post deleted
Last edited:
'Engines running' in crash plane
- Thread starter James07
- Start date
post deleted
Ahh ok. Good luck getting any more than anyone already knows, I imagine the whole thing is wrapped up tightly by the AAIB/NTSB and anything else we hear until formal statements will be just yet more speculation. Hope you can get hold of some concrete info though and not more 2nd hand gossip.
I find it hard to believe that waxing of the fuel occured to only this aircraft - why not all the others cruising around at 38-40000ft? And its designed to handle the temps at that altitude, so something mustve gone wrong somewhere. Will wait and see, very interesting.
I find it hard to believe that waxing of the fuel occured to only this aircraft - why not all the others cruising around at 38-40000ft? And its designed to handle the temps at that altitude, so something mustve gone wrong somewhere. Will wait and see, very interesting.
Do your aircraft have a fuel return to tank system that bypass's some fuel back into the tank for heating purposes or oil/fuel heat exchangers in the wings that are used to cool the hydraulic oil and heat the fuel?
post deleted
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,597
Boeing made the thing so they would be very interested. There have been a couple of accidents with this type of plane due to ice or water, so Boeing would want to know in case a partial redesign was required.
They have the expertise with this plane.
It is also not unusual, if a plane powered by Rolls-Royce engines crashes then RR engineers go to the crash site and investigate. Their expertise speeds up the process.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 792
- Location
- Darwin, Australia
Just confirm what others have said regarding who is investigating. The NTSB said in their initial press release that:
NTSB Chairman Mark V. Rosenker has designated investigator
Bill English as the U.S. Accredited Representative. An
aviation systems technical specialist and a powerplants
technical specialist will accompany him. The Federal
Aviation Administration and the Boeing Aircraft Company are
also sending investigators as part of the team.
The UK Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) is leading
the investigation and will release all information on its
progress.
Oh and the press release i got today probably doesnt say anything that hasnt already been reported:
The AAIB, sensitive to the needs of the industry including
Boeing, Rolls Royce, British Airways and other Boeing 777
operators and crews, is issuing this update to provide such
further factual information as is now available.
As previously reported, whilst the aircraft was stabilised
on an ILS approach with the autopilot engaged, the
autothrust system commanded an increase in thrust from both
engines. The engines both initially responded but after
about 3 seconds the thrust of the right engine reduced.
Some eight seconds later the thrust reduced on the left
engine to a similar level. The engines did not shut down
and both engines continued to produce thrust at an engine
speed above flight idle, but less than the commanded thrust.
Recorded data indicates that an adequate fuel quantity was
on board the aircraft and that the autothrottle and engine
control commands were performing as expected prior to, and
after, the reduction in thrust.
All possible scenarios that could explain the thrust
reduction and continued lack of response of the engines to
throttle lever inputs are being examined, in close
cooperation with Boeing, Rolls Royce and British Airways.
This work includes a detailed analysis and examination of
the complete fuel flow path from the aircraft tanks to the
engine fuel nozzles.
NTSB Chairman Mark V. Rosenker has designated investigator
Bill English as the U.S. Accredited Representative. An
aviation systems technical specialist and a powerplants
technical specialist will accompany him. The Federal
Aviation Administration and the Boeing Aircraft Company are
also sending investigators as part of the team.
The UK Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) is leading
the investigation and will release all information on its
progress.
Oh and the press release i got today probably doesnt say anything that hasnt already been reported:
The AAIB, sensitive to the needs of the industry including
Boeing, Rolls Royce, British Airways and other Boeing 777
operators and crews, is issuing this update to provide such
further factual information as is now available.
As previously reported, whilst the aircraft was stabilised
on an ILS approach with the autopilot engaged, the
autothrust system commanded an increase in thrust from both
engines. The engines both initially responded but after
about 3 seconds the thrust of the right engine reduced.
Some eight seconds later the thrust reduced on the left
engine to a similar level. The engines did not shut down
and both engines continued to produce thrust at an engine
speed above flight idle, but less than the commanded thrust.
Recorded data indicates that an adequate fuel quantity was
on board the aircraft and that the autothrottle and engine
control commands were performing as expected prior to, and
after, the reduction in thrust.
All possible scenarios that could explain the thrust
reduction and continued lack of response of the engines to
throttle lever inputs are being examined, in close
cooperation with Boeing, Rolls Royce and British Airways.
This work includes a detailed analysis and examination of
the complete fuel flow path from the aircraft tanks to the
engine fuel nozzles.
Last edited:
You havent seen the message on the intranet then that staff arent allowed to get involved in any public(including the internet) speculation on the accident and if caught will face disiplinary action and termination of contract?
I haven't seen that info mate, but I've removed the posts in question have been removed as a precaution, cheers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 12,957
I just P myself laughing!
That's so funny for some reason!What did the plane need to land properly? More lift? I understand it was coming down too fast. I take it the forward thrust would result in more lift due to the aerodynamics of the aerofoil.
Assuming that they are all related of course.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 18,018
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
Airliners are not gliders, they need thrust to fly overcoming the huge amount of drag of the airframe. Forward thrust = acceleration (more speed) not neccesarily more lift, hence in this case the angle of attack was so high trying to get as much lift as they could to get the plane into the aerodrome boundary.
Having flown on this Beijing to London route many times with BA and actually flying on this plane before Christmas, I believe I am in a unique position to tell you what I believe actually happened. They accidentally filled it with diesel, instead of unleaded.
The fact that it is has been stated that 6 other specific incidents are being looked at would suggest that there are enough similarities to warrent investigating. Civil aircraft and engines experience a whole host of small problems throughout the years, most times passengers don't even know there is a problem.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2007
- Posts
- 1,681
- Location
- York
Hahaha it would actually have to be the other way around. Its diesel anyway. For a time, til they got caught lots of guys on nights at my old workplace used to fill their diesel cars up with what we drained from tanks during a check.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 May 2003
- Posts
- 429
- Location
- Plymouth
Kerosene actually. Little bit lower flashpoint than diesel.