Faulty BA again!!?Create Topic


Home Forums Airlines All airlines Faulty BA again!!?

This topic contains 8 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  SimonS1 4 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #522371

    Anonymous
    #522372

    VoyageVoyage
    Participant

    Have a look at this one now??!!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23631153

    #522373

    conshaldow
    Participant

    Quite worrying to say the least. I hope all travellers get full compensation as the deserve it. One emergency landing would be bad enough but two in the space of as many days is horrible. Glad to see no one was badly injured though, it could have been so much more worse.

    #522374

    FormerlyDoS
    Participant

    I wouldn’t describe these as ’emergency’ landings, as there was no emergency.

    Non-normal would be my term and they are perfectly manageable by lowering the weight of the aircraft by dumping fuel and then approaching at the calculated airspeed for the aircraft configuration and weight.

    No doubt distressing for the pax and the aftermath would be a world of hassle and pain, speaking as someone who knows RUH pretty well.

    #522375

    tangey1
    Participant

    Not being a pilot I have little knowledge of the matter, but the layman in me suggests having malfunctioning flaps might make the landing somewhat more complicated than usual.

    #522376

    millionsofmiles
    Participant

    In the 80ies I also had an emegency ladning with BA 747 due to non functioning flaps.

    A I said before, I am sure that BA saves on maintainance. Looking at the many incidents in the last weeks, I am sure, they only reapir if absolutely unavoidable.

    #522377

    FormerlyDoS
    Participant

    tangey1 – 09/08/2013 13:53 GMT

    Speaking as a pliot, who has doen a number of flapless landings during training (in real aircraft) and on a full motion sim (3 engined jet), it does not make the landing more complicated, you just have to recalculate and ensure the runway is long enough to allow you to approach at a higher speed and then land according to your new calculations.

    If it isn’t, then you go somewhere else. remeber the aircraft was fuelled for a 6-7 hour flight, so even with the extra drag of take off flaps (or a lesser setting) they could have flown for quite a distance, if necessary. But RUH has pretty long runways, due to altitude an d heat in summer, so no probs.

    The approach speed will be higher, the landing run will be longer, but it is no more complicated. Landings always require max attention.

    #522378

    Speedbird_ABZ
    Participant

    I read on The BA Source today that a LHR/LAX 747 and LGW/MCO 777 both dumped fuel over the English Channel and returned to their respective airports this morning.
    Quite horrifying that such an amount of fuel is dumped into the sea.
    Does anyone know how frequent this is on our shores?

    #522379

    SimonS1
    Participant

    I believe most of the fuel evaporates if dumped above 5,000 feet.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.