By: Ren Frew - 27th March 2004 at 11:35
The engineers have traced the fault to the air-con unit.
By: Wrenchbender - 27th March 2004 at 05:16
In general the 777 is super reliable. Especially the RR powered ones.
the GE engines are prone to problems. so much so most airlines are switching to RRs
UA are the only operator (that I know of) of P&W powered 777s and from what I’m told they have endless problems too.
Its the engines, not the aircraft Mark
RR engines are the pigs. United is not having trouble with their engines! They are running out of engines due to time. They have engines stripped off everything in the desert and everything in maintenance to keep the fleet going because they are bankrupt and don’t want to spend the cash to make the books look better so they can get the goverment loan! Don’t get me going on RR! I still remember the RB-211. I can not go into details but Airbus said that P&W was their best engine supplyer!
By: greekdude1 - 27th March 2004 at 03:09
Originally posted by Mark L
Just found out it was indeed an RR powered one! :rolleyes:
:p
By: EAL_KING - 27th March 2004 at 01:24
concorde 777 747 a340-600 can all land their the 777 and 747 are regulars as cwl is their maintanance base
By: Mark L - 27th March 2004 at 00:17
Just found out it was indeed an RR powered one! :rolleyes:
By: Bmused55 - 26th March 2004 at 23:44
The UA info was circumstancial, and I made no claim it was a certainty. Just gathered from a few tech friends.
As for the GE engie issues, BA have made it known they didn’t and still don’t like them due to reliablilty issues. That is why they changed all outstanding 777 orders (at the time) to the RR engine. To quote a tech friend of mine at ba “We got lousy engines from GE and changed to RR because of that.”
Also, I stated its was “Probably” a GE engined aircraft. I did not say it was.
I’m fully aware of the windscreen heating element shorting on the early 777 models.
By: greekdude1 - 26th March 2004 at 23:35
Originally posted by Bmused55
Its the engines, not the aircraft Mark
Both of you are overgeneralizing. How can you automatically assume that it is the GE engine? If it is, then so be it. But what if it’s RR powered? There goes your theory out the window. Why do you never here about CO’s, or Lauda’s, or China Eastern’s 777’s that are all GE powered, have incidents like the aforementioned one? If any type of airliner has to make an emergency landing for any reason, you can’t go blaming the engine manufacturer. Come on now! It’s just a feak occurrence.
P.S. JAL, ANA, and KE’s 777’s are also P&W powered. Lastly, how substancial is the rumor that United has ‘endless problems’ with their P&W powered 777’s?
By: Airline owner - 26th March 2004 at 23:22
Wow i would just kill to have been at CWL because the largest plane i saw when i went was a A321
By: Ren Frew - 26th March 2004 at 20:30
Wasn’t the common fault with the 777’s creating smoke in the cockpit down to an issue with the windscreen glass heating system ?
By: wysiwyg - 26th March 2004 at 20:26
The Swissair MD11 crash has made us all rightly sh1t scared of smoke on board. Top marks to the crew.
By: Ren Frew - 26th March 2004 at 20:20
Yes, the smoke in cockpit 777 emergency is becoming quite a common occurence. There’s been two through GLA recently.
By: Bmused55 - 26th March 2004 at 18:27
Originally posted by Mark L
As BMused said, the BA 777s, especially the GE ones have had all sorts of problems recently. I think they are worse than ATPs in terms of reliability :rolleyes:
In general the 777 is super reliable. Especially the RR powered ones.
the GE engines are prone to problems. so much so most airlines are switching to RRs
UA are the only operator (that I know of) of P&W powered 777s and from what I’m told they have endless problems too.
Its the engines, not the aircraft Mark
By: Arabella-Cox - 26th March 2004 at 18:25
What is the biggest plane cardiff can handle?
p.s my 200th post! 😀 😀 :p :p 😉 😉 🙂 🙂 😎 😎
By: Mark L - 26th March 2004 at 18:22
As BMused said, the BA 777s, especially the GE ones have had all sorts of problems recently. I think they are worse than ATPs in terms of reliability :rolleyes:
By: brenmcc1 - 26th March 2004 at 18:11
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3573083.stm
The Boeing 777 was reported to have smoke in its cockpit prior to the landing. British Airways flight from Heathrow to Toronto had 274 passengers and 16 crew on board. Vehicles from the emergency service surrounded the plane when it landed on Friday afternoon, but no-one was taken to hospital. South Wales Fire Service said they sent seven appliances to the airport, including four fire engines, a hydraulic platform, a rescue tender and a foam tender. The call was received at 1700 GMT. A spokeswoman said the plane stopped safely outside the maintenance depot after landing. No flights are expected to be delayed as a result of the emergency.
By: Bmused55 - 26th March 2004 at 18:10
Probably a GE engines 777
The GE engines seem prone to this with AA, BA and others all reporting this kind of trouble. hence why Ba changed the rest of their 777 orders to RR engines
By: Jeanske_SN - 26th March 2004 at 18:06
hmm, does buing give a 5 year guarantee on the aircraft, or the engine manufacturer? 😀
What do you mean with “being common on the 777?”
By: brenmcc1 - 26th March 2004 at 18:04
Ba 777 LHR – Torronto, all crew an passengers safe. Crew reported smoke in cabin and requested emegencie landing at cardiff. Landed just before 5:30. Technical Fault.
By: Mark L - 26th March 2004 at 18:01
Nothing too uncommon, in fact the fact it went to Cardiff means it was probably an technical problem (Increasingly common on the 777s these days) as BA have a big maintenance base there.
By: brenmcc1 - 26th March 2004 at 17:59
hope it werent a hijack atempt
Sign In
March 26, 2004 at 5:50 pm