Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > British Airways | Executive Club
Reload this Page >

[17 Jan 2008] BA38 lands short of the runway

[17 Jan 2008] BA38 lands short of the runway

Old Jan 18, 08, 2:56 pm
  #601  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 399
What really angers me about all these passengers comments is that they seem to be oblivious to the fact that they were an inch away for a major catastrophe yet all there worried about is not getting a cup of tea? I'd be on the phone to my family telling them all how much I love them

Yes BA might not have handeled it perfectly, but the pilot got that plane down safely and avioded a major accident that could have cost many lives. After an incident like that I wouldent care if i was hungry, had not clothes, or anything, I'd be greatful for my life.

Honestly, complaining about no baggage? Umm I sorry we can't access your baggage as your plane just crashed. I assume for the saftey of others they didn't try to retrieve baggage, and Im sure a investigation needed to be completed .

Just my two cents, feel free to disagree. I would take a "catastrophe avoided
and nothing else over a catastophe and a cup of coffee anyday.
faithwins is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:05 pm
  #602  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: EGTE/EHAM
Programs: A3 *Silver, BA Bronze
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by AJLondon View Post
Can you please provide a link sunrisegirl. It really might help alleviate some of the misperceptions that might exist here.
Media Accident Coverage thread on the other Pplace...

m.
msmorley is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:16 pm
  #603  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,762
Good outcome for all involved. ^ to the onboard crew.

In terms of cause the best option by far is to wait for the various AAIB reports to come out and have a read of them. They're informative and educational.

Originally Posted by faithwins View Post
What really angers me about all these passengers comments is that they seem to be oblivious to the fact that they were an inch away for a major catastrophe yet all there worried about is not getting a cup of tea?...

...I would take a "catastrophe avoided
and nothing else over a catastophe and a cup of coffee anyday.
Without commenting on the accuracy or otherwise of what's reported re pax treatment I pretty much agree with you, but I can see how a pax may well take the view that 'BA have nearly just killed me and now they won't even give me a brew'.

EDIT: Just to add http://www.pprune.org/forums/archive.../t-309133.html is a better link to the PPRuNe media thread.
phillipas is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:22 pm
  #604  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Brussels, London, Geneva, ....
Programs: Priority Club Gold, Eurostar Carte Blanche, formerly BA Gold, formerly KLM silver
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by LapLap View Post
There's also video footage of Chloe Richards and Ian Newborn shown on BBC News24 (there's a link on this page on the right "Passengers describe evacuation" showing these pax) saying very similar things. (I can't open that link, but I can see this one: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fc6_1200603997&c=1 the comments I've reacted to come after the 3 minute mark)
I've just watched the clip on liveleak. The experiences described by Chloe and Ian are quite consistent with my experences after evacuating a plane at LHR a few years ago.
After a while standing around on the grass, we were taken by bus to one of the gate lounges (T1?). I don't remember any refreshments other than what was available in the vending machine. They took everyone's name and adddress and asked people about injuries. I don't remember any announcements about why the evacuation happened. I think we got out after about 3 hours when they'd towed the plane to T4 and cleared out the hand luggage.
traveller42 is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:27 pm
  #605  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by Panic Stations View Post
GrobDJ - I was speaking in laymans terms, as every pilot knows that trying to stretch the glide doesn't work and gets you beaten about the head by your first flying instructor. Were I faced with a total loss of thrust at 500ft, fully configured for landing, my first response would be to pitch down to maintain the speed at Vref and not stall the aircraft short of the runway. I would shortly after expect to be alerted by my colleagues screams that we were going to land very short and then reduce the speed back to the stick shaker if necessary to ensure I cleared any big hard objects in the distant undershoot (such as Hatton Cross tube station or the Jurys Inn hotel) before easing the speed back up if possible once assured of reaching something relatively flat. If the video on the BBC is of the aircraft in question it looks very much like what they were doing. The concept of Vmd doesn't really work in a dirty airliner, nobody really knows what it is and it's probably too late to get to it anyway.

Apologies for gate-crashing your forum last night whilst pPrune was down, thanks to Rambuster for making me welcome, and well, without PanicStations sounding off there'd be little to talk about!

Speculation, argument and debate are all parts of the healthy way in which aviation exorcises its demons, making it the safest technology on the planet.

I'm not a professional pilot, so forgive me if the following turns out to be a load of rubbish, however I do think Vmd is pertinent to gliding whatever the aircraft configuration. I agree, Vmd is a speed usually pertaining to the 'clean' configuration, but there will be a minimum drag speed for each flap setting and these speeds will be achieved at less than maximum angle of attack (i.e lower the nose, increase speed). Vmd is the speed at which the ratio between lift and drag is highest (L/D ratio), and the glide will be the furthest achievable without power.

No doubt those with access to 777 simulators will be re-running the flight as we speak.

These are very rough assumptions:

Let's suppose BA38 lost all thrust at 1 mile(1850m) from the threshold, height 100m; given that it fell short by 350m, it might make the threshold if L/D could be increased by 20% (350/1850) over the final phase of flight. If drag could be reduced by 5%, and lift were increased by 15% 1.15/0.95=1.21, that should do the trick. But lift increases with the square of speed so about 7% extra speed will generate the extra lift required.

BA38 looks to have landed with a high flap setting.

Is there a case for reducing flap and increasing speed immediately when suffering an engine failure on final approach when plenty of runway is available to counter the higher landing speed? Max thrust on the remaining engine increases the possibility of a double engine failure. Or the plane may be out of fuel, so the other engine is about to pack up too. Does the 777 engine failure procedure ready the pilots for a second failure shortly after? (oops I shut down the wrong one?)

Or is it the case that the higher landing speed presents a greater hazard to the safety of the flight?
GrobDJ is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:28 pm
  #606  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Roscommon, Ireland
Programs: AA PLT 2MM, IHG Dmd
Posts: 3,565
Originally Posted by Wingnut View Post
I do think the "the press are hopeless they get everything wrong" line is a little hysterical.
I agree. It sounds like BA could have handled and communicated things better on the ground so IMO people are being overly defensive regarding the minor criticism of BA here. I'm just surprised the passengers complaints haven't yet been blamed on "cultural differences".
oiRRio is online now  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:32 pm
  #607  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine, & London, UK
Programs: BA Gold; HH Gold; M&M; PS Classic; VV Silver (deceased); BD Silver (deceased).
Posts: 3,576
Originally Posted by LapLap View Post
So commenting on these perfectly clear comments from passengers involved:

As well as Mark Tamburro's comments http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7196128.stm

There's also video footage of Chloe Richards and Ian Newborn shown on BBC News24 (there's a link on this page on the right "Passengers describe evacuation" showing these pax) saying very similar things. (I can't open that link, but I can see this one: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fc6_1200603997&c=1 the comments I've reacted to come after the 3 minute mark)

is responding to rumour and innuendo...

Too many others seem far too quick to rubbish points of view they are uncomfortable with. Perhaps if they meet Chloe Richards face to face they can tell her in person that her comments were meaningless rumour and innuendo.
As far as I can see, there is nothing in the interview with Chloe Richards and Ian Newborn that contradicts anything that I reported, based on the experience of my daughter's boyfriend, who like Chloe and Ian, was also on the flight.
heartybob is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:32 pm
  #608  
Moderator: GLBT travelers, India-based Airlines and India; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Asia
Programs: Yes!
Posts: 15,492
Thanks. Registered and read it!

Interesting indeed.
AJLondon is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:35 pm
  #609  
Moderator: GLBT travelers, India-based Airlines and India; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Asia
Programs: Yes!
Posts: 15,492
Originally Posted by oiRRio View Post
I agree. It sounds like BA could have handled and communicated things better on the ground so IMO people are being overly defensive regarding the minor criticism of BA here. I'm just surprised the passengers complaints haven't yet been blamed on "cultural differences".
Blimey, I am in full agreement with oiRRio! Now what's that I see flying outside my window!?
AJLondon is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 3:48 pm
  #610  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 39,272
Originally Posted by heartybob View Post
It is untrue that pax were not taken to a lounge;
It is untrue that pax were not offered counselling;
It is untrue that pax were only offered water;
It is untrue that pax were denied food and refreshments;
It is untrue that relatives and friends were kept in the dark, and
It is untrue that pax were not offered assistance to get to their ultimate destinations;

I'm sorry to say that this thread seems to have degenerated into a slanging match based on rumour and inuendo that IMHO is unworthy of FT.

I have given up reading any further, so if these points have already been addressed then I am more than happy to receive a prodding.
Many thanks for your post heartybob.^

The true picture at last. A lot of posters shall wish they had kept their opinions to themsleves instead of being made to look rather foolish.Still that's the kind of people the media love to feed.
HIDDY is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 4:00 pm
  #611  
27R
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London
Programs: Programmes. Please!
Posts: 500
Originally Posted by faithwins View Post
What really angers me about all these passengers comments is that they seem to be oblivious to the fact that they were an inch away for a major catastrophe yet all there worried about is not getting a cup of tea? I'd be on the phone to my family telling them all how much I love them

Yes BA might not have handeled it perfectly, but the pilot got that plane down safely and avioded a major accident that could have cost many lives. After an incident like that I wouldent care if i was hungry, had not clothes, or anything, I'd be greatful for my life.

Honestly, complaining about no baggage? Umm I sorry we can't access your baggage as your plane just crashed. I assume for the saftey of others they didn't try to retrieve baggage, and Im sure a investigation needed to be completed .

Just my two cents, feel free to disagree. I would take a "catastrophe avoided
and nothing else over a catastophe and a cup of coffee anyday.
Of course, they may have had a case of delayed shock; they may still have been "high" on having survived. Ask them again in a week, or a month what they remember, and what seems important.....
27R is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 4:30 pm
  #612  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,775
arguably the best news service in the world, the BBC as part of "Britain's Lying, Cheating, Conniving Gutter Press".
I suggest, A J London, if you think the BBC is really the best news service in the world, you trot along to Buckingham Palace and ask Her Majesty the Queen about her recent little incident at their hands!

The BBC News rivals comic newspapers like the "Sun" and the "Daily Sport" at the moment for inaccuracy and deliberate misrepresentation!

Ask the Government - the conduct of BBC News has recently been debated at length in the House of Commons, particularly following the "Queen storming off in a huff, incident!" A couple of hundred years ago, there would have been a few BBC employees hung, drawn and quartered for that act of treason!
bealine is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 4:30 pm
  #613  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,775
arguably the best news service in the world, the BBC as part of "Britain's Lying, Cheating, Conniving Gutter Press".
I suggest, A J London, if you think the BBC is really the best news service in the world, you trot along to Buckingham Palace and ask Her Majesty the Queen about her recent little incident at their hands!

The BBC News rivals comic newspapers like the "Sun" and the "Daily Sport" at the moment for inaccuracy and deliberate misrepresentation!

Ask the Government - the conduct of BBC News has recently been debated at length in the House of Commons, particularly following the "Queen storming off in a huff, incident!" A couple of hundred years ago, there would have been a few BBC employees hung, drawn and quartered for that act of treason!
bealine is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 4:30 pm
  #614  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,775
arguably the best news service in the world, the BBC as part of "Britain's Lying, Cheating, Conniving Gutter Press".
I suggest, A J London, if you think the BBC is really the best news service in the world, you trot along to Buckingham Palace and ask Her Majesty the Queen about her recent little incident at their hands!

The BBC News rivals comic newspapers like the "Sun" and the "Daily Sport" at the moment for inaccuracy and deliberate misrepresentation!

Ask the Government - the conduct of BBC News has recently been debated at length in the House of Commons, particularly following the "Queen storming off in a huff, incident!" A couple of hundred years ago, there would have been a few BBC employees hung, drawn and quartered for that act of treason!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taken from Daily Telegraph
Peter Fincham, the controller of BBC One, was facing a battle to save his job yesterday after the corporation’s Director-General described the edited footage of the Queen shown to the media as “incorrect and misleading”.

Mark Thompson said that he planned to introduce a series of measures to tighten standards after the error, which Mr Fincham was forced to admit having known about on Wednesday evening, although he did not apologise until Thursday.

Mr Fincham’s fate will most likely be decided by a meeting on Wednesday of the corporation’s regulator, the BBC Trust, for which Mr Thompson has been asked to provide a full report as to how pictures of the Queen walking into a photo shoot came to be presented as footage of her storming out.

In an e-mail to all staff, sent at 3pm, Mr Thompson said that recent problems including “the incorrect and misleading edit of Her Majesty the Queen in the BBC One seasonal launch tape” defied “our values and threaten the precious relationship of trust between the BBC and our audiences”.
Related Links

* BBC boss and the Queen’s ‘huff’

* Crisis of trust after BBC makes another apology

* The day the Queen snapped

Yesterday, before the stern warning from Mr Thompson, Mr Fincham went on a tour of radio and television studios. He conceded on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme that he knew that the clip of the Queen was misleading late on Wednesday, a few hours after it had been shown to journalists as part of a promotion for the BBC’s autumn season.

Officials from the Palace called the BBC press office at about 7pm that day, unhappy with the emerging press coverage. Mr Fincham was alerted. He contacted the programme’s makers RDF Media and established that the clip he aired had been edited out of sequence, and was therefore misleading.

However, an apology was issued just before midday on Thursday, by which time newspapers had widely reported the story.

The BBC has already become concerned at declining standards, as mounting competition and a growing tendency to rely on external producers have put pressure on quality. Yesterday, the corporation said that it would introduce a special training initiative, entitled Trust With Our Audience, aimed at both in-house and external production staff in an effort to reassert editorial values.

Michael Grade, the former BBC Chairman who now runs ITV, said that the breakdown in standards in television was endemic. “Kids today [in production teams] don’t understand that you don’t cheat viewers,” he said, but added that corners were often cut because of “huge commercial pressures” and “there is no job security in this industry any more”.

According to the BBC’s account, it obtained the footage of the forthcoming five-part series, A Year with the Queen, from RDF Media, but did not check the clips. Mr Fincham, in a presentation to journalists, said that viewers would see “the Queen walking out in a huff”.

It has also emerged that the photographer Annie Leibovitz contradicted the version put out by the BBC originally when she described the photocall in a magazine interview several weeks ago.

She said of the Queen in the June issue of Vanity Fair: “She entered the room at a surprisingly fast pace — as fast as the regalia would allow her — and muttered, ‘Why am I wearing these heavy robes in the middle of the day?’. She doesn’t really want to get dressed up anymore. She just couldn’t be bothered and I admire her for that.”

Mr Fincham, a multimillionaire from the sale of his television production company, Talkback, for £62 million, said that resigning would be “disproportionate”, but he did say that he would if the Director-General asked him to do so.

Nobody was yesterday willing to own up to making the controversial clip, although the programme itself was co-produced by Stephen Lambert, a respected producer. He worked with Andy Goodsir, who runs his own small production company HTI. The programme has already been sold to ABC in the US and around the world.

This week the BBC was fined £50,000 after production staff faked the winner of a Blue Peter phone-in by choosing the winner from the studio audience after the phone lines failed.

Last edited by bealine; Jan 18, 08 at 4:37 pm
bealine is offline  
Old Jan 18, 08, 4:43 pm
  #615  
27R
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London
Programs: Programmes. Please!
Posts: 500
Bealine, Peter Fincham resigned. The dodgy edit was made by an independent company, RDF, and the person responsible was one of their most senior execs, Stephen Lambert; it was never meant for broadcast. It was a screw up by a company sub-contracted by the BBC, which blew up all over the BBC; and the contoller of BBC1 fell on his sword.

Believe me, BBC journalists don't seek out the gutter; they always want to do the best possible. Of course they're going to try and find people who were on the aircraft. Personally, I think BA's PR operation has done a reasonable job on this occasion, but they could have done better. The more they provide for the media, the less space there is for inaccurate speculation.
27R is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread