observed that the Pilots could not see from the flight deck. Bangs, Flames, etc.....In other words, take into consideration all variables and FACTS as they are known, and sorry, but in my Reasoned opinion, these folks screwed up multiple times on this flight and endangered passengers unnecessarily. And as someone else has written over there, they speculated this may be enough to have BA Change their procedures. well, hopefully the do tighten them to our standards before 351 people end up drinking saltwater.Sonar5****************Grab My FREEWARE Voice recognition Profiles here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=58334]Cessna 172 Voice Profile[/a][a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=60740]FSD Avanti Voice Profile[/a].You will need the main FREEWARE Flight Assistant program to use it, get it here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=genutils&DLID=39661]Flight Assistant 2.2[/a]


CryptoSonar on Twitch & YouTube. 

Share this post


Link to post

>Kevin...without being too glib >>>Seems to me that an overland flight is a safer bet from an>alternate airport point of view. Perhaps that is why>overwater flights have some different requirements?>>Cheers,>>bt...not for airplanes with three or more engines. Alright, I'm being glib again.If you are thinking of ETOPS, do realize that ETOPS stands for Extended Twin-engine Operations Performance Standards. The Boeing 747 has four engines. Twin means two. There is no difference in whether they are dispatched across the continent or the ocean. Except for maybe having a raft or two.

Share this post


Link to post

When did I say you cannot have an opinion? I'm just presenting some actual facts for you to chew on with regard to the shocking concept of continuing a flight after losing one of your four engines. Gosh, I might have even copy and pasted over some sections from the regulations. You're the one trying to divert the discussion of rules, equipment and risk assessment over to your entitlement of an opinion.The point I am driving home to you, as supported by ample examples of fact, rules, and logic, is that the process for continuing the flight is well spelled out in procedures and regulations, and is something that should not be as shocking as it is for the layperson to accept. Whether that particular crew did it correctly, whether they miscalculated the fuel requirements, I do not know. But it is irrelevant to the three engine flight concept. Running out of gas is running out of gas, whether you have one or eight engines. If they did screw up, it would be for fuel mismanagement. You are painting with a very wide brush, and not really trying to distinguish separate issues from one another. If the crew made it to Heathrow just fine, without having to declare a fuel emergency, guess what the headline would have read? "BA in deep trouble for crossing ocean on three engines!!!" But I have clearly demonstrated to you that flying on three engines is something well spelled out in the books.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey Kevin...you're a big fan of this two-engine theory, even going as far as suggesting the performance would be on par with a tripple-7.Sorry, I can't see it that way. Lets look at reported engine thrusts from "Flightsafe.co.uk" http://www.flightsafe.co.uk/engines.htmlRB211-524C2 Turbofan 51,500/229.0 4.5 747-100B/200B/300 68 RB211-524D4 Turbofan 53,000/235.7 4.4 747-200B/300/SP 196 RB211-524G Turbofan 58,000/257.9 4.1 747-400 72 RB211-524G3 Turbofan 58,000/257.9 4.1 747-400 12 RB211-524G-HT Turbofan 58,000/257.9 4.3. 747-400 180 Trent 875 Turbofan 77,900/346.4 6.2 777-200 16 Trent 877 Turbofan 80,270/357.0 6.1 777-200 16 Trent 884 Turbofan 86,910/386.5 5.9 777-200ER 16 Trent 892 Turbofan 91,450/406.7 5.8 777-200ER/300 194 Trent 895 Turbofan 95,000/422.5 - 777-200ER 36 As you can see, 747 engines range from 50 to 58 Kpounds of thrust. 777 engines range from 77 to 95 KpoundsThe net effect of having two engines on a 747 would clearly not be the equivalent of flying a 777.Cheers,bt

Share this post


Link to post

No, not ETOPS just FAR regs: 91.509 Survival equipment for overwater operations. 91.511 Radio equipment for overwater operations. There is a difference, and it is because overwater flights are different from a safety perspective.Cheers,bt

Share this post


Link to post

>Hey Kevin...you're a big fan of this two-engine theory, even>going as far as suggesting the performance would be on par>with a tripple-7.>>bt>Uhh...you are starting to make things up now. What I said was "Then you'd have two engines. About the same as a 777." The 777 has two engines. The 747 with two failed engines is running on two engines also. I don't believe there was any reference to any kind of performance figures there.

Share this post


Link to post

Considering engine thrusts is really silly here.Flying 3 engine 747 is equivalent from the safety point of view to flying a 2 engine 777.Flying a 2 engine 747 is equivalent to flying a 777 with a single engine. That's all what is to it.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

Share this post


Link to post

You said:"But it is irrelevant to the three engine flight concept."Sorry, but simple logic dictates otherwise, IMHO. How can you seperate the two when the Engine out, Emergency and the Fuel mismanagement are part and parcel to each other.No lost Engine, = No Fuel Emergency, = No Divert.The fact that you are attempting to seperate the two issues is troublesome to me, because had they crashed, it surely would be part of the report as why he made those decisions. One Caused the Other.He maybe didn't need to return to LAX, but he surely could have landed somewhere else before going over the Pond. And if some of the things people at PPRuNe were saying is accurate, then he made another bad decision.There was talk over there that ATC had him move to a lower altitude, and that may have been a concern. Well, As PIC, he could have declared right there, and stayed upstairs for best fuel consumption.This Pilot, IMHO, made some decisions that put lives at unnecessary risk, and IMHO, you cannot discount the engine problem because that is what caused the Fuel problem in the first place.If you want to go find an incident of Engine out, and continue enroute, feel free to start another thread, perhaps on the same aircraft which experienced just that a short time later.However this thread and this incident Surely did have an Engine out, and a fuel management problem, and a declared emergency that are integrally linked because one caused the other.Can't be more clear than that, IMHO.So How about Barry Schiff's comments? And the other Pilots at PPRuNe, and the FAA who is apparently looking into this as well now.Sonar5****************Grab My FREEWARE Voice recognition Profiles here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=58334]Cessna 172 Voice Profile[/a][a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=60740]FSD Avanti Voice Profile[/a].You will need the main FREEWARE Flight Assistant program to use it, get it here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=genutils&DLID=39661]Flight Assistant 2.2[/a]


CryptoSonar on Twitch & YouTube. 

Share this post


Link to post

Sonar5, the point I am making is that continuance of flight on 3 engines by a 747 is an established procedure, not a big shocking stunt by some rogue captain, never before seen in aviation. Whether these guys did it right, figured the fuel correctly or not, etc., is besides the point. And I really don't care. If they calculated the numbers incorrectly, then they certainly would be open for certificate action. If they calculated the numbers correctly, then they shouldn't be open for certificate action. Neither you or I know what numbers were run for them by dispatch. Again, my point is three engine flight is in their manuals as an option, not an action taken by a rogue captain in complete disregardance of the rules. But I agree, if they crashed, the chain of events certainly started with the engine failure. In your rush to judgement on them, you seem to have assumed I have also made a judgement on them...

Share this post


Link to post

Kevin, and had that been a US Flag Carrier along the same route, I don't think they would have attempted what these folks did.And my "Rush to Judgement", your words, is based upon sound reason, a look at the facts we currently know, threads from people who deal with these things, the FAR's, the fact that it was a US departure based Airport, and common sense.Your comments about the dispatcher are also disturbing. He is Still Pilot In Command, and I have not read too many NTSB reports that blame a dispatcher. A Dispatcher recommends, but a PIC has the Final Authority of any decision. That is why they make the big bucks, and they have to exist with their decisions, good, bad, or otherwise. The PIC and his crew should have, along with their flight computers been able to properly compute fuel flow to destination, and if the PIC needed to make the trip at a higher altitude, and ATC asked him to descend, he could have stated Unable, and given his reasons. It is his and his alone, the Responsibility for making those decisions, because just like ATC is rarely at fault the PIC is still the PIC.And of course, there is an established procedure for an engine out, on a 747, even two. But those procedures are there for getting an aircraft safely to an airport, not generating continued revenue when it may be unsafe to do so. I'll be looking for further reports on this particular Engine, (if they bother to release what happened to cause the malfunction). I will also be watching BA's response to this as well as our own FAA. Because had our FAR's been followed, I think the whole episode could easily have been avoided.We'll just have to agree to disagree, and we'll see where this comes out in the end.Sonar5****************Grab My FREEWARE Voice recognition Profiles here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=58334]Cessna 172 Voice Profile[/a][a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=60740]FSD Avanti Voice Profile[/a].You will need the main FREEWARE Flight Assistant program to use it, get it here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=genutils&DLID=39661]Flight Assistant 2.2[/a]


CryptoSonar on Twitch & YouTube. 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...