BBC news reporting BA statement at 16:00 with the captain..

I'm not sure what the primary flight actuation system is on the 777, if they are EHMA (electro-hydro mechanical actuators) then they just need electrical power which could come from batteries. If it's a more conventional hydraulic system then they would need the ram air turbine to provide hydraulic power. It would be interesting to know how long this takes to deploy and start generating at approach speed. There's reports the APU had started, but unless it has EHMA's it doesn't help flight actuation.

Reports i've read say the engines may have gone into reverse at circa 400ft, the engines i believe go into reverse thrust just prior to touchdown automatically.
It was mentioned that if the computer thought the plane was lower than it actually was this would cause the engines to go into reverse.

This would also account for the sudden 'Fall' and witness reports of the engines gunning it.

Not possible, there needs to be a Weight-on-Wheels signal before reverse thrust can be deployed.

I too would question its effectiveness at approach speed, as it would be operating close to its minimum operating speed

Typical, just like the planes....... he is running behind schedule! :lol1:

Marvelous bit of assuming the captain was flying it!
Bet the media feel like pricks now!

lol indeed, and the senior first officer escaped a media slating for a day too lol.

Captain: The co-pilot was landing the plane

<cue interview with 1st officer>

Co-pilot: I thought the Capatin was landing the plane.

:D


Shirley, we're all counting on you :lol1:

More likely the gutter press will start and ask questions such as "Could the plane have made the runway had the captain actually been flying".

Its not like they are going to stick their hand up and say "We sold a lot of papers without knowing anything" now is it ;)

:lol1: :lol: superb!

Interesting that its seems like the injuries incurred were during evacuation! Goes to show seatbelts have their uses.

Makes me laugh the number of people who take them off and walk about when the light is on....... :Whatever_

Excellent simulator demonstration just now. Not sure if they had it planned to end the way it did, but same model plane, same "believed" issue, and the plane came to rest, almost in the same place as in reality.

<<same "believed" issue>>

Which one would that be?

Never mind that, you found the shift key, can we expect capital letters from now on ?

Short clip from the news of the approach...

YouTube - British Airways BA038 Approach

Loss of engine power. Thought that had been covered already.

prelim investigation confirms engine fault..

BBC NEWS | England | London | Engine fault caused crash-landing

Interesting images of the engines.
It looks like the stbd engine had run down and the port engine was running at low power (if at all) at the point of impact. The damage to the port engine doesn't appear to be consistent with bird ingestion. (Even in the event of a bird strike, the engine wouldn't be shut down by the pilot - the engine control system has surge recovery logic which should recover the engine.)

Thrust reversers cannot be deplyed without a valid weight-on-wheels signal from the aircraft, so that is extreemly unlikely, unless there was a mechanical failure.

From the news, it appears that the engines failed to respond to an increased demand in thrust. This seems very strange if both engines failed to respond, and would indicate either an aircraft control system problem (ie; the aircraft did not demand more thrust), or some problem with the delivery of fuel to the engines (the engines were trying to spool up, but there was insufficient fuel).

That report does not confirm an engine fault!! Merely that the engines did not respond to the pilot demand. As above, the likelyhood of both engines failing to respond (having each suffered a similar failure) is extreemly remote. More likely a fuelling / aircraft fault.

Ok - the engines didn't respond to auto pilot and pilot demand..
The AIBB report in full quoted on the BBC

BBC NEWS | England | London | In full: AAIB initial statement

Wouldn't a suspected fault like that ground all 777's until the problem has been identified and fixed?

:smug:

:D :D :D

So they seem to have ruled out any climatic reasons, crew error and bird strikes. So that just leaves some sort of system malfunction.

They said the engines didn't respond, which suggests they were still spooling (as opposed to having stopped altogether). The pictures show the RAT, but was that because it had been deployed (either automatically or commanded by the aircrew) or is that just a result of the impact?

The engines have different power supplies, different fuel sources, different FADEC's, each with multiple channels, independent computer hardware supplied with independent electrical sources and independently derived software and commanded by the throttles which have multiple redundant RVDT's.

It shouldn't be possible to effectively lose both at the same time. Lot's of late nights in store for the engineers and investigators to find out the cause quickly, there's several hundred B777's in the air at any given time.

Purely guessing but I think may be a 1 in a million/billion ( pick any number you like ) system malfunction. Be interesting to see if the FDR has picked up the cause. If not, as B_in_J said, some long nights ahead for Boeing engineers.

just like how it was posted in the paper today ;)

Heathrow BA 777 Plane Crash Pilot Tells What Went Wrong |Sky News|UK News

2 miles out both engines fail while on a normal descent rate, no wonder the 1st Officer is getting massive praise for getting it as close to the runway as he did :eek: At that point there must be a very fine line between getting the nose up to prolong the descent and stalling it.

I just don't know how anyone in that situation can not have a brown trouser moment.

I don't buy newspapers. :smug:

Hear! hear!

If ive read the AAIB report correct, the engines didnt FAIL, they just didnt provide more power, is that right?