Comments on: British Airways 777 Accident at Heathrow Linked to Delta Incident

By: 767 Captain

767 Captain — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 01:53:48 +0000

I still thinks French should stick to building Peugots and Citroens, and leave the plane making to Boeing.

By: Jim Daniels

Jim Daniels — Mon, 17 May 2010 13:17:49 +0000

I never did believe that ice was the cause of the BA 777 crash (the fuel was at 5 degrees C) and now the world has seen the presence and strength of Hydrocarbon hydrates in blocking the ‘funnel’/'dome’ in the BP blow-out off Louisiana I remind everybody out there that hydrates are (were) a more likely cause of the fuel system blockage.
It is important because systems to eliminate ice MAY not eliminate hydrates but if hydrates are prevented then ice cannot form.
Is there someone out there listening who has the capability of examining hydrates as a reason for the crash?

By: John

John — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 05:08:23 +0000

We are dealing with more than one engine. That says oil from each engine warms a fuel line. How can it be that both had the same blockage? I do not buy this as the cause. I am sticking with what i think the cause was. Like i said if i am right they are never going to admit to it.
How could the Delta restart if the lines were blocked? Did the same thing happen did the Delta pass over a radar beam and and restart when past it? This is true many cars parked near the empire state building in new york city are unable to restart until towed some blocks away.
What is going on is siginals from all the transmitters on the building jam some cars alarm system and will not allow the cars to start. If you do not know about this do a search so that you will see i am not a nut making this up.

By: CF

CF — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 02:40:38 +0000

Ali – Actually, the descent likely created the problem. The water that built up in the lines would have started to melt as the plane descended and the air warmed. It’s that melting that probably caused chunks of ice to shift and block the fuel flow, if momentarily.

By: Ali

Ali — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:53:56 +0000

It is interesting that the solution of flying lower after prolonged periods at height/lower temperatures did not help the BA flight – as they would have been on a steady and reasonably shallow descent to land.

By: Flüge Bangkok

Flüge Bangkok — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:04:03 +0000

It doesn’t matter for me, if it’s Rolls-Royce engine or not. As someone, who’s first flight was with an old Tupolev, I won’t complain about the minimal risk. They made it public, this means, they’re working on solving the problem. In Addition they know now what to do in case of an emergency. Enough for me to prove, that it’s save to fly with this planes. I’m looking forward to my next flight in the summer with a Boing, Rolls-Royce engine or not.

By: John

John — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:44:13 +0000

i won’t be felling comfortable if the airlines are flying with Rolls-Royce engines.

By: CF

CF — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 21:37:03 +0000

Flying Blue – This appears to be in response to the NTSB here in the US requiring Rolls to do a redesign (which should be done within one year). I will have a post on this on Monday.

By: Flying Blue

Flying Blue — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 21:17:19 +0000

John, matter of fact BBC today reported the news that there is this risk out there… why today? i don’t really know…
Why going public today, telling BA has 18 B777 with RR engines?
RR has decleared that there a need to redesign a component in the fuel department.. and won’t be ready before end of the year (or did they say one year?) well i was not paying too much attention on the delivery date but they clearly said that the fleet doesn’t need to be grounded.. is because they know? is because is not serious? is because grounding the planes gives a bad signal and aviation is seeing declining passengers?
How this matches with the initial declaration that a second episode is not a good sign and that the matter is now officially a problem that may reoccur anytime…
If somebody can tell me how this decisions are taken, because i started to get confused now…

By: John

John — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 03:57:29 +0000

Able to restart the Delta that is not the same thing as the BA were both engines would not come off just above idle. Both engines fed from the same fuel line and the same amount of restriction i doubt it. The Prime Minister was at the airport and signal jammers are used with motorcades to jam roadside bombs.
They had to come up with some kind of fix so this could be it.
If it was because of the jamming we will never be told that.
What i found strange is after it happened all the 777′s were not grounded that tells me they knew what it was from the start.