THE BRITISH THREAD II

It's always much safer after a crash. Don't worry. And shitless is definitely the best way to fly.

Whereaway this time, Clazza? Back to Blighty?

Yes, McT, coming back from 20 to 10 degrees, dark days and a tax bill. Can't wait! Any ideas of how to cheer myself up???

The world is your lobster. And the days are getting lighter.

I have cheered myself up by eating and drinking less, and exercising more. But if that's too Spartan for now, you could always try the opposite. The change is the thing, variety.

It will be different to have booze readily available, my own strong coffee, hot baths and my own Mac. But the glory of those things may not last. Maybe I have to reconcile myself to exercise, diet etc.
I could come and see you, and other people Points North. What became of that chap with a Greek god avatar??

You would be most welcome here. Mathos is in Indonesia somewhere, or Thailand I think. Gone native.

That's hardly likely Mac. He has the wife with him.

I was in a plane crash once. A prang we called it. There's nothing to it Clary and it's very unlikely to happen. The 777 has had its "one in a million".

Logic has nothing to do with phobias, alas. I know it is much more likely I'll have a nasty road accident or just fall off my kitchen steps, but it's the height that gets me about planes. And the utter helplessness.

Yes Clary. That's why I never fly. I find my position up there absurd.

If you hold the curved back of a spoon, dangled lightly from your fingers, against the jet of water from your kitchen tap, if you don't have a jet diffuser and are not on a metered supply, you will find that instead of being deflected away from the stream of water, the spoon is sucked in.
This is a demonstration of the principle harnessed by the Wright Brothers and many since which allows your aeroplane to get airborne and stay there, other things permitting.

Sounds like pilot error to me. Underpowered during the approach; dropping the nose to maintain airspeed; below the prescribed glide path; and unable to save it at the last moment with a burst of engine thrust. (Those big bypass engines have a lot of inertia, and it takes a few moments for them to wind up).

This didn't get reported in the States? The plane had no power (from only 600 ft altitude), hence the problem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7196945.stm

That is how it was reported here as well. However my own experience (several decades as a military pilot) supports the pilot error theory in such cases.

Simultaneous double engine failures during landing approach almost never occur, excepting only one circumstance - fuel starvation, either from simply running out of fuel, or misaligning the valves and controls. In addition cases in which the aircraft was grossly underpowered or below glide path during the approach are usually described in the initial reports as being due to "slow engine response", when in fact the real cause is pilot error. If you are descending at 1000 ft/min, just 200 ft above the ground and 1,500 ft from the runway it is too late to save the situation.

Americans, free our haggis!

Give us LIBERTY or give us........er

Give us liberty or else!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7198751.stm

So we'll have to wait for the report of the incident investigators. These fellows are fairly dispassionate, and don't mince words when need be.

Heck it's a thirteen-hour flight from China. Maybe they felt a little drowsy and nodded off. :wink:

I read about an alarm inhibitor in the control software which prevents the distraction of unneccessary alarms during takeoff and landing.
Maybe that will have to be tweaked.
I believe at two miles out, the control of the approach would be switched from auto to manual. If this is correct I suppose pilot error is unlikely in this case.
But I've never landed a warplane on an aircraft carrier.

The description in the link you provided indicated that the aircraft was on autopilot with the auto throttle engaged until the aircraft was at a height of 600', two miles from the runway threshold. This is a common enough situation, particularly in bad weather. Indeed the 777 is equipped with a certified system able to take the aircraft to touchdown on the runway in that configuration. Merely applying pressure to the engine throttles and pitch or roll pressure to the control yoke will automatically disengage these systems -- and that opens a number of possibilities. Hard for us here to know what really happened at that moment, but I am inclined to doubt that it was the automatic controls that suddenly failed.

The auto pilot is linked to the airport instrument landing system which will cause the aircraft to fly down a preestablished, shallow glide path to the runway. The auto throttle will independently adjust engine thrust to maintain a specified airspeed or angle of attack. If the auto throttle was inadvertantly disengaged (and no manual control assumed) the aircraft could have quickly become underpowered in a downdraft. Alternatively if the autopilot was inadvertantly disengaged by (say) a little forward pressure on the control yoke, the aircraft would have accelerated & descended, causing the autothrottle to reduce engine power. Either situation would have quickly put the aircraft in a situation of too low, too slow, too far from the runway. It is clear that such a low/slow/far situation did occur - we lack only specific knowledge of what caused it.

It seems to me that contaminated fuel might have been the problem.

Or Canada Geese. Let's blame Canada.

TWO Canada geese, one in each engine simulatneously!??

They do get in the way of golfballs a lot, I have noticed. Blame Canada for that.

Clazza, make the most of Arabia, if it's dry and dusty today I mean. It's absolutely sluicing down here, and will do all day according to the forecast.

Bon voyage, too!

I dont think there would be quite the adulation for the crew as heros if pilot error was an obvious reason. However all will be revealed in a few days. It cant be often that the air accident investigation has such a wealth of evidence to examine.

As for flying, I dont like it. I dont like being processed as self loading freight. I dont like being in a pressurised aluminium tube at 30000 feet. And I dont like as Clary said the feeling of helplessness. If the car breaks down I can walk. If the boat sinks I can swim, but if a wing falls off I damn well cant fly.

Having said that, went for my usual Sunday bike ride yesterday and nearly drowned. Towards the end i took a short cut home and was on my own. Passed and ignored a road sign that said "Flood". (I'd already been through a ford only 6" deep and two pints of beer so feeling invincible). Saw the water ahead, slowed down and went in...


I dont know if anyone here has experience of underwater bicycling, but its quite interesting. I suddenly realised I couldnt stop or turn round so had to continue praying it wasnt going to get any deeper. It got up as far as the wheel hubs then mercifully got shallower. I emerged wet chastened and completely sober. Now I'll have to rebuild the bottom crank.