Jaxs170
Topic Author
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:53 am

CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:02 am

99,

I was wondering if anyone out there knows why CO 10 (IAH-CDG) diverted to EWR and is listed to depart around 930am on Sat, 10 NOV? I am taking this flight in a few weeks and at the same time my mom will be flying from EWR to CDG to meet me in Paris, and suffice to say she would be a wreck if she got to Paris and I was 12 hours behind schedule. Just looking for info as to what happened if anyone can get a hold of it. Thanks.
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,
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13762
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:06 am

I think your concern is a bit misplaced as this kind of thing is not normal. There must have been a problem with the plane (as a medical emergency would not take 12 hours). The odds of you being delayed like that are about the same as she being delayed 12 hours or any other flight being delayed due to being diverted. It's part of air travel, it's not common, and it's not specific to this flight somehow.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:13 am

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/C...0/history/20071110/0057Z/KIAH/LFPG

Looking at the near 90-degree turn in the BUF area for EWR, my money is on a mechanical issue that involved the overwater portion.

Not likely a medical issue, as you'd really want to land in BUF or someplace closer than EWR to get an ill pax in the hands of medical care more sooner than later...

Not likely an engine-related mechanical issue, since engine shutdowns on twins (like on a 777) require diversion to the nearest suitable airport in point-of-time, even if that airport isn't a MX base like EWR is. BUF, ROC, PIT... not EWR.

Whatever it is, they'll work to get it resolved as best they can, and as fast as they can.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13762
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:40 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 2):
Not likely an engine-related mechanical issue, since engine shutdowns on twins (like on a 777) require diversion to the nearest suitable airport in point-of-time

Yes, but if they don't actually shut the engine down, they don't have to divert to closest, right? They could have an engine problem that would require repair but not an immediate shutdown, and then they'd do their darndest to get to EWR where they could put the bird into the hangar and swap out a new one if need be.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:07 am

Diverted for Mechanical, then crew went illegal
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:22 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
They could have an engine problem that would require repair but not an immediate shutdown

Like?
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
iahcsr
Posts: 3606
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 2:59 pm

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:24 am

Offending aircraft is Ship 004... 10 will op EWRCDG with Ship 019.
CO56 EWRCDG will turn CO11 CDGIAH and CO57 will have to wait 14 hours for 10 to gat there.
Sounds like a fun time for all...  ashamed   banghead 
Working very hard to Fly Right....
 
WJ
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:14 am

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:09 pm

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 5):
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
They could have an engine problem that would require repair but not an immediate shutdown

Like?

Could be a bunch of things, like engine temps above normal, using oil faster than expected or any one of dozens performance standards that are measured that can be off from optimal. Any one of those would alert the crew that something may be off but would not require a shut down and a diversion to nearest suitable, but still concerning enough that you dont want to cross the Atlantic with...
146,727,732,733,734,735,73G,738,739,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,764,772,300,310,319,320,321,330,343,DC9,D10,MD11,M80,E17
 
User avatar
iahcsr
Posts: 3606
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 2:59 pm

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:11 pm

Quoting Wj (Reply 7):
alert the crew that something may be off but would not require a shut down and a diversion to nearest suitable, but still concerning enough that you dont want to cross the Atlantic with...

From what I have heard Engine #1 developed a case of vibration combined with increased fuel consumption. It was decided that was not a good thing... so much so that an engine change is required.
Working very hard to Fly Right....
 
zTagged
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:59 am

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:23 pm

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 2):
PIT.

I'll admit, it would have been really nice to see a T7 inbound for PIT.  biggrin 
Something awful.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13762
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:18 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 5):
Like?



Quoting IAHcsr (Reply 8):
From what I have heard Engine #1 developed a case of vibration combined with increased fuel consumption. It was decided that was not a good thing... so much so that an engine change is required.

But it didn't require a shutdown.

As has been stated, there are a lot of reasons you would not want to shut an engine down, but also wouldn't want to fly 6 more hours on it. This is one of them.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Jaxs170
Topic Author
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:53 am

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:44 am

First, thanks for the info about what happened. I know these types of events are rare, so in a way I am glad it happened now and not when I go  Smile (though that sucks for those aboard CO 10). Mostly it got me thinking about devising a plan in case this happens when I travel.

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 5):

As for engines problems like this, I recently downed a jet that had an engine that was consistently overtemping on climbout. It would only be by a few degrees at MCT, but that is not right. Since we have missions we need to complete, I decided (with my FE in agreement) that we would wait for an opportunity to down the jet when it would not adversely impact us getting missions done, knowing the maintenance would take a day to complete. There are tons of grey areas like this in our operating manual (NATOPS (or -1 for you AF types)), and pilot (and FE) discresion is needed to decide what the best course of action is. Based on the high fuel consumption/vibration report, I would have been wary on taking a twin (or even a quad) across the pond as well, but if the engine was still useful and not showing signs of immenant failure, I would keep it running, even if it was at a lower power setting, to get somewhere I could get it fixed.
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,
 
pilotntrng
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 8:13 pm

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:51 am

Quoting Artsyman (Reply 4):

Care to elaborate on that one?
Booooo Lois, Yaaaa Beer!!!
 
pilotntrng
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 8:13 pm

RE: CO 10 Divert On 9 NOV

Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:02 am

Quoting PilotNTrng (Reply 12):

My bad, I think you were talking about the crew timing out right?
Booooo Lois, Yaaaa Beer!!!

Who is online