Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA MD-80 At JFK- No Nose Gear  
User currently offlineTan Flyr From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1897 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9176 times:

Just heard that an AA MD 80 from DFW to EWR made an emergency landing at JFK with no nose gear.

49 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePshifrin From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 255 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9084 times:

Very blurry picture here: http://www.wnbc.com/traffic/2449540/detail.html

User currently offlineCmckeithen From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 617 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8792 times:

This goes to show all that the flight crew is HIGHLY trained in emergency situations. Though the passengers onboard were concerned when I assume, the captain came over the pa and said "Folks we are getting a warning light that is telling us the nose landing gear is not extended....FA's prepare the cabin for a rough landing." I also assume the FA's told the pax's to "brace, brace, brace" right before touchdown and went through the proper emergency landing procedures with them.

Any way, those pax's were never in any danger. Just a rough landing.


User currently offlineTekelberry From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1459 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8732 times:

What a nightmare for the mechanics who have to get that baby off the runway and repaired.

Good thing everyone is safe.


User currently offlineDispatch From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8662 times:

I must say, I LOVE that link Pshifrin provided:

captain received an instrument signal that the nose landing gear -- which includes the wheels

Had it NOT been an MD-80, it makes me wonder: WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE NOSE GEAR........... Big grin

Peter


User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2368 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8485 times:

I like the phrase.....
"came down on the tarmac, using the landing gear under the middle part of the aircraft"



Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16691 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8406 times:

The flight was heading to EWR, they most likely diverted to JFK because of the large AA maintenance facility at JFK.

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/news/wabc_090203_jfkplane.html



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineBigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4076 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8375 times:

Anyone got registration number, runways, more info? Anythign else?>


Phil Derner Jr.
User currently offlineB777FA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 246 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8297 times:

Registration is N454AA MD-82

User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3843 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8284 times:

No actually they diverted to JFK due to the lenght of runways in EWR. No where near the size of JFK. So not diverted due to maintenance but rather length of runway.


okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8212 times:

>>>No actually they diverted to JFK due to the lenght of runways in EWR. No where near the size of JFK. So not diverted due to maintenance but rather length of runway.

Yeah, that's what the article -said- but EWR's runway lengths are plenty long enough for a nosegear-up landing. No doubt in my mind they went to JFK due to AA's larger presence at JFK (as far as customer service) and MX facilities...

Now, to be nasty, they could have landed at EWR, closed a runway, and put CO's EWR hub operation into a big delay situation. Betcha CO is -real- glad they went to JFK...  Big grin


User currently offlineBobs89irocz From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8183 times:

Hmm i wonder what the cause was?

Good do hear no one was hurt and everything was ok. Good idea on the pilots part to opt to the airport with the longer RW. If anyone could post the pilots names or have a way of finding out that would be great. I know of a lot of AA MD-80 pilots based out of DFW.


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8125 times:

>>>Good idea on the pilots part to opt to the airport with the longer RW.

When "non-emergency" situations like these come up, the captain is in communication with his dispatcher, and they jointly decide where the best place to put the aircraft with respect to both MX and customer service. They may even have time (fuel permitting) to try some trouble-shooting efforts before going somewhere.

I say "non-emergency" in the context that the aircraft didn't need to land -immediately- due to something much more urgent like a fire. (In that case, that captain wouldn't waste any time talking to anyone other ATC to get an ASAP full-blown emergency landing at the nearest suitable airport). Absent that level of urgency, and assuming proper fuel onboard and sufficient runway lengths, a flight like this with a gear problem could have really diverted and landed almost anywhere. Whatever the eventual destination, it would have been an "emergency" landing once they got there, but just for the landing, not getting to the airport itself...


User currently offlineBobs89irocz From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8058 times:

LOL....I think they call that an "emergancy landing"

User currently offline727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5953 posts, RR: 17
Reply 14, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 7978 times:

Just wondering, do EWR, LGA, ISP, HPN ever get emergency landings, or do they all go to JFK? Does the aircraft look repairable?


Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineCicadajet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 7937 times:

I can remember a Continental DC-10 making an emergency landing at EWR a few years back..pretty serious problem it had, if I remember.

Also, a Fed Ex 747 - not sure how serious that was or wasn't...they had the trucks out waiting for it..

Tom


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 7901 times:

>>>Just wondering, do EWR, LGA, ISP, HPN ever get emergency landings, or do they all go to JFK?

I doubt you'd see them at LGA and ISP, LGA due to runway length, and ISP due to the fact that not many folks fly there. HPN's runway is a litle on the short side. You'd more likely see a diversion like this in the NYC area go into JFK (as it did) or EWR (where it would have gone if it had been a CO MD80 instead of an AA MD80). Stewart (SWF) could have been an option too...


>>>Does the aircraft look repairable?

Absolutely! Some minor skin damage, but these things usually take only a day or two tp get back in service....


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16691 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 7860 times:

EWR's runways are 11,000-12,000 ft, no problem.

The main reason no doubt for the JFK deversion was the 14,000 ft runway AND the large AA maintenance facility at JFK.

If they had landed at EWR, they would have had to borrow hangar space from either CO or UAL. It would be alot cheaper for them to just go to JFK, since there was nothing wrong with the "flight" aspects of the aircraft that would keep them from diverting to JFK.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineBigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4076 posts, RR: 54
Reply 18, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 7769 times:

What about damage to the runway? Didn't that thing dig into the ground at all?


Phil Derner Jr.
User currently offlineCaptainStabbin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7725 times:

I think the diversion was because of runway choice rather than runway length. JFK has four runways, so if lands on one, they couldn't easily close it and use the other two or three. I believe the plane landed on 4R, which they were using this moring. The 4's were later closed and they switched to the 31's.

If they landed at EWR, they probably would have had to close one of the runways, which would have caused more delays than if they switched to JFK.


User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7610 times:

i was always told by instructors, in the event of someting like that, go to an airport that was best equiped to handle the situation. what runway did they land on? 13R/31L?

what i found annoying is that the media kept calling it a crash landing. it was not. i seriously hate how the media miss-labels everything!



"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineFDXmech From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3251 posts, RR: 35
Reply 21, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7536 times:

>>>What a nightmare for the mechanics who have to get that baby off the runway and repaired.<<<

Actually a nightmare for some DFW mechanics sweating out the cause of this incident.




You're only as good as your last departure.
User currently offlineBobs89irocz From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7474 times:

Could have been some of those mechanics that always sleep through there shift instead of doing a CORRECT B-check, or maybe it was no ones fault it was just one of those things that just happens. Oh well, hope no one looses there job over it.

User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7435 times:

In a sense, it is a "crash-landing", but not the way the media portrays it. Crash Landing can deal from UA 232 to a flight without Nose-Gear.

Most, if not all aircraft that have Nose Gear Failures are returned to service within 3-4 weeks if that is all that was wrong. They disassemble the piece, repair it, repaint it, install the piece, and voila. I suggest you do some research on N2417F (Now N919AT) that made an emergency landing. They has N2417F back in service in 2 weeks, and I flew on it as N919AT in March 2003.


User currently offlineMirrodie From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 7438 posts, RR: 62
Reply 24, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7436 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

727 lover, I did witness once, an emergency landing at ISP.

It was a biplane landing and I have a photo of this with a 737 landing in the background.

Whilse I am not sure if you mean ANY emergency landing vs one with an airliner, the answer is yes, ISP has had emergency landings in the past.

regards, Mirrodie



Forum moderator 2001-2010; He's a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, a worthless st
25 Bigphilnyc : There was an AirTran 717 that had an emergency landing at LGA after electrical problems this year.
26 Tu154m : TYPICAL LONG BEACH SEWER PIPE!!!!!!!!!!!! Seriously.......glad everyone is OK!!! S
27 Mikephotos : what runway did they land on? 13R/31L? 4L Mike
28 Bigphilnyc : Anyone who saw the video of this on the news...guess who got that!! Ok, it wasn't me. But that would be REALLY cool if I did. DAMN!
29 Okie : I think they have had some minor problems with the splash deflector on the MD-80 series on the front gear. I think when it breaks it causes the gear t
30 JpetekYXMD80 : "TYPICAL LONG BEACH SEWER PIPE!!!!!!!!!!!! " The MD-80 is the safest aircraft in its class, and second only to the saab 240 in rate of incidents.
31 B6FA4ever : I saw the AA MD-80 on the runway still at 2:15 p Local time when i was taking off from JFK. was on the runway that is parallel to terminal 4. it was c
32 Artsyman : I can remember a Continental DC-10 making an emergency landing at EWR a few years back..pretty serious problem it had, if I remember. ****************
33 Beltwaybandit : LONG BEACH SEWER PIPE I believe that this is a reference to how tough the airframe is, not a criticism.
34 Post contains links Pshifrin : There is now a video report here: http://www.wnbc.com/traffic/2449540/detail.html Amazingly, they correctly identified the type of aircraft.
35 PROSA : Whilse I am not sure if you mean ANY emergency landing vs one with an airliner, the answer is yes, ISP has had emergency landings in the past. There w
36 E1FAIL : >>>Does the aircraft look repairable? Absolutely! Some minor skin damage, but these things usually take only a day or two to get back in service.... I
37 Post contains images Mikephotos : Amazingly, they correctly identified the type of aircraft. Taken from the article: "As a precaution, he elected to go to JKF, which has longer runways
38 GroundStop : "There was an AirTran 717 that had an emergency landing at LGA" Now, that case was not elective. The aircraft was already established on final approac
39 FDXmech : >>>Most, if not all aircraft that have Nose Gear Failures are returned to service within 3-4 weeks if that is all that was wrong. They disassemble the
40 PROSA : Most, if not all aircraft that have Nose Gear Failures are returned to service within 3-4 weeks if that is all that was wrong. They disassemble the pi
41 ModernArt : I was just speaking to an associate and he told me he got a call from a buddy who regularly commutes on this flight for work...and as fate would have
42 Spacepope : The HP A-320 at PHX was indeed a writeoff. There was substantial damage to the forward fuselage structure hitting the runway when the gear unexpectedl
43 Mirrodie : I read about the incident in the local paper. It said it did a fly by EWR tower for visual inspection. Is that accurate? If so, then how close to the
44 Accidentally : It is believed that the spray deflector prevented extension for whatever reason (dislodged or damaged).
45 E1FAIL : Most, if not all aircraft that have Nose Gear Failures are returned to service within 3-4 weeks if that is all that was wrong. They disassemble the pi
46 Aviaar : The father of one of my best friends was the captain of the plane at the time. The original route was DFW-EWR, but he chose to land at JFK for the lon
47 Post contains images JBirdAV8r : I say "non-emergency" in the context that the aircraft didn't need to land -immediately- due to something much more urgent like a fire. Certainly a "n
48 Bobs89irocz : Aviaar- Does your friends dad live in the DFW area? If so send me an email to www.bobs89irocz@aol.com I use to live there and know A LOT of AA captain
49 E1FAIL : Could have been some of those mechanics that always sleep through there shift instead of doing a CORRECT B-check, or maybe it was no ones fault it was
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AA MD-80 At SJU, 01/11/2011 posted Wed Jan 12 2011 07:14:30 by eastbay
Man Opens Door, Deploys Slide On AA MD-80 At DFW posted Tue Mar 3 2009 13:03:43 by FrequentFlyKid
AA MD-80 At SJC X-wind Take Off Video posted Fri Apr 4 2008 06:48:49 by SJC-Alien
AA MD-80s At JFK posted Fri Dec 7 2007 21:36:15 by RJpieces
AA MD-80 At SFO Video posted Tue Mar 21 2006 14:36:33 by SJC-Alien
AA MD-80 At DFW West Hangar posted Tue Dec 30 2003 04:36:59 by Deltaffindfw
Pics Of AA MD-80 Gear-up Landing At JFK On posted Tue Sep 9 2003 19:00:00 by PSU.DTW.SCE
AA MD-80 Crossing The Street At MIA posted Sun May 16 2010 19:41:52 by flymia
AA MD-80 Damaged At LAX posted Sun Feb 15 2009 07:26:13 by FlyDeltaJets