Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5771988/

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: OA260
Posted 2013-05-24 01:05:36 and read 61148 times.

Sky News reports LHR closed due to BA aircraft indicent on landing . Smoke reported.

News.sky.com

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TS-IOR
Posted 2013-05-24 01:09:46 and read 61271 times.

You can see all the holdings in progress on http://www.flightradar24.com/ but how all runways closed ?

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: OA260
Posted 2013-05-24 01:11:32 and read 61262 times.

Seems it took off and smoke poured from rear of aircraft.

Pic here :

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 01:13:33 and read 61089 times.

Accrding to http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-0...ys-shut-after-plane-loses-engine/, it says an aircraft lost an engine on takeoff, and landed with the second engine on fire! Pax evacuated on the runway.

[Edited 2013-05-24 01:18:48]

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: OA260
Posted 2013-05-24 01:14:36 and read 60938 times.

BA A319 G-EUOE is the aircraft involved.

Corrected Reg typo

[Edited 2013-05-24 01:20:13]

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: andrej
Posted 2013-05-24 01:14:44 and read 60926 times.

Apparently BA plan made an emergency landing, landed on 'northern runway'...all passengers safely evacuated.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: baw787
Posted 2013-05-24 01:16:08 and read 60829 times.

You can watch the holding aircraft on
http://www.rb24.com

Hope everyone is safe.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: audidudi
Posted 2013-05-24 01:16:53 and read 60836 times.

I am directly under the 27R flightpath and saw the aircraft going overhead Parsons Green, London, with the right engine on fire! This was at 08.40 and the reg. is G-EUOE, not as reported above, which I think was just a typo!

[Edited 2013-05-24 01:18:48]

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: edina
Posted 2013-05-24 01:17:04 and read 60839 times.

It's the BA762 OSL.....am hearing it was a major bird strike....in the BA Crew Report area currently...will report further if I get any info.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: ba319-131
Posted 2013-05-24 01:19:03 and read 60690 times.

Good news by the looks of it, plane down safe in one piece and all pax and crew safe.

Well done to the crew and ATC for getting her down so quickly.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TS-IOR
Posted 2013-05-24 01:21:34 and read 60633 times.

Diverting to STN, LTN, LGW, BRS, and BHX in progress   and Shannon Control is advising all the inbounds from NAT about the airport closure and coordinating diversions  Wink

[Edited 2013-05-24 01:25:06]

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: scouseflyer
Posted 2013-05-24 01:26:49 and read 60271 times.

Another picture of the plane trailing smoke on the sky new website

http://news.sky.com/story/1095039/heathrow-closed-smoke-seen-on-plane

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Globetraveller
Posted 2013-05-24 01:27:28 and read 60197 times.

You can see the plane's short flight path on FlightAware: http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW762

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TS-IOR
Posted 2013-05-24 01:28:56 and read 60037 times.

It seems like it's open again. Three flights just departed...

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 01:31:34 and read 59907 times.

It's funny the way sometimes they report, Plane of fire ?? comeon.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Bthebest
Posted 2013-05-24 01:33:16 and read 59788 times.

Quoting TS-IOR (Reply 14):
It seems like it's open again. Three flights just departed...

South Runway at least. Makes sense.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 01:33:43 and read 59792 times.

BA264 BA188 landing now..followed by AA 104

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: KarelXWB
Posted 2013-05-24 01:38:53 and read 59496 times.

Picture of the evacuation:

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BLA9u9dCIAAF8_Q.jpg:large

Full credit: http://twitter.com/TBoneGallagher/status/337837849028206593/photo/1

[Edited 2013-05-24 01:40:43]

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: EK413
Posted 2013-05-24 01:47:12 and read 58703 times.

Great to see all on board evacuated safely. Was this a ex-BMI aircraft as I'm not educated on the BA/BMI A319 fleet registrations.

EK413

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: CXfirst
Posted 2013-05-24 01:48:41 and read 58535 times.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 19):
Was this a ex-BMI aircraft as I'm not educated on the BA/BMI A319 fleet registrations.

No.

-CXfirst

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: vikinga346
Posted 2013-05-24 01:48:43 and read 58530 times.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 19):
Great to see all on board evacuated safely. Was this a ex-BMI aircraft as I'm not educated on the BA/BMI A319 fleet registrations.

No - it is BA a/c.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: ba319-131
Posted 2013-05-24 01:49:14 and read 58530 times.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 19):
Was this a ex-BMI aircraft as I'm not educated on the BA/BMI A319 fleet registrations.

- No original BA machine, though I don't think that makes a difference.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: a380heavy
Posted 2013-05-24 01:53:24 and read 58283 times.

It's possible looking at the damage to the cowling on the port engine that these passengers may well be extremely lucky that they got back to LHR - maybe today is a good day for them to do the lottery!

Congratulations to the crew for the safe outcome.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: gilesdavies
Posted 2013-05-24 01:58:03 and read 57860 times.

Please to hear the plane landed safely and everyone is OK...

What a mess that causes to UK airspace, when one runway closes!

There are some aircraft circling over south Wales, Herefordshire and the North Sea but the bulk seem to be queuing Buckinghamshire... Circling around the Aylesbury and High Wycombe area at around 15,000ft...

The only diversions I can see to Luton, are a BA flight from Oslo and a VS flight from Edinburgh.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: ba319-131
Posted 2013-05-24 01:59:12 and read 58130 times.

Quoting a380heavy (Reply 23):
It's possible looking at the damage to the cowling on the port engine that these passengers may well be extremely lucky that they got back to LHR

- Not as bad as it looks really, there are numerous pictures on-line showing these having come off during flight.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: tcx69k
Posted 2013-05-24 02:01:18 and read 60987 times.

But damage to the left engine cowling... However it was the right engine that was on fire/smoking!

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: audidudi
Posted 2013-05-24 02:01:36 and read 61256 times.

What is interesting to me is that there is a missing cowling on the port engine probably as a result of a bird strike, and yet it was the starboard engine that I saw on fire as I reported earlier. So is it possible that both engines were involved in the bird strike?

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: planefixer
Posted 2013-05-24 02:04:32 and read 63848 times.

Reports saying LH engine lost fan cowls, and was shut down followed by surge on RH engine - hence the smoke as it was not shut down.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-24 02:04:37 and read 63272 times.

Is it just me or are both cowlings missing? Images on BBC News appear to show the aircraft from the other side of the runway with a cowling missing from the right engine with no overwing chute deployed on that side. The images above show a chute deployed from the side with a cowling missing....

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: ThomasCook
Posted 2013-05-24 02:05:39 and read 63028 times.

It looks like an uncontained failure judging by the cowling?

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: liquidair
Posted 2013-05-24 02:05:58 and read 63470 times.

You've got to laugh..

BBC news reporter saying this reminds her of BA flight from Beijing that crash landed due to problems with "undercarriage".

eh? Wtf?

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-24 02:09:13 and read 63298 times.

Quoting liquidair (Reply 31):
BBC news reporter saying this reminds her of BA flight from Beijing that crash landed due to problems with "undercarriage".

Well yeah the undercarriage separated from the fuselage - that's a pretty serious undercarriage problem   

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: liquidair
Posted 2013-05-24 02:13:00 and read 62412 times.

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 32):

Have I missed something?

Undercarriage separation was a consequence, not a cause?

as a side note... Wherever those cowlings came off..ouch.

How much damage could they do falling from height?

[Edited 2013-05-24 02:14:51]

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 02:13:10 and read 62367 times.

What's with BA202 ? can anyone see it's at 1400ft alt and landing in cardiff??

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-24 02:15:43 and read 62080 times.

Quoting TheAviator380 (Reply 34):
Undercarriage separation was a consequence, not a cause?

Clearly my smiley wasn't sarcastic enough.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 02:15:54 and read 62204 times.

http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW202

Strange one, why Cardiff?

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: BA777
Posted 2013-05-24 02:17:21 and read 62034 times.

Winds are slightly right of centerline at the moment in LHR, great airmanship to handle the tech issue and point the aircraft into the wind to minimise the fire risk.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: CaptainDoony
Posted 2013-05-24 02:17:43 and read 62372 times.

Looking at the pictures the damage to the left engine looks really consistent with the cowling latching problems that have plagued the IAE V2500. Doesn't explain the right engine - maybe the off chance it has malfunctioned.

No surprise for me personally that's its G-EUOE, been on that bird twice now with it giving me 90 minute delays both times!

EDIT: Reports saying the right hand engine cowling is missing as well. Wonder I this aircraft was fresh out of maintenance.

[Edited 2013-05-24 02:30:40]

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: liquidair
Posted 2013-05-24 02:20:03 and read 61730 times.

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 35):

Whoops, my bad!

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: eugegall
Posted 2013-05-24 02:29:13 and read 61549 times.

Quite serious damage by the looks of it.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b315/eugeclio172/ScreenShot2013-05-24at102612_zps4c3f7b89.png

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Globetraveller
Posted 2013-05-24 02:31:27 and read 61400 times.

There are quite consistent reports now that one of the engines was, at one point, on fire. It is amazing from how many angles and how quickly we get to see incidents these days!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22652718

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Aesma
Posted 2013-05-24 02:34:47 and read 60668 times.

Glad everyone is safe. Compared to the evacuation the other day, here we can see someone was smart enough to not evacuate where the fire was.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: btblue
Posted 2013-05-24 02:35:17 and read 60817 times.

Both engine covers clearly detached. Is that normal during a bird strike?

Any possibility they were not latched correctly in the first place causing the problem? Seems odd that both detached.

Glad it ended well.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: SKAirbus
Posted 2013-05-24 02:36:00 and read 60855 times.

I just haven't a clue why the plane went back to LHR. Apparently it flew over Essex before returning. Surely disruption and risk to urban areas (if the plane had crashed) would have been minimised if it had landed at SEN or STN?

Glad to hear everyone was evacuated ok!

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: a380heavy
Posted 2013-05-24 02:37:36 and read 60660 times.

What I was hinting at in my earlier reply (23) was the possibility that the starboard engine became inoperative due to the bird strike and subsequent fire, and maybe the port engine was ALSO damaged by a bird strike but still able to provide at least SOME thrust.

I'm assuming that the starboard engine was shut down following the fire and the aircraft limped home on the port engine. This would make earlier suggestions of an uncontained failure of the port engine unlikely.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Aesma
Posted 2013-05-24 02:40:31 and read 60305 times.

You always go to the main airport when possible, more fire trucks, more equipment, better runways, more ambulances, more hospitals. Disruption to the airspace is someone else problem.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 02:40:52 and read 60427 times.

There must be something else caused this other than Bird Strike. Looks more serious than just bird strike to me.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: SKAirbus
Posted 2013-05-24 02:49:40 and read 59744 times.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 45):
You always go to the main airport when possible, more fire trucks, more equipment, better runways, more ambulances, more hospitals. Disruption to the airspace is someone else problem.

Well STN has more than enough emergency coverage. It also has a very long runway.

Quoting TheAviator380 (Reply 46):
There must be something else caused this other than Bird Strike. Looks more serious than just bird strike to me.

Well a birdstrike brought the US A320 flight down in the Hudson... That was pretty serious IIRC.

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: nighthawk
Posted 2013-05-24 02:51:18 and read 59943 times.

Quoting a380heavy (Reply 44):
I'm assuming that the starboard engine was shut down following the fire and the aircraft limped home on the port engine. This would make earlier suggestions of an uncontained failure of the port engine unlikely.

The video footage seems to show the aircraft was continuing to fly with the engine on fire. To me that suggests a failure in the port engine that was then shut down. Subsequently the starboard engine caught fire, and they had no choice but to continue with the engine on fire.

your theory does not explain the damage to the port engine.

Topic: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: liquidair
Posted 2013-05-24 02:52:54 and read 59918 times.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 45):

I'm not sure flying back over London is such a good idea. Even with the river.
contingency plans couldn't possibly allow it... I hope. I live in London.

Quoting TheAviator380 (Reply 46):

Big Bird strike?

Big version: Width: 423 Height: 279 File size: 39kb
bigbirdstrike


[Edited 2013-05-24 03:26:32]

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: tcx69k
Posted 2013-05-24 02:54:24 and read 59635 times.

The opposite, left hand side...

http://i1248.photobucket.com/albums/hh498/TCX69K/IMG-20130524-WA0006_zps0876ef33.jpg

Topic: BA A319 Incident at LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: GLAGAZ
Posted 2013-05-24 02:54:58 and read 59305 times.

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 43):
I just haven't a clue why the plane went back to LHR. Apparently it flew over Essex before returning. Surely disruption and risk to urban areas (if the plane had crashed) would have been minimised if it had landed at SEN or STN?

Much easier to go to somewhere you're familiar with. You know the runways, you know the weather, you know the ILS frequency, you know the minima....Then you come on to things once you're on the ground such as proper engineering support is available for the aircraft and the passengers can be easily shifted on to another flight if they so wish.

First impressions are that this was a very well handled emergency and subsequent evacuation so kudos to the crew!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: RickNRoll
Posted 2013-05-24 03:01:14 and read 58203 times.

Must have been pretty hectic up in the front seats. Do they do anything like this on the simulators?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: GLAGAZ
Posted 2013-05-24 03:05:56 and read 57833 times.

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 52):
Do they do anything like this on the simulators?

Engine fires and evacuations? Definitely!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Bthebest
Posted 2013-05-24 03:06:04 and read 57851 times.

Quoting GLAGAZ (Reply 51):
Much easier to go to somewhere you're familiar with. You know the runways, you know the weather, you know the ILS frequency, you know the minima....Then you come on to things once you're on the ground such as proper engineering support is available for the aircraft and the passengers can be easily shifted on to another flight if they so wish.

First impressions are that this was a very well handled emergency and subsequent evacuation so kudos to the crew!

Agree. Also STN/LTN only have one runway so airport would effectively be closed. At least LHR has the other, even though disruption will still be significant. The important things are familiarity, pilot preference (at the end the day they're in charge) and ground support.

Flight history on BA Source doesn't show any trips to Prestwick in last month. Obviously line maintenance is done at LHR as well.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: B777LRF
Posted 2013-05-24 03:07:12 and read 57765 times.

The responsibilties of a PIC is first and foremost to his passengers, crew and aircraft. Everything else is secondary to those priorities, and if the skipper decides he want to go back to LHR for whatever safety reason he has chosen, then so be it.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 03:07:28 and read 57690 times.

No any press for Captain or F/O yet?? would love to see heros.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: mah584jr
Posted 2013-05-24 03:17:21 and read 56978 times.

Keeping a close eye on this as I'm delayed 4 hours in Istanbul because of this incident. Please keep the updates coming. Thankful everyone is ok!

-mah584jr

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: peterjohns
Posted 2013-05-24 03:18:45 and read 56745 times.

Very lucky and a very good outcome/performance from all involved.
As the evacuation was only carried out on the left side - it is safe to assume that the fire was on the right ( as evident in the video). So the crew wouldn´t open the doors on that side for safety reasons.
The inflight picture shows the right engine without it´s cowling and damage on the wing, which could have come from either large birds or the parting cowling itself.
So probably both engines were damaged.
A fire in an engine does not necessarily mean a loss of thrust.

Good job they didn´t have to end up in the Thames- depending on where - they however probably could have gotten to the bank over the wing without getting their feet wet!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: peterjohns
Posted 2013-05-24 03:20:07 and read 56554 times.

Quoting peterjohns (Reply 58):
The inflight picture shows the right engine without it´s cowling

Sorry - meant the LEFT engine , of course

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: par13del
Posted 2013-05-24 03:26:05 and read 56226 times.

Quoting Bthebest (Reply 54):
The important things are familiarity, pilot preference (at the end the day they're in charge) and ground support.

One would think the important thing would be to get the a/c on the ground as soon as possible, since most flight crew now carry computers and the flight departments ensure that they are updated, knowing the airport you are heading into is less of an issue since you are not concerned about taking the wrong exit or parking in the wrong spot. Pilots are trained to fly so the flight specifics of landing at a new airport should be no problem.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 55):
The responsibilties of a PIC is first and foremost to his passengers, crew and aircraft.

The PIC in charge is always front and center when an accident happens, for daily operations what is required for financial viability by management usually takes precedence, see this site numerous non-accident threads.

Glad to know that all pax are safe and sound, look forward to hearing the actual details on the initial cause of the incident.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: AIR MALTA
Posted 2013-05-24 03:28:11 and read 56077 times.

Great that everything ended without any harm to passengers. But time to think about adding some runways to LHR.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 03:29:05 and read 56038 times.

Quoting mah584jr (Reply 57):

You sure because of this incidence your flight is delayed?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 03:31:57 and read 55977 times.

Quoting liquidair (Reply 49):

I know big bird strike but would it causes engine cowling to ripoff like that?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: ggflyboy
Posted 2013-05-24 03:32:30 and read 56072 times.

I guess its early to speculate, but the lack of cowling on both sides is suspicious. Engineering models in design usually account for one failed latch, but not all latches open. So, leaving the latches open could separate parts from the aircraft in flight (only gust loading on the ground is accounted for the design phase).

So... Failure to latch or faulty latches, perhaps combined with a blown duct on the RH side? Not exactly sure how the plumbing works on this particular engine. Even a blown duct isn't supposed to separate parts from the aircraft, if that indeed were the root cause and not some sort of latch issue.

I don't think uncontained failure is likely on either side. Both casings themselves look intact, and at least one engine was (partly) operable.

There is also the chance that the cowling was removed for fire-fighting purposes, but I've never seen that before. Sounds like a pretty unhelpful/dangerous thing to do if there was an active fire.

In any case, glad everyone is made it down safely. The investigators will have fun piecing this one together.

[Edited 2013-05-24 03:37:58]

[Edited 2013-05-24 03:38:49]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: liquidair
Posted 2013-05-24 03:34:11 and read 56159 times.

Quoting TheAviator380 (Reply 63):

first time image didn't upload.... check my reply (49) again!
     

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: mah584jr
Posted 2013-05-24 03:34:53 and read 55797 times.

Quoting TheAviator380 (Reply 62):
You sure because of this incidence your flight is delayed?

Yeah, I'm flying THY1985. It was supposed to depart at 13:10 local and now shows a departure time of 17:10. When they announced a delay that large I knew it was more than an aircraft problem.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 03:43:40 and read 55214 times.

Quoting liquidair (Reply 65):

Hahah...I saw tht now....wooooshhhh,,,,good stuff.

Quoting mah584jr (Reply 66):

I C. Hope you able to spend some good time. Cheers.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Bthebest
Posted 2013-05-24 03:44:46 and read 55055 times.

Quoting par13del (Reply 60):
One would think the important thing would be to get the a/c on the ground as soon as possible, since most flight crew now carry computers and the flight departments ensure that they are updated, knowing the airport you are heading into is less of an issue since you are not concerned about taking the wrong exit or parking in the wrong spot. Pilots are trained to fly so the flight specifics of landing at a new airport should be no problem.

Of course getting on the ground safely is the primary concern, I was stating more in terms of importance over ATC ops/disruption etc. In this case though, as every BA pilot flies in and out of LHR all the time, they don't need computers and information as much so can concentrate on managing the problem and flying the aircraft. Even for just basic positioning they will know eactly where they are, where to line up and what heights to be at. Minimising workload in this type of situation is invaluable.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: EK413
Posted 2013-05-24 03:58:52 and read 54553 times.

Quoting CXfirst (Reply 19):
Quoting vikinga346 (Reply 20):

Thank you   

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 21):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 19):
Was this a ex-BMI aircraft as I'm not educated on the BA/BMI A319 fleet registrations.

- No original BA machine, though I don't think that makes a difference.

Doesn't make any difference at all. It was a simple question with a simple answer.

EK413

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: MerlinIIIB
Posted 2013-05-24 04:05:46 and read 54306 times.

Photo and video show missing inner & outer cowlings on both engines. Passenger have told Norwegian press about cowlings separating with corresponding loud bang at moment of rotation ...

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 04:09:08 and read 53915 times.

Quoting MerlinIIIB (Reply 70):
Passenger have told Norwegian press about cowlings separating with corresponding loud bang at moment of rotation ...

If that is true, sounds more and more like someone forgot to latch the cowlings. Will lead to some very red faces in within BA...  Wow!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: btblue
Posted 2013-05-24 04:16:41 and read 53600 times.

I saw some pictures on twitter and hearing what this guy said (he's the one that put images up when the aircraft landed and described the pop after rotation) it would appear the cowlings were, most possibly not fixed correctly.

There are some clear close-up shot on the daily mail website:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...plane-makes-emergency-landing.html

It does seem mightily odd that both cowlings seperated - also I can't see any tell tale signs of a bird strike along the wings and fuselage.

BA described is as a 'technical' incident.

Anybody know if this aircraft was operating yesterday? Was it in for maintenance?

NOTE - there is also a passenger video at the above daily mail link of the A/C on approach to LHR overlooking the LH engine minus the cowling.

[Edited 2013-05-24 04:19:11]

The aircraft was operating its first flight of the day - having arrived inbound Stavagner the previous evening.

http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/GEUOE


[Edited 2013-05-24 04:27:00]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LTBEWR
Posted 2013-05-24 04:21:58 and read 53036 times.

With problems with panels on both engines, one has to wonder if there is a mx procedural issue. The fasteners may be over torqued, or just missed, not double checked upon reattachment of the panels. You could also have bad, worn or damaged fasteners as well worn or damaged attachment points for them. The possibility of what happened will likely come out in the investigation.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-24 04:23:10 and read 52868 times.

How would the removal of the cowlings cause the apparent engine fire?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: 777
Posted 2013-05-24 04:26:14 and read 52577 times.

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 74):
How would the removal of the cowlings cause the apparent engine fire?

That's exactly my question too!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: MerlinIIIB
Posted 2013-05-24 04:33:12 and read 52252 times.

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 74):
How would the removal of the cowlings cause the apparent engine fire?

Disruption of the air flow during separation, compressor stall...?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: btblue
Posted 2013-05-24 04:33:34 and read 52018 times.

Quoting 777 (Reply 75):

Could force not pull with it some small parts - causing elements of the engine to contact and burn?

Fractured a pipe or something like that?

It is obvious that whatever the problem was, the fire wasn't able to be extinguished - hence the smoke on approach so something was still burning. Also there is a lot of smoke deposits outside on the side of the engine... indicating that fire possibly came from the pipes/exposed engine?

Pictures of both engines below:



[Edited 2013-05-24 04:45:46]

[Edited 2013-05-24 04:46:30]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: teme82
Posted 2013-05-24 04:35:40 and read 51954 times.

Guardian has nice video http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/vide...emergency-landing-from-plane-video

Any thoughts about it??

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-24 04:40:52 and read 51253 times.

Quoting btblue (Reply 77):
Could force not pull with it some small parts - causing elements of the engine to contact and burn?

Fractured a pipe or something like that?

Don't forget both engine cowlings are missing...

I'll admit at this stage it's got me stumped!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: planesarecool
Posted 2013-05-24 04:41:10 and read 51418 times.

From a pilot's perspective, it sounds very much like a non-event to me. EFATOs, engine fire drills and single engine operations are taught and tested from the first day you ever step into a multi-engine piston aircraft. It will be covered extensively in type rating and re-covered in sim checks.

Of course, from a passenger's perspective it is much more dramatic, and such a description of the event won't sell the Daily Mail any newspapers.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 04:45:52 and read 51144 times.

Quoting btblue (Reply 72):
There are some clear close-up shot on the daily mail website:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti....html

It says "British Airways has said it has cancelled all its short-haul flights in and out of Heathrow until 4pm today following the emergency landing.".

Wonder if that is to clear backlog caused by the runways being closed, or to inspect the cowlings, or both.

[Edited 2013-05-24 04:56:25]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-24 04:47:48 and read 51241 times.

The PIC is getting kudos from the Airline Pilots Association for pointing the aircraft into the wind after landing to ensure any flames were not blown onto the fuselage...

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 04:49:09 and read 50748 times.

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 74):
How would the removal of the cowlings cause the apparent engine fire?

Also why would it cause one engine to apparently shut down?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: btblue
Posted 2013-05-24 04:50:00 and read 50746 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 81):

Take what they say with a pinch of salt... Both runways appear to be operating now - at least from what I can tell in flightradar24.com

Sorry - you're right. I wonder if it's to check its fleet?

[Edited 2013-05-24 04:56:04]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: btblue
Posted 2013-05-24 04:53:19 and read 50770 times.

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 82):
The PIC is getting kudos from the Airline Pilots Association for pointing the aircraft into the wind after landing to ensure any flames were not blown onto the fuselage...

Smart move - memories of the British Airtours 737-200 accident, 1985 in Manchester... a lesson learned from that accident.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airtours_Flight_28M

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: ThomasCook
Posted 2013-05-24 04:53:32 and read 50507 times.

BA have canx all shorthaul departures ex LHR until 4pm.

ThomasCook

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: factsonly
Posted 2013-05-24 04:55:26 and read 50628 times.

KLM will be operating a MD-11 into LHR this afternoon to carry delayed passengers:

- dep. AMS 15:15 - arr. LHR 15.30 - KL 1019 / McDonnell Douglas MD-11 / PH-KCE

[Edited 2013-05-24 05:18:25]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: draigonair
Posted 2013-05-24 04:55:43 and read 50639 times.

Also now on aviationherald;

http://avherald.com/h?article=462beb5e&opt=4096

The article says that first the left hand engine cowling doors came off and then during her return to London, the right hand engine cowling doors came off (both associated with a bang). Didn't say anything about shutting down an engine.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: draigonair
Posted 2013-05-24 04:57:05 and read 50548 times.

Quoting factsonly (Reply 87):
KLM will operating a MD-11 into LHR this afternoon to carry delayed passengers:

- dep. AMS 15:15 - arr. LHR 15.30 - KL 1019 / McDonnell Douglas MD-11 / PH-KCE

Anyone in for a 45min flight on the good old 11?  

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: CXfirst
Posted 2013-05-24 04:59:49 and read 50212 times.

From videos and photos, it always surprises me how many passengers evacuate with their hand luggage. Can really cause problems when evacuation times increase with hand luggage being taken out from under the seat or even worse, overhead lockers.

-CXfirst

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: MerlinIIIB
Posted 2013-05-24 05:07:26 and read 49491 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 80):

From a pilot's perspective, it sounds very much like a non-event to me.

Even if both engines are affected incl. reduced performance?

[Edited 2013-05-24 05:11:34]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: garpd
Posted 2013-05-24 05:10:49 and read 49362 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 81):

Wonder if that is to clear backlog caused by the runways being closed, or to inspect the cowlings, or both.

My guess is the former. LHR as we know is busy, busy, busy.

Why on earth did they shut both runways down? The plane was only stationary on one of them. I do not see how that would affect the other runway.

Unless of course it was to check for debris?!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: odo
Posted 2013-05-24 05:15:53 and read 49070 times.

Quoting garpd (Reply 93):
Why on earth did they shut both runways down? The plane was only stationary on one of them. I do not see how that would affect the other runway.

When fire service is tied up with an accident, sufficient readiness can't be maintained for other traffic to operate normally.

//odo

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: GLAGAZ
Posted 2013-05-24 05:20:05 and read 48733 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 80):
From a pilot's perspective, it sounds very much like a non-event to me.

Certainly not a non-event!

Obviously the training covers this sort of thing extensively but to call it a non-event?!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Bthebest
Posted 2013-05-24 05:21:21 and read 48700 times.

Quoting garpd (Reply 93):
Why on earth did they shut both runways down? The plane was only stationary on one of them. I do not see how that would affect the other runway.

You want to clear traffic from the entire area so, if the aircraft needed to land on either runway for whatever reason it can do.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Bthebest
Posted 2013-05-24 05:24:46 and read 48561 times.

Quoting btblue (Reply 72):
Anybody know if this aircraft was operating yesterday? Was it in for maintenance?

Flew Berlin, Paris, Stavanger yesterday. Obviously some line mx could have been done at LHR but not and heavy mx likely.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-05-24 05:30:32 and read 48500 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 80):
From a pilot's perspective, it sounds very much like a non-event to me. EFATOs, engine fire drills and single engine operations are taught and tested from the first day you ever step into a multi-engine piston aircraft. It will be covered extensively in type rating and re-covered in sim checks.

Really dude? Dual engine failure on a twin engine airplane, is a non-event? What exactly qualifies as an "event" for you? A crash with everyone dead?  

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: katekebo
Posted 2013-05-24 05:31:20 and read 48258 times.

It's purely speculative, but how about ground crews leaving cowlings on both engines unlocked / open after routine checks / maintenance before take-off. The cowlings opened after take-off, the left one without consequences, but the right one hit something causing a fire.

What else could cause BOTH cowlings to open / separate almost immediately after take-off?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sandyb123
Posted 2013-05-24 05:37:05 and read 47765 times.

Quoting garpd (Reply 93):
Why on earth did they shut both runways down? The plane was only stationary on one of them. I do not see how that would affect the other runway. Unless of course it was to check for debris?!

I would imagine if the emergency services were responding to an incident then they would not be able to respond to another incident on the opposite runway?

Any debris would have been on the runway the aircraft landed on.

Thank goodness it all ended well.

Sandyb123

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Eagleboy
Posted 2013-05-24 05:38:28 and read 47940 times.

BBC had a small bit of tape from LHS inbound to LHR:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22655866

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 82):
The PIC is getting kudos from the Airline Pilots Association for pointing the aircraft into the wind after landing to ensure any flames were not blown onto the fuselage...

Looking at the BBC footage above it looks as if only the LHS chutes were used, good thinking in light of the history. Seems like a simple thing to think of sitting in out chairs but hard to focus when going into LHR knowing you will be evacuating.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LIFFY1A
Posted 2013-05-24 05:44:44 and read 47309 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 97):
Really dude? Dual engine failure on a twin engine airplane, is a non-event? What exactly qualifies as an "event" for you? A crash with everyone dead?

Was there a dual engine failure? And where in Planesarecool's post does he mention dual engine failure? He only mentions single engine operations. I do agree though that it isn't a non-event. Maybe an engineer forgot to lock the cowling, maybe the pilot on the walk-around forgot to check that the cowling was locked. But sure we'll find out in time.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LTC8K6
Posted 2013-05-24 05:55:27 and read 46388 times.

Maybe birds hit both engines, just worse on the right?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: SKAirbus
Posted 2013-05-24 05:59:32 and read 46268 times.

If the cowling disappeared from both engines then maybe it was a bird strike in both engines, with a fire developing in one? I am no expert but I guess it would go to explain why it happened like that. Or could there be feature built into the engine that ejects the cowling where there is a fire?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: planesarecool
Posted 2013-05-24 05:59:56 and read 46333 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 97):
Really dude? Dual engine failure on a twin engine airplane, is a non-event?

There wasn't a dual engine failure, there was a single engine failure or shut down. This is taught on your first, maybe second flight in a multi-engine aircraft and will be covered in every flight/sim check you do thereafter. If you can't handle an EFATO, you won't be flying for an airline.

Same applies for an engine fire, asymmetric flight, single-engine landings and full evacuations. It's nothing we're not trained for and it's exactly what we're paid to do.

What you consider an 'event' or 'non-event' is up to you. But I guarantee you won't see the PIC and FO of BA762 making public appearances as 'heroes', like we did after BA38/US1549. Of course they handled the situation well, but they were just doing the job they are trained and paid to do.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 06:02:27 and read 46093 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 104):

There wasn't a dual engine failure, there was a single engine failure or shut down.

This was more than a routine single-engine IFSD though. Cowlings blown off both engines. One engine with flames coming out of it. Not clear if other engine was operating or not. Certainly not a non-event in my books.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-24 06:02:34 and read 46039 times.

Speedbird Ops were advising incoming flights to also divert to Manston, Bournemouth or Southampton.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Aesma
Posted 2013-05-24 06:03:08 and read 46062 times.

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 47):
Well STN has more than enough emergency coverage. It also has a very long runway.

Pilots are prepared to come back to the runway they took off from in an emergency, that plays a role too.

Quoting liquidair (Reply 49):
I'm not sure flying back over London is such a good idea. Even with the river.
contingency plans couldn't possibly allow it... I hope. I live in London.

Well if you have to overfly London to circle to land, so be it, if people aren't happy they can try to get an airport built in the middle of nowhere. Then somehow houses will be built around it.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-24 06:05:37 and read 46166 times.

Speedbird Ops ATC during diversions...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsuUAXB3AVY

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: SKC
Posted 2013-05-24 06:06:11 and read 45937 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 97):
Really dude? Dual engine failure on a twin engine airplane, is a non-event?

This wasn't a dual engine failure. I've not seen anywhere that states both engines failed.

On a related note, while I was at Ryan Intl, we were operating A320s (with V2500s) for FL. One lost it's inboard and outbound cowls from the left engine thanks to latches that weren't fastened properly just after departure from ATL (I believe).

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: speedbird217
Posted 2013-05-24 06:07:14 and read 45845 times.

Glad everything turned out to be okay and safe. Even though I also wonder if it wouldn't be safer to divert to one of the airports in a less populated area. In the end you're not just responsible for saving the people on board but also on the ground. If you fly over Central London with 2 damaged engines that can't be very safe...
Landing on the Hudson is one thing, landing on the Thames is basically impossible!

Quoting sandyb123 (Reply 99):
Any debris would have been on the runway the aircraft landed on.

Not necessarily. Reports say that the first cowling came off right after take-off, which would place it on or near the runway that the a/c was departing from. FOD can have catastrophic consequences (e.g. Concorde crash)...

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LondonCity
Posted 2013-05-24 06:10:09 and read 45678 times.

BBC news is reporting that BA has cancelled all its short-haul flights at LHR until at least 1600hrs today. Given that it's the holiday weekend that will cause lots of travel problems.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: speedbird217
Posted 2013-05-24 06:11:59 and read 45878 times.

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 111):
Given that it's the holiday weekend that will cause lots of travel problems.

Given that tomorrow is a Champions League Final with an expected 100,000 to 200,000 German fans coming to town this can't help either  

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: cornishsimon
Posted 2013-05-24 06:12:01 and read 45612 times.

Anyone have a complete list of diversions for all airlines ?


cs

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LTC8K6
Posted 2013-05-24 06:13:17 and read 45744 times.

http://avherald.com/h?article=462beb5e&opt=0

Good pic there.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Tristarsteve
Posted 2013-05-24 06:13:48 and read 45602 times.

Quoting LIFFY1A (Reply 101):
Was there a dual engine failure

No,
having read the whole thread, and looked at Daily Mail pics, there was a failure of the fan cowls on both engines. First the left cowls, and later the right cowls. As the right cowls detached they damaged a fuel line on the right engine that caused a fire. With the cowling missing, the fire extinguisher won't work so the fire did not go out.
The fan cowls probably were not secured correctly. This is very difficult to see on this engine, unless you kneel down and specifically look. Just walking past and you cannot see that they are open.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 06:22:25 and read 44856 times.

Wonder where the cowls landed and if they have been located... have seen no mention of if so far.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: AngMoh
Posted 2013-05-24 06:26:20 and read 44822 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 105):
This was more than a routine single-engine IFSD though. Cowlings blown off both engines. One engine with flames coming out of it. Not clear if other engine was operating or not. Certainly not a non-event in my books.

  

You just don't shut down LHR for a "non-event"....

And in the past, people who have been trained for a serious event, fail to execute the training when it really matters because they are mentally not prepared for it.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LTC8K6
Posted 2013-05-24 06:30:44 and read 44566 times.

It sounds like the port engine cowling blew off early in the takeoff, and ATC reported this to the crew, who were then going to come back. Then while coming back, the starboard cowling let go, damaging the fuel or oil lines, and starting a fire.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 06:45:00 and read 43777 times.

I know this is too early to say but first thing came to my mind was 'this is not only due to Bird Strike'. This must be some maintenance issue too.

I read this comment below on Aviation Herald, very interesting.

( That plane was in the hangar last night, It looks like the fan cowl latches weren't latched and blew off, The RH engine fire may have been caused by damage due to the fan cowl being ripped off. Most airlines have a requirement for 2 engineers to check the latches are locked after maintenance. BA don't have this requirement on Airbus aircraft )

Also what about inspection done by pilots before departure ? is it possible to detect faults related with pylons or cowling? I am not pilot or engineer but just asking as curiosity.

Thanks.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: rwy04lga
Posted 2013-05-24 06:48:47 and read 43910 times.

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 61):
But time to think about adding some runways to LHR.

I'm surprised it took 60 posts for that to be mentioned.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 71):
If that is true, sounds more and more like someone forgot to latch the cowlings. Will lead to some very red faces in within BA.

'Maybe' the 'hero' FO who 'might' have missed the 'possibly' unlatched cowlings?   

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: curiousflyer
Posted 2013-05-24 06:48:49 and read 43703 times.

So it looks like the aircraft went through routine maintenance overnight and the cowling latches for both engines were not shut.

During takeoff, one engine lost its cowling, then the other one lost its cowling too, and one of the engines had to be shut down while the other one could still operate but caught fire as a fuel line was broken when the cowling flew away.

The pilots landed back at LHR, which forced them to fly over London. They could have picked another airport but it is usually simpler, or apparently simpler, to land at the origin destination and they had to make quick decisions.

There were no victims but the plane and engines are quite damaged and LHR operations were significantly disturbed.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: planesarecool
Posted 2013-05-24 06:49:16 and read 43533 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 105):
This was more than a routine single-engine IFSD though. Cowlings blown off both engines. One engine with flames coming out of it. Not clear if other engine was operating or not. Certainly not a non-event in my books.

But the pilots are trained to deal with an engine fire and would've been fully aware of which engines were operating. An 'event' to the passengers and witnesses maybe, but not to those up front. They would've diverted to a closer airport with a less dense surrounding population if they thought otherwise.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 118):
And in the past, people who have been trained for a serious event, fail to execute the training when it really matters because they are mentally not prepared for it.

If you can't remain calm during a 'routine' emergency, you shouldn't be flying an aircraft.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: foxxray
Posted 2013-05-24 07:00:14 and read 43088 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 104):
There wasn't a dual engine failure, there was a single engine failure or shut down. This is taught on your first, maybe second flight in a multi-engine aircraft and will be covered in every flight/sim check you do thereafter. If you can't handle an EFATO, you won't be flying for an airline.

Same applies for an engine fire, asymmetric flight, single-engine landings and full evacuations. It's nothing we're not trained for and it's exactly what we're paid to do.

What you consider an 'event' or 'non-event' is up to you. But I guarantee you won't see the PIC and FO of BA762 making public appearances as 'heroes', like we did after BA38/US1549. Of course they handled the situation well, but they were just doing the job they are trained and paid to do.

As a pilot, i can tell you that an in flight engine failure is definitely NOT a non event !

From your pilot experience (?!), have you ever encountered a real engine failure (not during training, TR, ...) ? I do and i can tell you it wasn't a non event for me even if i am trained to handle this kind of situation...

Then, what is an event for you ? Something nobody have been trained to ?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 07:03:59 and read 42974 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 123):

So both engines with cowlings blown off, the first one shut down as a precautionary measure, the second one on fire, no access to fire bottles as apparently you need the cowlings for those, and you still want to maintain it was a routine IFSD? Odd, but its your choice.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: foxxray
Posted 2013-05-24 07:10:46 and read 42786 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 123):
But the pilots are trained to deal with an engine fire and would've been fully aware of which engines were operating. An 'event' to the passengers and witnesses maybe, but not to those up front. They would've diverted to a closer airport with a less dense surrounding population if they thought otherwise.
Quoting planesarecool (Reply 123):
If you can't remain calm during a 'routine' emergency, you shouldn't be flying an aircraft.

Are you really a pilot ? Where and on what ?

I already had one engine failure on a single engine aircraft and one on a multi engine... i handled both failure well (both aircrafts are still flying and so do i    ) and with calm but again these were not non events !!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-05-24 07:22:04 and read 42020 times.

Quoting LIFFY1A (Reply 101):
Was there a dual engine failure? And where in Planesarecool's post does he mention dual engine failure?
Quoting planesarecool (Reply 104):
There wasn't a dual engine failure, there was a single engine failure or shut down.

Earlier reports stated that one engine was shutdown and the seocnd engine was on fire. Nevertheless, I don't think it's normal for A319's to fly around with the cowlings off the engines. So there was a failure of some sort on both engines. Whether there's more to it then just the cowlings coming off we don't know at this point.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LIFFY1A
Posted 2013-05-24 07:33:04 and read 41415 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 128):
Earlier reports stated that one engine was shutdown and the seocnd engine was on fire. Nevertheless, I don't think it's normal for A319's to fly around with the cowlings off the engines. So there was a failure of some sort on both engines. Whether there's more to it then just the cowlings coming off we don't know at this point.

There wasn't a dual engine failure, regardless of 'a failure of some sort on both engines'. If there was, we'd be reading about a completely different situation right now. Something more like what happened in the Hudson.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: EASTERN747
Posted 2013-05-24 08:00:05 and read 40160 times.

This is why I avoid 2 engine jets across the pond.....................................

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: TheAviator380
Posted 2013-05-24 08:22:32 and read 39128 times.

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 128):

UK, Europe flying across pond you hardly get to see quad engine jet. So no luxury to decide that I am afraid. Only Trans Atlantic flights and LHR-MAD rest most of the EU-Britain flights would be twin jet.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: foxxray
Posted 2013-05-24 08:29:17 and read 38915 times.

Quoting TheAviator380 (Reply 129):
UK, Europe flying across pond you hardly get to see quad engine jet. So no luxury to decide that I am afraid. Only Trans Atlantic flights and LHR-MAD rest most of the EU-Britain flights would be twin jet.

I think EASTERN747 was meaning across the atlantic ocean  

BAE/Avro are flying daily from the UK to mainland Europe daily  

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: btblue
Posted 2013-05-24 08:31:59 and read 38769 times.

I indicated very early on the likelihood of the cowlings not being latched correctly.

Fire resulting due to the casing being ripped from the engine, damaging it. The other engine seeing similar problems but no fire later into the short flight, Both cowlings detached at different times and not at the same time... Minutes apart.

There was NO dual engine fire/failure.

This all looks like a mechanical issue, but happy to be proved wrong... By a sarrow or a hawk... Or even a manky London pigeon.

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 128):

Give it 20 years and you'll be getting a boat then.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-05-24 08:33:57 and read 38743 times.

Who was the idiot filming this. If the landing was not so nice he could have caused a serious injury to somebody around him and then he took it with him off the aircraft. What an idiot.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Roseflyer
Posted 2013-05-24 08:42:03 and read 38345 times.

Speculation is fun, so I’ll try.

This doesn’t look like a bird strike to me. The front of the engines are clean. The leading edge of the wing, nose and flight deck windows are clean.

Both cowlings falling off in flight makes this sound like it is a technical problem with the airplane and seems to imply it could have been maintenance induced. I’d be curious to see the maintenance records for what happened overnight. It’s the first flight of the day, so it could have had some overnight maintenance that opened up the cowls and someone didn’t follow the correct procedure when closing them.

ETOPS maintenance programs are supposed to prevent this. Obviously a BA A319 isn’t ETOPS, but that’s why you don’t have the same person do the same task on both engines in the same maintenance visit. If they make a mistake, you eliminated the redundancy of having two engines.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: oykie
Posted 2013-05-24 08:51:58 and read 38036 times.

A friend of mine was onboard this flight and he told me the first cowling on the right hand engine fell of with a bang just after rotation. The take-off continued and pilots prepared landing. Then 3 minutes before landing the right hand engine caught fire while descending to LHR. Same engine as the one loosing cowling on takeoff. Left side lost cowling and both cowlings hit the fuselage. No power in cabin and a sudden bank happened after engine fire. But in my friends opinion the pilots handled the situation very well and so did BA after the incident. But he is shaky after this incident.

The situation became gradually worse as the flight progressed but the pilots did handled the developing emergencies well.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: nclmedic
Posted 2013-05-24 08:56:19 and read 37705 times.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 133):
I’d be curious to see the maintenance records for what happened overnight. It’s the first flight of the day, so it could have had some overnight maintenance that opened up the cowls and someone didn’t follow the correct procedure when closing them.

Bird was working last night as BA747 STV-LHR, arrived in 2138 (not particularly late) so unlikely that any *heavy* maintenance was done on her between then and leaving this morning.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: clydenairways
Posted 2013-05-24 09:08:45 and read 37138 times.

Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 115):
No,
having read the whole thread, and looked at Daily Mail pics, there was a failure of the fan cowls on both engines. First the left cowls, and later the right cowls. As the right cowls detached they damaged a fuel line on the right engine that caused a fire. With the cowling missing, the fire extinguisher won't work so the fire did not go out.
The fan cowls probably were not secured correctly. This is very difficult to see on this engine, unless you kneel down and specifically look. Just walking past and you cannot see that they are open.

I think this is the most logical theory suggested so far.
It really does seem like the cowlings were not secured after maintenance, and sheared off once the speed increased after take-off, and one of them hit a fuel line while detaching.

A lot of other posts on this thread such as double engine failure theories are rubbish.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: a380heavy
Posted 2013-05-24 09:15:05 and read 36948 times.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 133):

  

Its incredible how the news was initially reporting that "the pilot reported a birdstrike on the Boeing A319" but not nearly as incredible as its looking now that both cowlings either came undone, or were left undone by the maintenance crew!

The outcome of this incident could have been so different - just imagine a double engine failure at relatively low altitude, over one of the most densely populated areas of the UK!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-24 09:21:47 and read 36511 times.

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 136):
A lot of other posts on this thread such as double engine failure theories are rubbish.

Also, there's no indication of even a single engine failure or infligtht shutdown, correct?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 09:22:29 and read 36471 times.

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 136):

A lot of other posts on this thread such as double engine failure theories are rubbish.

Don't think I have seen anyone post it was a double engine failure on this thread once the pictures came out -- it became quite clear to all then then it looked more like a double engine *cowling* failure, likely due to unfastened latches, along with one damaged engine as it had evidently been damaged by the departing cowling and clearly been on fire.

It still is unclear though whether the left engine had been shut as a precaution after the cowlings flew off. Either way, not a trivial event at all.

[Edited 2013-05-24 09:24:25]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: 817Dreamliiner
Posted 2013-05-24 09:23:13 and read 36885 times.

...And here's a photo of G-EUOE in the database from this morning:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alex Sandro Vicente Barbosa

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: N821NW
Posted 2013-05-24 09:30:39 and read 36302 times.

It will be interesting to read the final report...now time to get my A319 out of the X-Plane hangar and try to recreate the situation   

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Roseflyer
Posted 2013-05-24 09:34:59 and read 36029 times.

Quoting nclmedic (Reply 135):

Bird was working last night as BA747 STV-LHR, arrived in 2138 (not particularly late) so unlikely that any *heavy* maintenance was done on her between then and leaving this morning.

There are some very frequent maintenance checks that require the cowls to be opened. Engine oil, IDG oil, and filter checks are all done on the line between heavy maintenance checks and are easily accomplished on an overnight sit. I don't know the specific of the A319 maintenance program, but some of those have to be checked every few weeks. If the same person did the checks on both sides and didn't shut the cowls correctly, then this is what can happen.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-24 09:38:55 and read 35794 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 139):
It still is unclear though whether the left engine had been shut as a precaution after the cowlings flew off.

It's unlikely a functioning engine would be purposely shut down because a cowling was lost.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-24 09:48:44 and read 35385 times.

Quoting N821NW (Reply 141):
time to get my A319 out of the X-Plane hangar and try to recreate the situation

X-Plane is better than I thought if it can simmulate engine cowlings detaching in flight.  

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 09:49:17 and read 35309 times.

Quoting hivue (Reply 143):

It's unlikely a functioning engine would be purposely shut down because a cowling was lost.

Perhaops one of the pilots can comment on this. I think it was speculated that it may have been shut down as a precaution.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: WesternDC6B
Posted 2013-05-24 09:57:03 and read 35022 times.

The article on Sky News clearly identifies it as an Airbus, and the first comment I read is a snide remark about the 737. That's either a reading comprehension problem, or it carries the A vs B debate to a new level of silliness.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: N821NW
Posted 2013-05-24 09:59:59 and read 34867 times.

Quoting hivue (Reply 144):
X-Plane is better than I thought if it can simmulate engine cowlings detaching in flight.

Well...maybe not that part of the problem but I can simulate the engine failure and engine fire.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-24 10:05:19 and read 34677 times.

Quoting N821NW (Reply 147):
but I can simulate the engine failure

What engine failure?

Quoting sankaps (Reply 145):
I think it was speculated that it may have been shut down as a precaution.

Emphasis probably on "it was speculated." I would think this incident is an object lesson for why a functioning engine would not be shut down as a precaution. They very quickly had a second engine-related problem.

[Edited 2013-05-24 10:08:40] (for confusion over "speculation" and "precaution")

[Edited 2013-05-24 10:10:43]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: my1le
Posted 2013-05-24 10:09:23 and read 34558 times.

What would cause BOTH engine cowlings to be blown off the airframe?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: PHX787
Posted 2013-05-24 10:11:13 and read 34719 times.

That engine looks really messed up.

Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 140):
...And here's a photo of G-EUOE in the database from this morning:

I reeaaaaaallly hate the position of that watermark right now (and hate being a Premium member)   

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: N821NW
Posted 2013-05-24 10:11:48 and read 34470 times.

Quoting hivue (Reply 148):
What engine failure?

Ok, the engine shut down and engine fire.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: clydenairways
Posted 2013-05-24 10:14:58 and read 34540 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 139):
It still is unclear though whether the left engine had been shut as a precaution after the cowlings flew off. Either way, not a trivial event at all.

That engine was still running and even used for reverse thrust after touchdown.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 139):
looked more like a double engine *cowling* failure

Interesting terminology.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-24 10:17:35 and read 34580 times.

Quoting my1le (Reply 149):
What would cause BOTH engine cowlings to be blown off the airframe?

165 kts of air flow.   (Sorry,couldn't resist.)

Actually, a number a of posters have speculated that a mx tech failed to latch the cowlings and the pilot doing the pre-flight failed to spot this.

[Edited 2013-05-24 10:18:53]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-05-24 10:19:47 and read 34336 times.

Quoting LIFFY1A (Reply 127):
There wasn't a dual engine failure, regardless of 'a failure of some sort on both engines'. If there was, we'd be reading about a completely different situation right now. Something more like what happened in the Hudson.

I think you're confusing engine shutdown or catastrophic failure with just a mere failure. I stand by my statement and anyone with reasonale reading skills would agree I think. Engine cowls coming off from1 engine let alone 2 engines is NOT NORMAL. That implies a failure of some sort. Whether is was just the latches that failed or something else it is still a failure and an uncontained failure by the looks of it.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-24 10:25:36 and read 34044 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 154):
I think you're confusing engine shutdown or catastrophic failure with just a mere failure

I think most posters on these forums would understand "engine failure" to mean that the engine has ceased producing any significant amount of power.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Md88Captain
Posted 2013-05-24 10:32:47 and read 33793 times.

Looks like the engine cowlings were left unlatched or partially latched leading to them flying open on departure. That is a big deal in that four sets of eyes would have missed them being unlatched. Original maintenance, supervising mechanic doing the sign off, mechanic doing the first flight walk around, and the last line of defense - a pilot doing his walk around. Big, multi-layered screw up. Imagine the cost of lost revenue today. And the damage to the aircraft both in direct cost and lost revenue will be significant.

There will be lots of finger pointing on this deal with the mechs saying "I closed them". The pilot is the only one who will be unable to say someone opened them after he checked them.

[Edited 2013-05-24 10:48:45]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 10:33:47 and read 33785 times.

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 152):
That engine was still running and even used for reverse thrust after touchdown.

You are right... just spotted the reverse thrust activation on watching the video again.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LIFFY1A
Posted 2013-05-24 10:46:11 and read 33193 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 154):
I think you're confusing engine shutdown or catastrophic failure with just a mere failure. I stand by my statement and anyone with reasonale reading skills would agree I think. Engine cowls coming off from1 engine let alone 2 engines is NOT NORMAL. That implies a failure of some sort. Whether is was just the latches that failed or something else it is still a failure and an uncontained failure by the looks of it.

No I'm not confused. I know exactly what an engine failure is and there was no dual engine failure here. You can stand by your statement all you want but you're the only one on this forum saying dual engine failure.

By the way, an uncontained engine failure relates to the components within the engine exiting the engine through the cowling and not just the cowling itself separating from the engine.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: A388
Posted 2013-05-24 10:48:27 and read 33099 times.

Amazing but luckily everything ended well. It's also amazing how today's technology makes these very detailed and high quality films and photos available to the public so quickly.

One of the posts says that the aircraft involved had just come out of maintenance the day before and that both engine cowlings were not locked by the maintenance crew. Is this really true or is this a bird strike as also mentioned or maybe a combination of both?

A388

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: cubastar
Posted 2013-05-24 11:35:59 and read 31392 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 122):
But the pilots are trained to deal with an engine fire and would've been fully aware of which engines were operating


Indeed they would be. However, this was not your "usual" situation. During or shortly after takeoff, the left engine cowling came off, as evidenced by the photograph taken by a passenger who took a picture of it prior to becoming (as the pax stated) airborne. I'm sure that the pilots would have noticed any abnormal instrumentation.

Then, at a later time (minutes or seconds) the right engine cowling left the aircraft. Obviously, when it departed it did some sort of damage to the underlying tubings which caused a fire. The pilots may have had some abnormal warnings this time. I don't think at any time they (pilots) would have considered this as a normal "trained for" situation.

At this stage in the investigation of the incident, I don't think it is appropriate to question or criticize any of the crew's actions taken.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 122):
If you can't remain calm during a 'routine' emergency, you shouldn't be flying an aircraft.

Who has said anything about the crew "NOT REMAINING CALM" during this incident or emergency? I do think that you are being too judgmental (although you may have your opinion) with way too little information or experience.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: spacecadet
Posted 2013-05-24 11:51:30 and read 30854 times.

Quoting hivue (Reply 143):
It's unlikely a functioning engine would be purposely shut down because a cowling was lost.

But it's very likely that one would be shut down that was on fire.

The video of the landing that someone posted earlier shows a pretty significant crab on landing. It would surprise me if the right engine was still operating at that point.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-05-24 12:07:16 and read 30458 times.

Quoting cornishsimon (Reply 113):
Anyone have a complete list of diversions for all airlines ?

Twenty-one BA diversions variously to AMS (1), BOH (1), CWL (3), LGW (7), LTN (3), MSE (2) and STN (4) are detailed here:

http://www.thebasource.com/

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: N766UA
Posted 2013-05-24 12:16:39 and read 30041 times.

People are saying birdstrikes…do we know this to be the cause?

It seems to me I've seen this many times before…

http://www.cuckoo.com/~dbaker/airtranengine.jpg

http://www.nycaviation.com/newspage/...tam-engine-cowling-630-260x152.jpg

http://i1.sinaimg.cn/jc/2013/0218/U6634P1247DT20130218145630.jpg

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd208/robbreid/JetBlue.jpg

Air Tran, TAM, Iberea, JetBlue, now BA… and I'm sure there are others. This seems to be an endemic and pressing safety issue, along with "nosewheel canting", on Airbus narrowbodies. Has anything been done to correct these faults?

[Edited 2013-05-24 12:17:45]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 12:19:10 and read 29931 times.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 165):
This seems to be an endemic and pressing safety issue, along with "nosewheel canting", on Airbus narrowbodies. Has anything been done to correct these faults?

You're trolling right? Or perhaps forgot the smilies?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: N766UA
Posted 2013-05-24 12:27:15 and read 29628 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 166):
You're trolling right? Or perhaps forgot the smilies?

Why would I put smilies?? I'm asking, given that this aircraft has just landed with an engine fire and 2 failed engine cowlings, if there is a connection to these other incidents, and if anything has been done to correct the issue, as apparently it is one.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 12:45:29 and read 29042 times.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 166):
Why would I put smilies?? I'm asking, given that this aircraft has just landed with an engine fire and 2 failed engine cowlings, if there is a connection to these other incidents, and if anything has been done to correct the issue, as apparently it is one.

So you believe birds are disproportionately attracted to Airbus aircraft? And somehow Airbus is responsible for cowling latches being left open, as appears may well have been the case?  

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-24 12:47:14 and read 28848 times.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 162):
Quoting hivue (Reply 143):
It's unlikely a functioning engine would be purposely shut down because a cowling was lost.

But it's very likely that one would be shut down that was on fire.

Correct. I should have qualified by saying "properly functioning." It will be interesting to learn what sort of messages the crew were getting.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: tcx69k
Posted 2013-05-24 13:15:48 and read 27967 times.

There was reports from the operating crew of yesterday's SVG that vibrations/noises could be felt/heard in the cabin. This no doubt prompted the aircraft to be sent to the hangar for inspection overnight. Where it seems, as mentioned, that the cowlings were not latched closed properly. We will just have to wait and see if that is exactly what happened.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-24 13:18:02 and read 27843 times.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 161):
The video of the landing that someone posted earlier shows a pretty significant crab on landing. It would surprise me if the right engine was still operating at that point.

Would you crab a landing for an engine out? I think you would just trim out the adverse yaw and land normally. Isn't crabbing reserved for crosswinds?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2013-05-24 13:18:18 and read 27786 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 80):
From a pilot's perspective, it sounds very much like a non-event to me.

Losing one and having a fire in another is a "non-event?" I'm sorry, but this sort of minimization of what could have been a major accident with mass loss of life just irritates me. In fact, as a professional with experience in MANY life-and-death emergencies, anyone on my team showing that sort of casual bravado over an actual emergency would find themselves off my team quickly. A basic tenet of professionalism in those fields that involve life-and-death emergencies is: be able to recognize such an emergency.

Maybe you DO train in the sims to have one engine out (although now that seems unclear) and the other on fire, but I'm pretty sure you'd feel differently about the entire thing after the event when you're in a plane and not in a sim where you know that you're at about 20ft AGL at all times, no matter how "realistic" the sim.

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 128):
This is why I avoid 2 engine jets across the pond.....................................

If you're going to have a dual-engine failure due to birdstrike, it's going to happen in the first few minutes before you start the crossing. And, frankly, if the flock was large enough to put out two engines, it probably would have put out all four on a quad.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LTC8K6
Posted 2013-05-24 13:21:59 and read 27717 times.

The "engine fire" is probably just from leaking fluid igniting on something hot, and not actually an engine fire, if you will.

Shut the fluid flow off, and the fire is gone.

[Edited 2013-05-24 13:24:08]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 13:25:09 and read 27577 times.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 170):
And, frankly, if the flock was large enough to put out two engines, it probably would have put out all four on a quad.

And if somehow the cowlings on all four engines were left unlatched, the chances of four sets of departing cowlings damaging the aircraft or engines would double relative to two sets of departing cowlings.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: N766UA
Posted 2013-05-24 13:25:53 and read 27578 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 166):
So you believe birds are disproportionately attracted to Airbus aircraft? And somehow Airbus is responsible for cowling latches being left open, as appears may well have been the case?

Did you comprehend what I said or are you just purposely being difficult for sport?

Quoting hivue (Reply 169):
Would you crab a landing for an engine out? I think you would just trim out the adverse yaw and land normally

You really can't "trim out" the adverse yaw created by having a dead engine. The crab is a consequence of the asymmetric thrust, not so much a technique, as it is in crosswind landings.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 13:41:41 and read 27033 times.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 173):
Did you comprehend what I said or are you just purposely being difficult for sport?

Well you wrote...

Quoting N766UA (Reply 163):
People are saying birdstrikes…do we know this to be the cause?

It seems to me I've seen this many times before…

... when it was pretty clear that opinion was moving away from birdstrikes and moving to dual cowling separation.

You then post a bunch of photos of A320-family cowling separations, not caring to distinguish between IAE and CFM engines, as both feature in your photos with missing cowlings.

Cowlings coming off can happen and do happen, but can hardly be linked to a particular airframe type especially if it is happening to engines from two different manufacturers. Plus I do not think there has been a case of both engines losing their cowlings within minutes of each other, which strongly suggest something other than a cowling failure as so many on this thread have pointed out.

So apologies if I over-reacted, but it seemed like an Airbus-bashing troll to me.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Roseflyer
Posted 2013-05-24 13:53:26 and read 26690 times.

Quoting Md88Captain (Reply 156):
Looks like the engine cowlings were left unlatched or partially latched leading to them flying open on departure. That is a big deal in that four sets of eyes would have missed them being unlatched. Original maintenance, supervising mechanic doing the sign off, mechanic doing the first flight walk around, and the last line of defense - a pilot doing his walk around. Big, multi-layered screw up. Imagine the cost of lost revenue today. And the damage to the aircraft both in direct cost and lost revenue will be significant.

The regulators are very sensitive about maintenance induced damage and not following procedures correctly. We’ll likely never know since I doubt an Airworthiness Directive would be issued over it, but I bet some form of corrective action will happen at BA over this.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 170):
Quoting planesarecool (Reply 80):
From a pilot's perspective, it sounds very much like a non-event to me.

Losing one and having a fire in another is a "non-event?" I'm sorry, but this sort of minimization of what could have been a major accident with mass loss of life just irritates me. In fact, as a professional with experience in MANY life-and-death emergencies, anyone on my team showing that sort of casual bravado over an actual emergency would find themselves off my team quickly. A basic tenet of professionalism in those fields that involve life-and-death emergencies is: be able to recognize such an emergency.

Maybe you DO train in the sims to have one engine out (although now that seems unclear) and the other on fire, but I'm pretty sure you'd feel differently about the entire thing after the event when you're in a plane and not in a sim where you know that you're at about 20ft AGL at all times, no matter how "realistic" the sim.

I think he is just a kid not knowing what he is talking about. According to the FAA Significant Reportable events are diversions, air turn backs, rejected takeoffs, and in flight shutdowns. This event was 2 out of the 4 and is a significant reportable event. EASA will probably require BA to implement some form of corrective action (likely a note in the maintenance manual to ensure latches are closed) because it is so serious. Some airlines even paint their latches in obvious colors to help identify problems. Significant events are usually 1 failure away from catastrophic crash. A cowling separating from the engine can take out a fuel or oil line, which means that engine is headed towards shutdown.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 171):
The "engine fire" is probably just from leaking fluid igniting on something hot, and not actually an engine fire, if you will.

Shut the fluid flow off, and the fire is gone.

Very true, but depending on what was leaking, the only way to shutoff fluid flow may be by pulling the fire handles, but not discharging the fire suppressant, which might as well have been an engine fire because that will take out the engine.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: oykie
Posted 2013-05-24 13:56:57 and read 26586 times.

Quoting oykie (Reply 134):
A friend of mine was onboard this flight and he told me the first cowling on the right hand engine fell of with a bang just after rotation. The take-off continued and pilots prepared landing. Then 3 minutes before landing the right hand engine caught fire while descending to LHR. Same engine as the one loosing cowling on takeoff. Left side lost cowling and both cowlings hit the fuselage. No power in cabin and a sudden bank happened after engine fire. But in my friends opinion the pilots handled the situation very well and so did BA after the incident. But he is shaky after this incident.

The situation became gradually worse as the flight progressed but the pilots did handled the developing emergencies well.
Quoting sankaps (Reply 139):
It still is unclear though whether the left engine had been shut as a precaution after the cowlings flew off. Either way, not a trivial event at all.

Sankaps, according to my friend on the plane that I quoted in my earlier post says the right engine cowling fell of during take-off. This was the one engine that caught fire. The left engine and working engine lost its cowling later in the flight.



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 170):
Losing one and having a fire in another is a "non-event?" I'm sorry, but this sort of minimization of what could have been a major accident with mass loss of life just irritates me. In fact, as a professional with experience in MANY life-and-death emergencies, anyone on my team showing that sort of casual bravado over an actual emergency would find themselves off my team quickly. A basic tenet of professionalism in those fields that involve life-and-death emergencies is: be able to recognize such an emergency.

According to my friend onboard this was a very big event, especially one minute after the engine caught fire just two minutes before landing, the plane had high degree bank, electricity was lost in the cabin and before the pilot got the plane level again it was a scary. That being said he told me the pilots and cabin crew was experienced and handled the developing emergency very well.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: planesarecool
Posted 2013-05-24 13:57:33 and read 26809 times.

Quoting cubastar (Reply 160):
Who has said anything about the crew "NOT REMAINING CALM" during this incident or emergency? I do think that you are being too judgmental (although you may have your opinion) with way too little information or experience.

Nobody. Perhaps you'd like to re-read the quote I was referring to (my apologies, I forgot everything had to be explained literally on this forum):

"And in the past, people who have been trained for a serious event, fail to execute the training when it really matters because they are mentally not prepared for it."

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 170):
A basic tenet of professionalism in those fields that involve life-and-death emergencies is: be able to recognize such an emergency.

Well seeing as we're in the mood for being patronising, here's another: remain calm enough to deal with the situation to the best of your ability, without being impaired by panic. I think you'd be in the minority if you'd rather see a pair of pilots panicking about an emergency in the cockpit, rather than two calm, collected professionals simply putting their extensive training into action to deal with the situation.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 170):
after the event

You can feel how you like after the 'event', as long as you're carrying out the procedures you were trained to do during the 'event'. I'm not saying they would've gone home today thinking it was just another day in the office, but they almost certainly won't feel they did anything they weren't extensively trained and prepared for.

Incidentally, the chairman of BALPA seems to share my views:

Quote:
Captain Mark Searle, chairman of the British Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa), said: "This was a professional job done by professional people.

"As pilots we spend our whole career training to manage incidents such as this in order to avoid an incident becoming a disaster."

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Aesma
Posted 2013-05-24 14:00:00 and read 26684 times.

Quoting WesternDC6B (Reply 146):
The article on Sky News clearly identifies it as an Airbus, and the first comment I read is a snide remark about the 737. That's either a reading comprehension problem, or it carries the A vs B debate to a new level of silliness.

This is the internet. That article has probably been edited ten times before you read it, but after the comment was made.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 14:21:01 and read 25952 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 177):
Incidentally, the chairman of BALPA seems to share my views:

Quote:Captain Mark Searle, chairman of the British Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa), said: "This was a professional job done by professional people.

"As pilots we spend our whole career training to manage incidents such as this in order to avoid an incident becoming a disaster."

They are not saying this is a non-event, which is what you are or were saying. So good try, but this does not add to your argument at all.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: tonystan
Posted 2013-05-24 14:28:26 and read 25774 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 177):

This was a big deal. How do I know? Well Iv received a hell of a lot emails from the company and EPIC was initiated! This doesn't happen for minor incidents!!!!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: planesarecool
Posted 2013-05-24 14:42:53 and read 25383 times.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 175):
I think he is just a kid not knowing what he is talking about.

You can 'think' what you like, and you can call me a kid if you want, but based on your proud profile statement "(I have my private pilot license)", I am far more experienced than yourself. But that's all I'll say, I'm not pathetic enough to make personal attacks on people I don't know.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 179):
They are not saying this is a non-event, which is what you are or were saying. So good try, but this does not add to your argument at all.

You're arguing with an opinion. Well done.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 180):
This was a big deal.

An aircraft evacuated on the runway with two missing cowlings, the airport closed, flights cancelled - yes it was a big deal. But from the pilot's perspective (which is the exact term I used to start my first contribution to this thread), it was nothing that they haven't been trained to deal with. They did a professional job, but an engine fire/shut down and an asymmetric landing isn't going to traumatise a cockpit crew.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Alpage
Posted 2013-05-24 14:43:45 and read 25383 times.

Probably someone already made this analysis but looking the pictures we may find some damage to the right wing slat. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong.

http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.fil...?id=180806&filename=phpPlarRS.jpeg

http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.fil...?id=180806&filename=phpgE0GNa.jpeg

[Edited 2013-05-24 14:45:09]

[Edited 2013-05-24 14:46:18]

[Edited 2013-05-24 14:47:51]

[Edited 2013-05-24 15:09:39]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 15:19:18 and read 24405 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 181):
You're arguing with an opinion. Well done.

Not just an opinion, but a poorly informed one as pretty much every else on this thread has pointed out. Interesting that you still want to keep going on offering the same opinion.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Toulouse
Posted 2013-05-24 15:28:30 and read 24163 times.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 163):

Don't think any need for concern over Airbus aircraft. In each case you mention, a simple google search will show you that all indications were that these issues were all due to the cowlings not being correctly latched, as many are suggesting may be the cause for today's BA incident. All of these incidents seem to have happened during take-off at which stage wind gained sufficient force to separate the unlocked cowlings. Didn't check them all, but the JetBlue incident, like the BA one, was an early morning first flight of the day and had been in maintenance that night.

It is interesting then when googling cowling separation some of the first results were not for Airbus aircraft as the inciðents you mention happened between a year and ten years ago, coming up first were more recent incidents of cowling separation on an AirTran B717, a 707, a Turkish Airlines 737-800...

While there does seem to be a particular difficulty in ensuring the cowlings are securely fastened on RR made latches on two different A320 engines types. In fact, back in 2008 the NTSB carried out research on this occurrence and they did pay special attention to Airbus narrowbodies and Bombardier regional jets as their research concluded that there had been, between 1992 and 2007, fifteen engine cowling incidents on Airbus a/c and 33 on Bombardier. They also concluded that the majority of incidents were caused by improperly fastened cowlings following engine maintenance. They mandated for the dual sigh off as I mentioned above amongst operators of these aircraft types.

So I wouldn't say it's an "endemic and pressing safety issue", as you say,with Airbus aircraft, but is indeed a safety issue of ensuring the operator's maintenance crews adhere to procedure with dual sign off.

Not sure of the cause for the also numerous cowling separation incidents on the aircraft of other manufacturers.

[Edited 2013-05-24 15:38:46]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: planesarecool
Posted 2013-05-24 15:39:29 and read 23965 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 183):
Not just an opinion, but a poorly informed one as pretty much every else on this thread has pointed out. Interesting that you still want to keep going on offering the same opinion.

Thankfully, unlike "pretty much every else on this thread", I'm an airline pilot, so my opinion might stand for something. I'll continue doing the job I'm paid and trained to do, confident in the knowledge that I too could have dealt with a similar situation, thanks to the extensive training I've received on emergency and abnormal procedures. You're welcome to continue sitting at home arguing on the internet.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-24 15:45:57 and read 23757 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 185):

Sure you could have dealt with it. Still does not make it a non-event. It is actually quite disconcerting that you want to keep minimising this event despite being an airline pilot.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Roseflyer
Posted 2013-05-24 15:48:11 and read 23805 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 181):
You can 'think' what you like, and you can call me a kid if you want, but based on your proud profile statement "(I have my private pilot license)", I am far more experienced than yourself. But that's all I'll say, I'm not pathetic enough to make personal attacks on people I don't know.

My apologies for offending you. I also have a masters degree in engineering and have spent most of my career working on safety analysis related to airplanes at both a manufacturer and airline including working accident and incident investigations along with routing root cause analysis for maintenance findings. Often times I see on A.net many posts that are uniformed. However you did say from the pilot’s perspective, so maybe I am looking at it from a different point of view.

I am sorry if it was wrong, but I was assuming that you aren’t familiar with the reportable event criteria in 49 CFR 830.5, which many pilots are not necessarily familiar with. It actually defines exactly what a serious event is. At this time, it very well could have been classified as a serious event because we don’t know if there was a fire, if a hydraulics were lost, if electrical power was lost, and the effect in the flight deck. From preliminary reports it sounds like those could have happened. It certainly wouldn't be a non-event in my mind. Inflight shutdowns alone are reportable events.

For what it is worth, this happening at Heathrow by BA makes it stick out. If this happened by a smaller airline at a small airport in China, no one would have noticed. Two commercial airplanes mysteriously disappeared into the ocean at night in 2009-2010 partially due to pilot error. Everyone immediately thinks of Air France 447, but no one seems to remember the other.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/830.5

An aircraft accident or any of the following listed serious incidents occur:
(1) Flight control system malfunction or failure;
(2) Inability of any required flight crewmember to perform normal flight duties as a result of injury or illness;
(3) Failure of any internal turbine engine component that results in the escape of debris other than out the exhaust path;
(4) In-flight fire;
(5) Aircraft collision in flight;
(6) Damage to property, other than the aircraft, estimated to exceed $25,000 for repair (including materials and labor) or fair market value in the event of total loss, whichever is less.
(7) For large multiengine aircraft (more than 12,500 pounds maximum certificated takeoff weight):
(i) In-flight failure of electrical systems which requires the sustained use of an emergency bus powered by a back-up source such as a battery, auxiliary power unit, or air-driven generator to retain flight control or essential instruments;
(ii) In-flight failure of hydraulic systems that results in sustained reliance on the sole remaining hydraulic or mechanical system for movement of flight control surfaces;
(iii) Sustained loss of the power or thrust produced by two or more engines; and
(iv) An evacuation of an aircraft in which an emergency egress system is utilized.
(8) Release of all or a portion of a propeller blade from an aircraft, excluding release caused solely by ground contact;
(9) A complete loss of information, excluding flickering, from more than 50 percent of an aircraft's cockpit displays known as:
(i) Electronic Flight Instrument System (EFIS) displays;
(ii) Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System (EICAS) displays;
(iii) Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitor (ECAM) displays; or
(iv) Other displays of this type, which generally include a primary flight display (PFD), primary navigation display (PND), and other integrated displays;
(10) Airborne Collision and Avoidance System (ACAS) resolution advisories issued either:
(i) When an aircraft is being operated on an instrument flight rules flight plan and compliance with the advisory is necessary to avert a substantial risk of collision between two or more aircraft; or
(ii) To an aircraft operating in class A airspace.
(11) Damage to helicopter tail or main rotor blades, including ground damage, that requires major repair or replacement of the blade(s);
(12) Any event in which an operator, when operating an airplane as an air carrier at a public-use airport on land:
(i) Lands or departs on a taxiway, incorrect runway, or other area not designed as a runway; or
(ii) Experiences a runway incursion that requires the operator or the crew of another aircraft or vehicle to take immediate corrective action to avoid a collision.
(b) An aircraft is overdue and is believed to have been involved in an accident.


Pilots will often look at an event from the perspective of what would I have done in a similar situation whereas an engineer would look at it from the perspective of what additional failures would have limited the ability of the airplane to continue safe flight and landing without exceptional pilot skill.

[Edited 2013-05-24 16:01:35]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: spacecadet
Posted 2013-05-24 15:57:07 and read 23532 times.

Quoting oykie (Reply 176):
According to my friend onboard this was a very big event, especially one minute after the engine caught fire just two minutes before landing, the plane had high degree bank, electricity was lost in the cabin and before the pilot got the plane level again it was a scary.

I'm not totally clear on the sequence of events from your post, but that sounds to me like an engine shutdown. The "high degree of bank", though, may or may not have been directly related - passengers often overestimate bank angles, and after an event like this, they're obviously going to be turning back to the airport pretty quickly. It could have just been a standard turn, albeit at a low altitude (which would make it seem scarier, to passengers). I've actually been in that situation as a passenger.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: seat55a
Posted 2013-05-24 16:06:57 and read 23374 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 185):
You're welcome to continue sitting at home arguing on the internet.

As a consumer of aviation services, I'm pleased to be here at home if the alternative is to be sitting in back of someone with the attitude you express. This is of course purely my preference and others will have other prefrences.

To help me understand the eventfulness or otherwise of this incident, what are the airlines' rules concerning pilots' return to flying duty after such an occurence?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: AR385
Posted 2013-05-24 17:04:58 and read 22303 times.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 171):
The "engine fire" is probably just from leaking fluid igniting on something hot, and not actually an engine fire

Indeed. The color of the smoke does not make it look like it was fuel. Looks more like oil.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: spacecadet
Posted 2013-05-24 17:23:54 and read 22038 times.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 190):
Indeed. The color of the smoke does not make it look like it was fuel. Looks more like oil.

Not sure that's a whole lot better.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: zeke
Posted 2013-05-24 17:43:53 and read 21821 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 3):
Accrding to http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-0...ys-shut-after-plane-loses-engine/, it says an aircraft lost an engine on takeoff, and landed with the second engine on fire!

Fairly poor reporting, it only takes a cursory glance to find the engine that was lost, it is still attached to the wing.

Quoting Globetraveller (Reply 40):
There are quite consistent reports now that one of the engines was, at one point, on fire. It is amazing from how many angles and how quickly we get to see incidents these days!

There may well have been a cockpit indication of fire, I will go into that detail below.

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 74):
How would the removal of the cowlings cause the apparent engine fire?

Engines when running are on fire (they burn fuel), they have a controlled fire within the combustion chamber. What most people do not realize is that when we get a cockpit indication of a fire, it is not in the "hot" section, not is it in the bypass area, it is where the accessories are and around the engine. Normally engines have dual fire loop fire detection system which are around the engine and in the accessory area which work by heat, or by the the loop being cut. It is possible with the cowl becoming detached that these loops could become damaged, and thus producing an indication of fire, without a fire.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 105):
One engine with flames coming out of it. Not clear if other engine was operating or not. Certainly not a non-event in my books.

Until we know what was the actual state of the aircraft, you are guessing a lot. Those of us who have flown these can tell a lot by the position of the gear doors, high lift devices, and spoilers. Different hydraulic system drive different flaps/slats/flight controls.

Quoting foxxray (Reply 123):
As a pilot, i can tell you that an in flight engine failure is definitely NOT a non event !

We do not even know if an engine failed, and in any case, the A320 can put the autopilot in just after liftoff with an engine failure and still come back and do an autoland. It does not super human to press AP1 after takeoff and then manage the situation. Sure it will be busy, but clearly as they have shown with this result, very manageable.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 175):
I think he is just a kid not knowing what he is talking about. According to the FAA Significant Reportable events are diversions, air turn backs, rejected takeoffs, and in flight shutdowns. This event was 2 out of the 4 and is a significant reportable event.

I am sure that BA, the UK AAIB, and the UK CAA will have a look at the facts involved. Not sure why BA would be reporting anything to the FAA.

Until we know the exact problem the aircraft had, everyone is " just a kid not knowing what he is talking about".

Quoting oykie (Reply 176):
According to my friend onboard this was a very big event, especially one minute after the engine caught fire just two minutes before landing, the plane had high degree bank, electricity was lost in the cabin and before the pilot got the plane level again it was a scary.

There are many reasons for what you are describing, and a passenger in the cabin would not be a very good position to know what the factors involved are. For example the cabin signs may have been cycled by the pilots to alert the crew, they cycle when gear is extended, and the cabin lights can momentarily turn off when the APU comes online (supposed to be a no break power transfer). On the A320 series it is common to start the APU if there is a possibility of an engine issue, as the blue hydraulic system in electrically powered.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2013-05-24 18:02:13 and read 21426 times.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 177):
Well seeing as we're in the mood for being patronising, here's another: remain calm enough to deal with the situation to the best of your ability, without being impaired by panic.

Please quote where I said "panic." In fact, I cannot find that word anywhere in my post.

I said: "Recognize an emergency." That is very different from panicking. In fact, that is probably the OPPOSITE of panicking. It is the first step in responding appropriately to an emergency.

I'm patronizing because you minimized a very major emergency.

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 185):
Thankfully, unlike "pretty much every else on this thread", I'm an airline pilot,

Then I am frightened that you would call an engine fire a "non-event." I wonder if your chief pilot knows that you think that way.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: gatorman96
Posted 2013-05-24 18:27:56 and read 21066 times.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 194):
Quoting planesarecool (Reply 185):
Thankfully, unlike "pretty much every else on this thread", I'm an airline pilot,

Then I am frightened that you would call an engine fire a "non-event." I wonder if your chief pilot knows that you think that way.

Let alone possible damage to the wings or empennage from flying debris. When an aircraft quickly returns to its departure airport, slides are deployed, LHR is shutdown, and short haul flights are cancelled for the day, sounds like an "event" to me. Not sure where Planesarecool is coming from...

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: eggync
Posted 2013-05-24 18:44:48 and read 20848 times.

I am abit confused......... hoping some airline pilots can share some knowledge with me!!

From these photos/videos and above messages, it seems ppl put it as "mechanical failure" with the latching of the engine cowling!! (or bird strike?)

I know engine can still operate without cowlings ~~~ with performance hit or course (more drag)!!
I also konw engine may or mey not operate after a bird strike (depends on the seriousness of the strike/damage and what indications pilots are getting from the cockpit ECAM!!!)

However, in this case, about the right engine...... as it was reported that not only was the cowling went off, the engine itself was on fire!! Isn't it a standard procedure that if an engine is on fire, you shut it down immediately and discharge the fire extinguisher!!

In this case...... why has the pilot elect to keep the "on fire" engine running? ( or is it running at all?)

so I am abit confused.......... in this incident, which engine is running? Left or right or both?? If the right hand side engine is running.............. ain't it against the engine fire procedure to let it keep on running???

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Md88Captain
Posted 2013-05-24 19:13:09 and read 20550 times.

Eggnyc, apparently the left cowl came off during departure. The pilots probably elected to perform a shutdown on that engine. Then I presume the second cowling broke off causing damage to the wing and perhaps severing a fuel line or hydraulics line. Having already shutdown Number 1 engine most here would agree that shutting down your only working engine would be an unwise course of action.

Pictures indicate that both engine cowls came off. Forget about birds - the most obvious answer is that the plane took off with them mis-latched or unlatched. That will prove to be most embarrassing to BA and the aviation community.

Realize that it is completely possible that the crew did not have any indication of fire inside the cockpit. With the cowl off the specific sensors may not have been able to sense a fire. The crew would have heard noise, felt vibration, and received a report from the tower/or cabin that the cowling(s) had departed the aircraft.

Of course, I am speculating based on reports. But it seems clear to me. And I am both current on the A319/320 and I did sleep at a Holiday In Express last night.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: comorin
Posted 2013-05-24 20:06:39 and read 19810 times.

Quoting Md88Captain (Reply 197):
I did sleep at a Holiday In Express last night.

Did you run into our good Doc out there  

From your post, it looks like BA once again had lady luck on its side - had the cowlings struck the empennage matters could have deteriorated quickly?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: YULWinterSkies
Posted 2013-05-24 20:23:21 and read 19540 times.

Quoting gatorman96 (Reply 195):
Let alone possible damage to the wings or empennage from flying debris. When an aircraft quickly returns to its departure airport, slides are deployed, LHR is shutdown, and short haul flights are cancelled for the day, sounds like an "event" to me. Not sure where Planesarecool is coming from...

A 'non event' in the sense that it is an event that pilots are trained and prepared for. Gosh! you guys are so picky!

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 52):
Must have been pretty hectic up in the front seats. Do they do anything like this on the simulators?

Well, one does not do flight sim to spend 10 hours at FL350 and have fish for dinner. To the point of calling a non-event is perhaps a bit of a stretch, but after all, everyone landed safely... it's really all what matters at the end of the day. Resulting diversions are minor events, and snowflakes over Britain cause much more havoc than a 319 on fire, and happen more frequently!

Quoting garpd (Reply 92):
Why on earth did they shut both runways down? The plane was only stationary on one of them. I do not see how that would affect the other runway.

Unless of course it was to check for debris?!

Well, that's one reason. Aircraft have crashed before as a result of hitting debris on runways... that and as others have pointed out, emergency responders and vehicles being deployed on one incident site = not enough help available if a subsequent incident happens on the other open runway.
Again, delays and diversions are minor inconveniences only, nevertheless they are the necessary cost of ensuring that other incoming flights' safety is not jeopardized...

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: gatorman96
Posted 2013-05-24 20:49:28 and read 19284 times.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 199):
A 'non event' in the sense that it is an event that pilots are trained and prepared for. Gosh! you guys are so picky!

Please tell me where pilots train for the loss of both engine cowlings within a few minutes of each other? A single engine failure may be considered a "non-event," but when you lose pieces of your aircraft that sever a fuel/oil line and could also damage the wings an empennage, that is pretty eventful in my book...

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: AirlineCritic
Posted 2013-05-24 22:04:38 and read 18423 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 193):
What most people do not realize is that when we get a cockpit indication of a fire, it is not in the "hot" section, not is it in the bypass area, it is where the accessories are and around the engine. Normally engines have dual fire loop fire detection system which are around the engine and in the accessory area which work by heat, or by the the loop being cut. It is possible with the cowl becoming detached that these loops could become damaged, and thus producing an indication of fire, without a fire.

The last bit is very interesting. Thanks.

Quoting Md88Captain (Reply 197):
Eggnyc, apparently the left cowl came off during departure. The pilots probably elected to perform a shutdown on that engine. Then I presume the second cowling broke off causing damage to the wing and perhaps severing a fuel line or hydraulics line. Having already shutdown Number 1 engine most here would agree that shutting down your only working engine would be an unwise course of action.

That was what I was thinking of, too. When the cowling departs, bad things may or may not happen, and the cockpit indications are also potentially unreliable as per what Zeke said above. And then if the standard procedure is to shut down that engine... I have to wonder if that is always right. It is the right action if the engine just broke or ingested birds. But if your cowling departed, the chances are that the same maintenance engineer forgot to latch the other one too, and it too will depart soon... as happened here. But I guess there is nothing else to do. You get fire indications on an engine, you've gotta shut it down.

FWIW, regarding the "non-event" discussion, of course the pilots are trained for a multitude of emergencies, including engine fire, flying with one engine, possibly even flying with more complex failures, and certainly the crew also trains for evacuations. But whether you are trained for something does not in my mind equate to non-event. As Zeke pointed out, we are all kids guessing at home until we know more. However, there are some things that we do already know for certain, based on the pictures. These include:

- there was an evacuation through slides
- both engines sustained some damage (cowlings gone, possibly more)
- one engine was on fire
- there was some damage to the wing leading edge
- aircraft returned to the airport
- evacuation happened immediately after landing, leaving aircraft on runway

In my book that definitely constitutes an event. Each of the four first items alone would be an event, let alone combined.

Of course, we do not know many other things, including, for instance, whether an engine (or even engines) were shutdown, whether there was hydraulic problems, what specifically was damaged in each engine, what indications they got in the cockpit, how much time would have passed before the burning/running engine (if it was) had before it would have shut down, whether the engine that possibly was shut down first could have been re-started, etc.

[Edited 2013-05-24 22:05:55]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: ggflyboy
Posted 2013-05-24 22:16:45 and read 18265 times.

The thing I am curious about here is how easy non-secure latches are to spot in pre-flight checks. I've worked in the design phase on nacelle cowlings before, and the latches are painted red on the sides to show clearly if they are in a non-flight configuration. Are these things that routinely get missed? I'll admit, the latches are small, but they are red for a reason.

My dad was on a SW flight some time ago and told me he saw one of the thrust reverser casing latches at the red detent-- flew the whole way in that configuration. This is something that should certainly be brought up if it is noticed-- if more than one latch is open for a given unit, this whole BA scenario can unfold (assuming that is what happened, and I think in the end this incident will have been influenced by a couple different factors).

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: eggync
Posted 2013-05-24 22:42:11 and read 18225 times.

thank you md88captain for the explanation (of course I know shutting down both engines is defenitely not the way to go!!)
but still abit.......... I don't know how to put it!!

but my concern is............ ok, under the circumstances, with the information they have in front of them(and if they do ask the cabin crew to visually check and report the status of the right engine), if they knew the right engine is on fire...... would re-lite the left engine and shut down the right engine be an option?

ok let me ask any pilots here(and forgive me if you seen this as a stupid question)......... if you shut down an engine with an issue(A) and few minutes later, the other engine also shown the same issue(A) and upon further visual inspection that, in addition to issue (A), you also known that the engine is on fire!

What are your options?


*Regarding to Zeke's great explanation......... I beleve for the engine, it is a control "explotion" instead of control "fire"! But the paragraph is very informative~~~!

[Edited 2013-05-24 22:54:24]

[Edited 2013-05-24 23:01:03]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: RickNRoll
Posted 2013-05-25 00:05:54 and read 17242 times.

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 201):
That was what I was thinking of, too. When the cowling departs, bad things may or may not happen, and the cockpit indications are also potentially unreliable as per what Zeke said above. And then if the standard procedure is to shut down that engine... I have to wonder if that is always right. It is the right action if the engine just broke or ingested birds. But if your cowling departed, the chances are that the same maintenance engineer forgot to latch the other one too, and it too will depart soon... as happened here. But I guess there is nothing else to do. You get fire indications on an engine, you've gotta shut it down.

That was what I was wondering about. Is it standard procedure to shut down the engine that loses it's cowling, perhaps this situation is covered in simulators. Then the other engine also loses it's cowling, you can't shut it down as well. Then the remaining engine is also on fire. The fire can't be put out because the fire suppression, (according to a previous post), only works properly when the cowling is in place.

Some maintenance engineers will be feeling very uncomfortable.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: RubberJungle
Posted 2013-05-25 00:11:56 and read 17292 times.

Quoting ggflyboy (Reply 202):
The thing I am curious about here is how easy non-secure latches are to spot in pre-flight checks.

Perhaps this gives an indication:

http://twitter.com/FlightDKM/status/338002737084125184

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-25 01:05:34 and read 16526 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 192):

Fairly poor reporting, it only takes a cursory glance to find the engine that was lost, it is still attached to the wing.

Zeke -- perhaps a language thing here, but by "lost an engine" I think it is pretty clear to most that they lost the use of an engine, not that an engine fell off the wing.

Quoting zeke (Reply 192):
Quoting sankaps (Reply 105):One engine with flames coming out of it. Not clear if other engine was operating or not. Certainly not a non-event in my books.
Until we know what was the actual state of the aircraft, you are guessing a lot.

I was not guessing at all, just summarizing what is known or suspected at the point in time.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 198):
A 'non event' in the sense that it is an event that pilots are trained and prepared for. Gosh! you guys are so picky!

Still not a non-event. Sure pilots train for it and most would handle it professionally. But still quite a signifiant event. A non-event would have been if it turned the entire emergency landing was based on a faulty indication or a false alarm.

It should also be noted that while some pilots here prefer to view it as a non-event from the pilot's perspective, there are other pilots also on this thread who clearly view it as a significant event. Do not think any one pilot or person has a monopoly on how it should be viewed.

[Edited 2013-05-25 01:17:50]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Lofty
Posted 2013-05-25 02:55:47 and read 15847 times.

Quoting TS-IOR (Reply 1):
You can see all the holdings in progress on http://www.flightradar24.com/ but how all runways closed ?

All runways where closed due to Fire Cover. You must have Fire Cover to operate but when all your applianies are commited to an incident you are unable to provide cover on the other runway or runways if LHR had more.

You can only operate the other runway once some of your appliancies are made avavable.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: phen
Posted 2013-05-25 03:19:07 and read 15823 times.

Quoting Md88Captain (Reply 196):
apparently the left cowl came off during departure. The pilots probably elected to perform a shutdown on that engine.

Looking at the photo on the front page - the jet blast looks like it is coming from the left engine, suggesting that the right hand engine is the one that was shut down, no?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alex Sandro Vicente Barbosa

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-05-25 04:00:20 and read 15418 times.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 163):
People are saying birdstrikes…do we know this to be the cause?

It seems to me I've seen this many times before…

http://www.cuckoo.com/~dbaker/airtranengine.jpg

http://www.nycaviation.com/newspage/...tam-engine-cowling-630-260x152.jpg

http://i1.sinaimg.cn/jc/2013/0218/U6634P1247DT20130218145630.jpg

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd208/robbreid/JetBlue.jpg

Air Tran, TAM, Iberea, JetBlue, now BA… and I'm sure there are others. This seems to be an endemic and pressing safety issue, along with "nosewheel canting", on Airbus narrowbodies. Has anything been done to correct these faults

The one that comes to mind for me was the US flight that was landed on the Hudson after the Canadian Geese "attacked" it.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: flyingthe757
Posted 2013-05-25 06:18:44 and read 14723 times.

Quoting hivue (Reply 169):
Quoting planesarecool (Reply 181):
it was nothing that they haven't been trained to deal with. They did a professional job, but an engine fire/shut down and an asymmetric landing isn't going to traumatise a cockpit crew.

I'm really sorry, but if you think its not going to have even a small effect on the crew, both cockpit and cabin after (they of course have no time to think, procedure sets in) then your dead wrong. It was in no way a 'non event' keep calling it. There has not been an activation like this at LHR since...well, the BA38 back in 2008. There may have been smaller incidents since then, but nothing like yesterday morning. Surely, as a pilot you can understand at least that much?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: audidudi
Posted 2013-05-25 06:38:36 and read 14583 times.

Have there been any reports of the various cowling parts being found yet? Someone will surely find something soon you would think!

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Pihero
Posted 2013-05-25 06:54:19 and read 14630 times.

Quoting ggflyboy (Reply 201):

The thing I am curious about here is how easy non-secure latches are to spot in pre-flight checks.

Very very difficult as this vid shows : at time 2:00, you see the operation of the fan door cowls ( those which went away ).
Instead,during our walk-around, we verify that all the junctions of the engines outside panels are flush. They are not if the doors are not properly latched.
These latches are at the bottom of the engine, at some 75 cm above the ground. One has to lay down underneath the engine, looking up in order to see them.
see Door cowls Operation V2500

Quoting eggync (Reply 202):
Regarding to Zeke's great explanation......... I beleve for the engine, it is a control "explotion" instead of control "fire"! But the paragraph is very informative~~~

Zeke is generally very careful with his posts. He's right : it is a controlled fire with burners. The *controlled explosion* belongs to your car engine.

It's really early days and we do not have a lot of infos on this incident. We don't know for sure what happened, in which oreder the cowlings were detached from the airplane, the reason for them to be blown off...
- What we see is a series of pictures showing the right engine trailing smoke and none of them shows any fire.
On the other hand, knowing that the cowlings that are missing are around the fan case, had the right fan been rotating, the smoke coming from behind the aft part of the door would have either been blown in the exhaust pipe - or through a Venturi effect - sucked into the fan exhaust stream. IMO, the right engine has been shut down.

- For more infos, we'd need pics of the front of the engines : the state of the fan blades, either soot or not...etc...

Among the reasons why the doors were blown off are :

  • - Maintenance poor quality, which I doubt for the time being as opening these doors is not an action of routine overnight operation...
  • - Compressor surge due to either FOD or a FADEC malfunction. This could explain the *explosion, bangs...* the witnesses reported.


That the flight deck crew suspected fire on the right engine is proven by the evacuation which was performed only on the port side of the aircraft.

That's all we know. The rest is pure speculation.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Md88Captain
Posted 2013-05-25 07:50:56 and read 14282 times.

Interestingly enough - to me anyway - is that I had a simulator check ride a few days ago where I experienced a bang and then some vibration. We had just initiated a descent and pulled the power back when it occurred. The engine had flamed out but had normal cockpit indications (windmilling N1, N2, TGT etc). The question is always "what just happened?" I elected to run a Severe Damage checklist because of the bang/vibration, but with normal indications I could have elected for a restart. We did a single engine approach and the simulated fire marshal on the ground told us we were missing panels and a reverser door. (This was a rear engined aircraft so no report available from the cabin crew.)

The point is that sometimes you have to make the best guess in the cockpit commensurate with safety. I got that one right in the checkride, but I could have gotten it wrong very easily. These guys got handle a pile of aviation poo and got everyone back safely. Good on them.

And I suspect that they may have kept Number 1 going and shutdown Number 2 on the turnback. I probably wouldn't do a precautionary shutdown on a cowling failure unless I had an abnormal indication. But every airline trains in a slightly different way.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-25 14:06:56 and read 13061 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 192):
It is possible with the cowl becoming detached that these loops could become damaged, and thus producing an indication of fire, without a fire.

I must disagree. If fire loops are damaged, you don't get an indication of a fire, you get a loop fault.
Fire loops work by the principle that conductive properties of the loop change with temperature. Temperature increases conductivity. Hence, a loop losing conductivity through damage will lead to an indication of a fault.

Quoting eggync (Reply 195):
However, in this case, about the right engine...... as it was reported that not only was the cowling went off, the engine itself was on fire!! Isn't it a standard procedure that if an engine is on fire, you shut it down immediately and discharge the fire extinguisher!!

In this case...... why has the pilot elect to keep the "on fire" engine running? ( or is it running at all?)

so I am abit confused.......... in this incident, which engine is running? Left or right or both?? If the right hand side engine is running.............. ain't it against the engine fire procedure to let it keep on running???

The engine itself was not on fire. The engine's job is to produce thrust before anything else.
This is an essential requirement to maintain the aircraft flying.

In this incident, both engines can be seen running until they are somewhere established safely on final. On final, they idled or shut down the right engine as can be seen from the airliners.net picture, where only the left engine is seen producing that damp pattern behind the exhaust.
Their flaps setting is very shallow, I'm guessing that they left take-off flaps and elected to not touch them, because of possible damage to the slats and flaps. This was also directly perfect for the one-engine landing, as they would come in faster and light on flaps, to facilitate an eventual single-engine go-around.

Quoting gatorman96 (Reply 199):
Please tell me where pilots train for the loss of both engine cowlings within a few minutes of each other? A single engine failure may be considered a "non-event," but when you lose pieces of your aircraft that sever a fuel/oil line and could also damage the wings an empennage, that is pretty eventful in my book...

The event itself is not a non-event.
I don't think that a cowling blowing can completely severe a fuel line. It can damage it as seen in this incident.
The smoke is from jet fuel, Mobil Jet 1 or Skydrol do not ignite and burn easily and certainly wouldn't have produced that much smoke.

The damage to the wing and horizontal stabiliser would not make the aircraft uncontrollable, the cowlings are relatively light but they still keep a certain momentum, so they don't decelerate from aircraft speed to zero within the 20 meters from separation to impact with wing and tailplane surfaces.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 211):
- What we see is a series of pictures showing the right engine trailing smoke and none of them shows any fire.
On the other hand, knowing that the cowlings that are missing are around the fan case, had the right fan been rotating, the smoke coming from behind the aft part of the door would have either been blown in the exhaust pipe - or through a Venturi effect - sucked into the fan exhaust stream. IMO, the right engine has been shut down.

Spend more time in the hangar like I suggested because what you are suggesting here is impossible.

The smoke generated from the fuel leaking onto the hot engine can not go into the aft cowling and through the bypass when the aft cowling is still in place. You have a firewall there that prevents that. You have that firewall on most engines by the way, to prevent that air would flow into the fwd cowlings when you apply reverse thrust, bust also as an actual firewall to protect the electrical and other components located there from an eventual fire in the hot section.

The picture below shows this firewall.
http://www.flightglobal.com/Assets/GetAsset.aspx?ItemID=50722

The smoke here was going around the firewall. The right engine was off or idling during the final approach but it was on before, as can be seen in the amateur footage of the aircraft overflying London. The fuel pumps were still pumping fuel that caused the huge amount of smoke in the footage, otherwise the fuel would be cut off and there would be no smoke visible. Actually the "smoke" is a mix of smoke and fuel if you look closely enough. You don't have nearly enough oil to produce that spectacular and prolonged an effect as seen here.
The shallower amount of smoke seen after landing would be explained by residual fuel.

It also makes sense that the pilots keep both engines on until the very last moment, because BOTH engines were affected and you can't take the risk that the one engine that looks better than the other suddenly quits on you.
But it's likely that they idled or shut down the right engine to avoid feeding too much fuel into that engine once they were established and sure that they could reach the airport.

[Edited 2013-05-25 14:15:42]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-25 14:41:28 and read 12827 times.

...and no need to wait for final report. This is a typical case of enginus cowlus not closedus properlydus.

You can blame both the incompetent mechanic and Airbus.
On both the V2500 and CFM56 powered A320 family, you can close the cowlings perfectly flush without realising that the latches are not engaged. You need to verify visually that the hooks latches are engaging when you are operating the latches.

It almost happened to a colleague of mine under my watch. He closed the latches while I was standing nearby, all done and ready. But I'm a paranoic son of a b*tch and I always give the cowls a good pull. I found that there was too much movement, so I undid the latches only to find out that none of the 3 were engaged.

Bad design by Airbus, looking for trouble.

Good job by the pilots? In my eyes, they didn't do anything spectacular, after all they did have 2 engines that provided them with the required thrust, so it would have been rather embarrassing to crash the aircraft under these circumstances. They did their job, no heroism required.

You can't blame them for not checking that the latches were properly engaged, because you just can't see it unless you try to open the cowls with quite a bit of force, and even like that, if they're jammed they won't move until you're above 300 kts.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: zeke
Posted 2013-05-25 16:42:27 and read 12459 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
I must disagree. If fire loops are damaged, you don't get an indication of a fire, you get a loop fault.
Fire loops work by the principle that conductive properties of the loop change with temperature. Temperature increases conductivity. Hence, a loop losing conductivity through damage will lead to an indication of a fault.
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a357/thezeke/320%20systems/Capture_zpsd7d814be.png

Not 100% correct, fire warnings do get generated if the loops are broken in quick succession to account for uncontained failures etc. What I posted above was correct. With the removal of a cowl in flight both loops can be damaged in quick succession due to the aerodynamic loads.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: cubastar
Posted 2013-05-25 16:49:36 and read 12427 times.

Quoting draigonair (Reply 88):
Also now on aviationherald;

http://avherald.com/h?article=462beb5e&opt=4096

The article says that first the left hand engine cowling doors came off and then during her return to London, the right hand engine cowling doors came off (both associated with a bang). Didn't say anything about shutting down an engine.

This posting by "draigonair", shows photos from the AVHerald site that seem to show a fire or glow on the aft portion of the right engine.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: whiteguy
Posted 2013-05-25 17:03:12 and read 12350 times.

Quoting cubastar (Reply 216):
This posting by "draigonair", shows photos from the AVHerald site that seem to show a fire or glow on the aft portion of the right engine.

That's a landing light....

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: zeke
Posted 2013-05-25 17:31:14 and read 12320 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):

Their flaps setting is very shallow, I'm guessing that they left take-off flaps and elected to not touch them, because of possible damage to the slats and flaps

No to me, and with an engine failure we do not land with takeoff flap. The leading edge devices are clearly deployed in reply 17.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 214):
Bad design by Airbus, looking for trouble.

Those latches are designed and built in the USA, airframe manufacturers do not build or design engines.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: gatorman96
Posted 2013-05-25 18:18:36 and read 12208 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 214):
Bad design by Airbus, looking for trouble.

Tell me again what Airbus/Boeing has to do with engine design?

If the cowling latches are so poorly designed, why aren't they flying off more frequently? Clearly someone dropped the ball along the line. New maintenance and walk around procedures will be adopted and we won't see this occur again in the far future. Fortunately this lesson was learned with no loss of life (can't say the same for certain parties wallet's though).

No reason to be so dramatic re: cowling latch designs...

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Pihero
Posted 2013-05-25 18:26:08 and read 12265 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
Fire loops work by the principle that conductive properties of the loop change with temperature. Temperature increases conductivity. Hence, a loop losing conductivity through damage will lead to an indication of a fault.

I really do suggest you update your library. You are describing a Graviner system that went out of date in the seventies. Nowadays, fire detection is achieved through *gas detectors*.
So taking your arrogant correction of Zeke's post apart :
Fire detection is done with two loops. Both need to detect an overheat at the same time in order to trigger a fire warning.
A broken loop will see its electrical resistance diminish, detecting an overheat state at a determined threshold of lesser resistance.( The exact contrary to your 40 years outdated assertion).
With one loop inoperable, the remaining one would cause a fire alarm if an overheat is detected.
With one loop inoperable, the remaining one, if pinched, would trigger a *false* fire warning
If both loops are pinched, the system will generate a fire alarm (albeit with an indicated "Fault" message).
If both loops are severed within five seconds of each other, the system would generate a fire alarm.
So Zeke was perfectly correct in his post... which means you are wrong... Again.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
The engine itself was not on fire.

Nothing can allow you such a definite statement. At least the crew thought the fire possibility was great enough to prevent evacuation on the starboard side.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
This was also directly perfect for the one-engine landing, as they would come in faster and light on flaps, to facilitate an eventual single-engine go-around.

I've got news for you : There is no difference of configuration between two or one engine operation for the 320 family. Look elsewhere for a reason for the reduced flap setting ( config 2 as it is )

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
The event itself is not a non-event.

... and of course you'd have done better. sarcastic 

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
I don't think that a cowling blowing can completely severe a fuel line. It can damage it as seen in this incident.

As the fuel lines are in the pylons - apparently undamaged - and behind the aft cowls, how can you explain them being damaged by the flying fan cowl doors ?   

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
The smoke is from jet fuel, Mobil Jet 1 or Skydrol do not ignite and burn easily and certainly wouldn't have produced that much smoke.

Mobil Jet 1 ? Again, put your library to date. Jet one ended up being used in the early sixties. So the book you're using is some 55 years out of date. We are now in the third generation of jet engine lubricants.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
The smoke generated from the fuel leaking onto the hot engine can not go into the aft cowling and through the bypass when the aft cowling is still in place.
Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
The smoke here was going around the firewall.

Make up your mind. Can it or can't it ?
In fact it can as the picture shows smoke coming from behind your firewall , probably pulled by a depression caused by the missing fan door cowls.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alex Sandro Vicente Barbosa


...unless that smoke comes from Satan's behind.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 214):
You can blame both the incompetent mechanic and Airbus.

A more arrogant expression of misplaced self-righteousness I've rarely seen before.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 214):
I found that there was too much movement, so I undid the latches only to find out that none of the 3 were engaged.
Quoting Wisdom (Reply 214):
the latches were properly engaged, because you just can't see it unless you try to open the cowls with quite a bit of force, and even like that, if they're jammed they won't move until you're above 300 kts.

So now you're a maintenance supervisor... I'm impressed.
"above 300 kt", you say ? and then according to witnesse and the debris on the runway at least one of the doors left the aircraft at takeoff ?...  

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 214):
On both the V2500 and CFM56 powered A320 family, you can close the cowlings perfectly flush without realising that the latches are not engaged. You need to verify visually that the hooks latches are engaging when you are operating the latches.

Bull.
See the youtube vid I linked to above in # 211.
And, by the way, you just proved that you could have been responsible for this incident : there are four latches and you just missed one as you counted only three   

[Edited 2013-05-25 18:30:23]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: awthompson
Posted 2013-05-26 07:26:54 and read 11174 times.

Quoting Md88Captain (Reply 156):
Looks like the engine cowlings were left unlatched or partially latched leading to them flying open on departure. That is a big deal in that four sets of eyes would have missed them being unlatched. Original maintenance, supervising mechanic doing the sign off, mechanic doing the first flight walk around, and the last line of defense - a pilot doing his walk around. Big, multi-layered screw up. Imagine the cost of lost revenue today. And the damage to the aircraft both in direct cost and lost revenue will be significant.

If the above is true and four sets of eyes missed this, I can only say that complacency has crept in big time, just human nature. A serious incident like this now and again in my book is essential to keep the system alert and to perhaps prevent something much worse taking place.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-26 10:15:45 and read 10907 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 220):
Make up your mind. Can it or can't it ?
In fact it can as the picture shows smoke coming from behind your firewall , probably pulled by a depression caused by the missing fan door cowls.

I said that it can't, twice. Look closely because the smoke clearly comes from forward of the firewall. Zoom in or get yourself a ultra premium membership to see the fit screen picture. The aft cowlings rest on this firewall.

Quoting zeke (Reply 218):
No to me, and with an engine failure we do not land with takeoff flap. The leading edge devices are clearly deployed in reply 17.

The take-off flaps selection do deploy the leading edge devices on most aircraft. And if you look at the airliners.net picture, you can see the position of the trailing edge of the flaps relative to the fuselage, consistent with take-off flaps .
For your comparison, a picture of an A319 in take-off configuration, from approx. the same angle.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Briti...d=6f97d0cabaf4402d9aec39a153fc5edd

Quoting zeke (Reply 215):

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 213):
I must disagree. If fire loops are damaged, you don't get an indication of a fire, you get a loop fault.
Fire loops work by the principle that conductive properties of the loop change with temperature. Temperature increases conductivity. Hence, a loop losing conductivity through damage will lead to an indication of a fault.


Not 100% correct, fire warnings do get generated if the loops are broken in quick succession to account for uncontained failures etc. What I posted above was correct. With the removal of a cowl in flight both loops can be damaged in quick succession due to the aerodynamic loads.

That's true, but the assumption is that both loops have been severed simultaneously. There is no evidence that any loops have been severed at all and you did not precise this in your original post.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 220):
I really do suggest you update your library. You are describing a Graviner system that went out of date in the seventies. Nowadays, fire detection is achieved through *gas detectors*.
So taking your arrogant correction of Zeke's post apart :
Fire detection is done with two loops. Both need to detect an overheat at the same time in order to trigger a fire warning.
A broken loop will see its electrical resistance diminish, detecting an overheat state at a determined threshold of lesser resistance.( The exact contrary to your 40 years outdated assertion).
With one loop inoperable, the remaining one would cause a fire alarm if an overheat is detected.
With one loop inoperable, the remaining one, if pinched, would trigger a *false* fire warning
If both loops are pinched, the system will generate a fire alarm (albeit with an indicated "Fault" message).
If both loops are severed within five seconds of each other, the system would generate a fire alarm.
So Zeke was perfectly correct in his post... which means you are wrong... Again.

Why don't I save us both some time. I've replaced plenty of loops on Airbus and many other aircraft of post 70's, while you probably never touched one of your life. On Airbus aircraft, the system works exactly as I described. Refer to AMM 26-12-00.
Also, a broken loop's resistance does not diminish, it increases considerably. This results in a drop of voltage below the threshold 1, as described in AMM 26-12-00, page 21, integrity fault.
The 5 seconds rule is true. However, the original quote of Zeke did not mention this at all and was described that any severance of any loop would cause a fire warning. This needed my correction.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 220):
As the fuel lines are in the pylons - apparently undamaged - and behind the aft cowls, how can you explain them being damaged by the flying fan cowl doors ?   

Again, I urge you to visit your hangar. Where are all your fuel filters, fuel pumps and heat exchangers located? Right, on the fan case. The fuel lines are not only in the pylons and inside the aft cowls, you have plenty of lines running all around the fan case.
I've installed plenty of engines and done plenty of run-ups after installation. The pattern of the fire/leaks is consistent with leaking lines on the fan case. The fuel will keep leaking until you shut it off. The pilots obviously did not cut the fuel flow, as the engine continued to run despite the leaks. As long as the main lines are not completely severed, your engines will continue to run.

And again, what else could cause the huge smoke in your opinion? How could the smoke come from inside the aft fan cowl when this still maintained its integrity? I'm not being arrogant, just pointing out serious discrepancies in your analysis and very vague assumptions based on-paper knowledge instead of actual, visual understanding of the powerplant systems.

I don't blame you, this is the philosophy of 21st century aviation. Stuff pilots with limited on-paper knowledge so they don't get confused and don't start imagining things. Well unfortunately, pilots don't t get the chance to make a visual image of the systems, so to fill the blanks they have to use their imagination.

Other than that, it may look spectacular as a passenger or pilot to see all those pipes running all over the place, but that's how it always looks like when you open the cowlings. It's like when you open up someone on a surgery table and you see all the organs. It looks unreal but that's how we always look like inside...

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Pihero
Posted 2013-05-26 13:07:38 and read 10596 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 222):
On Airbus aircraft, the system works exactly as I described. Refer to AMM 26-12-00.

Bull ( that's twice)
Like the rest of this post

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 222):
Why don't I save us both some time.

Yes . Do start with how many cases possible of loop damage can trigger a fire alarm. I counted foiur.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 222):
The take-off flaps selection do deploy the leading edge devices on most aircraft.

Yes,; but Zeke, and I left out a very particular feature on the 'Bus.
It is obvious you don't know it, hence your erroneous assumption   
So much for

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 222):
The pilots obviously did not cut the fuel flow, as the engine continued to run despite the leaks.

Bull.
A funny way of reasoning : First you are sure the right engine was turning ( in all the pictures it is not the case, the smoke as seen from the phone cameras pics have a definite pattern of being thicker on the right side. Explain the new physics that allows that pattern out of a **rotating** engine.
Then you assume smoke comes from fuel touching very hot parts. I fail to see such hot parts inside the fan cowling. Of course,you're right as it can't be Mobil Jet One oil, this lubrican having been out of use for 55 years.  .
Plus the fact that with a fire warning / severe damage, the crew have in all probabvility pushed the fire button and discharged the fire extinguishing bottle (s), therefore shutting off fuel and hydraulics, bleed air, and disconnecting the IDG...
Wonder where the smoke comes from in that fan cowl area.  

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 222):
Stuff pilots with limited on-paper knowledge so they don't get confused and don't start imagining things

Apparently, pilots on this thread know a great deal more than you do, without any sort of bullpoo.

Keep on amusing us.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-26 14:30:02 and read 10253 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 223):
A funny way of reasoning : First you are sure the right engine was turning ( in all the pictures it is not the case, the smoke as seen from the phone cameras pics have a definite pattern of being thicker on the right side. Explain the new physics that allows that pattern out of a **rotating** engine.

Are you suggesting that the fire was inside the aft cowl and that it was sucked forward to the front of the aft cowl by mysterious forces? Aren't you forgetting a big big factor called ram air pressure?

OMG. Someone explain to him please that the fire was obviously on the fan case, not in the bypass located inside the aft cowl.




Original pic: http://news.smashpipe.com/

Quoting Pihero (Reply 223):
Then you assume smoke comes from fuel touching very hot parts. I fail to see such hot parts inside the fan cowling.

Well, next time open the cowlings after your landing and put your bare hand on it and keep it on there. You will see if it's hot or not. You can cook an egg on it, if it doesn't burn instantly. It's certainly hot enough to ignite jet fuel.
1. Do I need to remind you that the fan's tips travel at supersonic speeds and very high pressures and temperatures occur at the clearance at the tips of the fans?
2. Do I also need to remind you that electrical components housed in this section can be shorted by leaked fuel or by mechanical damage and cause a fire igniting the fuel?
3. Do I also need to remind you that there are visible bleed ducts there that can ignite your fuel?



Then from a piloting point of view,
1.would you immediately shut down both engines when you have a fire indication on both even though they are still producing thrust?
If you answered yes, you're a donkey, if you answered no, proceed to question 2.

2. if you have a problem with both engines, and one indicates fire, but is still producing thrust and provides normal EPR and EGT, are you going to shut it off?
If you answered yes, you're a donkey, if you answered no, proceed to question 3.

3. Aren't you obviously going to wait until you're at gliding range from the runway before shutting off the engine that's on fire?
If you answered yes, you're certain to come out alive, otherwise your life is in the hands of god.

The smoke as seen on the footage taken from the city below, was a mix of smoke and fuel leaking from the right engine's fan case, because the pilots probably elected to keep that engine running until they were at a safe gliding range from the airport, given that they didn't know the extent of the damage to the left engine. It makes sense and it's common sense.


Please spare me the lectures and your dominant attitude, show some arguments to prove me wrong.

[Edited 2013-05-26 14:31:25]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: upperdeck
Posted 2013-05-26 16:12:38 and read 9925 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 224):

To be fair mate you did suggest that Airbus made engines. If you make a rookie mistake like that you're going to open yourself up to criticism.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-26 17:28:53 and read 9735 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 211):
Among the reasons why the doors were blown off are :
- Maintenance poor quality, which I doubt for the time being as opening these doors is not an action of routine overnight operation...
- Compressor surge due to either FOD or a FADEC malfunction. This could explain the *explosion, bangs...* the witnesses reported.

Simultaneous (more or less) FADEC failures? There are seaparate FADECs for each engine, correct?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-26 18:07:44 and read 9833 times.

Quoting hivue (Reply 228):
Quoting Pihero (Reply 211):
Among the reasons why the doors were blown off are :
- Maintenance poor quality, which I doubt for the time being as opening these doors is not an action of routine overnight operation...
- Compressor surge due to either FOD or a FADEC malfunction. This could explain the *explosion, bangs...* the witnesses reported.

Simultaneous (more or less) FADEC failures? There are seaparate FADECs for each engine, correct?

Now we're talking Universal Studios. Or is it Cartoon Networks?

Even if the FADEC fails, the engine will continue to run and a FADEC malfunction will not cause any bangs or explosions and certainly not the cowling to separate. Sorry Pihero, now I even don't believe that you are an airline pilot, because a 19 year old pilot with 200 hours wouldn't dare to say that FADEC failures could lead to cowlings coming off.

Furthermore, your first statement isn't accurate.
Every A-check is an opportunity for opening the fan cowls. If IDG oil levels needs to be checked, or other things need to be checked, you open the cowls, and this happens outside of A-checks as well. We don't know if the aircraft is coming straight out of A-check. MAybe it was something else that required inspecting.

Very bad assumptions, only to lead to more complicated and unlikely explanations. FOD will be sucked into the engine before it hits the cowlings. Also, given the position and shape of the cowlings, no amount of FOD can apply enough pressure on the cowlings to separate them from the engines. The chance of FOD removing a cowling, let alone 2 pairs, is 0.00000000000%.

In aircraft accidents, the most simple explanation is usually the right one.

It's useless to protect the human element here, serious mistakes have been made because safety wasn't taken seriously and I see no reason why anyone should defend that. It's sad again that someone has to become the billboard, but I prefer a few guys to be billboards to keep all the others in line, than to read, hear or be affected by bad news about planeloads of dead people.
It would be nice of BA if it can give its mechanics a second chance, but BA needs to investigate its procedures before it happens again.

[Edited 2013-05-26 18:09:16]

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: AmericanAirFan
Posted 2013-05-26 18:28:11 and read 9762 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 218):
Those latches are designed and built in the USA, airframe manufacturers do not build or design engines.

Correct, the engines are not designed by aircraft manufacturer. However, cowlings and inlets etc. are designed by the airframe manufacturer. They are a part of the airframe, not the powerplant. Hence it would be an Airbus designed cowling.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: RickNRoll
Posted 2013-05-26 18:42:39 and read 9731 times.

I would hope the NEO engines have a design that indicates more easily if the latches are open or closed. It's just basic ergonomics, isn't it?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Pihero
Posted 2013-05-27 02:48:29 and read 8934 times.

Quoting hivue (Reply 226):
Simultaneous (more or less) FADEC failures? There are seaparate FADECs for each engine, correct?

Yes. Stretching things a bit, we don't know the events on both engines have the same origin.
Since the year 2000, there are 13 instances of lost cowls on the V2500 due to unlatched doors. There was a procedural solution given by both the OEM and the engine maker, proposed to the airlines but on a voluntary basis . I don't know whether BA took the procedure up or not. It was about visually making the gap left by the unlatched door more obvious.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 227):
Even if the FADEC fails, the engine will continue to run and a FADEC malfunction will not cause any bangs or explosions and certainly not the cowling to separate

A FADEC malfunction is the main cause for compressor stalls and surges.
A FADEC failure will cause the engine to fail. There is no manual reversion to engine control. That's why it's called l *full authority digital engine control*.
Of course, with your outdated references, you could be excused to mistake the FADEC for the old solutions of *ECU, engine control unit* also known as *EEC, electronic engine control* which have some sort of limited manual reversion.   

So, answering your question :

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 227):
Now we're talking Universal Studios. Or is it Cartoon Networks?

,
you tell me, but to me it's more like Charlie Chaplin.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 227):
Every A-check is an opportunity for opening the fan cowls.

For once you are correct. But as the airplane arrived late the previous night and was put on the line early in the morning, I want to see that it was done on a short night shift.The case is open. Pun intended.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 227):
FOD will be sucked into the engine before it hits the cowlings. Also, given the position and shape of the cowlings, no amount of FOD can apply enough pressure on the cowlings to separate them from the engines. The chance of FOD removing a cowling, let alone 2 pairs, is 0.00000000000%.

I never mentioned FOD as it is still early days. A scenario that has happened countless time is FOD damage to the engine : bent fan blades, damaged guide vanes.... all could - and did - lead to a disturbed airflow, causing compressor stalls and surges.

Quoting AmericanAirFan (Reply 228):
However, cowlings and inlets etc. are designed by the airframe manufacturer. They are a part of the airframe, not the powerplant. Hence it would be an Airbus designed cowling.

No. Inlets are designed by the engine manufacturer as they're important to the aerodynamics of the engine. Most of the time, the actual manufacture - on the engine manufacturer specifications - are given to nacelle specialists, of whom Rohr - now part of Goodrich - and Bombardier are amongst the most prominent.
The aircraft manufacturer then takes the whole nacelle for wind tunnel studies / 3D computations for interaction with the complete wing and then the complete aircraft.
This is of course certified by the OEM.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Tristarsteve
Posted 2013-05-27 03:11:18 and read 8863 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 230):
Quoting Wisdom (Reply 227):
Every A-check is an opportunity for opening the fan cowls.

For once you are correct. But as the airplane arrived late the previous night and was put on the line early in the morning, I want to see that it was done on a short night shift.The case is open. Pun intended.

The BA Airbus fleet have a weekly maintenance check which is performed on the ramp. This includes the IDG oil level check, which on this engine requires the fan cowls to be opened.
Most other airliner engines have an access panel for the IDG oil service. Perhaps a new access panel on the V2500 cowl could be a good idea?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Pihero
Posted 2013-05-27 03:38:18 and read 8741 times.

Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 231):
The BA Airbus fleet have a weekly maintenance check which is performed on the ramp. This includes the IDG oil level check, which on this engine requires the fan cowls to be opened.

Thanks, Steve.
Could it be programmed on a short night stay ?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Tristarsteve
Posted 2013-05-27 04:46:29 and read 8536 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 232):
Could it be programmed on a short night stay ?

Yes around 15 weekly checks done every night on aircraft parked on terminal gates.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-05-27 05:08:34 and read 8494 times.

Quoting hivue (Reply 155):
I think most posters on these forums would understand "engine failure" to mean that the engine has ceased producing any significant amount of power.

If that's true then most posters would be wrong.

Quoting LIFFY1A (Reply 158):
No I'm not confused. I know exactly what an engine failure is and there was no dual engine failure here. You can stand by your statement all you want but you're the only one on this forum saying dual engine failure.

By the way, an uncontained engine failure relates to the components within the engine exiting the engine through the cowling and not just the cowling itself separating from the engine.

Thats your opinion and it's incorrect.

This one is for the 2 of you, hivue and LIFFY1A:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Uncontained_Engine_Failure
Scroll down to where it says "Uncontained Engine Failure Events on SKYbrary" and pick the third incident on the list:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/A...,_Toronto_Canada,_2000_(AW_GND_HF)

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 170):
Losing one and having a fire in another is a "non-event?" I'm sorry, but this sort of minimization of what could have been a major accident with mass loss of life just irritates me. In fact, as a professional with experience in MANY life-and-death emergencies, anyone on my team showing that sort of casual bravado over an actual emergency would find themselves off my team quickly. A basic tenet of professionalism in those fields that involve life-and-death emergencies is: be able to recognize such an emergency.

  
Those who know, know  
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 175):

I think he is just a kid not knowing what he is talking about. According to the FAA Significant Reportable events are diversions, air turn backs, rejected takeoffs, and in flight shutdowns. This event was 2 out of the 4 and is a significant reportable event. EASA will probably require BA to implement some form of corrective action (likely a note in the maintenance manual to ensure latches are closed) because it is so serious. Some airlines even paint their latches in obvious colors to help identify problems. Significant events are usually 1 failure away from catastrophic crash. A cowling separating from the engine can take out a fuel or oil line, which means that engine is headed towards shutdown.

Ditto  

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-05-27 08:47:17 and read 8107 times.

Quoting AmericanAirFan (Reply 228):
However, cowlings and inlets etc. are designed by the airframe manufacturer. They are a part of the airframe, not the powerplant. Hence it would be an Airbus designed cowling.

Is this an absolute rule? For example CF6 engines cowlings appear to be the same whether on the 747, DC10, or A300. Conversely, the cowlings for RR vs GE vs PW look very different within the same aircraft model (see again the 747, A330 family, and the 777 family, and of course also the A320 family in discussion.

At best I would think if cowlings are not designed by the enginer makers within parameters laid out by the airframe manufacturers (eg ground clearance, etc), they would be designed collaboratively. But I could be wrong.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: b2319
Posted 2013-05-27 09:06:02 and read 8044 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 224):
Do I also need to remind you that electrical components housed in this section can be shorted by leaked fuel

I am no means an aviation engineer/maintenance specialist/expert and so on.

In the chemical industry, aviation fuel would be considered as an electrical insulator and in terms of physics/electricity, not give rise to shorting. For this scientific effect, you require an electrical conductor, such as metal, graphite, salt water and so on.....

Good night (midnight local time.....)

B-2319

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Pihero
Posted 2013-05-27 10:48:24 and read 7843 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 234):
This one is for the 2 of you, hivue and LIFFY1A:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Uncontained_Engine_Failure
Scroll down to where it says "Uncontained Engine Failure Events on SKYbrary" and pick the third incident on the list:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/A...D_HF)

No, this one is for all of us. Thanks

Quoting b2319 (Reply 236):

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 224):
Do I also need to remind you that electrical components housed in this section can be shorted by leaked fuel

I am no means an aviation engineer/maintenance specialist/expert and so on.
In the chemical industry, aviation fuel would be considered as an electrical insulator and in terms of physics/electricity, not give rise to shorting.

That one escaped me. Read too fast. And there are so many errors in that post..

Thanks for the find and sharing.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: hivue
Posted 2013-05-27 13:05:22 and read 7502 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 234):
This one is for the 2 of you, hivue and LIFFY1A:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Uncontained_Engine_Failure
Scroll down to where it says "Uncontained Engine Failure Events on SKYbrary" and pick the third incident on the list:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/A...D_HF)

Interesting links, but where does it say that, following the incident, the left engine continued to produce normal power? In fact, the article says, "The aircraft commander flew the aircraft with the autopilot and flight director off and the left engine at the ECAM-commanded power setting of idle." And in theTSB Canada report, there is a list of ECAM messages that, to my non-expert eye, do not add up to an engine able to produce proper thrust.

Pending more convincing information, I will stick by my original claim that most people on this forum would use the term "engine failure" to mean that the engine is no longer able to provide significant thrust.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LIFFY1A
Posted 2013-05-27 13:13:20 and read 7451 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 234):
Thats your opinion and it's incorrect.

There was no dual engine failure.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 234):
This one is for the 2 of you, hivue and LIFFY1A:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Uncontained_Engine_Failure
Scroll down to where it says "Uncontained Engine Failure Events on SKYbrary" and pick the third incident on the list:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/A...D_HF)

Did the engine fail?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: zeke
Posted 2013-05-27 14:20:58 and read 7287 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 222):
The take-off flaps selection do deploy the leading edge devices on most aircraft. And if you look at the airliners.net picture, you can see the position of the trailing edge of the flaps relative to the fuselage, consistent with take-off flaps .

We do not land with takeoff flap with an engine failure, we use landing flap. The flap selection used for this approach would be consistent with the reported slat damage mentioned earlier in the thread.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 222):
That's true, but the assumption is that both loops have been severed simultaneously. There is no evidence that any loops have been severed at all and you did not precise this in your original post.

How precise did you want me to be ? This is what I said ....

"Normally engines have dual fire loop fire detection system which are around the engine and in the accessory area which work by heat, or by the the loop being cut. It is possible with the cowl becoming detached that these loops could become damaged, and thus producing an indication of fire, without a fire."

You are the one who said " If fire loops are damaged, you don't get an indication of a fire, you get a loop fault. Fire loops work by the principle that conductive properties of the loop change with temperature."

The statement you made is not correct, damaged loops can cause a fire indication as per the extract from the Airbus manual I posted abovge. This is not the first time that both cowls have departed an A320 with V2500 or CFM-56 engines. In all cases there was damage sustained to the aircraft, the damage however was not always the same.

If the detaching cowl can produce enough force to damage the air frame, it can also damage the engine. You are correct there is no evidence that the loops were cut, or there was a fire, or an engine was shut down. These facts are not known, and will be part of the investigation. All I did in my earlier post was to provide a plausible way for fire warning to be generated without a fire, and to explain where the detector actually are. A lot of people who are not in the industry think the engine fire detectors are inside the engines, likewise they think the extinguishers are injected into the engine.

What we see venting from the engine could be many things, it could also be return fuel to the tank. If the trail we see from the aircraft is fuel, it is an indication that the fire pushbutton was not depressed given where the low pressure shutoff valve is. It could also be oil, previous events have caused damage to the engine for oil line to be damaged.

Quoting AmericanAirFan (Reply 228):
Hence it would be an Airbus designed cowling.

I believe on the V2500 it is actually done by United Technologies.

Quoting LIFFY1A (Reply 239):
Did the engine fail?

I am not sure one did, this is an old OIT regarding these incidents sent out a few years ago to A320 operators, as you can see all of the previous incidents the aircraft returned with various levels of damage, however no mention of thrust loss.

Quote:
Operators Information Telex
TO: A318/A319/A320/A321 V2500/CFM56 OPERATORS

SUBJECT: ATA 71 - FAN COWL DOOR LOSS AFTER TAKE-OFF

OUR REF: 999.0057/07 dated 15 May 2007

OIT CLASSIFICATION : INCIDENT

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS:

1. AMM: 71-13-00
2. SOP FCOM: 3.03.05
3. AIRBUS OIT AI/SE 999.0069/99/SB DATED 03 JUNE 1999
4. AIRBUS AOT 71A1024 DATED AUGUST 1999
5. AIRBUS TFU 71.13.00.048 DATED 1999
6. GOODRICH SB RA32071-117 DATED DECEMBER 2000
7. AIRBUS OIT AI/SE 999.0025/00/JS DATED 28 NOV 2000
8. AIRBUS OIT AI/SE 999.0088/04/JS REV 1 DATED 04 OCT 2004
8. IAE SB V2500-NAC-71-0227 DATED MAY 1999
9. IAE SB V2500-NAC-71-0235 DATED MAY 1999
10. IAE SB V2500-NAC-71-0256 DATED JUNE 1999
11. IAE SB V2500-NAC-71-0259 DATED DECEMBER 1999
12. AD 2003-18-06 DATED OCTOBER 2003


1. REASON
The purpose of this telex is to report 4 recent events of fan cowl loss in flight on A320 family aircraft. All 4 aircraft had the modifications available to improve latch visibility and detect unlatched fan cowl doors embodied.

This telex is also to remind all operators of A320 family aircraft of Airbus recommendations and available modifications that have been developed to prevent fan cowl loss events.

2. DESCRIPTION
4 operators have experienced the loss of both fan cowl doors on one engine in the last months.
3 events occurred on IAE V2500 powered aircraft and 1 on a CFM powered aircraft.
For IAE events, each fan cowl door had modifications required by AD 2003-18-06 embodied (see part 5. improvements)

- 11 December 2006: loss of both fan cowl doors on A319/V2500 engine 2 after take-off.
Aircraft performed uneventful turn back and landing.
Pylon cantilever found damaged. The fan cowl latches and keepers were recovered and found to be in good condition with no evidence of distress or strain.
Investigation shows that the latches of the fan cowl doors were either unlatched or not properly hooked and secured. It was confirmed that only two of the four latches had the fluorescent paint; all other improvements embodied (see part 5. improvements).

- 18 March 2007: loss of both fan cowl doors on A320/V2500 engine 1 after take-off.
Aircraft performed uneventful turn back and landing.
Damage to slats 1 & 2, the Main Landing Gear (MLG) and the upper fuselage.
Fan cowl have been recovered and are being hold by the operator.

- 12 April 2007: loss of both fan cowl doors on A320/V2500 engine 1 after take-off.
Aircraft performed uneventful turn back and landing.
Damage found on engine 1 pylon and on slat 3. The fan cowl latches and keepers were recovered and found to be in good condition with no evidence of distress or strain.
Investigation shows that the latches of the fan cowl doors were either unlatched or not properly hooked and secured. Latches did not have the fluorescent paint;
all other improvements embodied (see part 5. improvements).

- 22 April 2007: loss of both fan cowl doors on A319/CFM56 engine 2 after take-off.
Aircraft performed uneventful turn back and landing.
Extensive damage found on engine 2 pylons. Fan cowls have been recovered. The fan cowl latches and keepers were recovered and found to be in good condition with no evidence of distress or strain.

Moreover Airbus review of these 4 events shows that they occurred on the first flight after maintenance activity that required opening of the fan cowls.

Including these 4 events, a total of :
- 13 events of fan cowl loss have been reported on V2500-A1/A5 powered Airbus fleet.
- 5 events of fan cowl loss have been reported on CFM56-5A/5B powered Airbus fleet.
The level of structural damage sustained during these events is varied. Areas impacted were pylons, slats, flaps, fuselage skin & the MLG.
Previous events did not have the improvements described in part. 5 embodied.

3. ANALYSIS
In all reported cases analysis shows that the latches of the fan cowl doors were either unlatched or not properly hooked and secured, leading to air scooping and subsequent cowls separation.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS
Fan cowl loss can result in minor to severe aircraft damage. Although the various modifications will reduce the risk of repeat events, the modifications cannot fully cater for the "human factor".

Airbus recommends to strictly adhere to AMM task 71-13-00 for proper latching and closing of fan cowl doors after each maintenance action requiring cowl opening.

4.2 OPERATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS
The following FCOM Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) provide instructions to perform a visual check to ensure that the overall condition of the aircraft, the visible components and the equipments are secure for the
flight:
- A318/A319/A320/A321 FCOM CHAPTER 3.03.05.
As part of this inspection, it is essential that a flight crew member visually inspects the fan cowl doors prior to each flight to ensure that they are closed and latched.

5. IMPROVEMENTS
Modifications have been developed for both IAE and CFM powered aircraft to aid operators identify not fully closed or unlatched fan cowl doors:

- Fluorescent paint on the forward cowl door latch handles
. V2500: IAE SB V2500-NAC-71-0227
. CFM: GOODRICH SB RA320071-117

- Caution decal on the outboard fan cowl doors
. V2500: IAE SB V2500-NAC-71-0235
. CFM: GOODRICH SB RA32071-117

- Latch assy modification to ensure that latch handles will hang down if unlatched: weighted latch and improved anti-swivel plate
. V2500: IAE SB V2500-NAC-71-0256 & AIRBUS SB A320-71-1028 (AD 2003-18-06)

- Hold open device :
. V2500: IAE SB V2500-NAC-71-0259 & AIRBUS SB A320-71-1028 (AD 2003-18-06)

- Installation of new restrainers to prevent improper rotation of the eye-bolt
. CFM: GOODRICH SB RA32071-117

- Installation of improved latch handle hook spring. CFM: GOODRICH SB RA32071-117

On A320F/V2500 aircraft, Airbus SB A320-71-1028 is mandated by AD 2003-18-06.

Airbus would like to emphasize that strict compliance with the above part 4 maintenance and operational procedures is required to avoid similar occurrences.
Furthermore, incorporation of the above-mentioned modifications will help avoiding further events.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: LIFFY1A
Posted 2013-05-27 15:05:38 and read 7140 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 240):
I am not sure one did, this is an old OIT regarding these incidents sent out a few years ago to A320 operators, as you can see all of the previous incidents the aircraft returned with various levels of damage, however no mention of thrust loss.

Yes, I can see no mention of the engine failing or loss of thrust in the article. I wonder why it comes under the headline of Uncontained Engine Failure Events.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: musang
Posted 2013-05-27 15:07:03 and read 7139 times.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 161):
The video of the landing that someone posted earlier shows a pretty significant crab on landing

Apparently there was a crosswind.

Quoting ggflyboy (Reply 201):
how easy non-secure latches are to spot in pre-flight checks

Seemingly not that easy. Not only would the mechanic and pilot doing the walk-round have to fail to spot them, but also the push-back crew. A couple of times I've been embarrassed to have a tug driver report some issue outside which I should have spotted.

Quoting ggflyboy (Reply 201):
he saw one of the thrust reverser casing latches at the red detent-- flew the whole way in that configuration

If thats a Classic 737, a red plug protrudes from both sides of the aft engine casing/reverser sleeve IF a thrust reverser has been made inoperative. Its intentional, as a "witness mark". Perhaps this is what he saw.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 211):
Among the reasons why the doors were blown off are
Quoting Pihero (Reply 211):
Compressor surge

How does a compressor surge blow doors off?

Quoting Pihero (Reply 223):
Wonder where the smoke comes from in that fan cowl area

Vapourising Fuel perhaps?

Can't wait for the final report. I hope all the above theorists come back to this thread and compare!

Regards - musang

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-05-27 15:09:18 and read 7133 times.

Quoting AmericanAirFan (Reply 228):
the engines are not designed by aircraft manufacturer. However, cowlings and inlets etc. are designed by the airframe manufacturer.

Not necessarily true. If not mistaken Rolls-Royce has generally designed the cowlings as a package along with the engine.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-27 15:28:45 and read 7058 times.

Quoting b2319 (Reply 236):
Quoting Wisdom (Reply 224):
Do I also need to remind you that electrical components housed in this section can be shorted by leaked fuel

I am no means an aviation engineer/maintenance specialist/expert and so on.

In the chemical industry, aviation fuel would be considered as an electrical insulator and in terms of physics/electricity, not give rise to shorting. For this scientific effect, you require an electrical conductor, such as metal, graphite, salt water and so on.....

Good night (midnight local time.....)

B-2319

Let's start by saying that fuel and its vapors are not good insulators. In this case they would form a non-conductive dielectric, but given sufficient difference in potential between different electric components, or between the electric components and the earth, you can very easily at least create static discharges that can cause the dielectric itself, ie the fuel, to ignite.

If the difference in potential is large enough, it can even cause electrical breakdown of the fuel, resulting in electrical discharges or arching.
Shoot a taser-gun into a can of fuel and you will see that the can will explode (don't try at home).

So mr. Pihero, it doesn't look like this argument that you support will hold well in the real world.


It looks like airbazar and Pihero are trying to support that two uncontained engine failures (caused by FOD or FADEC failure) resulted in the smoke in engine 2 and the loss of the cowlings on both engines.

Unsurmountable flaws with these theories:
-An uncontained engine failure would result in much more damage than can be seen in these pictures. The fan case seems intact, so it's very unlikely that any uncontained engine failures occured, let alone that they cause the cowlings to become separated.
-Uncontained engine failures would result in the engines stopping to operate. Pushing the fire button would have closed off the fuel supply and activating the fire extinguishing bottles would have stopped any fire. So where did the smoke keep coming from?
-If FOD would cause a significant enough *bang* to cause the cowlings to separate, the engines would no longer be usable.
-Fadecs are fail-safe systems with redundancy. A Fadec is really built out of 2 Fadecs which are operated by different digital channels. A total Fadec failure is a very low probability event on as reliable a FADEC as found on the V2500, unless it's caused by external factors such as a fire that destroys the entire FADEC box.

At this point I think that the discussion is unnecessarily contaminated by these very unlikely, impossible scenario's.
The discussion should be about why the cowlings were not latched properly and maintenance procedures at BA.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-27 16:11:39 and read 6995 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 240):
Quoting Wisdom (Reply 222):
The take-off flaps selection do deploy the leading edge devices on most aircraft. And if you look at the airliners.net picture, you can see the position of the trailing edge of the flaps relative to the fuselage, consistent with take-off flaps .

We do not land with takeoff flap with an engine failure, we use landing flap. The flap selection used for this approach would be consistent with the reported slat damage mentioned earlier in the thread.

I find it disrespectful of you to come between me and Pihero with a quote taken out of context.
I did not imply that single engine landings are done with take-off flaps.

To quote myself correctly:
"Their flaps setting is very shallow, I'm guessing that they left take-off flaps and elected to not touch them, because of possible damage to the slats and flaps. This was also directly perfect for the one-engine landing, as they would come in faster and light on flaps, to facilitate an eventual single-engine go-around."

Why don't you tell me what the flap setting is on the picture of the landing BA A319? Does it look to you like it's landing flaps?

Why don't you instead ask your friend Pihero how the uncontained engine failure surgically removed the cowlings without further damage to the fan case and how he explains the smoke? Because he strongly disagrees with you on the cause of the cowlings becoming separated, yet you don't seem to be interested to argue with him.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: AR385
Posted 2013-05-27 16:31:16 and read 6932 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 240):
I believe on the V2500 it is actually done by United Technologies.

I think the V2500 is a joint venture between Pratt & Whitney and Rolls Royce.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: zkojq
Posted 2013-05-27 16:33:00 and read 6944 times.

Looking at the photo in the link below, there seems to have been some paint removed along the bottom of the fuselage. I assume this was done by the cowl door contacting the fuselage after it broke off? Thankfully it appears to have missed the horizontal stabilizer and elevators.
http://bit.ly/1asdDu6

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: spacecadet
Posted 2013-05-27 16:54:24 and read 6887 times.

Quoting musang (Reply 242):
Apparently there was a crosswind.

That's another interpretation, which doesn't disprove or even dispute mine - an engine shutdown does not preclude crosswinds. The photographs of the smoke also suggest the right engine was not running on landing. People who claim to have been passengers on the plane in other forums (and I don't vouch for them, you can choose to ignore if you want) also say the right engine was shut down before landing.

Quoting musang (Reply 242):
Can't wait for the final report. I hope all the above theorists come back to this thread and compare!

Yes, because as we all know, the purpose of these reports is to prove people wrong in online forums.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Pihero
Posted 2013-05-27 17:41:30 and read 6843 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
Let's start by saying that fuel and its vapors are not good insulators. In this case they would form a non-conductive dielectric, but given sufficient difference in potential between different electric components, or between the electric components and the earth, you can very easily at least create static discharges that can cause the dielectric itself, ie the fuel, to ignite.

That's what you call a *short by leaked fuel * Hmmm   

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
It looks like airbazar and Pihero are trying to support that two uncontained engine failures (caused by FOD or FADEC failure) resulted in the smoke in engine 2 and the loss of the cowlings on both engines.

Never said that as I haven't given an assumption on the origin of the events:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 211):
Among the reasons why the doors were blown off are :
- Maintenance poor quality, which I doubt for the time being as opening these doors is not an action of routine overnight operation...
- Compressor surge due to either FOD or a FADEC malfunction. This could explain the *explosion, bangs...* the witnesses reported.
Quoting Pihero (Reply 230):
Stretching things a bit, we don't know the events on both engines have the same origin.
Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
-An uncontained engine failure would result in much more damage than can be seen in these pictures. The fan case seems intact, so it's very unlikely that any uncontained engine failures occured, let alone that they cause the cowlings to become separated.

... and yet you saw fire in that area : Intact or not intact ? you don't seem to be really set in your posts as you keep on changing your angle of view with the informations others provide.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
-Uncontained engine failures would result in the engines stopping to operate. Pushing the fire button would have closed off the fuel supply and activating the fire extinguishing bottles would have stopped any fire. So where did the smoke keep coming from?

You're just repeating what I said on my # 223 :

Quoting Pihero (Reply 223):
Plus the fact that with a fire warning / severe damage, the crew have in all probabvility pushed the fire button and discharged the fire extinguishing bottle (s), therefore shutting off fuel and hydraulics, bleed air, and disconnecting the IDG...
Wonder where the smoke comes from in that fan cowl area

That's called *plagiarizing*..
Lost your self-assurance ?

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
-Fadecs are fail-safe systems with redundancy. A Fadec is really built out of 2 Fadecs which are operated by different digital channels. A total Fadec failure is a very low probability event on as reliable a FADEC as found on the V2500, unless it's caused by external factors such as a fire that destroys the entire FADEC box.

Now that it is obvious that you've - at last ! - read about FADECs, I have news for you : FADECs have failed in the past and will in all probability fail in the future. Quite a few diversions to prove that it is certainly not an impossible occurrence.
A fire that destroys the FADEC : In this case it is the last of my worries as I would already have completed a fire drill... and that engine would have therefore been shut down.

Quoting musang (Reply 242):
How does a compressor surge blow doors off?

A violent one is lkike an explosion.
There's one case when one happened on initial climb (CFM-56 )
Fan doors were buckled, showing a wide gap on the left side of the fan cowl. Aerodynamic loads could have ripped the cowl at higher speed.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
The discussion should be about why the cowlings were not latched properly and maintenance procedures at BA.

In this case, you're wasting your time. It has been discussed almost exactly nine years ago on this forum :
A320 lost cowls

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: AngMoh
Posted 2013-05-27 17:45:17 and read 6828 times.

Quoting b2319 (Reply 236):
I am no means an aviation engineer/maintenance specialist/expert and so on.

In the chemical industry, aviation fuel would be considered as an electrical insulator and in terms of physics/electricity, not give rise to shorting. For this scientific effect, you require an electrical conductor, such as metal, graphite, salt water and so on.....

  

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
Let's start by saying that fuel and its vapors are not good insulators. In this case they would form a non-conductive dielectric, but given sufficient difference in potential between different electric components, or between the electric components and the earth, you can very easily at least create static discharges that can cause the dielectric itself, ie the fuel, to ignite.

If the difference in potential is large enough, it can even cause electrical breakdown of the fuel, resulting in electrical discharges or arching.

In high voltage systems, oil is used as an insulator. High voltage cables contain oil. Transformers are immersed in oil.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):

Shoot a taser-gun into a can of fuel and you will see that the can will explode (don't try at home).

So mr. Pihero, it doesn't look like this argument that you support will hold well in the real world.

This is a load of nonsense. You watch too many Hollywood movies. Sparks can ignite fuel vapour, but not a liquid. To get an explosion you need a fuel/air mixture where the fuel is LOW enough for an explosion to occur.
Some education: the simplest example is a fuel tank in a car. If the fuel tank is full, it can not explode. And when I say can not, I really mean it is technically not possible to explode. The fuel tank can only explode if there is only ONE TABLESPOON of fuel in the whole fuel tank and the rest is air. Only then the air/fuel mixture becomes explosive. Most of the accidents with exploding fuel tanks happen when a technician empties the fuel tank but does not use inert gas to vent it properly, and then starts welding.
If you drop a burning match in a pool of fuel, in most cases the liquid will extinguish the match. If it catches fire, it was because there was sufficient vapour above the pool which caught fire before the liquid extinguished the match.
And the taser example is complete nonsense because you won't even get sparks unless the sparks are between the can and the taser wire.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Pihero
Posted 2013-05-27 17:55:44 and read 6800 times.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 247):
there seems to have been some paint removed along the bottom of the fuselage. I assume this was done by the cowl door contacting the fuselage after it broke off? Thankfully it appears to have missed the horizontal stabilizer and elevators.

Those are marks left by the wing evacuation chute being deployed.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 245):
I did not imply that single engine landings are done with take-off flaps.

and...

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 245):
This was also directly perfect for the one-engine landing, as they would come in faster and light on flaps, to facilitate an eventual single-engine go-around."

A bit contradictotry, don't you think ?

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 245):
he strongly disagrees with you on the cause of the cowlings becoming separated, yet you don't seem to be interested to argue with him.

No, we don't at all. we're just careful not to jump into theories without more infos. And we certaiunly not judge human actions without facts.
Quite a bit different from your attitude, I daresay.
And by the way, I never mentioned uncontained failure.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-27 18:30:18 and read 6725 times.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 250):
Quoting b2319 (Reply 236):
I am no means an aviation engineer/maintenance specialist/expert and so on.

In the chemical industry, aviation fuel would be considered as an electrical insulator and in terms of physics/electricity, not give rise to shorting. For this scientific effect, you require an electrical conductor, such as metal, graphite, salt water and so on.....

  

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
Let's start by saying that fuel and its vapors are not good insulators. In this case they would form a non-conductive dielectric, but given sufficient difference in potential between different electric components, or between the electric components and the earth, you can very easily at least create static discharges that can cause the dielectric itself, ie the fuel, to ignite.

If the difference in potential is large enough, it can even cause electrical breakdown of the fuel, resulting in electrical discharges or arching.

In high voltage systems, oil is used as an insulator. High voltage cables contain oil. Transformers are immersed in oil.

I think that you're failing to make a fundamental difference between mineral oil, grease and jet fuel. They all have significantly different electric properties.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 250):
This is a load of nonsense. You watch too many Hollywood movies. Sparks can ignite fuel vapour, but not a liquid. To get an explosion you need a fuel/air mixture where the fuel is LOW enough for an explosion to occur.
Some education: the simplest example is a fuel tank in a car. If the fuel tank is full, it can not explode. And when I say can not, I really mean it is technically not possible to explode. The fuel tank can only explode if there is only ONE TABLESPOON of fuel in the whole fuel tank and the rest is air. Only then the air/fuel mixture becomes explosive. Most of the accidents with exploding fuel tanks happen when a technician empties the fuel tank but does not use inert gas to vent it properly, and then starts welding.
If you drop a burning match in a pool of fuel, in most cases the liquid will extinguish the match. If it catches fire, it was because there was sufficient vapour above the pool which caught fire before the liquid extinguished the match.
And the taser example is complete nonsense because you won't even get sparks unless the sparks are between the can and the taser wire.

First of all, your full explanation is not relevant to this discussion. Tell me how it relates at all to the discussion at hand, if not to try to prove that my example is not valid in a defined set of circumstances.
Second, it 's not accurate. Liquid fuels can burn with very little oxygen. There is always some oxygen dissolved or embedded in the fuel on an aircraft. Little oxygen leads to incomplete combustion, which can then lead to a chain-reaction and cause combustion.

You're welcome to pitch in, but please do not pollute the discussion with irrelevant notions that lead nowhere.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: Wisdom
Posted 2013-05-27 19:05:12 and read 6659 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 249):
Quoting Wisdom (Reply 244):
The discussion should be about why the cowlings were not latched properly and maintenance procedures at BA.

In this case, you're wasting your time. It has been discussed almost exactly nine years ago on this forum :
A320 lost cowls

I'm sorry if you misunderstood my comment. I will rephrase it as follows: The discussion should be about why the holes in the Swiss Cheese aligned.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 251):
Quoting Wisdom (Reply 245):
I did not imply that single engine landings are done with take-off flaps.

and...

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 245):
This was also directly perfect for the one-engine landing, as they would come in faster and light on flaps, to facilitate an eventual single-engine go-around."

A bit contradictotry, don't you think ?

If you see a contradiction in there, you are suggesting that the pilots were wrong to deviate from standard procedures and land with less than landing flaps. That's in contradiction of your own claims that the pilots did a good job.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 251):
No, we don't at all. we're just careful not to jump into theories without more infos. And we certaiunly not judge human actions without facts.
Quite a bit different from your attitude, I daresay.
And by the way, I never mentioned uncontained failure.

It's too late to hide behind the delay of the report and hope that people forget your bad assumptions in this thread.
You mentioned uncontained failure. Read your post 237 where you endorse reply 234. That means that you consider it a strong possibility. You repetitively said that you suspect engine surge, when there is no sign of it. Too late to retract your bad assumptions now, you're cornered.

When you see a single crushed egg on the floor, you know that it's either been dropped or stepped on.
You know that it's not a chicken that exploded misteriously, leaving a crushed egg behind.
We don't need a report to see the picture here, dozens of other forums worldwide already are way passed the cause, it's only on airliners.net where people are debating the cause.

You claim to be or have been a captain, so I hope that in-flight you don't wait for the EASA to issue the final report before making crucial decisions, for the sake of your passengers.
You demonstrated similar attitude after the Lion Air's interim report came out and everyone else in the world saw what happened and you still were trying to sell your theory of microburst, based on blanks in the transcript that the investigating agency left out out of irrelevance.

I think that you fail to sort out relevant and irrelevant information and when you realise that your assumptions were wrong, you leave the discussion and hope that it becomes forgotten. Look how fast the Lion Air discussion disappeared in the pages.

Why don't we meet at the IAE stand at Le Bourget and ask together what IAE thinks about your theory?

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: prebennorholm
Posted 2013-05-27 19:54:00 and read 6559 times.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 250):
In high voltage systems, oil is used as an insulator. High voltage cables contain oil. Transformers are immersed in oil.

Right.

But for safety reasons jet fuel contains as an additive an antistatic agent to dissipate static electricity. Most often used additive for this purpose is dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid.

That's what makes jet fuel an electric conductor. Not a very good one, but still not a conductor.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: zkojq
Posted 2013-05-27 20:40:41 and read 6512 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 251):
Those are marks left by the wing evacuation chute being deployed.

Thankyou for clarifying.

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: zeke
Posted 2013-05-27 20:49:30 and read 6537 times.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 245):
I find it disrespectful of you to come between me and Pihero with a quote taken out of context.
I did not imply that single engine landings are done with take-off flaps.

This is a public forum, we can all join in. Myself and others did not follow the following comment, "perfect for the one-engine landing, as they would come in faster and light on flaps, to facilitate an eventual single-engine go-around"

For a single engine landing we would normally have flaps 3 (landing flap), and in the event of a go-around is commenced flap is retracted as part of the procedure.

I am still not convinced they made a single engine approach, none of the previous events of this type I am aware of resulting in the crew shutting down an engine. The comments about one "perfect for the one-engine landing", and "eventual single-engine go-around" do not make sense in the context of the event with the information that has been released. There has been speculation of an engine fire, and engine being shut down, I have seen nothing that has officially confirmed that. As you are aware, I have provided a hypothesis of how a fire warning can be generated without a fire being present as a result of damage caused by the cowl as it rapidly detached.

This BA flight probably would have had flaps/slats locked, they would have flown the takeoff, cruise, approach, and landing with the same amount of slats/flap physically deployed, however different flaps selected in the cockpit. If they went around the amount of flap physically deployed would have also been the same.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 245):
Why don't you tell me what the flap setting is on the picture of the landing BA A319? Does it look to you like it's landing flaps?

The flap setting is not visible in external pictures, the selection is made in the cockpit, my best guess is they would have selected flap 3. Selecting flap 3 for a slats/flaps locked scenario is standard procedure, it does not mean the flaps will physically move, as they are locked.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 246):
I think the V2500 is a joint venture between Pratt & Whitney and Rolls Royce.

Correct, and UTC are the parent to P&W. UTC Aerospace Systems, Aerostructures (U.S.A.) make the Inlet cowl, fan cowl, nozzle & cone, EBU & thrust reverser for both CFM56-5 and V2500 engines ; Nacelles - Nacelle & thrust reversers, variable area nozzle for teh A320/A320neo

http://www.airframer.com/direct_detail.html?company=119739

Topic: RE: BA A319 Incident At LHR, All Runways Closed
Username: iowaman
Posted 2013-05-27 21:17:35 and read 6498 times.

Due to length, this thread will be archived and available for future reference. Here is part two: BA A319 Incident At LHR Part 2 (by iowaman May 27 2013 in Civil Aviation)


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/