Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NWA 803 ATL To HNL Diverting To MSP?  
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2446 posts, RR: 3
Posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10292 times:

From flightaware it looks like NWA 803 departed ATL to HNL is diverting to MSP. It initially filed for OKC, but changed course to MSP. Anyone know what is going on?

It could be a pressurization issue, as it is flying at 10,000 ft over Oklahoma. Must be going to MSP for maintenance.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/NWA803

.

[Edited 2009-11-14 11:40:50]


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.
33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKL911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5219 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10250 times:

Wasn't MEM closer when they diverted? Or returning to ATL, why backtrack and go north so far?

User currently offline413x3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10238 times:

Probably because you have a big repair base there instead of a smaller station like MEM

User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2446 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10224 times:

The closest hub airport is not always the best. The decision may be based on the maintenance required or the availability of replacement aircraft for the passengers. There may be more flights or available seats to HNL from MSP rather than MEM or ATL for the passengers.

NWA has two non-stops MSP to HNL leaving yet this afternoon that they could connect to. Maybe they can get some of the passengers on those two flights. There are no MEM to HNL non-stops.

[Edited 2009-11-14 11:57:52]


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 offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2834 posts, RR: 45
Reply 4, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10198 times:



Quoting KL911 (Reply 1):
Wasn't MEM closer when they diverted? Or returning to ATL, why backtrack and go north so far?

Better maintenance facilities, possible spare aircraft availability, reaccommodation of passengers is easier; without knowing the specifics it's all conjecture. Not all abnormals require a hasty return to earth... with a long ETOPS leg ahead of them more stuff has to be working at 100% than for a domestic leg. Also a landing at a closer field may (almost certainly would) require either dumping fuel or an overweight landing, meaning yet more maintenance involvement.


User currently offlineTranspac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3214 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9919 times:

If the MX issue is severe enough that it will require several hours to fix and get the flight back on track, MSP also has an A330 crew base to call up reserves should the scheduled crew go out of duty time. Neither MEM nor ATL have a crew base.

User currently offline71Zulu From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3086 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9844 times:



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 5):
MSP also has an A330 crew base to call up reserves should the scheduled crew go out of duty time.

How does the pilot turn normally work on that route. Do they just deadhead the crew to ATL from DTW or MSP?



The good old days: Delta L-1011s at MSY
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1969 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8187 times:

It makes all sense to go to MSP. A reserve crew can be brought in, and the plane can either be fixed or a different plane in the system used to continue the passengers on to HNL. It will be a late arrival in HNL for the PAX, but at least they made it today.


BTW, I wonder if anyone living far from an airport would have been alarmed seeing such a big bird fly overhead at 10K!


User currently offlineOkie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3104 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8036 times:



Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 7):
BTW, I wonder if anyone living far from an airport would have been alarmed seeing such a big bird fly overhead at 10K!

I do not know about that but you would bet there were some oil companies smiling seeing that bad boy burning that much fuel flying that low.

Quoting CitationJet (Reply 3):

The closest hub airport is not always the best. The decision may be based on the maintenance required or the availability of replacement aircraft for the passengers. There may be more flights or available seats to HNL from MSP rather than MEM or ATL for the passengers.

Throw in a possible over weight landing the extra fuel burn to MSP might also factor in.

Okie


User currently offlineTimf From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 970 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7957 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From looking at the flight status on delta.com, they changed to a different aircraft in MSP. The stop took about 2 hours, and in total the flight is running 5 hours late.

User currently offline71Zulu From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3086 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7888 times:

Back in the air after about 2hrs 10 minutes at MSP

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N...3/history/20091114/1622Z/KATL/KMSP

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N...3/history/20091114/2222Z/KMSP/PHNL

Don't know if they changed aircraft or not.



The good old days: Delta L-1011s at MSY
User currently offlinePilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7581 times:

Posted on AvHerald: http://avherald.com/h?article=422bf1ea&opt=1

User currently offlineMikelive From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7225 times:

Wow, according to the tracking data, she descended 26K feet in about 9 minutes. I can only imagine what kind of ride that must have been.

 eyepopping 


User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5267 posts, RR: 24
Reply 13, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7036 times:

Well...that's what an emergency descent is.

Once you are stabilized in the descent, you tend not to feel like it's that fast. Your body feels the acceleration effects more than anything else.

An autorotation in a helicopter, properly executed, is a pretty fast descent (1300-1800 fpm), but it really doesn't feel like you're descending that fast. It's only when you pull back on the cyclic at treetop level and flare to decelerate your forward speed and descent rate that you recognize the significance of both. Oddly, it almost feels like you could just keep going at that pace and be fine. Of course, upon contact with the ground, you would find that you were very wrong.

Back to the A330 incident: Your ears will notice, but of course if this was a pressurization issue, chances are they're pretty messed up/uncomfortable already, depending upon the rate that the cabin altitutde climbed and how high it climbed.


User currently offlineCruiseshipcrew From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 207 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6585 times:

Bird strike. About 80 passengers missed the ship I'm on today due to this. Always fly to a cruise a day before it leaves!


facebook sn jetboy787
User currently offlineCalibansA333 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6530 times:



Quoting Cruiseshipcrew (Reply 14):
Bird strike



At 36,000 feet? What kind of birds fly at that altitude? Not saying it's not possible, I'm just curious.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19954 posts, RR: 59
Reply 16, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6476 times:



Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 13):

Once you are stabilized in the descent, you tend not to feel like it's that fast. Your body feels the acceleration effects more than anything else.

Deck angle must be pretty crazy, though.

Quoting CalibansA333 (Reply 15):
Not saying it's not possible, I'm just curious.

Well, I do have two degrees in Biology and I know of no species of animal that can survive that oxygen tension and temperature.


User currently offline71Zulu From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3086 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5617 times:

Geese have been frequently spotted in the high 20's and low 30's.

Supposedly a Vulture hit an airliner at 37,000 feet off the African coast in 1973.

According to this Navy club flying brief,
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:...rd+strike&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
the highest reported bird sighting was at 54,000 feet.



The good old days: Delta L-1011s at MSY
User currently offlineRcair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1328 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5421 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT



Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 13):
is a pretty fast descent (1300-1800 fpm), but it really doesn't feel like you're descending that fast

Well - as far as acceleration goes - but it 'feels' (looks) fast as you approach the ground  Wink - and auto rotations are a lot closer to the ground (as the end on it), and an emergency descent from 29K to 10K.



rcair1
User currently offlineNwaesc From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 3391 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5140 times:

Well *something* shattered the windshield over OK...


"Nothing ever happens here, " I said. "I just wait."
User currently offlineJaxs170 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 99 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4696 times:



Quoting CalibansA333 (Reply 15):
At 36,000 feet? What kind of birds fly at that altitude? Not saying it's not possible, I'm just curious.

More likely that the windshield simply shattered. It could have been caused by a faulty heating element, or perhaps it just went on it's own accord. Not sure what the specs for the 330 are, but it could have even been that only the outer or inner pane cracked/shattered/broke and it required them to get down to 10K where pressurazation would not be required.

Quoting Mikelive (Reply 12):
Wow, according to the tracking data, she descended 26K feet in about 9 minutes. I can only imagine what kind of ride that must have been.

A pretty boring one! Just under 3000'/min isn't anything to write home about, and the passengers probably would not have even noticed it. I've done well over 6000'/min and it wasn't anything worth talking about. C-17 drivers can do in excess of 20000'/min.



707, 717, 727, 732/3/4/5/6/7/8/9, 752, 762/3/4, 744, 772, MD-80/2/3/8, DC-9, F-100, A319/20/21, A333, DC-10, MD-11, ARJ,
User currently offlineC5LOAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4560 times:



Quoting Nwaesc (Reply 19):
Well *something* shattered the windshield over OK...

It may have been the windshield heat. I know on the C-5, sometimes the windshield heat would cause the outer layer of the windscreen to shatter, but the middle and inner layer still held.



"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5267 posts, RR: 24
Reply 22, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4546 times:



Quoting Mikelive (Reply 12):
Wow, according to the tracking data, she descended 26K feet in about 9 minutes. I can only imagine what kind of ride that must have been.



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 16):
Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 13):

Once you are stabilized in the descent, you tend not to feel like it's that fast. Your body feels the acceleration effects more than anything else.

Deck angle must be pretty crazy, though.

I was thinking about that after I posted. Probably not "crazy", but probably pretty noticeable if you were sitting in the aft part of the aircraft. Let's hope they communicated something to the pax upon entering the descent. If you hear a bang followed by a rapid noseover, it's nice to know that there's gonna be level flight again at some point!

Quoting Rcair1 (Reply 18):
auto rotations are a lot closer to the ground (

Yes, they are. Which is why you usually have about 20 seconds to recognize the event, stabilize the aircraft, pick your spot, adjust your airspeed and/or rotor speed to increase the chances that you will actually land on or near the spot, recheck for obstructions, flare, pull on the collective and "land".

Quoting Jaxs170 (Reply 20):
passengers probably would not have even noticed it


Well, maybe a little.


User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3706 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4424 times:



Quoting Mikelive (Reply 12):
Wow, according to the tracking data, she descended 26K feet in about 9 minutes. I can only imagine what kind of ride that must have been.

That's less than 3k feet/minute, that's pretty pedestrian.



PHX based
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4335 times:

DL went through a phase w/ the A310s when windshields were cracking on a pretty regular basis - at least several times in a fairly short period for something that isn't supposed to happen; not sure what the cause but it obviously was corrected.

The 777 and 767 have both had windshield issues as well... at least for one or more carriers.

there are techno types who can better explain but windshields are highly complex and stressed structures that have to be very well engineered. And even minor cracks or blemishes can cause a fracture later.

It does happen and unless it happens on the 330 often - which I doubt - it is a part of the business.

My only surprise is that NW operated the a/c for that long at such a low altitude but the alternative is to put it down where there was no replacement and where passenger convenience and airline cost would have been much higher.

Everything I have read here says this was a not entirely unexpected event for airlines and NW handed it as best as could be reasonably expected.


25 Brilondon : I heard that it's is our old friend the Canadian Goose who have been spotted at those altitudes. Ironically the Hawaiian Nee-nee (I think that's how
26 Nwaesc : True... Also true... Good point. Agreed 100%. Having been on the receiving end of a "broken windshield" diversion at an outstation, I can tell you th
27 WorldTraveler : specifically the right hub. given that they probably were going to have to dump fuel before they landed at any hub other than on the west coast (and
28 Transpac787 : Most of the ATL crews come in on overseas rotations. Examples: DTW-FRA-ATL-FRA-DTW (DTW A330 crews) MSP-HNL-ATL-HNL-MSP (MSP A330 crews)
29 Flyingbronco05 : Averages 2888 fpm. We typically descent at 3000-3500 in the EMB145 to save gas. So 2888 is nowhere unusual.
30 Jawed : What would have happened if the pressurization problem had occurred over the Pacific Ocean half-way between LAX and HNL?
31 RFields5421 : They would have descended and most likely turned back to the mainland - again better MX opportunities. The decision to go back or continue on would be
32 Eaa3 : Why would this be a concern though. The A330 can dump fuel. And why did they not do that before landing in MSP. Accroding to the news story link they
33 RFields5421 : Not really a concern. There are about 6 to 10 threads per year on this forum about a flight experiencing similar cracked cockpit windows. There are m
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 B763 ATL-ANC Diverted To MSP, Any Info? posted Wed Jul 27 2005 07:39:11 by Pilottim747
Regent Air: JFK/ORD/IAH/DTW/MSP To HNL? posted Mon Apr 18 2005 19:34:29 by Timz
Quick Help...NWA Flt 100 From PHX To MSP...EQ? posted Thu May 23 2002 06:04:53 by TWAL1011
Possible DL Nonstop ATL/DFW/CVG/JFK To HNL posted Mon Mar 4 2002 07:17:05 by 2cn
Delta Nonstop ATL To Hnl? posted Fri Jan 19 2001 06:59:34 by US A333 PIT
ORD To HNL Non Stop posted Sun Oct 25 2009 23:50:58 by Rooinc
When Will Delta Move Their ATL-LGW Flight To LHR? posted Wed Oct 7 2009 05:07:10 by 8herveg
ATL's E Gates - Accessible To RJs? posted Tue Jun 2 2009 13:28:19 by JA
HNL To See The B737-900ER In Sept. posted Mon May 18 2009 18:32:44 by ADXMatt
Continental 15 EWR-HNL Diverting To SFO posted Sun May 17 2009 13:11:17 by DAL763ER