Morning:
13°c
An awesome and ridiculous film that leaves you thrilled beyond the point of your natural endurance
London faces a wave of bus and Tube strikes that could cause chaos for millions of passengers as unions walkout over pay and conditions
More...
Passenger plane 'seconds from disaster' over London
Last updated at 11:52am on 27.09.06
A packed jumbo jet was forced into a series of steep dives over London by instrument failure.
The aircraft dropped to its minimum permitted altitude of 1,200 feet meaning it was seconds from a major disaster.
See also...
Airport confusion again as US relaxes its ban on liquids
There was panic on board among more than 450 passengers and crew as the plane began its landing approach 10 miles east of Heathrow. The pilot had to disconnect the autopilot of the Boeing 747 and put it into a climb to 1,800 feet.
He re-established control with moments to spare and had to switch to manual to land. A report today into the incident says the jumbo's control panel was showing "progressive fly down commands and the autopilot was attempting to pitch the aircraft's nose down to follow these indications".
Seconds later a warning of "glide scope failure", which gives the height of the jet, appeared on the cabin screen with the warning "no auto land".
The co-pilot immediately tried to contact air traffic control to find out if there was a fault with the glide scope - but he could not get through because of radio congestion.
The air traffic controller had also noticed the "unusually low altitude" as the plane dropped and immediately ordered the Boeing to climb again.
The official report into the incident by the Air Accident Investigations Branch says that as the flight crew taxied the jet towards its parking stand they reported to air traffic control that the glide scope "had fluctuated".
A warning was immediately sent out by air traffic control to other approaching aircraft to see if they were experiencing similar problems but none did. The incident happened on 10 January just after midday.
The report concludes that "available evidence" suggested there was an error in glide scope signal. However, monitoring equipment on the ground showed no fault and no cause could be found for the error recorded on board the aircraft.
The Investigations Branch says it was not aware of any similar dramas immediately after the event.
Two years ago Prince Charles's plane was involved in a near-miss with an Airbus. Charles was flying in his private jet to Spain when it came within 900 feet of an Airbus A321 with 186 passengers on board. Aer Lingus said the Airbus had been flying under the control of London air traffic control at the time.
Reader views (8)
I wonder how hack proof the glide slope system really is. Can someone set up a phantom signal and steer a plane that has Cat3 auto-landing engaged?
- Khawk, Raleigh, USA
Where's the story? The only thing I can see is that systems are now so reliable that this is a rare event. It was handled perfectly well in accordance with normal aviation practices, it being exactly the sort of thing that we all train to deal with, and the aircraft was landed safely. The aircraft's on-board systems even noted the failure to warn the pilots, so that worked nicely too. That protection is why flying is so safe.
- Richard, Southend, UK
This is why they have humans in the cockpit...
- Mark Pi, Indianapolis, USA
A good example where skilled pilots are better than complex systems.
- Steven Bernier, Tampa Florida, USA
Having a career in aviation, specifically in Avionics, I can cite this as proof-positive why there will always be a need for pilots in civilian aviation. Whether it was a fault in the aircraft avionics or the Ground Control Approach electronics, it's moot. A trained individual took control from the automatic system and the plane landed safely.
- Nick Robinson, Atlanta, Georgia USA
Why doesn't the story name the airline involved?
- Mike Good, Oxford, UK
Having owned British cars in the past. I'm guessing its a gremlin in the Heathrow electronics.
- Yirmin Snipe, Boston USA
The official finding - risk was minimal.
- Ralph Lunt, Staines, UK
