Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
WesYan wrote:AF54 CDG-IAD A380 is now diverting to PHL
KFTG wrote:A United DC-10 diverted into DCA but I'm not sure if it was an international flight.
Flydude1063 wrote:KFTG wrote:A United DC-10 diverted into DCA but I'm not sure if it was an international flight.
Gonna go way out on a limb and say you probably didn't see a United DC-10.
WN732 wrote:It's only a 757 so not too difficult for DCA.
D L X wrote:I'm not a fan of diverting to DCA at 3:39pm today. A tornado warning was issued for us at 3:45, and the weather was pretty ominous by 3:30. If they couldn't land at IAD, choosing to land where the storm was heading seems like it wasn't all the way thought out. I wonder if it was approaching a fuel emergency instead of waiting 20 minutes for the storm to pass. (It's sunny now!)
PS: I've never seen night at 3:30pm without an eclipse. Wowza!
EC135C wrote:WN732 wrote:It's only a 757 so not too difficult for DCA.
What do you mean "757 so not too difficult". DCA is very easy for 757s. Won't even be breathing hard when it rotates.
Flydude1063 wrote:KFTG wrote:A United DC-10 diverted into DCA but I'm not sure if it was an international flight.
Gonna go way out on a limb and say you probably didn't see a United DC-10.
smokeybandit wrote:BWI also had the same line of storms
ctrabs0114 wrote:Can we presume that BWI wasn't an option over DCA? Was BWI under the same storm warnings that IAD was?
Actually, now that I read that (1) it was a 757 and (2) UA167 had already attempted an approach to IAD, I probably answered my own question. But, I guess my question would be if an approach was not possible into IAD, would BWI have been a better divert option at the time, or was BWI experiencing similar weather issues?
Flydude1063 wrote:KFTG wrote:A United DC-10 diverted into DCA but I'm not sure if it was an international flight.
Gonna go way out on a limb and say you probably didn't see a United DC-10.
ctrabs0114 wrote:Can we presume that BWI wasn't an option over DCA? Was BWI under the same storm warnings that IAD was?
Actually, now that I read that (1) it was a 757 and (2) UA167 had already attempted an approach to IAD, I probably answered my own question. But, I guess my question would be if an approach was not possible into IAD, would BWI have been a better divert option at the time, or was BWI experiencing similar weather issues?
D L X wrote:I'm not a fan of diverting to DCA at 3:39pm today. A tornado warning was issued for us at 3:45, and the weather was pretty ominous by 3:30. If they couldn't land at IAD, choosing to land where the storm was heading seems like it wasn't all the way thought out. I wonder if it was approaching a fuel emergency instead of waiting 20 minutes for the storm to pass. (It's sunny now!)
PS: I've never seen night at 3:30pm without an eclipse. Wowza!
Scarebus34 wrote:D L X wrote:I'm not a fan of diverting to DCA at 3:39pm today. A tornado warning was issued for us at 3:45, and the weather was pretty ominous by 3:30. If they couldn't land at IAD, choosing to land where the storm was heading seems like it wasn't all the way thought out. I wonder if it was approaching a fuel emergency instead of waiting 20 minutes for the storm to pass. (It's sunny now!)
PS: I've never seen night at 3:30pm without an eclipse. Wowza!
Of course it was thought out... the objective is to get the airplane on the ground. DCA wasn’t the planned alternate but obviously the captain felt it was the best option to get the aircraft on the ground safely.
D L X wrote:Disagree.
Racing to beat storms is not good. These storms were predicted a day ahead of time. That flight overflew BOS, EWR, and PHL before its attempt at IAD. Those would have been good alternatives, especially EWR. Then it missed at DCA and had to loop over alexandria to quickly try again five minutes later. So that’s two missed approaches ahead of a tornado warning. I am not in love with that at all.
airbazar wrote:D L X wrote:Disagree.
Racing to beat storms is not good. These storms were predicted a day ahead of time. That flight overflew BOS, EWR, and PHL before its attempt at IAD. Those would have been good alternatives, especially EWR. Then it missed at DCA and had to loop over alexandria to quickly try again five minutes later. So that’s two missed approaches ahead of a tornado warning. I am not in love with that at all.
I somewhat agree with you however, who's to know that what they did wasn't the plan? It worked right? Maybe a plan you and I might not like but it's a plan nonetheless.
EC135C wrote:WN732 wrote:It's only a 757 so not too difficult for DCA.
What do you mean "757 so not too difficult". DCA is very easy for 757s. Won't even be breathing hard when it rotates.
capitalflyer wrote:EC135C wrote:WN732 wrote:It's only a 757 so not too difficult for DCA.
What do you mean "757 so not too difficult". DCA is very easy for 757s. Won't even be breathing hard when it rotates.
That could refer to the landing. The pilot botched the initial approach and had to go around before finally landing. If you are unfamiliar with DCA or haven't done it in a long time that river approach might be tricky, especially in 757 without as much room for error.
D L X wrote:airbazar wrote:D L X wrote:Disagree.
Racing to beat storms is not good. These storms were predicted a day ahead of time. That flight overflew BOS, EWR, and PHL before its attempt at IAD. Those would have been good alternatives, especially EWR. Then it missed at DCA and had to loop over alexandria to quickly try again five minutes later. So that’s two missed approaches ahead of a tornado warning. I am not in love with that at all.
I somewhat agree with you however, who's to know that what they did wasn't the plan? It worked right? Maybe a plan you and I might not like but it's a plan nonetheless.
I just can’t imagine flying into a tornado warned thunderstorm as being acceptable. It “worked” this time, but I don’t think I’m being overly alarmist to point out there are times in fairly recent memory where it ended poorly. (Little Rock and Jamaica come to mind.)
codc10 wrote:"Consumer" weather alerts (severe thunderstorm watch/warning, tornado warning, etc.) are not reported via aviation weather services, so they aren't independently relevant to airmen. However, if the conditions in the vicinity of a given airport are consistent with the type of weather forecast, then there can be a correlation; e.g., strong winds, lightning, hail, and more, all of which have a negative impact on flight ops.
In other words, even if DCA was under a tornado watch/warning, if the critical meteorological factors are within margins, then operations will generally continue. There might not be ground service personnel outside available to receive the airplane, at least right away, but operations aren't contingent on public watches/warnings.
As for the decision to land at DCA, probably not an ideal scenario, but afternoon weather up and down the East Coast has been brutal over the last 10 days or so. I would imagine the crew and company dispatch had extensive discussion over the last half of that TATL crossing and determined that an attempt to continue all the way to IAD was the most prudent course of action under the circumstances. A 757-200 will have no problem landing at DCA, even with a contaminated runway, and getting out for the short hop to IAD after the weather clears is a piece of cake, as well. UA regularly handles 757s (753) at DCA, so parking space, towbars, handling equipment isn't an issue, either.
TMccrury wrote:A few years back, severe storms hit DC which caused a lot of diversions. My friend, who worked for one of the fuelers at RIC, called me and told me we had an AF 777, UA 777, Brussels A330 and a BA 777. The company he worked for refueled all of them. I went out and watched them all depart for IAD. Also, there were several smaller A320/B737 types from UA and others as well. They were parked everywhere.
capitalflyer wrote:UA167 from Lisbon to IAD just attempted to divert to DCA. After going around once it landed at DCA just before a line of severe storms ripped through.
Weather is the obvious reason, but has there been an international diversion like this before? Can CBP process these folks or do they have to get to IAD?
ferminbrif wrote:capitalflyer wrote:UA167 from Lisbon to IAD just attempted to divert to DCA. After going around once it landed at DCA just before a line of severe storms ripped through.
Weather is the obvious reason, but has there been an international diversion like this before? Can CBP process these folks or do they have to get to IAD?
I’m just wondering why wouldn’t “Can CBP process these folks or do they have to get to IAD?”
Isn’t DCA inside USA as well as IAD?
ferminbrif wrote:capitalflyer wrote:UA167 from Lisbon to IAD just attempted to divert to DCA. After going around once it landed at DCA just before a line of severe storms ripped through.
Weather is the obvious reason, but has there been an international diversion like this before? Can CBP process these folks or do they have to get to IAD?
I’m just wondering why wouldn’t “Can CBP process these folks or do they have to get to IAD?”
Isn’t DCA inside USA as well as IAD?
ojjunior wrote:TMccrury wrote:A few years back, severe storms hit DC which caused a lot of diversions. My friend, who worked for one of the fuelers at RIC, called me and told me we had an AF 777, UA 777, Brussels A330 and a BA 777. The company he worked for refueled all of them. I went out and watched them all depart for IAD. Also, there were several smaller A320/B737 types from UA and others as well. They were parked everywhere.
And why on Earth didn't you or your friend take some pics?
capitalflyer wrote:D L X wrote:airbazar wrote:
I somewhat agree with you however, who's to know that what they did wasn't the plan? It worked right? Maybe a plan you and I might not like but it's a plan nonetheless.
I just can’t imagine flying into a tornado warned thunderstorm as being acceptable. It “worked” this time, but I don’t think I’m being overly alarmist to point out there are times in fairly recent memory where it ended poorly. (Little Rock and Jamaica come to mind.)
Storms often happen in late spring/summer. But there was no way that they could predict a tornadic storm would affect all 3 DC terminals at nearly the same time. The BWI storm dropped an EF1 tornado in Columbia, MD.
The storm line itself was strong but not severe until it came off the mountains and down onto piedmont in NoVA. The rapid intensification happened probably as the flight was over BOS or NY, so not much time to react.
I agree that UA did well with a bad situation. And the pilots did well to get it on the ground safely and to stay steady after go around with fast approaching severe wx.