Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Emergency Landing Times  
User currently offlineAirfoilsguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2356 times:

Quick and easy question for the pilots or anyone else in the know. Lets say I am at 35,000 in a 737 or similar aircraft, directly over a suitable airport with no traffic or weather. How long will it take me to get on the ground, stopped, with doors open for evac or ambulance transport?

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJhare From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 1 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2348 times:

That would depend on the emergency situation. The shortest time would most likely be 8-10mins, realistically however there is always traffic and weather conditions wherever you go, so it could take upto 10-15mins. A problem with the 737 however is that the pilot is unable to dump fuel, so it may have to circle for a while to burn off fuel, this could add on a considerable ammount of time,

Jordan


User currently offlineNathanR From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 22 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2342 times:



Quoting Jhare (Reply 1):
A problem with the 737 however is that the pilot is unable to dump fuel, so it may have to circle for a while to burn off fuel, this could add on a considerable ammount of time

Is burning fuel (if you cannot dump it) really necessary? You would think in an emergency that they would be the fastest they could be.


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2337 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting Jhare (Reply 1):
A problem with the 737 however is that the pilot is unable to dump fuel, so it may have to circle for a while to burn off fuel, this could add on a considerable ammount of time,

Depending on the severity of the emergency, the risk of staying aloft could far exceed the risk of landing overweight.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2312 times:



Quoting Jhare (Reply 1):
A problem with the 737 however is that the pilot is unable to dump fuel, so it may have to circle for a while to burn off fuel, this could add on a considerable ammount of time,

The 737 is completely capable of landing fully loaded. This is the only way you can get away without a fuel dump system in the first place.

Tom.


User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3466 posts, RR: 47
Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2312 times:



Quoting Airfoilsguy (Thread starter):
How long will it take me to get on the ground, stopped, with doors open for evac or ambulance transport?

Depends upon the scenario and what you are trying to accomplish. I flew (twice) a simulated terrorist threat to my 738 at FL410 overhead LAX (in simulators). Both times I had the plane stopped on the runway in less than 8 minutes (7:38 and 7:21) from time of notification. About as close to an answer to your question I can think of.



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlinePilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2280 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
The 737 is completely capable of landing fully loaded

Yes, but not every runway can handle that. I'm not trying to defend the other side of that discussion. I'm just making a reminder. Aircraft structure is not the only thing that needs consideration when worrying about weight.

Quoting NathanR (Reply 2):
Is burning fuel (if you cannot dump it) really necessary? You would think in an emergency that they would be the fastest they could be.

It depends on the situation. If it's not that needs immediate attention from someone/thing on the ground, then yes, it usually is necessary. But if you have someone with a heart attack, bomb threat, or fire in the cockpit, then no, it's not necessary, and you need to get on the ground ASAP. But also remember that if you have someone with a heart attack, and end up landing extremely overweight (let's say runway limiting, meaning the runway can't really handle your weight), then you may end up making the situation worse by damaging the runway and causing a crash, possibly harming more passengers. This is just one example, and is not meant to be picked on. :-P


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2274 times:



Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 6):

Yes, but not every runway can handle that.



Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 6):
Aircraft structure is not the only thing that needs consideration when worrying about weight.

Both are moot points--the OP said "suitable airport" and I think AAR90 has answered the gent's question...


User currently offlineEssentialPowr From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1820 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2250 times:

AAR90's answer is a good one. I guessed 8 to myself, and then read his. As was mentioned, landing weight issues are irrelevant when an emergency is declared, and all part 121 a/c are capable of landing at MGTOW by design and certification standards.

User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2204 times:



Quoting Jhare (Reply 1):
A problem with the 737 however is that the pilot is unable to dump fuel, so it may have to circle for a while to burn off fuel, this could add on a considerable ammount of time,

If the Emergency is not as critical,an overweight Landing can be done on the B737.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineAirfoilsguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2172 times:



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
About as close to an answer to your question I can think of.

That is exactly what I was looking for. In this scenario did you "break" anything? I.E. overweight landing necessitating inspection or could you theoretically put the plane back in service immediately?


User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3466 posts, RR: 47
Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2161 times:



Quoting Airfoilsguy (Reply 10):
That is exactly what I was looking for. In this scenario did you "break" anything? I.E. overweight landing necessitating inspection or could you theoretically put the plane back in service immediately?

Anytime you land overweight requires on overweight inspection no matter how gentle you are with the plane. I know the brakes got heavy use and were probably "throw-aways" if it were for real. OTOH, the landing was very gentle.... lots of energy to bleed-off there.



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlineMiamiair From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2130 times:



Quoting Jhare (Reply 1):
problem with the 737 however is that the pilot is unable to dump fuel, so it may have to circle for a while to burn off fuel, this could add on a considerable ammount of time,

Remember Swiss Air 111?

The other consideration is if there is some sort of structural integrity issue. You do not want to come down like a ruptured duck.

I recall a guy who flew Caravelles. He said they can come down at 13K FPM. I am not sure about that one.


User currently offlineEssentialPowr From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1820 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1997 times:



Quoting Miamiair (Reply 12):

The other consideration is if there is some sort of structural integrity issue. You do not want to come down like a ruptured duck.

Emergencies are considered heavily in part 121 certified a/c...they are designed to withstand multiple system failures. Aint that brilliant?


User currently offlineJawed From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1987 times:

interesting.. what are the main steps to achieve such a quick landing? and at such a high rate of descent, at what angle to the ground is the plane descending?

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
Depends upon the scenario and what you are trying to accomplish. I flew (twice) a simulated terrorist threat to my 738 at FL410 overhead LAX (in simulators). Both times I had the plane stopped on the runway in less than 8 minutes (7:38 and 7:21) from time of notification. About as close to an answer to your question I can think of.



User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3466 posts, RR: 47
Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1963 times:



Quoting Jawed (Reply 14):
what are the main steps to achieve such a quick landing? and at such a high rate of descent, at what angle to the ground is the plane descending?

Emergency Descent procedure and good eye-hand coordination as to energy management --idle glide all the way to the landing at max speed but still able to land/stop on the runway in minimum amount of time. First time I did it I simply surprised myself. Never would have guessed 8 minutes. Second time it became a challenge to do it in less time. Considering there was more than one minute spent on the ground (touchdown, stop, complete emergency evac checklist) plus slowdown requirements... I'd guess a 10,000fpm maximum descent rate would not be out of the question. I don't recall the deck angle --I was a bit busy at the time.  box 



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Emergency Landing Times
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
De-Ice Failure Requires Emergency Landing posted Fri Nov 16 2007 18:54:42 by Airline7322
Stages Of Emergency Landing posted Tue May 29 2007 20:22:52 by Swiftski
Emergency Landing As Resume Item? posted Tue Jan 17 2006 13:16:12 by LHMARK
Emergency Landing Question posted Tue Jan 18 2005 10:31:22 by B741
Emergency Landing Question posted Sat Jul 10 2004 14:32:21 by Planespotterx
AR 737-236 Emergency Landing posted Thu Mar 14 2002 19:19:16 by ARG-777
Emergency Landing W/o A Close Runway posted Sun Aug 26 2001 07:00:30 by Airlinelover
Emergency Landing At PHL Saturday? posted Mon Aug 6 2001 03:31:10 by Contrails
MD-11 Hydraulics/Emergency Landing posted Wed Mar 28 2001 11:43:37 by Edward
Emergency Airliner Landing On Interstate Hwy posted Fri May 25 2001 20:37:37 by Beechbarron

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format