Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


How do you move a 200-tonne jet? Very, very carefully

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 21 January 2008
INCH by painstaking inch, the wreckage of a 200-tonne British Airways plane was last night moved from the spot where it came to rest after its dramatic crash-landing at Heathrow airport.
The Boeing 777 started its slow 500m journey from the end of the southern runway to the airline's engineering base at Hatton Cross yesterday afternoon.

BA038 crash-landed last Thursday after its engines failed – with all 136 passengers and 16 crew escaping from the flight from Beijing.

Yesterday, the BA aircraft recovery team placed the 209ft plane on to electronically controlled platforms positioned under its belly.

Specialist equipment for such scenarios arrived at Heathrow from Staffordshire-based company ALE yesterday morning.

Hydraulic jacks and airbags were used to position eight canvas strops under the hull.

These were attached to two specialist cranes each capable of lifting 150 tonnes. Once in position, the aircraft was jacked up inch by inch until it was at the correct height for the three platforms to be positioned. Each wheeled platform is capable of holding 80 tonnes.

To prepare for the move, the airline's expert recovery team has been working around the clock since the crash to stabilise the aircraft and prepare it for the move.

Speaking as the operation began yesterday, Bruce Hunter, the general manager of operational maintenance, said: "BA's specialist recovery team of 20 engineers flies round the world helping airlines move stranded aircraft.

"The team has painstakingly lifted the aircraft to prepare it for the move. The next stage will take several hours to complete as the team makes sure the aircraft is moved slowly and safely to its new location."

More than 50 short-haul and domestic flights at Heathrow were cancelled due to the move.

John Coward, the senior first officer on the flight, under the command of Captain Peter Burkill, averted disaster by landing the plane just within Heathrow's fence following the malfunction. The preliminary report from the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) into the incident – which left 18 of the 136 passengers needing treatment for a range of injuries, including one broken leg – is due to be published within 30 days.

Members of the AAIB have worked through the night to determine the cause of the fault.

An initial report released by the AAIB stated that all had gone normally with the flight until the aircraft was just two miles from landing and at a height of 600ft.

The early findings appeared to corroborate various claims that the plane suddenly lost power.

Mr Coward, who guided the aircraft in, said he feared everyone on board was going to die.

The 41-year-old said he became aware of a loss of power on board the plane on the final approach to the airport.

The father-of-three said: "When I came in to land, I thought, 'This is going to be a catastrophic crash. This is it'.

"Suddenly there was nothing from any of the engines, and the plane started to glide.

"I didn't think we'd clear the fence at first. As we landed I was bracing myself for an enormous thud.

"But instead of one thud, there was a series of thuds as it bounced along the grass."

Some disruption continued at the airport yesterday in the wake of the incident.

A spokeswoman for BAA, which runs Heathrow airport, said there had been 52 cancellations in total – 26 departures and 26 arrivals.

She added: "It's a knock-on effect from the incident.

"We have had a slight reduction in capacity because we do not have the (use of the] full length of the runway, but we do have to put this in context – 1,300 flights leave Heathrow every day."

'WHAT HAPPENED WOULD ENCOURAGE ME TO FLY BA AS IT SHOWS HOW GREAT THEIR PILOTS ARE'

PASSENGERS at Heathrow yesterday gave British Airways their vote of confidence by saying they would not hesitate to fly with them, despite facing more delays and cancellations.

Louise O'Neill, 23, a human resources officer who was boarding a BA flight to Johannesburg, said: "What happened on Thursday will encourage me to fly with BA because it is an example of how great their pilots are. I am looking to change my career and possibly become a pilot as well. I feel like I have a better understanding of how planes work and what the risks involved are. Pilots are trained for these events. If you think of cars on the road, people are not trained to deal with crashes. I have all the faith in the pilots."

Neil Milne, 38, an operations manager, faced a two-hour delay after his flight to Aberdeen was cancelled. He said: "I expected a delay. It's frustrating, but there is nothing you can do. If you fly with any regularity you know it's one of the safest ways to travel.

"If you are going to allow what happened on Thursday to stop you from flying, then you would not leave the house. It is something that can happen to any airline.

"I think what it says is that BA has excellent crews, as shown by the heroic co-pilot who glided the plane down."

Linda Magill, 58, a housewife on her way to Manchester, said: "I am confident about flying, despite what happened. It does not bother me. The odds of it happening again are so low it is not even worth thinking about."

A spokeswoman for BA said a tenth of short-haul flights had to be cancelled.

The full article contains 929 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 21 January 2008 12:01 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: British Airways
 
1

Kipling,

21/01/2008 00:24:28
And just think, given the machinations of those in the airport industry and their nodding men in government, all that pleasant countryside around Sipson is going to be swamped with these belly-flopping monstrosities, reducing substantially the odds of a tragic disaster occurring. The problem is that those who use Heathrow to fly in and out in and out in and out in and out in and out, don't ever get to see the area in the vicinity. There's a nature park, an ancient church, a number of little country lanes and rambling paths and more. All in the name of speeding up a journey by an hour or so for people who would undoubtedly protest if the proposed Heathrow development was in their back yard.
2

JamboG,

Florida 21/01/2008 01:16:19
Ive been wondering since this happened why the CO-pilot landed the plane?! Where was the captain exactly?!?!
3

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta, CA..captured from Mexico 1845 21/01/2008 06:40:45

JamboG,
Florida 21/01/2008 01:16:19
Ive been wondering since this happened why the CO-pilot landed the plane?! Where was the captain exactly?!?!

Sitting next to him DUDE
4

Kate,

Zurich 21/01/2008 08:00:14
#2 and #3, if you had read other reports and done your homework before asking such reactionary questions, you would know that the pilot and co-pilot swap duties throughout the flight and that in all probability they agreed to have the pilot do the take off and the co-pilot do the landing. This is standard practice in all airlines and in all aeroplanes with 2 pilots.
5

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 21/01/2008 10:17:11
The account of moving the plane reminds me of the things International Rescue used to do with the Thunderbirds.

#4: Quite right.
6

Thumbelina ,

London 21/01/2008 10:23:18
Yes, the area around Heathrow has some lovely spots - the majority of the area surrounding the airport is somewhat less than lovely and could only be improved by bulldozing it. Still, as most of the inhabitants rely on Heathrow for their livelihood, that's unlikely, so I guess it's the few remaining beautiful areas that will disappear under the new runway.

I use Heathrow a couple of times a week and I have to agree that it's just too big: whether you live under its flightpath or have to fight through gridlocked traffic to get there. I moved out of West London (and off the flightpath) because I was sick and tired of being woken at 4am in the morning by screaming jet engines. (There have always been night flights, they just classify them differently to avoid having their knuckles rapped).

Now I just have to get up at 4am to fight through appalling traffic and even more appalling security staff to make a 730 am flight.

There is another way....small, regional airports like Southampton have some pretty good routes, their flights tend to leave and arrive on time and getting to/through the airport is a dream in comparison to Heathrow.

Equally, you're less likely to meet rude and truculent airport staff, less likely to have possessions stolen from your bags by baggage handlers, and less likely to meet BAA employees writing about their desire to join Jihad on the back of your receipt.
7

Strict Ivan Jellicoe,

Renfrew 21/01/2008 10:47:05
If the aircraft has been moved to BA's own maintenance hangar pending further ivestigation, I'd be interested in knowing what steps the AAIB and the authority have taken to safegaurd the integrity of the investigation?
8

GP,

21/01/2008 16:36:39
Should not all of these aircaraft be grounded until the error or fault is found?
I expect to see human error as the end result thus ensuring Boeing, BA and the rest can continue without loss. Shame we don't have an independant investigation team.
9

Strict Ivan Jellicoe,

Renfrew 21/01/2008 19:08:59
GP, the AAIB is an independence investigation team, even independent from the CAA. I am concerned at what steps have been taken to secure the hangar from the BA staff who would normally use and have access to it.
It is not normal practice within the industry to ground a fleet of aircraft for investigation following an incident, unless there is immediate and overwhelming evidence revealing faulty hardware that poses a threat to safety and airworthiness. If the investigation does reveal faulty hardware that poses an immediate risk to airworthiness and safety, the manufacturer would then issue a mandatory service bulletin enforced endorsed by the CAA.
10

us observer,

California 21/01/2008 19:32:40
1. With such a catastrophic landing, that there was no fire almost profoundly indicts lack of fuel to the engines. (both)

2. In a previous life (30 years ago), I worked on my company's project debugging/delivering the flight director for the US Air Force KC-135. As a part of the debugging, we killed the power to the plane's radar altimeter. The flight director, sensing "we're on the ground", tried to kill the engines. Disengaged, problem averted.

Computers CAN be at the focus of these kind of failures. (I'm not a pilot, but I'm somewhat surprised that, two minutes to touch down, the plane was still 'flying by wire'. My tendency would be to take over at low altitudes. Little margin for error, chance for recovery, and all that.
11

Kipling,

22/01/2008 00:24:37
#6. The area immediately to the north and east are not 'isolated' spots. To the west and south it's a bit suburban. But already the destruction has begun. For example, the hotel complex just to the north east of the M4 roundabout. It used to be fields not long ago. There are some strange roads you can get lost down between the dual carriageway going north and the M4. You wouldn't have an idea you were in London in the Sipson area to the north, which is where they want to place the new terminal. That's why they want to place it there, it looks 'empty' to the mind of a greedy airport developer.

We'll be looking a Heathrow and the aeroplane culture in several decades much like we look at pictures of industrial Britain with smoke coming out of the myriad of factory chimneys. (And I suspect the same will go for beautifully lit cities.) Airplanes are very photogenic things, they look impressive in the air coming into land or taking off. But the destruction they wreak is equivalent to a doctor's hand covered in invisible infectious germs: looks helpful but brings death.
12

GP,

22/01/2008 12:49:54
9# independant?
you make me laugh at your naivety.
13

Kipling,

the DoomRay lone ranger 22/01/2008 19:10:50
And if they hadn't landed successfully, what would have been the conclusion. How many people would have seen a 'flashing light'? Maybe better to transmit black box activity as you're flying, or would this be too much data?

There was talk in the newspapers today of mobile phone signals possibly interfering with the computer communication systems. How true that this could happen, i don't know. But given that loss of power happened 2miles from base, will the investigation team be considering what lies in that area, any mobile signals coming from that area (2miles out from point zero).

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.