dark light

  • EGBB

BHX Emergency Landing

Some pictures taken this morning at BHX of the TNT 737

http://www.airteamimages.com/30536.html

http://www.airteamimages.com/30535.html

Cheers,

Derek

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,766

Send private message

By: philgatwick05 - 17th June 2006 at 19:42

What was the initial reason for diversion in this incident?

Fog at Stansted seems to be the generally accepted version.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

58

Send private message

By: jasop - 17th June 2006 at 19:04

Surely that’s a good thing jasop. Must have been a nightmare for the ground staff at BHX today

Yep seems your right, was back in fri morning and still suffering the knock on effects.

Talking to the lads n lasses they had a very hard time, lots of offloaded angry passengers (one swearing and demanding to know why there wasnt a second runway :confused: ) and were doing turn arounds all night

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

790

Send private message

By: wozza - 16th June 2006 at 13:45

What was the initial reason for diversion in this incident?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,877

Send private message

By: Skymonster - 16th June 2006 at 13:43

Most logical explanation, based on all the heresay here and elsewhere, seems to me to be:

* TNT Liege-Stansted-Edinburgh elects to diver to EMA based on low vis (or reduced runway length, depending on who you believe) at Stansted, given that EMA is a TNT station

* EMA also low vis, but during an autopilot coupled approach at very low level the autopilot disengaged, resulting in a touchdown on the grass at EMA during which the right main gear was ripped off and damaged the flaps, followed by a pilot initiated go-around (this sounds like the most plausible explanation of the EMA part of the story to me, given that I find it hard to believe any crew would go that far below MDA without the runway in sight, or that the systems on the a/c would be that far off)

* Due to either (a) continued low vis at EMA and the previous problem and that BHX was CAVOK, or (b) concern about state runway at EMA due to previous go around and potential damage, crew elect to divert again to BHX, where they land without a right main gear resulting in the now familiar to most runway blockage.

Andy

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

137

Send private message

By: Matt K - 15th June 2006 at 23:39

Surely that’s a good thing jasop. Must have been a nightmare for the ground staff at BHX today.

1L.

Yes it was a nightmare for us!! Working on check-in! (working for Servisair).Horrible atmosphere and all the moaning!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

137

Send private message

By: Matt K - 15th June 2006 at 23:38

Air India diverted to LHR,
Emirates diverted to EMA,
Continental diverted to MAN.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

671

Send private message

By: Moondance - 15th June 2006 at 23:10

Can anyone answer why they used BHX?

No…..however…….overnight work at STN means approach aids/lighting significantly downgraded, high probability of diversion if fog about at dawn. LTN is the obvious alternate for STN, but this is closed overnight due runway work. That would make BHX/EMA the favourite alternates for STN.

Look at the speculation on pprune (yes I know we shouldn’t really)…but allegedly an unsuccessful attempt at autoland in fog at EMA, allegedly causing damage to the aircraft. BHX CAVOK and 35 miles away, know where I would have gone at that stage.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,009

Send private message

By: OneLeft - 15th June 2006 at 21:58

I work for swissport at bhx, trust all the excitement to happen on my day off

Surely that’s a good thing jasop. Must have been a nightmare for the ground staff at BHX today.

1L.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

419

Send private message

By: topjet330 - 15th June 2006 at 21:02

First choice sent a B767 down earlier to operate the SSH flight

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,492

Send private message

By: lukeylad - 15th June 2006 at 20:51

Well mate the thing we have to remeber is some people think that because stanstead is the UK’s hazard airport (hijacklings, bomb alerts etc) that it should have gone there, but she got turned away from EMA so really brum was the nearest option and no one can predict whats going to happen to the aircraft when it lands, for all we know it could have just taxied in no problem.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

383

Send private message

By: Jamie-Southend - 15th June 2006 at 20:41

Can anyone answer why they used BHX? I have just seen the BBC Local news for the East, and they are going on about 100`s of passengers delayed why th R/W is blocked. As it was a TNT flight with no PAX, and it must have been a guaranteed R/W closure once down, why pick a busy Intl airport?

Years ago when something like this happened inbound to any of the South East airports, Manston was always used for these sort of diversions. I know Manston is probably no longer suitable but what about other places, with much less knock on disruption?

Anyone know?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,608

Send private message

By: Future Pilot - 15th June 2006 at 18:26

Just watched a report on BBC News, some amateur video footage from another pilot in another a/c of the aircraft touching down, the aircraft is parked at the end of 15 according to the report.

Don’t know if it’s still there….

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

485

Send private message

By: jethro15 - 15th June 2006 at 15:56

Apparently, the runway is now clear

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 15th June 2006 at 15:40

There is a rumour that a landing was attempted at EMA and the undercarriage problem that the crew became aware of was that a large piece of gear was left there.

I believe this is from Pprune so make of it what you will.

Moggy

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

790

Send private message

By: wozza - 15th June 2006 at 15:31

Seems like brums going to be disrupted for most of the day now. She aint going to be moved till later this evening.

Thanks for that – didn’t know that already

Also the Air India 777 is either at Ringway or on it’s way.

Its diverted to LHR as far as I know

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

562

Send private message

By: wilag - 15th June 2006 at 14:21

Also the Air India 777 is either at Ringway or on it’s way.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

58

Send private message

By: jasop - 15th June 2006 at 14:19

I work for swissport at bhx, trust all the excitement to happen on my day off 🙁

Glad to hear the crew are ok 🙂

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,492

Send private message

By: lukeylad - 15th June 2006 at 13:41

Seems like brums going to be disrupted for most of the day now. She aint going to be moved till later this evening.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,946

Send private message

By: RIPConcorde - 15th June 2006 at 13:37

Well I guess this guy won’t be day stopping at EDI today then!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,492

Send private message

By: lukeylad - 15th June 2006 at 11:33

Ouch that looks painfull!

1 2
Sign in to post a reply