BA A319 makes emergency landing at LHR!

Profile picture for user cloud_9

Member for

14 years

Posts: 2,343

Flight BA762 flying from London Heathrow to Oslo had to return and make an emergency on the Northern Runway (27R) due to a "technical fault". Video has emerged of the aircraft whilst flying back to Heathrow with a trail of smoke coming from the starboard side engine, believed to have been a small fire. Cause has yet to have been identified, however a bird strike has been given as the most likely cause. The aircraft has landed safely and everyone onboard was evacuated safely. Both runways at Heathrow were closed for a short while, and the Southern one was re-opened whilst the Northern one remained closed with the aircraft remaining on it. http://news.sky.com/story/1095039/plane-on-fire-flying-over-central-london
Original post
Profile picture for user atr42

Member for

12 years 5 months

Posts: 338

Something strange here. Witnesses and some pics appear to indicate a fire in No2 engine. However pics on the ground show engine covers missing from No1.
Profile picture for user Matt-100

Member for

7 years 2 months

Posts: 569

I have to say looking at the BBC news report this doesn't look too much like a bird strike. Potentially an uncontained engine failure? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22652718 I just read an interesting rumour on another forum. Apparently the left hand engine was shut down shortly after take off due to a mechanical fault. As the crew were preparing to land, the right hand engine hit a bird and caught fire. If this is true it would explain why the crew perhaps didn't shut down the flaming engine, as it was the only one still running; a close call to all involved and another exemplary performance from a BA crew at LHR.

Member for

8 years 2 months

Posts: 124

Even during an emergency situation people can't resist using their electronics at a time when they have been told to turn them off. The cynic in me wonders whether our obsession with filming things is motivated by the media's willingness to pay good money for footage. Also interesting to see how many people took their hand baggage with them when leaving the aircraft. Agree that it looks like another job well done by the crew.

Member for

11 years 6 months

Posts: 1,059

Well done BA and very glad everyone is safe. The comments about passengers filming are interesting. If I were in that situation, I think I'd be more concerned about getting back on the deck in one piece. That said, camera phones do permit much more immediate and interesting news footage than ever before.
Profile picture for user cloud_9

Member for

14 years

Posts: 2,343

So BA have decided not to pay compensation to customers that were disrupted as a result of the emergency landing last Friday. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10084417/Delay-hit-BA-passengers-denied-compensation.html
It said the closure of the airport – albeit as a result of a crisis involving one of its own aircraft – should be classed as an “extraordinary circumstance”.
Whilst I understand the safety aspect of the aircraft returning to LHR and full credit to the crew for making a safe return, however I don't think they [BA] can be in a position to deny any responsibility for the associated delays/cancellations until such time as the full findings of the cause of the incident has been identified. If as the report above suggests it was a bird strike then I can understand that this is an an “extraordinary circumstance”, but if it turns out that it was a maintainence issue with the aircraft, then the airline should be held to account. Perhaps they should tell customers that they will wait for the findings to be released and that it may take time to process compensation claims, but to say that it was simply an "extraordinary circumstance" and to deny anyone compensation at this point is a bit naive in my opinon and will not go down well with customers in the future.
The same argument, BA said applied to services which were delayed by the incident involving a Pakistan International Airlines, which made a forced landing after being forced to divert to Stansted following a suspected terrorism alert.
This I understand a bit more to a certain extent as the airline had no prior warning or indication of the intentions, however the way around this one is to simply get the idiots who caused the aircraft to be diverted to pay out for any costs/losses that the airline incurs as a result of impacted journeys of other customers...that way it might make them (and hopefully others!) think twice before doing something like this in the future.
Profile picture for user paul178

Member for

8 years 6 months

Posts: 2,841

So two failures by BA, one by the engineering staff and one by the flight crew on walkround who missed a fault that seems to be well known. I wonder if the pressure of work to keep these aircraft in the air and earning money have any bearing on this?

Member for

6 years 8 months

Posts: 901

So two failures by BA, one by the engineering staff and one by the flight crew on walkround who missed a fault that seems to be well known. I wonder if the pressure of work to keep these aircraft in the air and earning money have any bearing on this?
Of course money and pressure won't help. But it's no it wasn't a 'fault', on a pre-flight check panels are/should be checked. Too soon for seculation, but I guess some butts will get kicked, when/if that happens it will get passed around all the airlines and at the end of the day safer travel for all. That's how investigations work. Good news is that everyone safe.

Member for

14 years 11 months

Posts: 997

So two failures by BA, one by the engineering staff and one by the flight crew on walkround who missed a fault that seems to be well known. I wonder if the pressure of work to keep these aircraft in the air and earning money have any bearing on this?
Three. The push back crew not only have to do a final walk round check, they have to verbally inform the crew that all doors and panels are secure prior to the start of the push back. As the AAIB have pictures of the aircraft on pushback that show that the cowls were un latched and it was daylight, I think there must be some very red faces in BA. Hero to zero in one photograph! Rgds Cking
Profile picture for user paul178

Member for

8 years 6 months

Posts: 2,841

Yes it is good news everyone is safe and I hope the old saying "lessons have been learned" is taken onboard. I would not have been suprised if it had been a third world operator but I would have expected better from BA.,especially from reading the interim report. I know cars are rather different from aircraft but my father who was a test pilot for Handley Page always told me to do a walk round my car every day before driving it. I have done this religiously evey time for 50 years now. I have found potential dangerous things such as leaking brake fluid,bulging tyres and insecure bonnets. So it is something that has stayed with me. Iwould have expected a closer look from aircrew with the life of many souls in their hands.
Profile picture for user cloud_9

Member for

14 years

Posts: 2,343

So in reference to my last post (#7) about BA saying they were not going to be paying compensation to those people who were effected by subsequent delays/cancellations...I don't think leaving the engine cowl covers unlatched can be classed as an “extraordinary circumstance”, which means they should be made to pay out now!
Profile picture for user nJayM

Member for

11 years 3 months

Posts: 1,684

I saw this BA aircraft coming over central London with a trail of smoke from its starboard engine. For several hours since I had no access to WiFi I was almost relieved when I did hear the news that everyone was safe. On this score 'hats off' to the flight crew for getting back safely. The AAIB bulletin makes extremely good factual reading. We must wait for the technical cause of the fire on the starboard engine in the AAIB report. I am not one for advocating scapegoats and since BA are my favourite airline I am left perplexed. How did a Commander with so many flying hours, a third on the type along with his first officer miss the open fan cowls on walk around in broad daylight? Yes the flight crew may have relied on the assurance given by the Push Off crew that everything was safe. Yet the pre Push Off photograph puts them all collectively in the 'hot seat. Extremely sad. Why can BA not introduce a simple electronic scanning of the pre Push Off photograph by a senior experienced on each type before Push Off commences at all BA departures? Yes a few extra minutes but if that puts BA back as one of the world's safest airlines it is worth it. It doesn't require with this type waiting for Airbus, engine manufacturer, AAIB or any other manufacturer combination to modify or recommend this safety enhancement. After all the photograph is already being taken but just not being utilised proactively.