British Airways Crash Landing.?

Question

Does anyone think that it could have been the pilot's fault? He was lined up for the right hand runway. Passengers and eyewithnesses say that there was a steep bank left before the impact. Could it have been that he was lined up for the wrong runway but instead of going around, he tried to correct it? Im not BLAMING the pilots, its just a theory.

Answer 1

It was probably the pilot's skill that prevented the plane from landing on the motorway

Answer 2

The fact that there was no fire would suggest he ran out of fuel

Answer 3

I don't know, you don't know, none of us were there.  Let's not start the theories until the facts are known.  From what I've seen the captain did a superb job of keeping the nose up just long enough to get it over the fence - must have been right on the edge of the stall, from the way it dropped after that.  Bear in mind, also, that there are two qualified pilots on the flight deck, they cross-check each other all the way and would have known well in advance exactly what ILS they were locked on to.  These airliner approaches are planned a long time, sometimes hours, in advance - the crew would have known what runway Heathrow was using, checked the approach plates and done all the setting up etc. in plenty of time.

I do know that BA make much of teamwork on the flight deck and First Officers are actively encouraged to point it out if the Captain is making a c ock of things. Apart from anything else, the flight deck crew are first at the scene of the accident.

Answer 4

Unlikely to be the pilots to be honest, they monitor the fuel state regularly, could be incorrect indication of fuel quantity.

Dont forget the aircraft normally pitches slightly during the final approach, if the fuel is low this can be enough to uncover the pumps and might explain why it was all of a sudden.

The engines will suck fuel and the fact that BOTH stopped at the same time without warning is very significant.

Answer 5

The aircraft was approaching runway 27L, which was correct. It is common for aircraft to appear to be approaching the parallel runway, especially if the observer is looking from an offset angle.

If you watch arrivals at any airport you will soon be aware that very few large aircraft actually come in "dead straight".

Regardless of whether they work there or not, 90% of people watching the aircraft movements at Heathrow do not understand how air traffic control system works.

This seems to be especially true of journalists, who appear to take pride in their ignorance. The scary thing is that "Joe Public" believes their uninformed sensationalist speculations.

Your theory is valid as a theory but in this case it's not viable. Nobody would ever attempt to change runways when on Finals without express Air Traffic Control instructions. It's one of the things that just isn't done (even if it was possible, which it isn't - for physical technical reasons beyond the scope of this forum).

If the aircraft had decared and Emergency (which it didn't) and didn't want to land, then a Go-Around would have been authorised. I know for a fact that the event was a surprise to everyone in the Control Tower.

The ATC Approach (in Hampshire) and Air Arrivals controllers (at Heathrow) were the ones who had to do some quick work to divert following aircraft onto the north runway (27R). This is actually quite a complex operation in itself but beyond the comprehension of broadcast and tabloid journalists so they ignored it.

It's now established that the engines, although running and with plenty of fuel, did not respond to a standard instruction for more power.

This short boost of engine power is often called for by autopilots (and manual pilots) during various stages of Final Approach. It's necessary for the fine control of speed and altitude required. Remember that the atmosphere is not a homogonous entity. Small air pressure differences and light breezes all affect an aeroplane as it nears the ground and continual corrections are always needed.

That's what caused the aeroplane to "wobble" and land short of the runway. So, a go-around wouldn't have been possible.

We do NOT yet know WHY the engines failed to deliver the extra power. The control and monitoring systems on a B777 are too complex to make speculation meaningful.

The pilot in control (1st officer) did a splendid job of dropping the machine safely on the soft grass so that physical damage was minimsed and no shower of sparks ensued - hence no fire.

Whilst not wishing to diminish his acheivement, you must remember that all professional pilots and cabin crews train rigorously for just such an event. Crash scenarios are run through on very authentic simulators about 6 monthly and so on.

The pilots training kicked-in and they proved that they could do their job. That's one reason why they're paid about £150k pa.  Bloody good value I reckon!

In other words, please don't absorb the media specualtion and guesswork. Wait until the AIB give their coldly dispassionate announcements of THE FACTS and then we'll know what happened and why. You can be sure that this is what the industry will be doing. That's why flying is the safest means of travel - and why aviation accidents are so rare that they hit the headlines big time.

Hope this helps.

Answer 6

Not you lot again! Pack it in, I am flying tomorrow!!!!!!!

Answer 7

Too early too tell, the flight recorder will provide the answers. I am just thankful that everyone got off safely!

Answer 8

It is very unlikely to be pilot error in fact I think that this has already been ruled out but it is far to early to speculate about the cause leave it up to the experts they will find the answer

Answer 9

It's highly unlikely to be pilot error, the Boeing 777 suffered a double engine flame out. Engine flame outs are usually caused by one of 2 things, fuel starvation and/or intake contamination such as volcanic dust (this has happened). When a gas turbine reaches self-sustaining (ie a set percentage RPM), the engine does not require an electrical supply to keep it turning. Engine ignitors are used only to start engines.

The news footage appeared to show that the flight crew had started or attempted to start the APU (which is a small gas turbine located at the rear of the aircraft). The APU can provide power to enable operation of various aircraft services but cannot provide the same electrical power as an engine.

Without being in possession of all the technical information regarding the status of the aircraft at the time of the incident, I couldn't state, without a shadow of a doubt, what caused this accident to occur.

From my knowledge at this stage of the investigation, I would put the problem down to fuel starvation, caused by either a catastrophic failure of the fuel system or the aircraft simply ran out of fuel. This has also happened before).

Answer 10

Most likely a massive failure of the Flux Capacitor or the Mr Fusion!

Answer 11

One theory is that the plane hit a bird and lost all power. Its a bit worrying that. What if the bird had hit a car?

Answer 12

Wind shear.

Answer 13

This plane did not 'CRASH'!.

If it had there would be many dead all over the runway.

It landed short of the runway.

Answer 14

could be human errors as sometimes the cause of this but could be anything?

Answer 15

was prince willy the pilot

Answer 16

mechanical fault.

Answer 17

It's too early yet to tell.

He may have had an engine failure and lost power and control when landing.