varigb707 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1220 posts, RR: 1 Posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 22336 times:
Report on Yahoo does not mention what type of aircraft and or the nationality of the crew.
"DUBAI (Reuters) - A small U.S. commercial plane has been stuck in Iran for nearly three weeks after making an emergency landing near the city of Ahvaz, the country's airports director said on Sunday"
acidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1855 posts, RR: 10 Reply 2, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 21628 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting 777STL (Reply 1): Its happened before. NW had a DC10 divert to Tehran back in '05 or so.
Absolutely! US Airliner Makes Emergency Landing At Tehran (by JoKeR Jun 19 2005 in Civil Aviation) talks about it. There was a smoke or fire alarm in one of the cargo bays but it was determined to be false and they went on their way. The Tehran airport authorities took care of the passengers. The real challenge was purchasing additional fuel - since there is no real way to quickly/easily transfer money to/from the US and Iran they had to find some intermediary who was willing to front the fuel; I remember this part of the operation taking about 4 hours to accomplish. It isn't like NW can just give the Tehran FBO their American Express or Visa card number over the phone
I'd like to know more about this plane parked in Ahvaz. I'm sure given time we will learn more.
777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2402 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 21187 times:
Quoting 777STL (Reply 1): Its happened before. NW had a DC10 divert to Tehran back in '05 or so.
Suffice it to say, relations between Iran and the US were slightly less contentious in 2005 than they are now. Iran probably wanted nothing to do with a couple of hundred passengers, as well, which explains their willingness to help resolve the situation (that and international protocol concerning the safety of airmen and seamen).
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8746 posts, RR: 52 Reply 4, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 20842 times:
The biggest problem is paying for the repairs and fuel. People in Iran are more than willing to help others but the political conflict makes payment for goods and services nearly impossible. I can imagine some customs headaches too since the crew left the country. IATA requires Iran to make accommodations for any plane requiring an emergency landing.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2402 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 20772 times:
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 4): People in Iran are more than willing to help others but the political conflict makes payment for goods and services nearly impossible.
People, probably yes, but the Iranian government might view this situation as an opporunity to exploit a perceived "invasion" or "act of aggression." Can anyone actually confirm this was a "commercial" aircraft? I'm guessing it may have been some sort of business jet or small cargo aircraft. In any case, with the crew long gone and the aircraft essentially on its own, I wouldn't be surprised to see the aircraft thoroughly inspected and "impounded" over some trumped up charge of whatever...
KC135Hydraulics From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 19452 times:
Write that plane off. It is forever marooned in that place.
texan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4204 posts, RR: 53 Reply 7, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 18415 times:
Some of you are real conspiracy theorists. The aircraft had a mechanical while exercising its rights to transit over Iran under Article 5 of the Chicago Convention. That places certain responsibilities on the State where the aircraft lands. If the aircraft suffered a mechanical problem in flight and was in "distress", Article 25 of Chicago puts a duty on States to assist those aircraft both in air and on ground. It is a common enough occurrence that an aircraft gets stuck in an "unfriendly" State because of a mechanical problem. When that happens, the State has obligations it must meet or face possible ICAO sanctions.
Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
strfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 488 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 17414 times:
Iran had to grant Overfly rights to the carrier and thus paved the way for that carrier to land were there an emergency that called for it. they can't just impound the airplane and act like Fools when they TOO fly internationally
What would be the point?? They tell everybody ELSE they want to BE reasonable so they have to ACT like it...
a300 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 453 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14094 times:
I was on a Delta flight DXB-ATL a few years back that overflew the entire Western length of Iran, exiting somewhere in the northwest. I suspect that there are no major issues with civil-registered US aircraft overflying Iran. In addition, lots of US bound EK flights transit the Iranian airspace.
Given the current geopolitical tensions though, the rules can change quickly. It would be quite costly for the flights that need to bypass the Iranian airspace.
trex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 3970 posts, RR: 14 Reply 12, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 13727 times:
Quoting acidradio (Reply 2): It isn't like NW can just give the Tehran FBO their American Express or Visa card number over the phone
Wasn't there a hijacked plane in the 70s where the pilot charged for fuel on his personal credit card? Even then I thought he must have had a heck of a credit limit!!
TonyBurr From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 983 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 13055 times:
I believe that hijacked plane was a 727 for TWA, going from ATH-FCO . There are pictures of the pilot handing over his credit card or the fuel.
COSPN From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1473 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 12827 times:
Sometimes you do have to "pass the hat" with the pax to come up with cash or CC for fuel if you land at an out of the way way place..many places in the world are still "cash and carry" Usually you are only needing a few thousand USD so in a big plane it works most the time..
71Zulu From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2736 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 12529 times:
Quoting trex8 (Reply 12): Wasn't there a hijacked plane in the 70s where the pilot charged for fuel on his personal credit card? Even then I thought he must have had a heck of a credit limit!!
Does Amex have a credit limit now?, back then I thought they didn't and maybe that's what he used. I knew of a Skybus pilot that put 3 charter buses on his card when the airport got fogged in and had to divert.
n797mx From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 96 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 11726 times:
Quoting TonyBurr (Reply 13): I believe that hijacked plane was a 727 for TWA, going from ATH-FCO . There are pictures of the pilot handing over his credit card or the fuel.
falstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 29 Reply 18, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 11292 times:
Quoting n797mx (Reply 17): Quoting TonyBurr (Reply 13):I believe that hijacked plane was a 727 for TWA, going from ATH-FCO . There are pictures of the pilot handing over his credit card or the fuel.
I think you are thinking of TWA 847, ATH-FCO-LHR
I was always under the impression it was the FA that used her Shell credit card.
Quoting TonyBurr (Reply 13): I believe that hijacked plane was a 727 for TWA
GSPflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 351 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10828 times:
Quoting trex8 (Reply 12): Even then I thought he must have had a heck of a credit limit!!
Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 16): Does Amex have a credit limit now?
Were there computerized credit card transactions in 85'? I wasn't around at that time. If there weren't, then was there any way for a retailer to tell if a customer had reached their limit at the time of purchase?
Quoting falstaff (Reply 18): I was always under the impression it was the FA that used her Shell credit card.
That's what I recall watching on some kind of special of the incident. I'm thinking an episode of air emergency.
solarflyer22 From US Minor Outlying Islands, joined Nov 2009, 395 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 10267 times:
Quoting 777fan (Reply 5): People, probably yes, but the Iranian government might view this situation as an opporunity to exploit a perceived "invasion" or "act of aggression."
People certainly yes not probably. I doubt if it were a perceived act of aggression it would be there for 3 weeks and as a matter of fact its the USA that has shot down civilian airliners not Iran.
Quoting texan (Reply 7): Article 5 of the Chicago Convention
The convention also stipulates that member nations have to support safe travel. The USA sanctions on civilian aircraft parts on Iran clearly violate the safety standards of these aircraft. They have been forced to fly million of passenger miles unsafely with known causalities. It would be hypocritical in my mind to turn around and use the same convention we've ourselves violated. You can sanction non-flight essential parts in my mind but to prevent delivery of things like pitot tubes etc is really dirty in my mind.
Quoting a300 (Reply 11): t would be quite costly for the flights that need to bypass the Iranian airspace.
I've always wondered why they don't route them in a circuitous route. If I were in charge, I'd route every plane from a hostile nation in a zig zag making it inefficient enough to not want to fly through airspace. This is in fact totally legal. I certainly doubt the USA would route any IranAir aircraft over its territory on anything other than a diplomatic flight. I certainly wouldn't grant the USA anything over and above what they are doing.
skywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 147 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9549 times:
Quoting falstaff (Reply 18): I was always under the impression it was the FA that used her Shell credit card.
Uli Derickson was the lead FA and used her Shell card to pay for the fuel. I think it was the only card the ground handlers could take.
Iran is an ICAO signatory country. They have to give all other signatory countries overflight rights, even if they don't like the country. The US tried to deny overflight rights to Cuba a few years back. ICAO told the US that overflight must be allowed or they would face possible penalties. Cuban aircraft overfly the US on a regular basis today, and vice versa.
Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
asctty From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2008, 72 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9316 times:
Would anyone like to comment on the fact that the aircraft in question has now apparently left Iran and therefore there is no 'bad news' story?
I am no Iran fan, but it appears that, in this instance at least, they do comply with the ICAO rules these days and should at least deserve some recognition for this???
ushermittwoch From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2888 posts, RR: 18 Reply 24, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9259 times:
Quoting asctty (Reply 23): I am no Iran fan, but it appears that, in this instance at least, they do comply with the ICAO rules these days and should at least deserve some recognition for this???
Why shouldn't they comply?
Iran complies with almost every international treaty that they have signed. Unlike the United States.
cbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1506 posts, RR: 6 Reply 25, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9299 times:
Quoting COSPN (Reply 14): Sometimes you do have to "pass the hat" with the pax to come up with cash or CC for fuel if you land at an out of the way way place..many places in the world are still "cash and carry" Usually you are only needing a few thousand USD so in a big plane it works most the time..
Absolutely! I remember hearing about US carriers going from ANC to parts of Eastern Russia where the Captain has to carry a brief case full of cash in order to buy fuel and services for the return trip.
If this flight was a random guy in a 172, it might have been a bit more difficult to acquire the finances to repair the aircraft, but seeing as though this was a Falcon, I am sure the financial resources behind the aircraft would be better suited to handle a divert to a place like Iran!
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 7771 posts, RR: 26 Reply 26, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8386 times:
Th problem is rather with the USA as with Iran.
The US embargo rules making payment for the costs accumulated difficult. Same for spare parts needed. An exemption by the State Department might be necessary.
If spare parts need to be shipped to Iran, they would fall under the embargo, although, technically such parts are "in transit", a customs procedure which, however, has to be arranged with Iranian customs.
At the end of the day, the problems made by USA are more severe than the problems Iran puts up here.
JoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5031 posts, RR: 29 Reply 27, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8384 times:
I don't see why anybody would be surprised that Iran would help. They have been aiding sailors in distress, of any nationality, (including American), for years.
SASDC8 From Norway, joined Mar 2006, 663 posts, RR: 1 Reply 28, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5601 times:
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 27): I don't see why anybody would be surprised that Iran would help. They have been aiding sailors in distress, of any nationality, (including American), for years.
Yes, but as you se from some of the posts earlier in this thread, they either don't know or they just don't care.
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 26): The US embargo rules making payment for the costs accumulated difficult. Same for spare parts needed. An exemption by the State Department might be necessary.
Exactly. The problem (if there was one) would be because of the US embargo and not with the Iranians.
AirPacific747 From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2091 posts, RR: 23 Reply 29, posted (4 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4515 times:
I've been overflying Iran as a pilot in a Ukrainian registered aircraft, no problem. All the way from the north western part past Tehran and exited at the southern coast line
Don't LH have cargo flights to and from Iran? I don't think there is any problem for any aircraft even if they are registered in a Western country.
I was on the crew of that flight. It was June of 2005. We made an emergency landing because there was an indicator of fire in the cargo hold on the DC-10. It turned out to be a false alarm. We were on the ground for about 7 hours total. The long delay was not in the inspection of the hold, but because of the difficulties involved in negotiating fueling, and how it would be paid. If I remember correctly, the fuel was charged to KLM, which passed on the charge to Northwest.
We did not remain on the plane. We were inside the terminal building. A number of airport workers came up to talk to us. We were quite the celebrities. Several people said to us, "We want you to know that we don't hate America." They were extremely lovely, and we were well taken care of.
aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8357 posts, RR: 47 Reply 31, posted (4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4169 times:
The only problem here is the economic sanctions imposed not by Iran, but other nations. Think what you may of their political and religious leaders, there are over 75 million people in the country - it's simply impossible for all of them to be anti-American zealots. Add to that their resourcefulness and hospitality:
Quoting pqdtw (Reply 30): Quite a fantastic experience, all in all.
and you're guaranteed to have a better experience than certain media suggest.
Quoting asctty (Reply 23): Would anyone like to comment on the fact that the aircraft in question has now apparently left Iran and therefore there is no 'bad news' story?
No, no, no! That doesn't fit the narrative, so you must never acknowledge it!
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
LH has a daily 747 FRA/IKA. Not sure about cargo flights however, exports to Iran are difficult with the sanctions. The belly capacity of the pax flight might be more than enough.
kgaiflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 3650 posts, RR: 1 Reply 33, posted (4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4054 times:
Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 16): Does Amex have a credit limit now?, back then I thought they didn't and maybe that's what he used. I knew of a Skybus pilot that put 3 charter buses on his card when the airport got fogged in and had to divert.
They follow your history.
For instance, my Amex is regularly cut off at a Shell station near YYJ because they ask that excessive amounts of money be set aside against my gas purchase (usually $100 for an Impala or Taurus fillup). Same with the Husky station near YYC.
For the pilot spoken about, his credit scores must be above 800.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 35, posted (4 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3791 times:
Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 16): Does Amex have a credit limit now?, back then I thought they didn't and maybe that's what he used. I
For the pilot spoken about, his credit scores must be above 800.
Amex used to be and apparently still is very flexible about limits. I've called Amex and said I wanted to make a large purchase for cruise tickets or airline tickets far above my normal spending, and had it approved.
Back when I was in the US Navy, one of our pilots called Amex and told them he wanted to make a $20,000 purchase of camera equipment in Japan. It was approved. At that time, 1972, his annual salary was only about $15,000.
For the case mentioned, I understand the airline contacted the credit card company on behalf of the pilot and assured them that the airline would quickly pay for any purchase the pilot made.
It is not that unusual to have such a plan in place.
The pilots who used to fly the jets for the company I last worked for carried a company backed American Express card like all travelers in the company. However their cards had the specific setups on their accounts that $100,000 or more could be charged for airplane fuel or repairs anywhere in the world.
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4147 posts, RR: 1 Reply 37, posted (4 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3404 times:
Quoting Aesma (Reply 36): If it really was a Falcon then it may have helped, only the US and some puppets are banning aircraft parts, not the EU.
It depends on the manufacturer of the part. If the part is from a US company or subsidiary of of US company the US sanctions apply. The same applies if your company does business with the US (in addition, your also not allowed to receive or send money from/to Iran). Thus you need a supplier which doesn't deal with the US or you would need a waiver from the US government.
BTW according to a Dutch website the aircraft was on its way from Dubai to Amsterdam.
I'm guessing the most extraordinary part of the experience was that you were treated so ordinarily...at least that was my experience when I was working there about the same time, for an American company.
I walked a couple of miles around the downtown Tehran airport dragging a wheelie bag and the only bother I had was people asking if I needed any help...and trust me, I blend in like a mirror ball at a funeral.
m404 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2214 posts, RR: 5 Reply 39, posted (4 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2422 times:
I'm wondering if it could have been a corporate sized jet from something like Delta's executive charter operations. Maybe that's how the story of it being a commercial flight got started.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
RWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2160 posts, RR: 4 Reply 40, posted (4 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1387 times:
Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 16): Does Amex have a credit limit now?, back then I thought they didn't and maybe that's what he used.
Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 33): For instance, my Amex is regularly cut off at a Shell station near YYJ because they ask that excessive amounts of money be set aside against my gas purchase (usually $100 for an Impala or Taurus fillup). Same with the Husky station near YYC.
For the pilot spoken about, his credit scores must be above 800
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 35): Amex used to be and apparently still is very flexible about limits. I've called Amex and said I wanted to make a large purchase for cruise tickets or airline tickets far above my normal spending, and had it approved
Having worked for American Express before, I can affirm there are definitely credit limits on all regular Amex cards, gold, platinum etc.... they know your spending habits, your payment history, your income, the reliability of the customer. That is the things they use to determine your credit line, they are flexible to some extent if you call them as stated above.
The only card that is truly unlimited are the "by invitation only" cards that are issued by all major card companies, these are not the cards advertised on TV or in magazines for the average chump. Those .05% of cardholders are wealthy enough to pay their bill, whether it's Faberge eggs, Yachts or Gulfstreams.
Next Flights: AS PDX-SEA-KOA on DH4/738 in F, HA KOA-OGG on 717 in Y, AS OGG-PDX on 738 in F
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1220 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4204 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2008, 72 posts, 
From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1473 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21488 posts, 
From US Minor Outlying Islands, joined Nov 2009, 395 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2888 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5031 posts, 
From Norway, joined Mar 2006, 663 posts, 
From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2091 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Aug 2008, 145 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2009, 4789 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
