Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
OA A340 Emergency Landing At JFK  
User currently offlineAgrodemm From Greece, joined Apr 2000, 401 posts, RR: 0
Posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2672 times:

I read today in one Greek newspaper in the web, that an Olympic Airways A-340 with 295 passengers, heading from Boston to Athens (OA 426 and most probably on its monday flight), had a failure (?) with one of the four engines, while flying over North Canada, and headed back to JFK were landed safely.
The article said that a full investigation was ordered from the Greek Commercial Aviation Directorate, since the plane is one of the most newly added to OA's fleet.
Anybody from JFK or Boston Logan with more news on this event?
Thanks,
agrodemm


8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2558 times:

If they were flying a high power 747 they could have continued with the flight to Athens on the remaining 3 engines.

User currently offlinePanman From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Aug 1999, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2545 times:

Err TEDSKI what have you been smoking. No matter what aircraft it was it would have diverted.

Or were you trying to be sarcastic, the original post did not merit your reply as the author was just passing on info he thought would interest.

PANMAN


User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5566 posts, RR: 36
Reply 3, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2526 times:

Tedski I think you have no idea about civil aviation. No aircraft or airline would continue its flight with one engine not working properly.

User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2519 times:

No, I was not being sarcastic, I am trying show that the CFM56 A340 is a little underpowered to fly on 3 engines which is why it had to land at JFK. A while back in another forum someone said that they were on a 747 which had an engine failure but still continued on with its destination on the remaining 3 engines.

User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2502 times:

I remember watching the movie on United 232 when Charlton Heston was playing the pilot. In the movie when they had the engine failure, because they didn't know yet about the loss of hydraulics they decided to continue on with the flight on the remaining 2 engines.
Isn't it the pilot's decision to continue with the flight on the remaining 2 or 3 engines if there is no danger?


User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2245 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (14 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2453 times:

In defense of TEDSKI, we've discussed many times in this forum the decision made by a 747 BA pilot leaving Buenos Aires for LHR, suffering an engine failure soon after departure, and deciding to complete the trip on three engines only. Whether this man was insane I don't know. But it does contradict the posts above by Panam and ZHR. Maybe the pilot was the one smoking...

User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2439 times:

Thank you Wingman for defending me on this. It was from reading many of these topics in this forum where I get my information from. If I were the pilot I would have immediately landed my aircraft at the nearest suitable airport. In another forum someone said that it was the second time this aircraft suffered an inflight engine failure. I think it was a big mistake for Airbus to put the CFM56 on the A340-200/300 instead of maybe the GE CF6 or P&W 2000 engine used on the 757 & Russian IL-96M.

User currently offlineAB.400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (14 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2430 times:

The plane was many hours away from it´s destiny and there is plenty of ocean to cross. Not that comfortable with an engine failure. Going back and land in New-York was in my view the best decision since there are probably the most opportunities for the passengers to get quickly another flight to Athen.

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...
Delta 806 Emergency Landing At JFK! posted Mon Jun 19 2006 22:35:29 by GusNYC
B6 Emergency Landing At JFK Today posted Sat Jul 2 2005 18:42:25 by CactusTECH
IB A340 Emergency Landing At LIS. 9 People Injured posted Fri Nov 19 2004 13:56:54 by BCNGRO
AA FL 167 Emergency Landing At JFK posted Mon Feb 23 2004 20:31:16 by Southpaw8669
AA Emergency Landing At JFK - The Next Day posted Fri Sep 5 2003 02:16:26 by FrequentFlyKid
JetBlue 52 Makes Emergency Landing At JFK. posted Mon Dec 30 2002 16:16:41 by UN_B732
Iberia B747 Emergency Landing At JFK/Engine Fire posted Mon Aug 12 2002 02:57:08 by AirFranceJFK
10PM Sunday: AA#92 Emergency Landing At Jfk!? posted Mon Nov 26 2001 04:20:07 by Bobcat
TWA Emergency Landing At JFK 6/5/01 posted Wed Jun 6 2001 07:35:43 by Critter_592
AA 738 Emergency Landing At Jfk? posted Sat Oct 21 2000 21:44:08 by FlyAA757