[capetonianm]

I am surprised to learn from the above posting that one of the world’s leading airlines, and love them or hate them they do fall into that category, is relying on ‘outdated computers’.

No doubt VK/SM will leap to their defence and say it was ACSA ground control who caused this accident.

[SimonS1]

Good visual of the site:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/530468-british-airways-incident-johannesburg.html#post8229388

[MarcusUK]

So that cuts the new Galleries lounge into two then, after doubling its size!..
Pleased no one injured though, could have been very serious, especially with fuel in the wings!

[JohnHarper]

I’m pleased no one was hurt, night time taxis only need the smallest things to go wrong for incidents to occur – I recall the SIA incident at Taipei which had tragic consequences so great that nothing like that happened. My sympathy to the pilots who I’m sure believed they were doing the right thing.

Message from Krug who is lying in a darkened room with a cold compress on his forehead: A BA 747 was hit while stationary on a taxiway at JNB by a moving building. All passengers were safely evacuated by the most exemplary BA crew and none would consider flying with any other airline at any time in the future 😉

[JKL]

Well on the positive side, the 747 retirement plan is now presumably ahead of schedule… 😉

Glad no-one was hurt, could have been nasty.

[FormerlyDoS]

“QAll passengers were safely evacuated by the most exemplary BA crew and none would consider flying with any other airline at any time in the future”

Also, all CW seats were in day mode, and all pax enjoying direct aisle access, whilst sipping ‘poo in the 1-2-1, 1-1-1-1 layout.

[FormerlyDoS]

JonHirsch – 23/12/2013 11:17 GMT

Ironically, this airframe had recently undergone heavy maintenance and was thus expected to do another 3 years+ in service.

BA have a tricky problem to decide how to handle being one down, you can’t just pull an airframe out of the desert and put it straight into service.

[superchris]

intrigued why BT doesnt carry this as a news item…..

[capetonianm]

“All passengers were safely evacuated by the most exemplary BA crew “
You can’t keep everyone happy though, the woman who announced this to the world by Twatter complained that F class passengers were disembarked first.
And the problem with that is what, precisely?

[superchris]

surprised they didnt go down the chutes to be honest, in which case she has a point. There was after all a fuel spill according to reports.

[BA4ever]

Perhaps a stupid question but why are we sure that it was the pilot’s fault? Couldn’t the directions he was given by the tower be wrong?

[FormerlyDoS]

BA4ever

The pilot in command (PIC) is always responsible for deciding whether to accept a clearance and for ensuring the safety of the aircraft.

In the event of incorrect instructions being received from ATC, it is up to the PIC to realise that they are incorrect and decline to accept them.

I think those of us who are/were pilots probably have a similar view as to what happened here, but a couple of outside possibilities (that I don’t think are high probability) are brake failure or nosewheel steering failure.

[canucklad]

Hi Martyn

Interesting insight..

One of the issues BA face on the flight deck of some of their fleets (only know for certain re the 747) is they still rely on outdated computers which DO NOT hold all suitable alternates and not able to embrace iPAD technology, instead still reliant on paper charts..

Most (OK not 100%) airline ops are embracing paperless cockpits, which is the way forward..

Surely they carry paper charts as a back up, I’m thinking of the Gimli incident.

On the evacuation issue, maybe because of the fuel leak it was determined safer not to deploy the chutes ?

And I’m going to be a bit naughty here, but I recall an AF380 incident at JFK and many on here vilified them as an unsafe airline. Citing lack of training etc.
After this latest, of many recent incidents involving BA, can they also fall into this same category ?

[FormerlyDoS]

superchris – 23/12/2013 12:01 GMT

Evacuating via slides carries a risk of injury, possible permanent disability for some pax.

And at night, to add to the chaos.

If airport fire service was quickly in attendance, I guess the decision was that the risk of fire was lower than the risk of injuries on the slides.

[BA4ever]

FormerlyDoS, thank you for the clarification.

[Author]

Posts