British manners

They are not concerned about other aircraft, they are trying to illicit as much information as possible about their own emergency. For example bits of fan blades or bird remains on the runway then you must suspect engine severe damage. It also lets them know if the same runway is available for a return landing.

@@nothinglessness It was for both. I bet you spend your entire life looking to disagree with and contradict people.

⁠@@Jason.King.at.your.service hmmm nope but 20 years as an airline pilot gives me a reasonably comprehensive insight into the thought processes following a catastrophic event. Standard protocol will be to close the runway immediately pending runway inspection so no, they are really not concerned with other aircraft. If stating FACTS based on 2 decades of experience that means I spent my entire life disagreeing with and contradict people then ok.

Even worried about possible debris on the runway. Wow.

@@livelyupmyself1 - Yep, remember the Concorde was killed that way

True

Ok. KZfaq is a social platform whereby we watch videos and then on watching said videos we move on to the comments section and read one another’s thoughts and opinions and on the basis of that we then contribute our own thoughts or in my case I actually responded to what was your own response to William Haynes personal opinion. Now whether you agree with my interpretation of what you said is completely irrelevant but you actually showed yourself to be an arrogant prick with a superiority complex who also seems to be suffering from an acute case of keyboard cojones because I seriously doubt whether you would actually speak to somebody’s face in that manner. I wouldn’t mind betting that William Haynes probably shares my view because you responded to him like a complete prick as well. And by the way I am actually a retired pilot turned flight dispatcher for a major World Airline and I know a hell of a lot about the aviation industry. One more thing keyboard tough guy, be mindful that this is a social platform where we are entitled to leave our thoughts and opinions without having jumped up little cretins like yourself behaving like a stroppy teenager who’s just discovered masturbating.

Show this video in pilot training imo

I especially like when the pilot responded "That's lovely." I about lost it. I love how the British speak.

🇬🇧🇬🇧👍

Yes this was top class all around

Hey 👋 John ❤️

@@BillGreenAZ ATC - How many pounds of fuel? 5400 pounds? PILOT: 52,000 kilos Captain to first officer (inaudible) - Those Americans and their apothecary system! Lol!

The famous Gimli Glider incident in the 1980s I believe. Must have been terrifying but iirc they did indeed restore thrust from three of the four engines and landed safely.

@@rich_edwards79 Gimly glider was the air Canada that ran out of fuel. The one he’s talking about is the flight that went through volcanic ash from an Indonesian volcano and all 4 engines quit. They managed to relight them after they cooled off

@@rich_edwards79 "Gimli Glider" was a 767 (2 engines). The BA (Speedbird 9) was a 747 (4 engines). You're muddling two separate incidents together.

@@hsw268 Crew and passengers from flight 9 formed a group to keep in touch; it was known as the Galunggung Gliding Club (Mount Galungung was the volcano which emitted the ash).

@@hb1338 I believe they had a special commemorative tie/scarf made up for all concerned.

Agreed, the pilot was concerned about others right up til the end. That’s real service to others rather than to self.

Theres something very stotic about British pilots. No shouting,hysterics etc just calm.

@@5thdimension625 I was especially impressed by the pilot's concern that there might be debris on the runway! 👍👍

@@jamesrau100 exactly!

Stiff upper lips you know... Well done by the pilots, all by the book.

Not that it's a competition but it reminds me of other British Commonwealth pilots, such as Qantas and Air New Zealand. Both nations have fantastic records.

Being Italian me to I trust English driver’s aircraft driver should say over and out….

@@jojoe469 maxi stunti

Right turn Clyde! (or you don't get your gaaawd damn Orio Cookies!)

agreed..but what was wrong with the engine???

@@wokewokerman5280 it was suffering from compression surge. It's when the airflow through the engine becomes disrupted severely, so the engine sputters, stalls and tries to relight itself. A really simplistic analogy would be like a car backfiring. If it's not taken care of immediately, the plane could catch on fire. I'm not 100% on the mechanics of it. I do know that it has the potential to become extremely dangerous. The air disruptions can be caused by a number of things- bird strike, FOD on the runway, ice....pretty much anything.

Someone is going to attack you for saying it was a happy ending. How dare you spoil some people’ s enjoyment of gore.

@@ecclestonsangel ...but what caused that engine to stall...mech failure, poor maintenance, fuel issue - root cause...etc...I think we all got the text about the engine stall???????

@@EtopEtim lolol! Thanks for making me laugh. I really needed that!

Captain Eric Moody, also in a BA 747 did the same when all the engines got blocked with volcanic ash "Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We have a small problem. All four engines have stopped. We are doing our damnedest to get them going again. I trust you are not in too much distress." Nobody does understatement like the Brits!

@@GemmaLB Ah yes, the Moody glider... Another classic.

Because of the logo of BA’s predecessor airlines, Imperial Airways, in 1932

"Auto landing banned". You have been reading the wrong comics. Under JAR regulations, all European pilots must perform in every month a certain number of manual and instrument landings.

Good genes

Lol Autolands are not banned at BA and are very much required under certain weather conditions.

@@hb1338 not quite. Autolands are only required when visibility is below limits for a manual landing.

BA? boat anchor?

@@K1OIK BA is the IATA abbreviation code for British Airways

@@sidrekhi IATA?

@@K1OIK The International Air Transport Association. It's the largest trade group of airlines. Also, British Airways staff call the airline BA internally too. I don't know too much more about the IATA but you might want to read up on the IATA and ICAO, a similar organization.

Well they said May-day rather than Pan-pan, since a B-747 can fly on three engines with no problem, and they confused pounds with kilograms for their maximum landing weight, but other than that, perfect response, well done.

@@raylopez99 sure thing KZfaq pilot

@@gabriel.hongkong Just reading comprehension bro. Not so hard to do, try it sometime.

@@raylopez99 England, along with Oz and most of the world use metric measurements,

@@hswforme I know. The pilots replied with imperial units and the air traffic controller had to correct him by mentioning metric. This goes to the issue of maximum allowed landing weight to prevent the plane tires from blowing out.

Absolutely professional and calm. However I was surprised they declared a Mayday immediately; the aircraft is certified to fly on 3 engines, they have full control and are continuing to climb. There's no immediate threat to the safety of the aircraft. Would a PanPan not be more appropriate?

I got the impression the pilots thought there would be debris and that could have caused a more serious situation than an engine surging.

@@derektp When the emergency occurs during take-off, you're low, slow, and in a congested airspace. In those circumstances, a mayday call is appropriate, as the pilots, at that point in time, didn't KNOW the rest of the plane was healthy. A PanPan would've been appropriate above 5,00ft, but at take-off? That's a Mayday...

@@derektp A Mayday was exactly the right call. They're low, should anything else go wrong then they're down quickly. Up above 20,000 then yes a pan-pan. Also until they know how good the ATC are, they want to make sure they are a priority. Hence why when they got settled down, and climbed they cancelled the mayday.

So do I

British crew, goes without saying :)

Yes great communication

You should see the lufthansa 747 8 one

@@kfl16 I did see that episode as well. That crew was also outstanding and did a great job 😁👍

I never did but I pretended to do so.

Amazing Airmanship!

I love the U.K. and hope to be able to actually fly there one day!!

Their communication with cabin crew is equally good! BA's CRM is excellent. (Ex BA crew here).

My dad was an airline captain for about 45 years and he worked for BA. I flew quite a few flights with him (and even got to sit in the cockpit a few times)and the staff always came across as very professional- and I don't just mean my dad lol.

@@lindatannock that’s good to hear. I’ve definitely enjoyed flying with BA 😊

As emergencies go, this was very minor, the 747 can take off safely with three engines, so this fact certainly made the Pilots and ATC realise this was not a life or death situation. Years ago I had a very similar situation with South African Airways, my employer. Enroute to Joburg, climbing out of Las Palmas, routine fuel dump, and return to the airport. More of a annoyance than anything else.

@@kennethwarburton177 You can get a late 747 off the ground with just one engine - I've seen it done, though it was in a simulator.

This is a very well produced video .

👋

@Karl Wentzel….When a Rolls Royce backfires, everyone knows it☺️

Following a May-day, landings are restricted and take offs cease in case the stricken aircraft is unable to follow its correct flight path or altitude. Downgrading and good communications are therefore vital for the safety of everyone involved. Deliberate use of improper emergency call signs is a criminal offence most Western countries and the airline can face heavy fines. But likewise, failure to report a fault is also an offence. Following the rules, is why air travel is so safe these days.

Well, they are British.

@@MrYfrank14 Racist

Manners

It's a cost thing. Pilot training is wildly expensive, so those that are lucky enough to get it tend to take it very seriously, and of those, it's usually only the highly professional ones get hired by BA. Oh and also we're British, we don't like to get overly excited when a simple nod and "well, let's crack on" will do

Due to their regular flights, most BA pilots get to know the ATC staff at their destination airports fairly well.

I'm not a pilot but was this really a mayday-worthy emergency? 4 engine 747 losing 1 engine? They are capable of flying on 2 aren't they? After all, they were able to execute a normal takeoff on essentially 3. Not even any mention of the right wing dipping. This is not criticism, it's praise for the 747!

@@bldn10 got you hahaha now worries. I've seen pilots losing one engine and not declare and emergency. But when you lose an engine you don't exactly know the reason. So it might be something that affect more systems or the rest of the engines....that's the reason of the may day call i believe, not knowing anything else beyond the loss of one engine. Specially when there were bangs and booms and maybe debris...just after take off, max fuel, max pax....many things going on

@@bldn10 A 747 losing an engine at 20,000ft is a pan call, but losing an engine when you're barely in the air, at low speed, in congested airspace is absolutely a mayday call. As the BA captain did, once you are stable and the situation is fully under control, you can consider downgrading the call, but ONLY when the entire cockpit is happy to do so. I'd rather my captain be overly cautious than overconfident. Overconfident pilots tend not to collect their pensions

Probably drinking tea whilst dealing with the problem.

@@gazza9463 don't knock it :) Tea has seen us through two world wars, multiple recessions, disasters, terrible governments, a worldwide pandemic... without tea, our society would have likely collapsed many times over by now!

@@gazza9463 And smoking a pipe.

@@nmellor774 don't forget the cucumber sandwiches cut into triangles

@@David-ki6jq Bread is getting a tad pricy now, so we just dunk the cucumber in the tea and grumble quietly about the situation

Buck 👋

Training to become a commercial pilot costs a fucking fortune here, so those that are lucky enough to do tend to take it very seriously

NP, 747 is certified to fly on 3 engines. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_268#:~:text=British%20Airways%20Flight%20268%20was,after%20take%20off%20from%20LAX.

@@barryj7478 I figured as much. Just thought that was pretty cool it could fly that far with one engine inop

a one engine out on a four engine plane is just a minor inconvenience, thats all. The 747 was designed to fly on just 2 working engines if needed👍🇺🇲

@@tat2steven810 that’s pretty cool. Maybe one day I’ll be lucky enough to fly one. My father in law flew them all over the world for Evergreen cargo back on the 80’s and 90’s

It is not really an issue for the 747. The 747 is certified to fly on 3 engines. Reminds me of BA 268 which, in 2005, lost an engine on takeoff from LAX, circled, consulted the flight manual and ground team, and then made the command decision (based on fuel dumping costs and delayed flight fees) to continue across the US. When they reached the East Coast, they decided to continue on to London. They ended up landing in Manchester due to low fuel.

I was wondering if they flew the aircraft back to Cardiff on three engines?

@@rogerhargreaves2272 That's exactly what I thought!

@@zzrandy7110 I can’t believe that would be allowed.

+q

@@rogerhargreaves2272 It was allowed as a ferry flight with only flight deck crew.

Was thinking the same thing. If there is no engine fire, then why not just continue the flight. There are risks with dumping fuel, landing heavy. Plus of course the financial aspect, which is probably in the millions. Plus inconvenience. If it is safe to continue, why not?

Yeah, it was :/

@@bigbaddms Two probable reasons: 1) After the BA268 flight, the FAA and passenger lawyers all crawled up the butt of the pilots for making that decision. Of course, after a protracted battle where the CAA insisted the aircraft was NOT unworthy to fly, the pilots were found to have acted within the bounds of the 747 Flight Manual and the charges and fines were dropped. However, no one probably wants to risk that decision again lest people raise a fuss again. 2) When an engine explodes, one never knows for sure if there is any collateral damage. So they probably decided it was best not to risk it since the financial constraints in the 2005 incident were not pressing on them here.

@@BSGSV After the incident, there was a huge battle between FAA and CAA, which went on for a number of years. At one point, there were threats of banning each other's aircraft from foreign airspace. All very silly, especially because it detracted from the important question of whether such operational decisions were reasonable, as opposed to lawful.

@@hb1338 Yes! At the time, I believe there were severe EU penalties for a flight that was more than a few hours delayed. Between that and the fuel dump, BA 268 was looking at close to $300,000 if it didn't keep going. Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place.

Hey, an 'Imagine" comment!!

@@martinc.720 Wow, thanks for pointing that out. Don't know what we'd do without that comment.

Seen it been there .Spanish flight in a bone rattler...freaky as hell.

@@DarkFilmDirector Hey, a 'reaction' comment!!

Well i would be like BA Baracus from A-team at that moment :D

Well, the engine IS part of the plane.. And there WERE flames exploding/popping out the back of the engine.

Their fuel quantity indicator displays total fuel in kilograms. 747’s can be programmed to display either lbs or kg. It’s a customer (airline) option, not a personal choice by the pilots 😂.

I don't understand - grateful if you could explain. Thank you. 🙂

@@tomsdottir On the display screen in front of the pilots - it says “total fuel on board = 52.0 KGS x 1000”. When the airline buys the plane, they can choose to have it show “LBS x 1000” if the airline wants. These pilots could only report the information they had to ATC regarding their fuel on board, it wasn’t a choice to use pounds or kilograms.

@@ahmed_3956 Thank you: very clear and helpful explanation.

@@ahmed_3956 and the airline chose SI units because they were British, what I appreciated about the pilot is that he didn't even try to convert it to empirical units for the American air traffic controller, which was clearly what the controller wanted him to do. And it's kind of a stereotypical meme that Americans are too lazy to do unit conversion, and have absolutely no idea about SI units, hence the intended humour.

👋

No Tea on the flightdeck below 10,000ft!

Keep flying it is certainly coming!

It's all the tea they drink that makes them so. ☕️😊

No they're not. They're good pilots, but not the world's finest...😆

Before landing: "The plane is going to crash. I will die." After landing: "I have to spend the night at an airport hotel. I will die."

The captain told us "There is an issue with the landing gear, and I was instructed to go back to our departure airport". "You mean to land? Didn't you just say there was an issue with the landing gear?" Everything turned out fine. We boarded another aircraft and were on our way to our destination in no time.

I've been a passenger during an aborted take off. We had to wait in the terminal while the plane got fixed and witnessed it doing trial take off and landings in-between trips back to the maintenance hangar. Then we were given the all clear to reboard. Some choice words from some of the passengers followed.

Was on a commercial flight out of Dallas with my wife and toddler when we lost an engine. Entire plane started shaking with smoke in the cabin. Pilots returned back to Dallas. Passengers were instructed on emergency landing procedures. Everyone was instructed to bend over with head between legs. Very intense for everyone, but landing was perfect and the pilots were able to taxi to the gate.

When I was a lot younger, our 747 engine #2 was smoking, Pilot dumped the fuel and landed at the airport. Mom was worried, there were some passengers crying.

Mini-Air-Crash Investigation is a great channel for that kind of info. I don't know if he's done this incident or not.

Eye watering costs . Replacement aircraft flown over , costly repairs/ engine replacement in Cardiff, hotels and meals for all those passengers, all that wasted fuel etc

😀😀

I've often said their pilots are amongst the best in the industry.

@@Footy_Fan based on? Their maintenance is bad enough that their pilots need to save the day more than other airlines? Not saying they are bad, or even not great, but what’s the basis for “best”

@@qwerty112311 sorry, my friend. I was referring to their pilots, strictly. Such as Captain Moody's crew of Speedbird 9 en route to Australia from London, via Indonesia. Also, the Captain who was sucked out and the crew held onto him and landed the aircraft. There are quite a few examples of exemplary airmanship from BA pilots. I apologize if I worded my post poorly. I am usually a much better communicator than that.

@@Footy_Fan bot

@@sicooper4230 🤔

Michael

Actually, the actions of the crew and ATC have nothing to do with this type of aircraft in particular.

@@martinc.720 I know, but I just have this thing for the queen of the skies.

My father is very sick 💘my mom has no🌝 job i lyrics video edit But no one support😔 i hope you will see the message 😇.

Yes, another British Airways departing I think from San Francisco or Los Angeles, but it was not an hour into the flight. It was immediately after take off. After holding for a while in the are to troubleshoot and make a game plan with the airline Ops, they headed again to the destination crossing not only all continental US/Canada but all the Atlantic ocean, which for me is crazy. Why would any pilot want to or agree with crossing the Atlantic ocean with one engine inop? And at the end of the day, they had to divert and land about 1 hour short of their destination due to low fuel (the time spent in the hold to troubleshoot, the lower cruising altitude with 3 engines and, to a lesser degree, the added drag of having to keep the rudder deflected to compensate for thrust asymmetry, eroded the fuel situation more than they calculated).