June 12, 2025, 14:23:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11899265
BBC reporting a statement from the survivor, "a load bang was heard just after take off and the aircraft crashed soon after".
Has there been any word about the state of the approach lights at the end of this runway?
Edit. Crossed post with Pampel. Looks like it was well clear of the lights.
Has there been any word about the state of the approach lights at the end of this runway?
Edit. Crossed post with Pampel. Looks like it was well clear of the lights.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): BBC
June 12, 2025, 15:05:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11899311
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Engine Failure (All)
June 12, 2025, 15:14:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11899323
Happy to be corrected.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Engine Failure (All) Engine Shutdown RAT (All)
June 12, 2025, 18:02:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11899550
As far as I know the flaps will stay where they are if hydraulic power is lost. There is an electrical over ride function as a back up but I doubt the crew would have used that as it's a guarded switch.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Hydraulic Failure (All) RAT (All) Switch Guards
June 12, 2025, 18:22:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11899571
Each engine has two identical Variable Frequency Starter Motor Generators.
They are a combined starter motor and generator.
More in this ancient thread here-
787 electrical system - variable frequency generators?
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Engine Failure (All) Generators/Alternators RAT (All) RAT (Deployment)
June 13, 2025, 23:16:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11900989
I have no knowledge about 787, but every landing gear system I\x92ve worked with did not sequence Left and Right MLG to retract and extend with each other. In fact it is typical for left and right side to move at slightly different speed due to different friction etc. Retraction assymmetry is probably not a clue to this mystery.
The 787 landing gear is operated by the centre hydraulic system's two electric pumps.
I have no idea why they have posted such nonsense.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Hydraulic Failure (All)
June 13, 2025, 23:20:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11900991
Yes, the RAT will deploy automatically in the event of a loss of both AC Busses, both engines or all hydraulics.
It can be deployed manually via a guarded push button switch on the overhead panel.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): RAT (All) RAT (Deployment) Switch Guards
June 13, 2025, 23:27:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11900996
Regarding flickering lights.
The 787 has, as far as I know, a unique electrical system. When a light is selected on, either by pressing a button, flicking a switch or a touch screen selection there is no direct link to the lights. All instructions go through computers and are controlled by software.
As a consequence lights are either off or on. A 'dicky' power supply as has been suggested by some will not cause the lights to flicker.
This is not a 737.
The 787 has, as far as I know, a unique electrical system. When a light is selected on, either by pressing a button, flicking a switch or a touch screen selection there is no direct link to the lights. All instructions go through computers and are controlled by software.
As a consequence lights are either off or on. A 'dicky' power supply as has been suggested by some will not cause the lights to flicker.
This is not a 737.
Subjects: None
June 13, 2025, 23:49:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11901007
Speaking as a B787 Captain..... There is so much rubbish and stupid suggestion being written here.
This aircraft was airborne for a grand total of 22 seconds, half of which was climbing to no more than 150' aal.
- No Flaps? Due to the setup of the ECL it is physically impossible to go down the runway without some sort of take-off flap set. The T/o config warning would have been singing it's head off. Despite assertions to the contrary I have seen no video clear enough to detect a lack of flaps.
- RAT out? Almost impossible, I have seen no quality footage that definitively witnesses the RAT being out. Those who think they car hear a RAT type noise might be listening to a motorcycle passing or similar. It takes a triple hydraulic failure or a double engine failure to trigger RAT deploment. They happily went through V1 without a hint of rejected take off so as they rotated the aircraft was serviceable. These are big engines, they take a long time to wind down when you shut them down. I have never tried it however engine failure detection takes 30s or for the aircraft to react and they were not even airborne that long.
- Flaps up instead of gear? The B787 flaps are slow both in and out. Given that the 'Positive rate' call is not made the second the wheels leave the ground, a mis-selection of flaps up would not cause any loss of lift for at least 20 seconds, by which time they had already crashed. I believe the gear remained down not because of mis-selection but because of a major distraction on rotate.
Discounting the impossible, two hypotheses remain:
1. Invalid derate set through incorrect cross-checking. Trundling down the runway takes very little power to reach Vr. It is only when you rotate that you create more drag and discover that you do not have sufficient thrust vs. drag to sustain a climb. Or....
2. Put 200' as the altitude target in the FCU. Immediate ALT capture and all the power comes off. PF is still hand flying trying to increase pitch but is already way behind the aircraft.
It could be after this that Boeing are forced to review the B787 practice of exploring the very edges of the performance envelope.
This aircraft was airborne for a grand total of 22 seconds, half of which was climbing to no more than 150' aal.
- No Flaps? Due to the setup of the ECL it is physically impossible to go down the runway without some sort of take-off flap set. The T/o config warning would have been singing it's head off. Despite assertions to the contrary I have seen no video clear enough to detect a lack of flaps.
- RAT out? Almost impossible, I have seen no quality footage that definitively witnesses the RAT being out. Those who think they car hear a RAT type noise might be listening to a motorcycle passing or similar. It takes a triple hydraulic failure or a double engine failure to trigger RAT deploment. They happily went through V1 without a hint of rejected take off so as they rotated the aircraft was serviceable. These are big engines, they take a long time to wind down when you shut them down. I have never tried it however engine failure detection takes 30s or for the aircraft to react and they were not even airborne that long.
- Flaps up instead of gear? The B787 flaps are slow both in and out. Given that the 'Positive rate' call is not made the second the wheels leave the ground, a mis-selection of flaps up would not cause any loss of lift for at least 20 seconds, by which time they had already crashed. I believe the gear remained down not because of mis-selection but because of a major distraction on rotate.
Discounting the impossible, two hypotheses remain:
1. Invalid derate set through incorrect cross-checking. Trundling down the runway takes very little power to reach Vr. It is only when you rotate that you create more drag and discover that you do not have sufficient thrust vs. drag to sustain a climb. Or....
2. Put 200' as the altitude target in the FCU. Immediate ALT capture and all the power comes off. PF is still hand flying trying to increase pitch but is already way behind the aircraft.
It could be after this that Boeing are forced to review the B787 practice of exploring the very edges of the performance envelope.
Even though these are big engines with plenty of inertia, when you select engine shut off they spool down very quickly if on load. IE, The generators, two per engine and hydraulic pumps, etc, being driven by the (relatively) small mass of the N2 rotor will drag the speed down very quickly, the gennies will trip offine in seconds, the pumps will quickly reduce flow and pressure.
As for what went wrong.
If the engines have stopped working there has to be a common failure mode, fuel is one but as has been said, no other aircraft has had a problem, as far as we know. FOD? It would have to be something major to shut down two GeNX engines and there would be debris all over the runway, we would know by now.
I have no idea if the RAT has deployed, I can't see it in the video and the noise could be something else.
We shall see.
There is compelling evidence that flaps are set correctly and not retracted inadvertently.
I await further evidence.
Edit to add. LAE 40 years, type rated on 737 to 787 with lots of others in between.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Dual Engine Failure Engine Failure (All) Engine Failure Detection Time Engine Shutdown GEnx (ALL) Generators/Alternators Hydraulic Failure (All) RAT (All) RAT (Deployment) V1
June 13, 2025, 23:59:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11901013
Unlikely, but possible.
This does add more credance to the complete power loss scenario.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): APU
June 14, 2025, 01:17:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11901057
Turin, your name appeared on a thread I was researching regarding generator control units, 787.
Do you recall a 787 made an emergency landing in Louisiana on a revenue flight Houston/Newark in 2012? Your Post referenced an abnormal that may lend credence to a major power loss in this wreck.
Never expected to see any surviving tail cone or Empennage structure. Quite a find
Forgive the intrusion sir
Do you recall a 787 made an emergency landing in Louisiana on a revenue flight Houston/Newark in 2012? Your Post referenced an abnormal that may lend credence to a major power loss in this wreck.
Never expected to see any surviving tail cone or Empennage structure. Quite a find
Forgive the intrusion sir
Boeing 787 Makes Emergency Landing
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Generators/Alternators
June 13, 2025, 23:49:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11903714
Speaking as a B787 Captain..... There is so much rubbish and stupid suggestion being written here.
This aircraft was airborne for a grand total of 22 seconds, half of which was climbing to no more than 150' aal.
- No Flaps? Due to the setup of the ECL it is physically impossible to go down the runway without some sort of take-off flap set. The T/o config warning would have been singing it's head off. Despite assertions to the contrary I have seen no video clear enough to detect a lack of flaps.
- RAT out? Almost impossible, I have seen no quality footage that definitively witnesses the RAT being out. Those who think they car hear a RAT type noise might be listening to a motorcycle passing or similar. It takes a triple hydraulic failure or a double engine failure to trigger RAT deploment. They happily went through V1 without a hint of rejected take off so as they rotated the aircraft was serviceable. These are big engines, they take a long time to wind down when you shut them down. I have never tried it however engine failure detection takes 30s or for the aircraft to react and they were not even airborne that long.
- Flaps up instead of gear? The B787 flaps are slow both in and out. Given that the 'Positive rate' call is not made the second the wheels leave the ground, a mis-selection of flaps up would not cause any loss of lift for at least 20 seconds, by which time they had already crashed. I believe the gear remained down not because of mis-selection but because of a major distraction on rotate.
Discounting the impossible, two hypotheses remain:
1. Invalid derate set through incorrect cross-checking. Trundling down the runway takes very little power to reach Vr. It is only when you rotate that you create more drag and discover that you do not have sufficient thrust vs. drag to sustain a climb. Or....
2. Put 200' as the altitude target in the FCU. Immediate ALT capture and all the power comes off. PF is still hand flying trying to increase pitch but is already way behind the aircraft.
It could be after this that Boeing are forced to review the B787 practice of exploring the very edges of the performance envelope.
This aircraft was airborne for a grand total of 22 seconds, half of which was climbing to no more than 150' aal.
- No Flaps? Due to the setup of the ECL it is physically impossible to go down the runway without some sort of take-off flap set. The T/o config warning would have been singing it's head off. Despite assertions to the contrary I have seen no video clear enough to detect a lack of flaps.
- RAT out? Almost impossible, I have seen no quality footage that definitively witnesses the RAT being out. Those who think they car hear a RAT type noise might be listening to a motorcycle passing or similar. It takes a triple hydraulic failure or a double engine failure to trigger RAT deploment. They happily went through V1 without a hint of rejected take off so as they rotated the aircraft was serviceable. These are big engines, they take a long time to wind down when you shut them down. I have never tried it however engine failure detection takes 30s or for the aircraft to react and they were not even airborne that long.
- Flaps up instead of gear? The B787 flaps are slow both in and out. Given that the 'Positive rate' call is not made the second the wheels leave the ground, a mis-selection of flaps up would not cause any loss of lift for at least 20 seconds, by which time they had already crashed. I believe the gear remained down not because of mis-selection but because of a major distraction on rotate.
Discounting the impossible, two hypotheses remain:
1. Invalid derate set through incorrect cross-checking. Trundling down the runway takes very little power to reach Vr. It is only when you rotate that you create more drag and discover that you do not have sufficient thrust vs. drag to sustain a climb. Or....
2. Put 200' as the altitude target in the FCU. Immediate ALT capture and all the power comes off. PF is still hand flying trying to increase pitch but is already way behind the aircraft.
It could be after this that Boeing are forced to review the B787 practice of exploring the very edges of the performance envelope.
Even though these are big engines with plenty of inertia, when you select engine shut off they spool down very quickly if on load. IE, The generators, two per engine and hydraulic pumps, etc, being driven by the (relatively) small mass of the N2 rotor will drag the speed down very quickly, the gennies will trip offine in seconds, the pumps will quickly reduce flow and pressure.
As for what went wrong.
If the engines have stopped working there has to be a common failure mode, fuel is one but as has been said, no other aircraft has had a problem, as far as we know. FOD? It would have to be something major to shut down two GeNX engines and there would be debris all over the runway, we would know by now.
I have no idea if the RAT has deployed, I can't see it in the video and the noise could be something else.
We shall see.
There is compelling evidence that flaps are set correctly and not retracted inadvertently.
I await further evidence.
Edit to add. LAE 40 years, type rated on 737 to 787 with lots of others in between.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Dual Engine Failure Engine Failure (All) Engine Failure Detection Time Engine Shutdown GEnx (ALL) Generators/Alternators Hydraulic Failure (All) RAT (All) RAT (Deployment) V1
June 13, 2025, 23:59:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11903715
Unlikely, but possible.
This does add more credance to the complete power loss scenario.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): APU
June 14, 2025, 01:17:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11903716
Turin, your name appeared on a thread I was researching regarding generator control units, 787.
Do you recall a 787 made an emergency landing in Louisiana on a revenue flight Houston/Newark in 2012? Your Post referenced an abnormal that may lend credence to a major power loss in this wreck.
Never expected to see any surviving tail cone or Empennage structure. Quite a find
Forgive the intrusion sir
Do you recall a 787 made an emergency landing in Louisiana on a revenue flight Houston/Newark in 2012? Your Post referenced an abnormal that may lend credence to a major power loss in this wreck.
Never expected to see any surviving tail cone or Empennage structure. Quite a find
Forgive the intrusion sir
Boeing 787 Makes Emergency Landing
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Generators/Alternators
June 17, 2025, 06:26:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11904001
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Electrical Failure FADEC
June 17, 2025, 06:28:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11904002
There is at least one thing common to the TCMA on each engine: The TCMA software.
My recollection may be inaccurate, but wasn't there something in the software for 787 generator control units that would cause generator shut down if the aircraft was 'powered up' for a continuous 248 days? Same software, so all 4 generators would shut down. Is my recollection inaccurate?
What we do know, for sure, is that the TCMAs have the same 'authority' and effect as the fuel cut-off switches. The difference is that the crew control the latter.
My recollection may be inaccurate, but wasn't there something in the software for 787 generator control units that would cause generator shut down if the aircraft was 'powered up' for a continuous 248 days? Same software, so all 4 generators would shut down. Is my recollection inaccurate?
What we do know, for sure, is that the TCMAs have the same 'authority' and effect as the fuel cut-off switches. The difference is that the crew control the latter.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Fuel Cutoff Switches Generators/Alternators
June 17, 2025, 11:12:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11904212
Perhaps?
-
Takeoff proceeded normally, TOGA used.
-
Autothrottle entered
HOLD mode at 80 knots
.
-
VNAV or FLCH was NOT engaged
after liftoff.
-
Pilot assumed A/T was managing thrust, but it wasn\x92t.
-
Pilot focused on pitch/flying manually.
-
Thrust stayed fixed or decayed (if levers were moved).
-
Speed decayed, aircraft climbed too steeply, energy bled off.
-
Pilot assumed engine failure due to poor climb response.
"LNAV" - "VNAV" or "FLCH SPD"
To ensure:
-
Proper navigation mode is active
-
Autothrottle resumes thrust management
-
Aircraft transitions smoothly into the climb phase
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Engine Failure (All) RAT (All) RAT (Deployment) TOGA
June 17, 2025, 21:47:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11904697
The 787 has a very sophisticated diagnostic system. Faults are presented through a central maintenance computer system accessible either through the flight deck display units or from a laptop plugged in to the aircraft (there is a WiFi option but honestly it's a bit clunky and I've only ever used it once).
All faults are displayed in ATA order as either active, not active or latched faults.
I cannot see how any IFE, lighting, air con or other non power plant related faults could cause the situation that has brought this aircraft down.
The IFE is entirely seperate and has its own independent diagnostic system.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Engine Failure (All)
June 19, 2025, 07:53:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11905807
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): High Pressure Shutoff Valve
June 19, 2025, 16:09:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11906156
Quite.
The 787 is operated throughout the middle East where temperatures far exceed that experienced in this instance.
The 787 is operated throughout the middle East where temperatures far exceed that experienced in this instance.
Last edited by T28B; 19th June 2025 at 16:15 . Reason: format and spelling assistance
Subjects: None