trousers Posted 29 December, 2014 Share Posted 29 December, 2014 (edited) Breaking news.... http://news.sky.com/story/1399293/landing-gear-fault-on-virgin-plane-circling-uk Live flight tracking: http://www.flightradar24.com/VIR43E/526ac78 Edited 29 December, 2014 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 December, 2014 Author Share Posted 29 December, 2014 Just landed OK. At ease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essruu Posted 29 December, 2014 Share Posted 29 December, 2014 So the only thing that those who thought they were heading to Vegas will get to gamble on any time soon, is whether they'll live or die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 29 December, 2014 Share Posted 29 December, 2014 West Stand AKA Eric on BBC News now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 29 December, 2014 Share Posted 29 December, 2014 BBC got the full landing... pretty standard, albeit a slight bounce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 29 December, 2014 Share Posted 29 December, 2014 I ve had emergency landing with engine fire over Boston. Eerie as we came down in total silence, nobody muttered a word until we came to a halt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-scooby Posted 29 December, 2014 Share Posted 29 December, 2014 My son is on a flight to Barcelona delayed a while, sat waiting losing valuable drinking time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 29 December, 2014 Share Posted 29 December, 2014 I've flown on that plane (G-VROM) on that route. I also survived. I've nothing else to add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 29 December, 2014 Share Posted 29 December, 2014 BBC got the full landing... pretty standard, albeit a slight bounce. That and his right outboard landing gear isn't down. I was out in Crawley and saw this aircraft making a low approach and go around. I thought it was odd that he hadn't retracted his landing gear, didn't realise it was that serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LVSaint Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 I know a captain who sometimes flies that route. I'll see if it's him and report back with any geeky technical stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rooney Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Saw it above my house in West Dorset yesterday as I took the dogs for a walk. I thought it strange that a 4 engine plane was so low and thought it would turn to Exeter.It then carried on Northwards and I thought then it was due for Bristol. I could see intermittent vapour trails and I guess this was the fuel jettison. I was quite shocked to read Trousers post when I logged onto this site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Boy Saint Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Very impressive landing, be interesting to know how much of that was computer aided and how much was pure pilot and co pilot ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Very impressive landing, be interesting to know how much of that was computer aided and how much was pure pilot and co pilot ability. None of it was computer aided, it would have been manually flown. To be honest it wouldn't have been any different to a normal landing except after landing he would have given it max aileron to the left and full nose up. It was a pretty hard landing to be honest. You can't blame the pilot really given the pressure but he would probably have liked a smoother touchdown that that. That's not a criticism, the crew did a good job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 None of it was computer aided, it would have been manually flown. To be honest it wouldn't have been any different to a normal landing except after landing he would have given it max aileron to the left and full nose up. It was a pretty hard landing to be honest. You can't blame the pilot really given the pressure but he would probably have liked a smoother touchdown that that. That's not a criticism, the crew did a good job. Why full nose up? Shirley that would increase the loading on the main gear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Why full nose up? Shirley that would increase the loading on the main gear? It wouldn't make a lot of difference but the engines are in front of the main gear. If you think of the gear as a pivot, then pushing down behind it would lift everything in front. Once the plane starts to decelerate the elevator becomes less effective, so it wouldn't really matter. However if the engines were going to hit the ground, you might be able to delay it until you are 5 or 10 knots slower. You are right, it will create more down force on the gear but they should be able to take that even with one missing. This isn't official Boeing, it's just what I would have done. Looking at the video again, it appears this pilot might have done the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huffton Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 None of it was computer aided, it would have been manually flown. To be honest it wouldn't have been any different to a normal landing except after landing he would have given it max aileron to the left and full nose up. It was a pretty hard landing to be honest. You can't blame the pilot really given the pressure but he would probably have liked a smoother touchdown that that. That's not a criticism, the crew did a good job. There is talk of a hydraulic failure which is what made it turn back in the first place, and this could have affected elevator control, hence the heavy landing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 There is talk of a hydraulic failure which is what made it turn back in the first place, and this could have affected elevator control, hence the heavy landing. Possible but all commercial aircraft are fitted with a manual gear release for use in the event hydraulics are lost. Basically the locking mechanisms are released and the gear falls down through gravity. If this, combined with a few high g-force turns didn't force the gear down I'd be inclined to think it was a specific gear problem. Or a combination of both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huffton Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Possible but all commercial aircraft are fitted with a manual gear release for use in the event hydraulics are lost. Basically the locking mechanisms are released and the gear falls down through gravity. If this, combined with a few high g-force turns didn't force the gear down I'd be inclined to think it was a specific gear problem. Or a combination of both. Can't understand why a gear problem would have made them turn back so far into the flight though. If it hadn't locked away surely they would have known long before crossing the devon coast, and they wouldn't have known it wouldn't extend until they got to the other end. Looking at flight radar, it turned back, made an approach, then aborted and flew off over the channel for a bit. My guess id they only found out about the gear when they made the first approach, then went and tried to sort it out/burn a load more fuel off before coming back with just the 3 sets. Whatever, good job all round! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Can't understand why a gear problem would have made them turn back so far into the flight though. If it hadn't locked away surely they would have known long before crossing the devon coast, and they wouldn't have known it wouldn't extend until they got to the other end. Looking at flight radar, it turned back, made an approach, then aborted and flew off over the channel for a bit. My guess id they only found out about the gear when they made the first approach, then went and tried to sort it out/burn a load more fuel off before coming back with just the 3 sets. Whatever, good job all round! Was the first approach before then heading south to the coast (presumably to dump a load of fuel) not just a case of getting in the vicinity of the airport where engineers would be able to have a half-decent view of what the problem was from the ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 It is likely that they continued the flight as normal whilst carrying out their check lists. Afterall they needed to dump fuel anyway if they wanted to return, might as well continue towards Vegas then they still have fuel to get there if they rectify the problem. Steve is right, I would say both approaches would be done to try and get visual information from the ground. It doesn't need to be an engineer but any ground ops vehicle with a decent view should be able to tell if the gear is down. It could after all have been a faulty indication and the gear itself could have been working fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huffton Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Lighthouse am I right in thinking you are a pilot yourself? I'm not sure of the maths but looking at FR they made it up to 32000 before coming back. If they had a gear unlocked situation what would likely be their safe airspeed, assuming they may try to cycle the gear, or if the door isn't shut properly. Could they get that high at that speed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 I am. The speed restriction on the landing gear is surprisingly high and they could quite conceivably have made it up to cruise altitude at a reasonable speed. Basically flying is done being indicated airspeed (IAS) which isn't actually your speed, just a measurement of pressure. The pitot probes are just measuring the amount of air moving past. At higher altitudes the air is thinner, so you need to fly faster to get the same IAS. At cruise altitudes a 737 will typically be doing 450 knots ground speed (corrected for wind) but will only have 250 knots of 'pressure' if that makes sense. The 747 is a fair bit quicker but the same principle still applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-scooby Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=23f_1419943519 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Im fairly tall and when sat in economy, due to lack off space, Im pretty sure the brace position they tell you to adopt (ie leaning forward with your head rammed against the seat in front with your hands on top of your head) would result in pretty severe neck damage if there was a real sudden stop from speed. Much better to put your forearms on the seat in front and rest your head in them imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 30 December, 2014 Share Posted 30 December, 2014 Virgin do have previous with this. I'm afraid it was filmed with a toaster. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NprTbTVl1Uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now