A Southwest Airlines aircraft is off the end of Runway 14R after landing at Eppley Airfield. There are no injuries and airport fire crews are working with Southwest to deplane the passengers and take them to the terminal.

gon2fly wrote:

Do we know that the airport is indeed closed? Referencing the live update on the FAA flight delay page....there is no reference to OMA being closed, and it shows delays of 15 minutes or less.

gon2fly wrote:

Do we know that the airport is indeed closed? Referencing the live update on the FAA flight delay page....there is no reference to OMA being closed, and it shows delays of 15 minutes or less.

gon2fly wrote:

Do we know that the airport is indeed closed? Referencing the live update on the FAA flight delay page....there is no reference to OMA being closed, and it shows delays of 15 minutes or less.

flyguy84 wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

gon2fly wrote:

Do we know that the airport is indeed closed? Referencing the live update on the FAA flight delay page....there is no reference to OMA being closed, and it shows delays of 15 minutes or less.

That page doesn’t usually list every airport that is closed. Usually only during major events. The airport is indeed closed by NOTAM.

gon2fly wrote:

I see now on the airport website that the airport is closed, but strangely, the FAA site is still not showing it correctly and stating it open with delays of 15 minutes or less.

citationjet wrote:

Looks like DL 6008 from LAX to OMA is diverting to DEN.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CPZ6008

FA9295 wrote:

citationjet wrote:

Looks like DL 6008 from LAX to OMA is diverting to DEN.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CPZ6008

That's AA 6008...

citationjet wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

citationjet wrote:

Looks like DL 6008 from LAX to OMA is diverting to DEN.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CPZ6008

That's AA 6008...

OK.
The photo on Flightaware for this flight shows a DL paint scheme.

gon2fly wrote:

flyguy84 wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

gon2fly wrote:

Do we know that the airport is indeed closed? Referencing the live update on the FAA flight delay page....there is no reference to OMA being closed, and it shows delays of 15 minutes or less.

That page doesn’t usually list every airport that is closed. Usually only during major events. The airport is indeed closed by NOTAM.

I clicked on the North Central states region tab.....and it gives a more detailed list of airports....including Omaha. I see now on the airport website that the airport is closed, but strangely, the FAA site is still not showing it correctly and stating it open with delays of 15 minutes or less.

KCaviator wrote:

So when is the FAA going to take notice and look into the safety culture, or lack thereof, at Southwest? This is getting ridiculous...

FA9295 wrote:

KCaviator wrote:

So when is the FAA going to take notice and look into the safety culture, or lack thereof, at Southwest? This is getting ridiculous...

I think Southwest is just getting unlucky...

kiowa wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

KCaviator wrote:

So when is the FAA going to take notice and look into the safety culture, or lack thereof, at Southwest? This is getting ridiculous...

I think Southwest is just getting unlucky...

Did they close the airport because of Southwest or did Southwest try to get in before the airport was closed for weather?

KCaviator wrote:

So when is the FAA going to take notice and look into the safety culture, or lack thereof, at Southwest? This is getting ridiculous...

SurlyBonds wrote:

KCaviator wrote:

So when is the FAA going to take notice and look into the safety culture, or lack thereof, at Southwest? This is getting ridiculous...

A few years ago, I took a Southwest flight to ABQ (from LAS, as I recall, but I could be wrong). I was in the first boarding group and took the aisle seat in row 1, so I had a clear view of the goings-on in the front galley throughout the flight.

One flight attendant never sat down for landing. As we were taxiing to the gate, she told her colleague, "it's been a while since I've done that."

I've never seen that on any flight before, except once in the former Soviet Union. I poked around a bit, and there is indeed an FAR about this.

I have to say that this incident did not speak well of WN's safety culture in my mind.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

kiowa wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

I think Southwest is just getting unlucky...

Did they close the airport because of Southwest or did Southwest try to get in before the airport was closed for weather?

I’m pretty sure the airport told Southwest that they were going to close for safety reasons and Southwest said hold the door open we can make it.

Smh...

Cubsrule wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

kiowa wrote:

Did they close the airport because of Southwest or did Southwest try to get in before the airport was closed for weather?

I’m pretty sure the airport told Southwest that they were going to close for safety reasons and Southwest said hold the door open we can make it.

Smh...

In the event that y'all aren't trolling, there's simply no evidence of that. AS landed 10 minutes before WN and OO landed 7 minutes before AS Meanwhile, another WN flight departed two minutes before WN landed and EV departed 10 minutes before that (after a lengthy sit on the tarmac). It looks like they may have stopped ops for a while between 1300 and 1330, presumably for runway clearing.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

I’m pretty sure the airport told Southwest that they were going to close for safety reasons and Southwest said hold the door open we can make it.

Smh...

In the event that y'all aren't trolling, there's simply no evidence of that. AS landed 10 minutes before WN and OO landed 7 minutes before AS Meanwhile, another WN flight departed two minutes before WN landed and EV departed 10 minutes before that (after a lengthy sit on the tarmac). It looks like they may have stopped ops for a while between 1300 and 1330, presumably for runway clearing.

I was trolling the poster I replied to.

KCaviator wrote:

So when is the FAA going to take notice and look into the safety culture, or lack thereof, at Southwest? This is getting ridiculous...

Bradin wrote:

Also consider the sheer volume of flights WN operates daily in the US alone.

hiflyeras wrote:

Bradin wrote:

Also consider the sheer volume of flights WN operates daily in the US alone.

No one else seems to have the problem of staying on the runway except WN. Good luck with your ETOPS application.

Cubsrule wrote:

hiflyeras wrote:

Bradin wrote:

Also consider the sheer volume of flights WN operates daily in the US alone.

No one else seems to have the problem of staying on the runway except WN. Good luck with your ETOPS application.

So the AA overruns at LIT (hull loss, significant loss of life), KIN (hull loss), and JAC don't count? I may well have missed a few.

litz wrote:

Weather there apparently is far north of "nasty"

hiflyeras wrote:

Bradin wrote:

Also consider the sheer volume of flights WN operates daily in the US alone.

No one else seems to have the problem of staying on the runway except WN. Good luck with your ETOPS application.

usflyguy wrote:

and then we have Alaska Airlines whom had an airliner stolen... what does that say of their safety/security culture?

PlanesNTrains wrote:

usflyguy wrote:

and then we have Alaska Airlines whom had an airliner stolen... what does that say of their safety/security culture?

I’m looking forward to the final report on that as well.

jetblastdubai wrote:

litz wrote:

Weather there apparently is far north of "nasty"

I'm 6 miles west of Eppley and ZERO snow here...just freezing rain.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

usflyguy wrote:

and then we have Alaska Airlines whom had an airliner stolen... what does that say of their safety/security culture?

I’m looking forward to the final report on that as well.

There won’t be an NTSB accident report on that—it’s a crime, not an accident.

GF

Cubsrule wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

I’m looking forward to the final report on that as well.

There won’t be an NTSB accident report on that—it’s a crime, not an accident.

GF

A hull loss is most certainly an accident.

AirKevin wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

There won’t be an NTSB accident report on that—it’s a crime, not an accident.

GF

A hull loss is most certainly an accident.

Not being investigated by the NTSB, as noted above.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Repor ... L&IType=FA

hiflyeras wrote:

Bradin wrote:

Also consider the sheer volume of flights WN operates daily in the US alone.

No one else seems to have the problem of staying on the runway except WN. Good luck with your ETOPS application.

flyguy84 wrote:

Southwest has a bit of a problem....

Cubsrule wrote:

AirKevin wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

A hull loss is most certainly an accident.

Not being investigated by the NTSB, as noted above.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Repor ... L&IType=FA

I’m confused. I said nothing about NTSB investigation. A hull loss is definitionally an accident regardless of who investigates.

Accident. An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which:

a) a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of

- being in the aircraft, or

- direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft, or

- direct exposure to jet blast,

except when the injuries are from natural causes, self inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew: or

b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which:

- adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and

- would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component,

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

AirKevin wrote:

Not being investigated by the NTSB, as noted above.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Repor ... L&IType=FA

I’m confused. I said nothing about NTSB investigation. A hull loss is definitionally an accident regardless of who investigates.

No, it’s not an accident, by definition in Annex 13, see quote below.

Accident. An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which:

a) a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of

- being in the aircraft, or

- direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft, or

- direct exposure to jet blast,

except when the injuries are from natural causes, self inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew: or

b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which:

- adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and

- would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component,

GF

PlanesNTrains wrote:

usflyguy wrote:

and then we have Alaska Airlines whom had an airliner stolen... what does that say of their safety/security culture?

I’m looking forward to the final report on that as well.

except when the injuries are from natural causes, self inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

AirKevin wrote:

Not being investigated by the NTSB, as noted above.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Repor ... L&IType=FA

I’m confused. I said nothing about NTSB investigation. A hull loss is definitionally an accident regardless of who investigates.

No, it’s not an accident, by definition in Annex 13, see quote below.

Accident. An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which:

a) a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of

- being in the aircraft, or

- direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft, or

- direct exposure to jet blast,

except when the injuries are from natural causes, self inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew: or

b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which:

- adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and

- would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component,

GF