Pilot gave no warning before Boeing 777 crash, reports say

[Royzee617]

Pilot gave no warning before Boeing 777 crash, reports say
just one of many reports none of which get to the meat of the matter.
Winston-Salem Journal | Pilot gave no warning before Boeing 777 crash, reports say

TV coverage and newspaper reporting has been the usual grab bag of ignorance and misinformation etc. One also gets the sneaky uneasy feeling of disappointment in the way they trump up the "what could have been" angle.

My money's on dodgy Chinese fuel making the engines quit. It's as plausible as other contentions such as wind shear, pigeons, UFOs or pilot error. All [but one] have precedents in flight accidents.

Shame coz it's ruined the 777's perfect record.

[Torch]

The story of completley losing power is hard to swallow,the big birds have redundancy to prevent that happening. Maybe just pilot error,over worked,weird.

[Royzee617]

Yes, it is a long way from PRC.

I thought it was worrying the way all the sheep-like media TV and papers lauded the pilot. It's too early. He could have cocked it up and then had to pancake.

Another puzzle is why no one asked about it going silent when/if the engines did pack up. IME there is a lot of noise from the engines on approach. The silence would be deafening as they say.

WTC it is going to run and run on forums like this.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

There was no silence. The Passengers said that it felt like a normal landing and that the engines could be heard.

It is too early to speculate what happened.

[Royzee617]

No it isn't. They are hiding something.... or is it just that the media are idiots?

It's the first crash for this magnificent plane ever. That is extraordinary.

Shouldn't Boeing ground them JIC?

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Royzee617

or is it just that the media are idiots?

BINGO!!!!

[Royzee617]

I should be able to find out soon because my daughter told me her art teacher claims to be best mates with the pilot - but they have not yet discussed the incident. Maybe Monday.

[Royzee617]

YouTube - Probe into Heathrow crash - 18 Jan 08
interesting comments

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Royzee617

I should be able to find out soon because my daughter told me her art teacher claims to be best mates with the pilot - but they have not yet discussed the incident. Maybe Monday.

NO that is not how things work.

A. They will not discuss anything until they know what happened. You dont discuss accidents with the public before you know what happened.

Do the Police tell the public the details of a murder before they have solved the crime?

B. They will not ground the fleet because there is no reason to ground the fleet. Why cause alarm when there is no need to cause alarm.

C. Accident investigations take time. They have to recreate the whole incident and try to piece together what happened. The Flight Data Recorder or Black Box (which is not black by the way) only gives you part of the information. You dont rush to conclusions and then possibly miss something that could save lives in the future.

As Joe said the media is idiots and they do not know what they are talking about.

[FLYBOYJ]

If he's smart he wouldn't say much.

[pbfoot]

THe guys from Rolls will be all over that

[Royzee617]

There are some unique or at least fairly special circumstances with this accident.

First it comes out that it was not the captain who was at the controls. He didn't hog the glory. Hmmm.

This is probably the world's most modern airliner with a longish service record. Thus it is the most thoroughly equipped as regards monitoring.

The plane is essentially intact - dunno why there was no fire - so they can inspect it intact away from the public etc. Compare this to Lockerbie.

Sort of lucky it happened when it did - odd timing though - if it had happened over water it might remain a mystery with no survivors. One recalls the early Comet accidents over the Med.

Odd that depsite all the spotters around LHR there is not yet available a single photo let alone vid of this arrival. No CCTV around the runway?

On TV last night they were talking a bit about the problem the pilot had and they mentioned sudden double engine failure. No mention of a birdstrike etc.

Because of the uncertainty as to the origin of the unusual double engine out I think they must be behind the scenes considering actions such as inspections and maybe selective grounding.

Dunno whether I'd like to be going for a flight in one of these tomorrow. On the one hand it is capable of survivable crash landings but this double engine out is what the naysayers always warned us about in this new type of plane.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

If he's smart he wouldn't say much.

Exactly. I have been part of an accident investigation before and you are told not to talk about incident.

A. If the Press finds out they manipulate it and run wild with it and then everything but the facts are what is known.

B. You can get in some serious trouble for doing so.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Royzee you are really blowing this out of proportion.

Originally Posted by Royzee617

There are some unique or at least fairly special circumstances with this accident.

First it comes out that it was not the captain who was at the controls. He didn't hog the glory. Hmmm.

That is not unusual. The Captain is the Pilot in Command but the other qualified pilot can be on the controls.

Originally Posted by Royzee617

This is probably the world's most modern airliner with a longish service record. Thus it is the most thoroughly equipped as regards monitoring.

What is there to monitor? There is a Black Box (which is not black by the way) and it only has the flight data on it.

Originally Posted by Royzee617

The plane is essentially intact - dunno why there was no fire - so they can inspect it intact away from the public etc. Compare this to Lockerbie.

That planes allways blow up and catch on fire in an accident is a Hollywood thing. I have personally seen about 10 crashes and only one involved fire and explosion.

This was not even really a crash my friend. It was a crash landing. That is why the aircraft is intact. The aircraft essentially landed short of the runway. It did not impact the ground in an unusual attitude.

Originally Posted by Royzee617

Odd that depsite all the spotters around LHR there is not yet available a single photo let alone vid of this arrival. No CCTV around the runway?

Because most likely it looked completely normal until it actually landed on the ground.

Are you a conspiracy theorist?

Originally Posted by Royzee617"

On TV last night they were talking a bit about the problem the pilot had and they mentioned sudden double engine failure. No mention of a birdstrike etc.

Again it is too early speculate. The Press does not know what happened, they speculate and then people talk.

Originally Posted by Royzee617

Because of the uncertainty as to the origin of the unusual double engine out I think they must be behind the scenes considering actions such as inspections and maybe selective grounding.

That is for the authorities to decide. Again the investigation is not over. It is too early to speculate.

If and when they find something that is worthy of grounding they will do so. It is not going to happen 2 days after the accident.

Originally Posted by Royzee617

Dunno whether I'd like to be going for a flight in one of these tomorrow. On the one hand it is capable of survivable crash landings but this double engine out is what the naysayers always warned us about in this new type of plane.

I would fly on a 777 any day. Allready have and would do it again.

Do you know it was a double engine failure? It could have been but do you know it was one. Again the TV Press does not know what is going on. They speculate and pretend to be experts and in the end they just get people all excited.

If it was a double engine failure my bet would be it had nothing to do with the engines themselves (it would happen more often if it were the engines) but I would bet it was the fuel that was used.

[Torch]

Some info and theory from flightinternational.com........Preliminary investigations into yesterday’s crash of a British Airways Boeing 777-200ER at London Heathrow have discovered that, on the final approach, the engines did not respond to demands for increased thrust.

An initial statement from the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch says that the aircraft, arriving from Beijing, was 2nm from touchdown at a height of 600ft, with the autopilot and auto-throttle engaged, when the auto-throttle demanded higher thrust from the two Rolls-Royce Trent 800 engines.

But the AAIB says the powerplants “did not respond” to the auto-throttle request, adding: “Following further demands for increased thrust from the auto-throttle, and subsequently the flight crew moving the throttle levers, the engines similarly failed to respond.”

As a result the 777’s airspeed reduced and the aircraft lost height, touching down 1,000ft (300m) short of runway 27L, to which it had been conducting an instrument landing system approach.

“The investigation is now focussed on more detailed analysis of the flight recorder information, collecting further recorded information from various system modules and examining the range of aircraft systems that could influence engine operation,” says the AAIB.

Information on the final stages of the flight has been downloaded from both the cockpit-voice recorder and the flight-data recorder. The AAIB’s investigation is being assisted by the US National Transportation Safety Board, Boeing, the US FAA and engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce. It expects to release an interim report on the accident within a month