Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
E170 Involved In Feb. CLE Incident - Written Off?  
User currently offlineRichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4278 posts, RR: 6
Posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5853 times:

On February 18, an E170 belonging to Shuttle America was involved in a landing accident at CLE (thankfully, nobody seriously hurt), operating as flight number DL6448.

http://www.aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20070218-0

According to this website, the plane suffered "substantial" damage and it was initially listed as "written-off". If it was deemed too expensive to fix, then this would be the first hull loss of an Embraer E170/175/190/195 family aircraft. Does anybody know if N862RW has been repaired or if it will ever return to the skies?

Here is the bird in question, during happier times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Matt Coleman - Nashville Aviation Photographers


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Wayne Cowan




None shall pass!!!!
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineOptionsCLE From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5827 times:

Per www.opshots.com/forum/, the aircraft is in the north AirServices hangar with its nose section completely chopped off waiting for replacement. There is some discussion that the plane will not return to the Shuttle America fleet, but will instead be sold after it has been repaired.

User currently offlineChrisjake From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 874 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5665 times:

here she sits: http://www.opshots.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-5025


chris



Well nothing's dead down here, just a little tired
User currently offlineUSCGC130 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5522 times:

Quoting OptionsCLE (Reply 1):
Per www.opshots.com/forum/, the aircraft is in the north AirServices hangar with its nose section completely chopped off waiting for replacement.

Reminds me of TWA Flt. 840, a 707 that was hijacked to Damascus in 1969. A bomb was detonated in the cockpit, and a new nose section was diverted from the production line and grafted on. It would've been fascinating to see photos of that operation, but I read somewhere (probably in _Howard Hughes' Airline_, Robert J. Serling's history of TWA) that the Syrian authorities prohibited photography.

Looking at the picture of the Embraer, I'm curious why it was deemed necessary to remove the engines. To create more working room, perhaps? Also, a surprising expanse of the passenger cabin has been gutted.


User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5473 times:

Quoting USCGC130 (Reply 3):
I'm curious why it was deemed necessary to remove the engines. To create more working room, perhaps?

Because the engines were nearly destroyed from all the stuff they sucked in. The pictures I've seen from people on-site was the engines full snow packed and I was told they dripped water for days as the snow melted.



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineViasa From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 1884 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5339 times:

Puh... they have a lot of work to do...

User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8310 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5258 times:

Quoting USCGC130 (Reply 3):
I'm curious why it was deemed necessary to remove the engines.



That's why!



This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineRichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4278 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5233 times:

Quoting Chrisjake (Reply 2):
here she sits: http://www.opshots.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-5025


chris



Quoting OptionsCLE (Reply 1):
Per www.opshots.com/forum/, the aircraft is in the north AirServices hangar with its nose section completely chopped off waiting for replacement.

Wow! Thanks for the info and the pictures! That's quite a repair job - when you said the nose section chopped off, you were not kidding. It looks like it has been decapitated! Assuming this aircraft does go back to the skies, it is probably safe to say that it came very very close to being scrapped!



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlineIFLYjets From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5206 times:

What happened to the pax? did they use the slides to evacuate?

User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11431 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5193 times:

Quoting Richierich (Reply 7):
Assuming this aircraft does go back to the skies, it is probably safe to say that it came very very close to being scrapped!

If it weren't so new, I'm sure it would have been. Kinda like how any little fender bender can "total" a 10 year old car, but a full t-bone on a 3 month old car will get repaired, maybe?



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineN231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5118 times:

Quoting Richierich (Thread starter):
According to this website, the plane suffered "substantial" damage and it was initially listed as "written-off". If it was deemed too expensive to fix, then this would be the first hull loss of an Embraer E170/175/190/195 family aircraft. Does anybody know if N862RW has been repaired or if it will ever return to the skies?

As stated, the aircraft is undergoing repairs. I have had the chance to check out the aircraft where it currently resides in the Air Services hangar at the Northeast corner of the field.

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 4):
Because the engines were nearly destroyed from all the stuff they sucked in. The pictures I've seen from people on-site was the engines full snow packed and I was told they dripped water for days as the snow melted.

However, from talking with the mechanic when I recently made a visit, he stated the engines didn't suffer that much/ if any damage, despite the amount of snow that was "crammed" into the engine while it was running. They are/were currently in Columbus, OH undergoing an inspection.


User currently offlineRichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4278 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4953 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 9):
If it weren't so new, I'm sure it would have been. Kinda like how any little fender bender can "total" a 10 year old car, but a full t-bone on a 3 month old car will get repaired, maybe?

I'm sure you are correct but it does seem like a pretty thorough rebuild of this aircraft nonetheless. The cockpit will be completely new, and that's where all the very expensive bits generally reside. I'm sure some of the equipment was salvageable and will be reused, if it hasn't already.

Quoting N231YE (Reply 10):
However, from talking with the mechanic when I recently made a visit, he stated the engines didn't suffer that much/ if any damage, despite the amount of snow that was "crammed" into the engine while it was running. They are/were currently in Columbus, OH undergoing an inspection

Those must be some tough engines then! Removing engines is pretty routine, as I understand it, and new engines can be supplied (assuming DL/Shuttle America has a couple of spares lying around) while these two are being repaired. I was more impressed with the level of gutting performed on the fuselage. Amazing.



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlineRampkontroler From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 859 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4570 times:

Quoting N231YE (Reply 10):
However, from talking with the mechanic when I recently made a visit, he stated the engines didn't suffer that much/ if any damage, despite the amount of snow that was "crammed" into the engine while it was running. They are/were currently in Columbus, OH undergoing an inspection

I heard the same thing from the mechanics. What I didn't ask was, what are they doing with the nose?

http://www.opshots.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-5038


User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4448 times:

Quoting Rampkontroler (Reply 12):
What I didn't ask was, what are they doing with the nose?

The old nose I was told might become a flight simulator.... the new nose is being shipped up from Brazil. I'm guessing the folks doing the repairs in CLE are the same ones that cut the nose off the Continental Express EMB-145 a few years back when the crew landed so hard it drove the nose gear up into the cockpit...?



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineRampkontroler From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 859 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4386 times:

Hmmm....I'm pretty sure COEX repaired the -145 that ran off of 06L. The -170 is being rebuilt by Air Services, who are now an Embraer repair shop. You see all kinds of ERJ's there undergoing maintenance, but I was told this was their first -170.

User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2971 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4156 times:

Wow, just shows that planes don't always 'die', I wonder if this repair was deemed economic only because the airframe itself is relatively new. Do you suppose such damage hits the premiums?


A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5504 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3963 times:

Quoting Rampkontroler (Reply 14):
Hmmm....I'm pretty sure COEX repaired the -145 that ran off of 06L. The -170 is being rebuilt by Air Services, who are now an Embraer repair shop. You see all kinds of ERJ's there undergoing maintenance, but I was told this was their first -170.

Are the ExpressJet and Air Services maint. shops separate operations? I've often seen ExpressJet planes parked at Air Services.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineRampkontroler From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 859 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3916 times:

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 13):
Continental Express EMB-145 a few years back when the crew landed so hard it drove the nose gear up into the cockpit...?

I just re-read this, and are you talking about the runway excursion that occured in a snowstorm back in Jan. 03 with N16571? Or something else?


User currently offlineEMB195 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 41 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3859 times:

Quoting Chrisjake (Reply 2):

That was the most interesting picture of an EMB170 i've seen so far. Its sad! As finances goes it sucks!! But on the mechanical side its pretty cool seeying it opened up like that. Anyways, thanks for the picture!


User currently offlineN231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3850 times:

Quoting Rampkontroler (Reply 17):
I just re-read this, and are you talking about the runway excursion that occurred in a snowstorm back in Jan. 03 with N16571? Or something else?

It was N16571, but it wasn't a runway incursion:

Quote:
An ILS runway 6L approach was performed. After touchdown, the flight crew was unable to stop the airplane on the runway. The airplane continued beyond the departure end, on extended runway centerline, and struck the ILS runway 6L localizer antenna. It came to rest with the nose about 600 feet beyond the departure end of the runway. The nose landing gear had collapsed rearward and deformed the forward pressure bulkhead.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20030106-0



[Edited 2007-07-12 21:59:36]

User currently offlineRampkontroler From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 859 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3796 times:

Yeah, that's the one...I remember it well as I was working that day. I guess I just couldn't remember the part about the nosewheel, but that makes sense. And to clarify, I said EXCURSION, not incursion.

"Runway Excursion

The term runway excursion sounds like a family jaunt in the airplane, out to enjoy the scenic stripes on the tarmac and the Jet-A-scented breezes wafting down the runway. It actually refers to the event of an airplane leaving the runway by a method other than taking off or trundling down the appropriate taxiway. That is, over the side or the end."


User currently offlineN231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3735 times:

Quoting Rampkontroler (Reply 20):
And to clarify, I said EXCURSION, not incursion.

Oops, my apologies, my bad:

Quoting Rampkontroler (Reply 17):
runway excursion



Quoting N231YE (Reply 19):
runway incursion


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25653 posts, RR: 22
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3635 times:

Quoting USCGC130 (Reply 3):
Reminds me of TWA Flt. 840, a 707 that was hijacked to Damascus in 1969. A bomb was detonated in the cockpit, and a new nose section was diverted from the production line and grafted on.

It was this aircraft:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kjell Nilsson
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank J. Mirande



NW has (or had, not sure if it's still in service) a DC-9-30 that was rebuilt from the wrecks of two DC-9s. While with Ozark (originally with Northeast in 1967) it collided with a snowplow landing at FSD in December 1983 and a wing separated. It was rebuilt using the wing from an AC DC-9-30 that made an emergency landing at CVG in June 1983 (en route from DFW to YYZ) with a cabin fire that started in a rear lavatory. 23 of the 46 passengers/crew died before they could evacuate. Republic acquired the DC-9 from Ozark in 1985 a year before the merger with NW. This is the aircraft in question:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rafal Szczypek - DC Aviation Photography



User currently offlineDLOnur From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 290 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3620 times:

Quoting IFLYjets (Reply 8):
What happened to the pax? did they use the slides to evacuate?

I was working the gates that day for DL. The snow squall started up so quick and was so heavy a number of aircraft (after the Shuttle America plane went off the run way) diverted to DTW and CMH.

The pax did use slides to evacuate and were bused over to the fire department building. An ambulance came and took a few people just to get checked on, but no one was really injured in that incident.

All the bags were brought over and given back to the paxs--except for the one sorry man who's bag was jammed up into the floorboards by the front main gear...his was the only bag we couldn't recover until they were able to release the pressure on it from the front gearing.

Weird day indeed at CLE....fifteen minutes before the plane slid off, the weather was mildly warm and sunny....CLE weather is weird indeed--damn lakes!



What you believe is what you see.
User currently offlineRampkontroler From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 859 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3579 times:

Quoting DLOnur (Reply 23):
The pax did use slides to evacuate and were bused over to the fire department building.

I was there that day too, and it was a crazy weather day indeed! One thing though...I don't recall them using the slides at all. They kept the passengers on board for quite a while, since there was no fire or immediate need to evacuate. They stayed on until the fire dept.arrived and I thought they were assisted out of the aircraft without blowing any slides.  Confused

Here's three different views taken after the incident, each with the pax still on board, and I don't see any slides (?):


http://www.opshots.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-2712

http://www.opshots.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-2713

http://www.opshots.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-2719


25 DLOnur : I think you are right and I am wrong. Those few days are a bit hazy for me because the next night I flipped my Toyota Land Cruiser over the median hea
26 Rampkontroler : Whoa! Glad you are okay...I know just the area you are talking about. The roads that week were just atrocious, and I am definately NOT looking forwar
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...
Monarch 757 Written Off In Gibraltar? posted Wed May 29 2002 01:36:37 by SAS23
Aviation In Iraq: Ready For Take Off posted Fri Apr 27 2007 12:28:04 by Dsa
Information On BA Strike In Feb? posted Fri Jan 5 2007 12:56:13 by FokkerVII
Aircraft Involved In Litvinenko Affair posted Fri Dec 8 2006 23:59:49 by Bennett123
KLM Stopover In Bonaire:do We Got Off The A/c? posted Fri Sep 22 2006 09:02:19 by RootsAir
BA A321 Involved In Search & Rescue Over North Sea posted Tue Sep 19 2006 15:37:56 by Fbgdavidson
What Costs Are Involved In A Medical Diversion? posted Mon Aug 28 2006 02:25:27 by MSPCRJ200
UA Flights Stopping In ORD - Allowed To Get Off? posted Thu Jul 27 2006 01:07:20 by Aviationwiz
AMC MD-83 SU-BOZ Written Off? posted Sat Jun 24 2006 00:25:46 by NA
UAX E170 Lands In IAD With No Nose Gear! posted Wed May 31 2006 02:57:53 by Hannigan