Oops, watch out next time you are reversing…..

UK news reports say that last Friday evening two British Airways aircraft collided at Heathrow just yards from Terminal 4 when one reversed into the other causing millions of pounds of damage, with British Airways confirming the crash but denying it was a result of cost cutting

The accident happened on Friday night as a BA Boeing 777 carrying 200 passengers to Washington DC reversed from its gate into the path of another BA plane which had just arrived from Zurich and was waiting for permission to dock at its own gate.

Horrified passengers felt the full force of the collision as the left wing of the heavier US-bound BA Boeing plane (registration number G-VIIK) smashed into the tail-fin of the lighter Airbus (registration number G-EUXH) – causing extensive and costly damage to both.

One BA insider said the Zurich plane was shunted about 10ft in the collision – with the Boeing weighing around three times that of the smaller Airbus.

There was damage to the flaps of the Boeing’s left wing and to the tail-fin of the Airbus.

Fire-tenders and emergency crews were scrambled to the scene as an emergency was triggered forcing other flights to abort landings, with passengers led off both stricken flights.

BA staff have complained that the collision was “an accident waiting to happen” and say cost-cutting has led to safety breaches becoming more common – a charge denied absolutely by BA, but it has sparked intense debate within the industry.

One BA insider said: “The Airbus which had just arrived from Zurich was supposed to straight to its parking stand.”  “There was space.”  “But the despatcher who gives permission for it to proceed wasn’t there.”  “So it had to wait on the taxi-way tarmac.”

“As it was waiting, the American-bound Boeing was pushed out of its stand in reverse.”  “The reversing Boeing’s left wing hit the back of the Airbus’s tale.”  

“It’s created a lot of damage.”  “Some people were suggesting both planes had been written off.”

The BA insider believed safety had been compromised because of ‘cost-cutting’, saying, “The despatcher to open the gate wasn’t there on time, so the incoming Zurich flight just had to wait.”  “It’s an accident waiting to happen.”

Another aviation insider with knowledge of the business said, “When two planes collide on a runway it is both very dangerous and very expensive.”  “We are talking at least a six figure sum – and possibly seven.”

British Airways confirmed the fact of the collision but denied it was caused by cost-cutting, saying, “We are aware that two British Airways aircraft clipped one another as one pulled onto its stand on arrival at Heathrow and the other left its stand.”

“The flights involved were the BA719, an airbus 321, arriving from Zurich with some 100 passengers on board, and the BA293, a Boeing 777, departing for Washington with around 200 passengers on board.”

“The wing of the B777 appears to have clipped the tail of the A321. Neither aircraft will operate until we are absolutely convinced they are safe to do so.”

“The fire brigade were called, but this is standard procedure.

“There were no injuries.”  “Customers would have been seated with their seat belts on.”  “Furthermore both aircraft would have been moving very slowly at the time, given the fact they were moving onto and off of the stands.”

“The passengers were disembarked from the aircraft, put up in hotels overnight, and later rebooked onto the next available service.”

BA insisted that it would never compromise safety, saying, “We are launching an immediate investigation into what happened and it would be inappropriate to comment on rumour or speculation until this investigation has been concluded.”

He added, “We will not pre-empt this investigation with speculation and will await the findings.”  “The aircraft will be thoroughly examined before either are permitted to operate again.”  “Safety and security is paramount to British Airways and we would never compromise that.”

But the accident and the safety aspects have sparked talk on the pilots’ chat-room website.  One codenamed “Mercenary pilot” said: “Maybe they thought it was possible that a fuel tank could have been ruptured.”

Another dubbed “Captain H. Peacock” observed: “If the aircraft was struck from behind with the possibility of fuel lines and electrical cables connected to an operating APU (auxulliary power unit), then a real risk of fire exists and a PAN call is entirely appropriate. Nasty.!

One pilot claimed: “About 50 ft. above the runway we had to make a go-round, requested by ATC (air traffic control) because fire trucks had to cross the runway… 10 mins later when taxiing we saw a massive amount of fire trucks at I believe Terminal 4.”

Another pilot observed: “So the inability of BA to have stand guidance available ‘on time’ has finally cost them a shed load of money? I wonder if any questions will be asked in that area of operations?”

Report By The Mole