Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
dfwjim1
Topic Author
Posts: 2420
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 6:57 pm

Just checking FlightAware and noticed that flight 43 from SJC to HNL turned around an 1:20 into their flight and headed back to SJC...not sure what happened to cause the return.
 
stealth777
Posts: 353
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 7:12 pm

as of 11:03PST (19DEC17) the plane was at 9,000 feet on its return back to the Bay Area and the aircraft is pretty far out (comparison JAL2 inbound to SFO roughly half the lateral distance of where HAL43 is to the Bay Area is at 32,000 feet an descending). I would say a pressurization problem maybe but we won't know until the aircraft is safely back on the ground.
 
masgniw
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 6:14 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 7:31 pm

Still in a holding pattern over the Pacific at 11:28a PST -- dumping fuel it seems?
 
Western727
Posts: 1766
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:02 pm

masgniw wrote:
Still in a holding pattern over the Pacific at 11:28a PST -- dumping fuel it seems?


Seems like quite a long fuel dump for a relatively short flight...one that had already expended over one hour of fuel, no less. Is that normal?

In any case, it appears to be on its way to SJC: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/HAL43
Jack @ AUS
 
masgniw
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 6:14 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:16 pm

Western727 wrote:
In any case, it appears to be on its way to SJC: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/HAL43


I thought so too...until they turned westward, back over the ocean, once again around noon PST.
 
User avatar
ACCS300
Posts: 569
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 4:05 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:19 pm

Looks as if it's turned back towards Hawaii again, agreed, seems like a very extended period of a fuel dump.
 
skyharborshome
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 11:19 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:29 pm

This is turning into a play-by-play as it is now heading back to the coast.

Is it just me or does it seem they are having issues with the 767? At one point they were the most on-time US airline and lately they have had major delays, at least here in PHX. Those 330s cannot come soon enough it seems. Just my observation; could be an anomaly.
Fly CHD!
 
barney captain
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:34 pm

The descent from FL320 to 90 occurred after the turn back to SJC and appeared to be a normal rate. They probably wanted lower to burn fuel quicker as well as dump (assuming this 767 can dump fuel). If not, that would definitely explain the lower altitude.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
Seat1F
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2015 8:42 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:35 pm

masgniw wrote:
Still in a holding pattern over the Pacific at 11:28a PST -- dumping fuel it seems?


Some 763 aircraft don't have the ability to dump fuel. They may be burning off fuel in order not to land heavy. Hope all ends well.
 
ASFlyer
Posts: 1714
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:25 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:37 pm

skyharborshome wrote:
This is turning into a play-by-play as it is now heading back to the coast.

Is it just me or does it seem they are having issues with the 767? At one point they were the most on-time US airline and lately they have had major delays, at least here in PHX. Those 330s cannot come soon enough it seems. Just my observation; could be an anomaly.


They're the on-time leader primarily because of their inter-island operations. If their Hawaii-mainland/international flights were broken out separately they would probably not have held that title. Their transpac flights don't operate at the same level with regards to on-time performance.
 
RushmoreAir
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:29 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:41 pm

skyharborshome wrote:
This is turning into a play-by-play as it is now heading back to the coast.

Is it just me or does it seem they are having issues with the 767? At one point they were the most on-time US airline and lately they have had major delays, at least here in PHX. Those 330s cannot come soon enough it seems. Just my observation; could be an anomaly.



The 767s will be gone by January 2019, but the aircraft involved today (N594HA) is Hawaiian's oldest tail by a long shot at 31 years, and is actually set to be retired next month.
Last edited by RushmoreAir on Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
NW UA DL F9 CO WN LO QF FI AC MU CA EU LH LX DY B6 AA HA NZ MW HU U2 SK AF EK IB HX WS G4 AZ IG 4B

The views and opinions as expressed in this post are entirely my own and are not those of my employer, Hawaiian Airlines, Inc
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3629
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:47 pm

WX radar went INOP

As for the other nonsense in here, I'll leave it to the 13 year olds
“They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
 
skyharborshome
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 11:19 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:48 pm

That far out, are they still talking to SoCal? I am not sure when they transition to the Oceanic. Surprised no one has picked up the reason on scanners.
Fly CHD!
 
kbmiflyer
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:47 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:12 pm

Looks like they are still circling off of the coast. Feel bad for the passengers and crew who are going to end up flying 5+ hours and going nowhere.
 
barney captain
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:21 pm

skyharborshome wrote:
That far out, are they still talking to SoCal? I am not sure when they transition to the Oceanic. Surprised no one has picked up the reason on scanners.



It would NorCal or OAK Center and yes, they are easily still within com and radar coverage.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
deebee278
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:14 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:27 pm

ACCS300 wrote:
Looks as if it's turned back towards Hawaii again, agreed, seems like a very extended period of a fuel dump.


Most likely for weight reduction. Even if this particular 767 can dump fuel, they can only empty the center tank. On a flight this "short", there would have been little, if any, fuel in the center tank.
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 4316
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:47 pm

This seems like a real overabundance of caution for a radar issue
The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:48 pm

jpetekyxmd80 wrote:
This seems like a real overabundance of caution for a radar issue


Really? So with convective activity forecast along your route and at the destination, you'd be okay with flying with no weather radar? How about you let the people that know what they're doing keep making the decisions.

And to all the other "experts," this plane has no dump capabilities. They're obviously burning fuel to get down to landing weight. Unless it's an emergency, they're not going to land overweight.
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 4316
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:58 pm

Um, no, i mean burning off pretty much the entire fuel load. They've been in the air for 5 hours now.
The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
 
seat1a
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:52 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:58 pm

Love threads like this. Always curious when you see a turn back or the following:

https://www.flightradar24.com/AAL9611/fe18d52

AA9611 from CLT to PAE. Anyone know why?
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:59 pm

jpetekyxmd80 wrote:
Um, no, i mean burning off pretty much the entire fuel load. They've been in the air for 5 hours now.


What do you suggest they do? Do you know what fuel load they had? Do you know the max landing weight of that a/c?
 
stealth777
Posts: 353
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:04 pm

As of 2:00pm PST, HAL43 is making its approach to SJC and it now over Santa Cruz Mountains and should be on the ground in the next 10 minutes. I'm curious since they couldn't dump fuel and stayed aloft to burn fuel would they still do the meal service (if they haven't already started)?
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 4316
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:04 pm

If it were a medical they'd have been on the ground 3 hours ago. Theres a middle ground here. Theres nothing really unsafe about slightly overweight landings. Gotta be a miserable experience for the passengers.
The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
 
barney captain
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:05 pm

It looks like they're finally inbound.....
Southeast Of Disorder
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:08 pm

jpetekyxmd80 wrote:
If it were a medical they'd have been on the ground 3 hours ago. Theres a middle ground here. Theres nothing really unsafe about slightly overweight landings. Gotta be a miserable experience for the passengers.


Yes, if it was a medical emergency there would be grounds to land overweight. However, this isn't an emergency, so landing overweight isn't an option. No, there really isn't anything terribly unsafe about an overweight landing, but there are rules and procedures to follow in situations like this. It's actually quite clear on how this situation should be handled. Unless you know what the HAL 767 FCOM and the HAL FOM say and what the HAL POI expects, you probably shouldn't act like you know what you're talking about. Yes, unfortunate to be on a flight to the same place you started, but miserable? Cut the drama.


stealth777 wrote:
As of 2:00pm PST, HAL43 is making its approach to SJC and it now over Santa Cruz Mountains and should be on the ground in the next 10 minutes. I'm curious since they couldn't dump fuel and stayed aloft to burn fuel would they still do the meal service (if they haven't already started)?


Yes, they very likely would have done the full service.
 
berari
Posts: 901
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 3:47 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:22 pm

Western727 wrote:
masgniw wrote:
Still in a holding pattern over the Pacific at 11:28a PST -- dumping fuel it seems?


Seems like quite a long fuel dump for a relatively short flight...one that had already expended over one hour of fuel, no less. Is that normal?

In any case, it appears to be on its way to SJC: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/HAL43


Maybe they go full on fuel from mainland because fuel is more expensive in Hawaii?
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 4316
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:33 pm

Thats a good theory
The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
 
777PHX
Posts: 962
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:36 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:38 pm

skyharborshome wrote:
Is it just me or does it seem they are having issues with the 767? At one point they were the most on-time US airline and lately they have had major delays, at least here in PHX. Those 330s cannot come soon enough it seems. Just my observation; could be an anomaly.


I don't show HA35 being significantly delayed in the past two weeks. PHX is a mx base for the 767, so they're often receiving maintenance while they RON. If there's an issues identified on the incoming, they can be fixed then.
 
User avatar
nickflightx
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 1:43 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:54 pm

Here she is making her landing into SJC. No trucks, no drama, beautifully lit, and went straight to the gate. Nothing said on freq about what the problem was.
Image
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19038
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:48 pm

[quote="nickflightx"]Here she is making her landing into SJC. No trucks, no drama, beautifully lit, and went straight to the gate. Nothing said on freq about what the problem was.

Wow, I didn't realise HA still had 767s without winglets. :o
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
MrBretz
Posts: 536
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:01 am

She is 31 years old. Maybe they didn't think she was worth it.
 
theSFOspotter
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 9:51 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:02 am

A 767 going to hawaii would maybe require 70-80K LBS in fuel? 767-300's (if able) can only dump fuel if theres fuel in the center tank so it is extremely unlikely there was any. From the photo it doesn't look like there the fuel nozzle towards the outermost aileron so they can not dump fuel.
Q-400 A319 A320 B737-300/400/700/800/900ER B757-200/300 B787-8
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:12 am

Western727 wrote:
masgniw wrote:
Still in a holding pattern over the Pacific at 11:28a PST -- dumping fuel it seems?


Seems like quite a long fuel dump for a relatively short flight...one that had already expended over one hour of fuel, no less. Is that normal?

In any case, it appears to be on its way to SJC: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/HAL43


Mainland Hawaii has to have quite a bit more fuel for ETOP's due to Hawaii being so remote. Longer distances to the nearest airport. Japan US has many more airports to go to en route in an emergency.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:16 am

berari wrote:
Western727 wrote:
masgniw wrote:
Still in a holding pattern over the Pacific at 11:28a PST -- dumping fuel it seems?


Seems like quite a long fuel dump for a relatively short flight...one that had already expended over one hour of fuel, no less. Is that normal?

In any case, it appears to be on its way to SJC: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/HAL43


Maybe they go full on fuel from mainland because fuel is more expensive in Hawaii?


Has nothing to do with fuel cost, it's an ETPS requirement. There are no alternate airports between Hawaii & the Mainland. As such they have to carry fuel to allow under 1000 ft, 1 engine speed from the halfway point. vs other route where there are closer airports along the route.
 
bzcat
Posts: 328
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 11:34 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:39 am

Bummer for the pax who spent the same amount of time on board as a normal flight to HNL but landed back at SJC.

Interesting that they elect to return to SJC rather than go to LAX where there are more flight options that could accommodate the passengers. I guess a good number of passengers probably will elect to go home tonight and try again tomorrow now that they are back in SJC.
 
Wingtips56
Posts: 1273
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:26 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:51 am

bzcat wrote:
Bummer for the pax who spent the same amount of time on board as a normal flight to HNL but landed back at SJC.

Interesting that they elect to return to SJC rather than go to LAX where there are more flight options that could accommodate the passengers. I guess a good number of passengers probably will elect to go home tonight and try again tomorrow now that they are back in SJC.

And HA doesn't have to put the entire passenger load up in a diversion city hotel.
Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines (Retired). Flight Memory: 181 airports, 92 airlines, 78 a/c types, 403 routes, 58 countries (by air), 6 continents. 1,119,414 passenger miles.

Home airport : CEC
 
N353SK
Posts: 1021
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:08 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 2:19 am

jpetekyxmd80 wrote:
This seems like a real overabundance of caution for a radar issue


121.357 states that an aircraft may not be dispatched without a weather radar if thunderstorms may reasonably be expected, which is pretty much every day in Hawaii and the tropics. I realize that this flight was already airborne and it's doubtful they'd plan to redispatch on this route, but weather radar is not really optional in part 121 flying.

Personally, I don't think I'd ever be comfortable taking an aircraft with no weather radar over tropical waters. There isn't even ATC or ground-based doppler weather radar as a safety net out there. Your only tool is your eyeballs and while valuable, they are useless if you're flying through clouds.
 
Caspian27
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:48 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:22 am

barney captain wrote:
skyharborshome wrote:
That far out, are they still talking to SoCal? I am not sure when they transition to the Oceanic. Surprised no one has picked up the reason on scanners.



It would NorCal or OAK Center and yes, they are easily still within com and radar coverage.


Based on their position when they turned back they were well into Oakland Oceanic airspace. So unless they have CPDLC, they would have to contact SFO ARINC on HF frequencies to relay clearances from Oakland Oceanic.
Image
Meanwhile, somewhere 35,000 ft above your head...
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6313
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:18 am

Seat1F wrote:
masgniw wrote:
Still in a holding pattern over the Pacific at 11:28a PST -- dumping fuel it seems?


Some 763 aircraft don't have the ability to dump fuel. They may be burning off fuel in order not to land heavy. Hope all ends well.


All 767-300s can dump fuel. The only 767s without fuel jettison were some low weight non-ER 767-200s.
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 4316
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:42 am

The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
 
77H
Posts: 1568
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:06 am

N353SK wrote:
jpetekyxmd80 wrote:
This seems like a real overabundance of caution for a radar issue


121.357 states that an aircraft may not be dispatched without a weather radar if thunderstorms may reasonably be expected, which is pretty much every day in Hawaii and the tropics. I realize that this flight was already airborne and it's doubtful they'd plan to redispatch on this route, but weather radar is not really optional in part 121 flying.

Personally, I don't think I'd ever be comfortable taking an aircraft with no weather radar over tropical waters. There isn't even ATC or ground-based doppler weather radar as a safety net out there. Your only tool is your eyeballs and while valuable, they are useless if you're flying through clouds.


Hawaii very rarely sees thunderstorms relative to other tropical regions. I flew DEN-HNL and it was smooth over the ocean. There were a few towering cumulus but nothing extreme.

I understand the abundance of caution especially with no other options to divert but considering they already had a dispatch forecast and the ability to receive PIREPS and updates from Oceanic wouldn't it have been reasonably possible to continue on with the above ?

77H
 
Western727
Posts: 1766
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:10 pm

77H wrote:
N353SK wrote:
jpetekyxmd80 wrote:
This seems like a real overabundance of caution for a radar issue


121.357 states that an aircraft may not be dispatched without a weather radar if thunderstorms may reasonably be expected, which is pretty much every day in Hawaii and the tropics. I realize that this flight was already airborne and it's doubtful they'd plan to redispatch on this route, but weather radar is not really optional in part 121 flying.

Personally, I don't think I'd ever be comfortable taking an aircraft with no weather radar over tropical waters. There isn't even ATC or ground-based doppler weather radar as a safety net out there. Your only tool is your eyeballs and while valuable, they are useless if you're flying through clouds.


Hawaii very rarely sees thunderstorms relative to other tropical regions. I flew DEN-HNL and it was smooth over the ocean. There were a few towering cumulus but nothing extreme.

I understand the abundance of caution especially with no other options to divert but considering they already had a dispatch forecast and the ability to receive PIREPS and updates from Oceanic wouldn't it have been reasonably possible to continue on with the above ?

77H


I'm only a licensed private pilot but I'm inclined to agree that the dispatch forecast, enroute PIREPS and updates from Oceanic would've been sufficient. I look forward to more insight on this.
Jack @ AUS
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 898
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:12 pm

Flightradar24 shows HAL43A just north of Hana right now and about to cross the coast. I'm guessing the "A indicates the replacement flight?
 
kbmiflyer
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:47 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:38 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
Flightradar24 shows HAL43A just north of Hana right now and about to cross the coast. I'm guessing the "A indicates the replacement flight?


wow, did they really leave at 4:00 am with passengers?
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 898
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:39 pm

I'm guessing so, either that a positioning flight? N594HA is the plane involved in both instances.
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 6:08 pm

77H wrote:
N353SK wrote:
jpetekyxmd80 wrote:
This seems like a real overabundance of caution for a radar issue


121.357 states that an aircraft may not be dispatched without a weather radar if thunderstorms may reasonably be expected, which is pretty much every day in Hawaii and the tropics. I realize that this flight was already airborne and it's doubtful they'd plan to redispatch on this route, but weather radar is not really optional in part 121 flying.

Personally, I don't think I'd ever be comfortable taking an aircraft with no weather radar over tropical waters. There isn't even ATC or ground-based doppler weather radar as a safety net out there. Your only tool is your eyeballs and while valuable, they are useless if you're flying through clouds.


Hawaii very rarely sees thunderstorms relative to other tropical regions. I flew DEN-HNL and it was smooth over the ocean. There were a few towering cumulus but nothing extreme.

I understand the abundance of caution especially with no other options to divert but considering they already had a dispatch forecast and the ability to receive PIREPS and updates from Oceanic wouldn't it have been reasonably possible to continue on with the above ?

77H


True, convective activity isn't as pronounced as in other tropical regions. But the last few days have had t-storms in the forecast for Hawaii as well as enroute to the islands. So no, you just can't wag it and go.

Western727 wrote:
I'm only a licensed private pilot but I'm inclined to agree that the dispatch forecast, enroute PIREPS and updates from Oceanic would've been sufficient. I look forward to more insight on this.


Uh huh... and private pilot flying is far different than 121 ETOPS flying. What you suggest wouldn't be sufficient.

kbmiflyer wrote:
wow, did they really leave at 4:00 am with passengers?


After the air-return, the crew didn't have enough duty day to complete the flight after repairs. They must have gone to rest and departed again early in the morning past midnight. It was a revenue flight, 43A is the call sign because 43 will also be operating today, as scheduled.
 
User avatar
United_fan
Posts: 6691
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 11:11 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Wed Dec 20, 2017 6:52 pm

So did the passengers hang out in the terminal . I doubt there was TSA if they left the terminal and returned .
"Suspicion is a matter of opinion"
 
User avatar
kjeld0d
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:21 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:45 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
All 767-300s can dump fuel. The only 767s without fuel jettison were some low weight non-ER 767-200s.


jpetekyxmd80 wrote:


Did you read your own link? The pdf states: "Early models were not delivered with fuel jettison capability although airlines could install the capability. Later models had fuel jettison capability. " As in, later models have the ability to dump fuel.
 
barney captain
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:54 am

Caspian27 wrote:
barney captain wrote:
skyharborshome wrote:
That far out, are they still talking to SoCal? I am not sure when they transition to the Oceanic. Surprised no one has picked up the reason on scanners.



It would NorCal or OAK Center and yes, they are easily still within com and radar coverage.


Based on their position when they turned back they were well into Oakland Oceanic airspace. So unless they have CPDLC, they would have to contact SFO ARINC on HF frequencies to relay clearances from Oakland Oceanic.
Image



My mistake - I misread the question as the area they were holding in, as opposed to the turn-back point. Yes, I agree, the diversion was likely initiated well inside Oakland Oceanic.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

Re: HAL 43, turnaround - SJC to HNL

Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:01 am

kjeld0d wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
All 767-300s can dump fuel. The only 767s without fuel jettison were some low weight non-ER 767-200s.


jpetekyxmd80 wrote:


Did you read your own link? The pdf states: "Early models were not delivered with fuel jettison capability although airlines could install the capability. Later models had fuel jettison capability. " As in, later models have the ability to dump fuel.


It doesn't really matter what he posted. As mentioned, the aircraft in question and several other HAL 767s do not and did not (since retired) have dump capabilities.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos