Speedbird 38: FADEC failure or something more basic .. ran out of gas?

Basic stuff, here. But the bit about BA running light on fuel loads intrigued me. I've heard that before.

But if Speedbird 38 was coming into London "on fumes," would they not have declared a fuel emergency? you ask. Probably so .. but maybe not. That would generate a shit-storm of paperwork.

I witnessed a KLM Boeing 747-200 land at Houston Intercontinental Airport (KIAH) in the early 1980s. They landed on runway 14L and took the high-speed turnoff in front of the Exxon corporate fleet hangar. As the 747 made the turn back up the taxiway, it stopped. All four engines had flamed out. Fuel starvation. KLM had to send a tug to tow the aircraft to the gate. The KLM crew not only said nothing to air traffic controllers about their critical fuel status, but they accepted clearance to a runway that was not the closest to their arrival route.

if they'd run out of gas? I assume each fuel tank feeds the respective engine, and even a FADEC-equipped airplane probably wouldn't burn at exactly the same rate. And I do remember reading something about fuel being found around the wreck (not sure if it was usable, though).

If there's a software glitch that basically deactivated the autothrust systems on both engines and prevented them going to TOGA when they tried, that could be bad. But the 777 has been around for awhile now (12 years or so, I think), with no accidents. This could be really interesting.

BA does have a reputation for going a little slim on fuel. And wasn't it BA that lost a 747 engine on takeoff from (I think) LAX (maybe it was SFO), and just kept going all the way back to England but had to divert to Manchester because they didn't have quite enough fuel to make it to Heathrow on account of the drag from the dead engine?

That way, both engines do quit at the same time if fuel runs out. If you are trying to make an airport in a critical fuel situation, you don't need a thrust asymmetry problem too.

I had plenty of experience with this in Viet Nam, where it was our units SOP to run tanks dry (and fail the engines) to get every drop of fuel. I still can't believe I did that shit!

I can't imagine they didn't know they were running low, if they were). Although there was that Canadian A330 that deadsticked into the Azores when they ran out of gas, and they didn't even know they were running out because they thought they were crossfeeding -- but it turned out there was a fuel leak and it was all going overboard. Oddly, the ECAM didn't tell them about this.

If they did run dry, they certainly will have a lot o' 'splainin' to do; and there's no way to hide it. The FDR will totally rat them out.

OTOH, there could be the odd software glitch... I've been talking to a few people who are typed in the 777 and they are kind of baffled. None of them thinks it was fuel exhaustion, but they can't figure out what else it could be, either.

But some pilots (stupidly) don't want to broadcast their fuel plight on VHF.

Not fuel related, but take off from Houston IAH, i saw a KLM 747-200 bank sharply because of thunderstorms, it looked cool from the ground, but i bet the passengers were 'scared'?


all airlines are supposed to have enough fuel for an alternate airport, if that is the case
that is not good on their part....

I love hearing "speedbird" when i am flying my 717 on the flight simulator!!!!

I used to have a silver 1978 Porsche 911SC with Virginia plates: SPDBIRD.

Other great callsigns:

CACTUS - America West

PALM - the old Air Florida

OPEC - USAFR KC-10 tankers

CRAZY CAT & CAT'S PAW - my callsign in Viet Nam

I fly into Las Vegas alot, and the New National airlines call sign is "red rock"

they went bankrupt tho, i have them loaded onto my computer.....


I also love hearing "Heavy" after the call sign

KLM departing AMS, snapped this one last March.

KLM 747-400

I love Amsterdam.

KLM 4805 and Pan Am Clipper 1736 (Clipper Victor) collided on the runway killing 583 people (3/27/1977). The captain of the Pan Am Clipper Victor was a friend of mine from my hometown of Griffin, Georgia: Captain Victor Grubbs. He and his first officer were among the survivors from the Pan Am B-747. All aboard the KLM 747 (which was taking off) were killed.

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

The PanAm FO is one of the narrators. Really chilling.

Perhaps they were at an FL that proved .....difficult?...contrary to fuel economy?

I flew BA from Detroit - Montreal - Heathrow several times in the 90's (admittedly, fuels costs were not the major concern they are now) and recall one flight where Heathrow was fogged in with what the Pilot said was freezing fog. We flew ovals off the coast of Ireland for about an hour and ended up landing in Glasgow. The point I'm getting at was they obviously carried plenty of fuel onboard for that flight.

But a westbound flight from Beijing?

You think headwinds could have played a part? Burned up their planned reserves fighting 100 + knots?

Or .. piss-poor dispatch planning. But I would have dropped into another up-track European airport for fuel had I seen the destination fuel prog going below my personal minimums.

A couple years ago coming into SFO from London in a BA 747-400, we were over the runway, about to touch down, when the pilot went full throttle and steeply climbed and banked up and out of there. It was a disconcerting feeling, knowing that something was decidedly amiss. The pilot didn't really explain it, but it has to be an incursion, right? What if we had been too low on fuel. Yikes.

And it should be treated as such. I always told my first officers that I would never question their decision to "go-around," whether they were flying or they called it while I was flying.

It just kind of freaked me out.

Happens now and then. You had plenty of fuel. Airplanes have to be dispatched with more fuel than they are expected to need -- at a minimum, what's called "reserve" fuel (45 minutes' worth), and usually more than that, for example: alternate fuel if the weather's bad and you might have to divert to another airport; contingency fuel for other delays (like holding) or possible added weight. Pilots are always watching their estimated fuel on arrival and they will divert if necessary long before they get so low they can't even do a go-around.

That's why this BA accident is so baffling.

But not at first. At first I just thought WTF???!!!

I'm not nervous nelly in airplanes, but airliners are such routine procdures, it kind of messes with your head when something like that happens.

That holding pattern over PVD inbound to a snowy KBOS brings challenges. How long can I hold? How is my alternate (KBDL)? Is everybody diverting to KBDL? The Europe in-bounds to JFK? They love KBDL as an alternate. JFK is down to 1/4 mile in blowing snow. Then maybe I should divert to KALB. Gate space. But KALB is CAT-1. KSYR is still open. We are legal for KSYR with KBUF as an alternate. DO IT!

wasn't good enough to fly for an airline...I never had to deal with a chief pilot (it was always me) or more than a handful of assholes in the back. :D :rofl:

Sometimes I'm glad I'm just a gnome in the training department...

as a Gulfstream pilot out of Los Angeles, because for some reason ATC will sometimes have the private jets climb very quickly and burn a lot of fuel (I'm sure it's just to keep the lanes clear for the airlines). Normally not that big a deal--except for the runs to Hawaii.

Depends on the model. The Speys and Tays sucked fuel. The G-V is less thirsty.

I'll have to pass that one on to him. He also flies a falcon jet, i'll have to ask him about this difference.

What are the Speys and Tays? Is that like the -II's and III's or something?

O-Tay?

for spacing or other reasons, partly because they know we're more willing to do it (it's not unsafe but it would frighten some airline passengers) and/or more actually -able- to! But a fast climb burns LESS fuel, not more...the ideal situation is to get high as quickly as possible. There are no "airline lanes", by the way.

It has caused him some consternation on flights to hawaii in particular, and I assumed it was because it was of the faster climb rate, as that's how I remember it, but in any case, something about the way ATC 'vectored' him out created some fuel issues for him. I know there aren't "airline lanes" really. What I was tryinig to convey the idea you suggested, having the private jets climb out faster to free up more space. All of my aviation knowledge is second-hand, as you can see.

There's not typically much if any radar vectoring on flights outbound west from California. Sometimes filing for a higher than "normal" altitude will cause that...

I'll have to ask him to recount what that's all about since apparently my memory of it is faulty.

The captain and crew are professionals.

I've never been on a 777...have they gotten to the famous point on PA announcements, "Greetings, Ladies and Gentlemen, this airplane is totally controlled by computer, there are no pilots. Nothing can possibly go wrong
go wrong
go wrong
go wrong
go wrong..."


:evilgrin:

Can't fail, they say. Never fails, they say. Well .. I say.

Reminds me of ETOPS, the long-haul over-water requirements for 2-motored jets (767, 777, etc). ETOPS. Engines Turn Or People Swim.

;-)

who also did a heck of a job controlling the crash. And I know what the dispatch requirements are for fuel (and there are additional requirements for international flights, especially ETOPS); I just can't imagine that the Brits are any less strict about that than we are. If the crew KNEW they were running low they certainly would have declared min fuel and diverted. I'm expecting to find out it was either a fuel leak that was undetected (like the A330 Azores incident) or some really strange autothrust malfunction.

after running out of fuel...they didn't IIRC properly 'declare' the 'emergency'...I can't recall the details, do you remember this one?

They were holding in crappy weather, running low on fuel but never declared an emergency, probably because of language problems. http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X22401&key=1

for the link...I couldn't remember the details.

I was on a long final for runway 04 at KLGA. It was so fucking rough I could barely read the instrument panel. We were getting the shit kicked out of us.

NY Approach said to us: "Look over just to your left front .. on the upper shore of Long Island. Do you see anything? Any fires? We have a 707 down there."

But of course there was no fire. That B-707 was bone-dry. That crew took a go-around and never fully communicated their critical fuel situation.

Good find.