Investigation Update=0AAllegedly leaked information and photos on the Pilot= sofAmerica.com forum. Very interesting stuff here if it's confirmed.=0A=0A= =0AAt about 700 ft AGL, the auto throttle commanded engine acceleration. On= e engine started to rollback during and the other engine started to acceler= ate then 8-10 seconds later began to roll back. Once the flight crew notice= d, they pushed the throttles up and the engines' EECs responded but the eng= ines did not. It appears that no fuel was getting to the engines. =0AThe in= vestigation continues to look broadly for a cause of the dual engine rollba= cks. Fuel exhaustion is the only item that has been positively ruled out. A= spects that the FAA believes the investigation is concentrating on are:=0A= =95 Ice in the fuel somehow limiting the fuel flow to the engines. A mainte= nance message indicating excessive water in the center tank was set during = taxi on the two previous flight legs, although it cleared itself both times= . The airplane was being operated in a high humidity, cold environment, con= ducive to ice formation.=0A=95 Small-sized contamination building up in the= engine fuel systems somehow limited the fuel flow to engine. All the fuel = samples have tested for contamination of larger particles (sizes outside th= e fuel specification). Testing has been started looking for small particles= (greater than 5 microns).=0A=95 Engine hardware failures sending inaccurat= e data to the engine electronic control (EEC) causing the EEC to demand ins= ufficient fuel. A preliminary review of the EEC data from the right engine = shows erratic combustor inlet pressure (P30). A leaking P30 sense line coul= d cause this, or the EEC receiving a higher than actual fuel flow parameter= .=0A=95 Software coding problem in the EEC causing the EEC to demand insuff= icient fuel. British Airways installed a new engine EEC software revision i= n December 2007. The software was approved in May 2006. There were several = changes to the software as part of the revision. Two items seem remotely re= lated to the accident: improvements to low power stall recovery logic and f= an keep out zones for ground maintenance. The first two items would be rela= ted to a part 25 compliance issue, while the last two items would be relate= d to a part 33 compliance issue.=0AMUCH MORE BELOW THE FOLD=0AAs stated yes= terday in this briefing paper, the electrical system anomalies noted earlie= r have been resolved, as describe below, and the conclusion now is that the= electrical buses were powered until impact and performing as expected.=0A= =95 The auxiliary power unit (APU) began its auto start sequence, even thou= gh the buses were still powered. In the days following the event, the fligh= t crew has added additional details to their report. The crew now believes = they turned the APU on prior to impact. There was sufficient time before th= e impact for the APU inlet door to open, but not for the APU fuel pump to t= urn on or the APU engine to start spooling up.=0A=95 The quick access recor= der (QAR) saved data and shut down approximately 45 seconds prior to impact= . The QAR saves data in batches. It is believed the QAR was working properl= y and was in the process of saving data when impact occurred, accounting fo= r the =93lost=94 45 seconds of data.=0A=95 The fuel crossfeed valves were c= losed in flight according to the flight crew, but the switches were found i= n the open position and only one valve was open. In the days following the = event, the flight crew has added additional details to their report. The cr= ew now believes they opened the valves just prior to impact and the airplan= e lost power before both valves moved to the open position.=0A=95 The ram a= ir turbine (RAT) was found deployed, even though the buses were still power= ed. It did not deploy until after the airplane came to a stop, as determine= d by the pristine condition of the turbine blades. The RAT either deployed = due to electrical power loss during impact with a failed air/ground signal = or the impact unlatched the RAT door.=0AFuel system: Leads regarding water = in the fuel and fuel contamination are continuing to be investigated. Fuel = testing looking for small-sized contaminants (5 microns) is beginning. The = tanks are still being drained and the team hopes to start evaluating the fu= el system hardware tomorrow.=0AEngines: Component testing and teardown of t= he engine-driven fuel pumps and the fuel metering units is planned for late= r this week. The data from the electronic engine controls is still being an= alyzed. Rolls-Royce is planning an engine test, unscheduled as yet, to try = and duplicate the rollbacks.=0ACrashworthiness: Cabin crew and passenger qu= estionnaires indicate that the evacuation bell was faint, but the evacuatio= n light was seen and the captain=92s message to evacuate over the passenger= address system was heard. Preliminary data indicates that the descent rate= at impact was roughly 30 ft/sec. Dynamic seat requirements that became eff= ective at the introduction of the Model 777 series airplanes require seats = protect occupants for hard landing impact up to 35 ft/sec. The passenger wi= th the broken leg was sitting next to the point where the right main landin= g gear punctured the fuselage and pushed into the cabin (pictured below).= =0ACrashworthiness: There was only one serious injury, a compound fracture = to the leg. The airplane landed on the main gear, bounced, came back down o= n the gear, then the gear failed, and the engines supported weight of the a= irplane. The descent rate at landing was 1500-1800 feet per minute. One of = the main landing gear swung around and pushed slightly into the cabin. The = other punctured the center fuel tank (empty) leaving a 1-by-2-foot hole. Th= e report of a fuel leak is unconfirmed. All the slides deployed and the doo= rs worked. Some passengers had to shuffle down the slides due to the slight= angle. The flight deck door opened on its own during the landing. Some oxy= gen masks dropped. =0A*Surprised by what you have read?Do you think this re= port has gone any closer to establishing the true reason for the crash? Hav= e youir say on AirSpace=0ATags:=0A777 =0ABoeing =0ABritish Airways =0APoste= d by Jon Ostrower on January <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you wish to unsubscribe from the AIRLINE List, please send an E-mail to: "listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx". Within the body of the text, only write the following:"SIGNOFF AIRLINE".