PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 7977 posts, RR: 66 Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3558 times:
Look at the front of the SriLankan aircraft's wing - there is a fair amount of damage to both planes... and the media turned it into the UK's worst air disaster ever - as usual
It's the Daily Mail after all, turning a mole him into a mountain and the like, whilst getting facts frequently wrong. An old story dug up again, must be a slow news day!
ADXMatt From United States, joined Jul 2006, 796 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3336 times:
I forgot to add they wat the pictures are in the story it makes you think that it was the BA plane that flew.
I realize if you read the story carefully and look at the name on the plane it doesn't jive. But look at the pic of the badly damaged BA winglet and the circle around the missing piece on the taxiway. They lead you to believe it was the BA plane in this story.
PhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3335 times:
Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 2): I don't dispatch a B747 but I could not find CDL data for the B757 or B737 with a winglet missing or damamged.
Here is the info out of the CDL:
CDL Number: 57-28-1
Item: Winglets [P]*
Model: All
No. Installed: 2
Requirements:
One may be missing provided the performance limited weights are reduced by the following:
Takeoff Enroute Climb Landing
9435 kg 4536 kg 9435 kg
Apply fuel penalty of 2.5% to the entire mission fuel.
NOTE: If a winglet is removed, the affected winglet fairings except the leading edge wingtip fairing Part Number
118U0010 and the trailing edge wingtip fairing Part Number 118U0030 must be removed. The forward
facing opening in the trailing edge wingtip fairing must be covered (e.g. sped tape).
However, I'm not sure that would apply in this case as an inspection and release from Boeing would have to be obtained. I've ferried several aircraft like that and there were additional restrictions such as 280KIAS/.80MN as the max speed.
RJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3246 times:
Even after server migration and several really annoying upgrades to the system, the search function still sucks to high heaven. I searched before starting a new thread and it missed it completely. Oh well. My post was that someone must have gotten the two airlines mixed up. I don't see any damage to the Srilankan A340 at all. At CO the winglets of several aircraft have been knocked off. Usually during pushback in a tight gate. Normally one aircraft comes away almost scott free while the other gets banged up pretty good so it's not unheard of. I wonder which plane was not where they were supposed to be since the taxi and parking lines are supposed to guarantee clearance.
474218 From United States, joined Oct 2005, 3763 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3229 times:
Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 5): However, I'm not sure that would apply in this case as an inspection and release from Boeing would have to be obtained.
I think Boeing has already provided their approval, the CDL was written by Boeing. OEM does not have to be consulted everytime the CDL is used. The inspection for any additional (hidden) damage could easily be handled by BA.
PhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3213 times:
Quoting 474218 (Reply 8): I think Boeing has already provided their approval, the CDL was written by Boeing. OEM does not have to be consulted everytime the CDL is used. The inspection for any additional (hidden) damage could easily be handled by BA.
The CDL only covers the removal of the winglet, not the removal after a collision. I have flown 4 744s back to their maintenance base to repair damage as the result of a ground incident. In all cases the damage to the wing was minimal, however the aircraft could not be used in revenue service. Now in the case of BA, they were at their maintenance base so it's really academic.
N62NA From United States, joined Aug 2003, 1794 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3156 times:
Quoting RJdxer (Reply 7): My post was that someone must have gotten the two airlines mixed up. I don't see any damage to the Srilankan A340 at all.
My point exactly!
Quoting 474218 (Reply 8): I think Boeing has already provided their approval, the CDL was written by Boeing.
Why is everyone talking about Boeing on here? Wasn't it the SriLanken A340 that the pax "revolted" and didn't want to fly on because of damage to it's winglet?
That's what's so confusing about this whole story. Yeah, the BA 747 has clear and ugly damage to it's winglet, but from reading the story, it was the pax on the SriLanken A340 that were faced with the prospect of riding on the same A340 with the "damaged" winglet the next day. I don't see any damage to the A340 winglet in those photos.
Strudders From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2004, 109 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3130 times:
I think if you look at the second I on the British on the side of the 747, there would appear to be damaged on the A340.
My view is the leading edge probably chomped though the winglet on the 747 and thus the damage was not to the winglet on the A340 but the leading edge,
Just a thought.
A point though, if this is the case are the A340 winglets easy to remove? was this removed for the flight back?
I am also guessing that not having a winglet would only cause more fuel to be burned as it is not a flying surface, does anybody else know of any times when a A340 has been flown with out one?
Tristarsteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 2817 posts, RR: 23 Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2988 times:
Quoting RJdxer (Reply 7): I wonder which plane was not where they were supposed to be since the taxi and parking lines are supposed to guarantee clearance.
The holding point where this happened has just been repaved religned. There is a note in the airport booklet that says, Wingtip clearance not assured, take care when passing!!!!!
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 11078 posts, RR: 84 Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2935 times:
Yep, G-BNLL flew the next day, but don't tell the Daily Mail!
I must caution against using stories from this paranoid rag, for some time now, for whatever reason, they've decided that BA is to join the long list of people/organisations they want their readers to hate.
(Maybe a senior journalist did not get an upgrade or something).
I mean hate too, one ex editor of the Mail admitted that the task was to get the readership to hate someone or something, over their breakfasts.
Bongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 1815 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2898 times:
Quoting GDB (Reply 13): I must caution against using stories from this paranoid rag, for some time now, for whatever reason, they've decided that BA is to join the long list of people/organisations they want their readers to hate.
(Maybe a senior journalist did not get an upgrade or something).
I mean hate too, one ex editor of the Mail admitted that the task was to get the readership to hate someone or something, over their breakfasts.
Where are you coming from on this story ? The article clearly states in its 2nd sentence "The SriLankan Airlines customers had been on the Airbus A340 a day earlier when it sliced through a wing of a stationary British Airways 747 at Heathrow, delaying departure by 24 hours. "
Whilst the pictures primarily show the damage to the BA 747, the article only ever mentions the BA plane in the context of describing the incident;, and the diagram explaining the accident clearly states that the Sri Lankan plane ran into a stationary BA plane
PhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2749 times:
Quoting 474218 (Reply 14): There is no logical reason for removal of a wing let other than for damage.
However, this damage was caused by a ground collision. There are instances where the winglet itself is damaged, for example, by a birdstrike, lightening strike and there is no resulting damage to the wing structure. Had this happened at a non-maintenance base, the aircraft would have to be flown back to a maintenance base for inspection via a ferry permit or a team dispatched to the location to accomplish the inspection and removal of the winglet. The real problem with the latter option is if subsequent inspection of the wing area uncovered any damage. Since it happened at LHR it's really meaningless since any inspection/repair was accomplished there
Aftonbladet in Sweden is having fun too: "Pax forced to fly on damaged aircraft". I suggested to them that they could at least have gotten an opinion from SK which flies the same type before just recycling British tabloid copy.
Quoting Strudders (Reply 11): I am also guessing that not having a winglet would only cause more fuel to be burned as it is not a flying surface, does anybody else know of any times when a A340 has been flown with out one?
There must be hundreds of examples. Here are some more sans winglet pics, including a 340.
What's a "mole him" Dan ?. Something you student's do to each other
Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 2): Sri Lanken consulted with Boeing and the winglet manufacturer about this
Sri Lanken would have no reason to consult Boeing as they operate AIRBUS.
Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 3): I forgot to add they wat the pictures are in the story it makes you think that it was the BA plane that flew
The BA plane also flew the next day.
Quoting N62NA (Reply 10): I don't see any damage to the A340 winglet in those photos.
Just because you can't see in the pic doesn't mean it wasn't there. If there had been no damage, the highly trained licensed aircraft engineers would not have wasted valuable tea drinking time to remove it !!.
Quoting GDB (Reply 13): don't tell the Daily Mail!
I must caution against using stories from this paranoid rag,
The chaps over at pprune have the right idea in the Proffesional Pilots Forum. When the Daily Mail write sensationalist stories like this, they take the name of the writer then email them with real facts about what really happens in the various scenarios that they are making out to be major incidents !!.
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
Strudders From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2004, 109 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2494 times:
Quoting Leezyjet (Reply 18): Quoting N62NA (Reply 10):
I don't see any damage to the A340 winglet in those photos.
Just because you can't see in the pic doesn't mean it wasn't there. If there had been no damage, the highly trained licensed aircraft engineers would not have wasted valuable tea drinking time to remove it !!.
Bennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 4568 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2349 times:
Given that the aircraft were taxiing, they presumably collided at low speed, which would reduce the damage. Also an A340 can fly with or without winglets, meaning it is not on MEL.
Would the CAA/AAIB have inspected the aircraft involved in this ground collision?. I assume that the answer is yes.
In that case, who is the best judge of an aircraft safety, Sri Lankan/AAIB or passengers/Daily Mail?.
Leezyjet From United Kingdom (England), joined Oct 2001, 3895 posts, RR: 60 Reply 22, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2255 times:
Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 21): Would the CAA/AAIB have inspected the aircraft involved in this ground collision?.
Depends, sometimes they do come out, other times they just ask for pictures and other info to be sent to them. IIRC there were reports on here in the thread at the time about them not attending, then they decided they would attened. It's sometimes more of an inconvenince in a situation like this where the a/c can be repaired and put back into service relatively quickly as you then have to leave the a/c where they are until they come to inspect for themselves.
Had a tyre burst incident a couple of years back, when the a/c landed on the shoulder of the runway and burst all 4 tyres on the r/h main gear as it swung back onto the centre line. The a/c stopped on a rapid exit taxiway and was disembarked out there, but the AAIB wouldn't let the a/c be moved until they had attended which was several hours later. The a/c could have been towed to a stand and been repaired and back in service in that time !!.
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
MSYPI7185 From United States, joined Oct 2007, 383 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1980 times:
Unfortunately Neil Cavuto on FOX News has picked up this story and had some moron Mike Boyd an so called Aviation Security Consultant on slamming foreign carriers (non - US). He MB said "this would never happen in the US", and "this is a reason why you should avoid non-US airlines". He was stating emphatically that the airplane was unsafe. What an idiot!
Not to mention they are also reporting the story all screwed up, just like it was in the daily mail. I emailed them immediately slamming their coverage and the comments made, but I know I am probably wasting my time.
Flown: PI, AL, US, EA, PA, MC, WN, CO, DL, LH, BA, HP. Worked at: MSY, CLT, FRA
CF6PPE From United States, joined Mar 2006, 149 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1847 times:
Quoting Leezyjet (Reply 18): The chaps over at pprune have the right idea in the Proffesional Pilots Forum. When the Daily Mail write sensationalist stories like this, they take the name of the writer then email them with real facts about what really happens in the various scenarios that they are making out to be major incidents !!.
Has informing the offending writer of the sensationalist stories of the real facts been beneficial to getting better based on fact stories written..??
26 Starlionblue: Heh. No but it feels good to vent.
27 GDB: Boondog, I'm really thinking about that rag's general posture as regards us, day in day out. A big part of me though sees been hated by the Mail as al
28 Leezyjet: Some of them have had replies from said journalists thanking them for correcting the facts, so one would hope if the same journalist was to write ano
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Aug 2003, 1794 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 7977 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 957 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 2817 posts, 
From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 13591 posts, 
.gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Oct 2001, 3895 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
