Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
mcdu
Posts: 1655
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:06 pm

hivue wrote:
mcdu wrote:
Except that the planes are designed to land up to the max weight if needed and not have the brakes catch on fire...


I believe the max energy RTO test done during certification of the airplane is designed to show that the airplane can safely sit 5 minutes (or something like that) with no intervention from fire services with the brakes on fire. The brakes are expected -- depending on wear level -- to catch fire during max braking on a MTOW airplane.


Was the aircraft at MTOW for the flight to PVG. I suspect it was well below MTOW
 
ldvaviation
Posts: 1258
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:21 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:21 pm

RightRudder wrote:
There would be a class action within hours If this would of been over Orange County.


The plane's flight path crossed northeast Orange County (Fullerton and Brea).

I know people in the area. I dare say some of them were not happy to read that the plane dumped fuel downstream from them.
 
RightRudder
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:04 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:26 pm

D L X wrote:
RightRudder wrote:
A piilot/crew declaring an emergency is a big deal. They are not going to do that for any reason. My point is what was the original cause of the accident? Time will tell whether the airline is negligent or if it was force majure.


Would any pilot NOT declare an emergency with a compressor stall?


Thanks for putting me back on my bearings. :goodvibes: Never quite knew much about compressor stalls. :scratchchin:


I noticed on some brief reading that FOD (tarmac, taxiway, runway, etc.) can be a contributor to compressor stalls.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana".
 
mcdu
Posts: 1655
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:38 pm

RightRudder wrote:
A piilot/crew declaring an emergency is a big deal. They are not going to do that for any reason. My point is what was the original cause of the accident? Time will tell whether the airline is negligent or if it was force majure.


BS. Declaring an emergency is not a big deal. It cost nothing and gives lots of protections. Especially in this case if the captain is going to say he used his emergency authority to dump at low level while simultaneously telling ATC he had it under control and didn’t need to dump or declare an emergency.
 
D L X
Posts: 12680
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:49 pm

RightRudder wrote:
D L X wrote:
RightRudder wrote:
A piilot/crew declaring an emergency is a big deal. They are not going to do that for any reason. My point is what was the original cause of the accident? Time will tell whether the airline is negligent or if it was force majure.


Would any pilot NOT declare an emergency with a compressor stall?


Thanks for putting me back on my bearings. :goodvibes: Never quite knew much about compressor stalls. :scratchchin:

Not so fast. I'm not a pilot, so I'm asking because I don't know.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24657
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:52 pm

longhauler wrote:
In reading this thread, i wonder if there hasn’t been some “negative training”.

Every time I had a compressor stall in the sim, we always got it back. Slowly advancing the thrust until the engine operated normally. Then ...... about 10 miles on final, as we configured for landing, slowing, with higher thrust, (not good for a stall) the engine stalled again. This time we didn’t get it back.

So ever since, I always prepare for a single engine landing, as it always happened in the sim. So I would most definitely jettison fuel, even if both were still running. It is sad these Gentlemen are being second guessed. In my opinion, they achieved a perfect end. No one was hurt and the airplane was not damaged.

Good work.

Agreed. The main objective was achieved. The rest is noise.

32andBelow wrote:
Would you also Just not inform ATC you were fuel dumping after they asked you? Doubtful.

ATC did not ask him if he was dumping fuel, ATC asked him if he'd like to go somewhere to dump fuel.

ATC did this already knowing he declared emergency and after he told them his intention was to return to LAX.

They never asked him if he was already dumping fuel, and his tone of voice suggested to me that he was too busy to elaborate further.

Feel free to listen to the ATC exchanges, the VAS youtube link is already given in this thread.

N14AZ wrote:
Before graduating I made tests on a sewage treatment plant and the hose of a septic sludge tanker exploded next to me covering me with … well, you can imagine (some of us may still have breakfast...)

Did you decide to change careers immediately?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
sciing
Posts: 205
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:54 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:07 pm

D L X wrote:
RightRudder wrote:
A piilot/crew declaring an emergency is a big deal. They are not going to do that for any reason. My point is what was the original cause of the accident? Time will tell whether the airline is negligent or if it was force majure.


Would any pilot NOT declare an emergency with a compressor stall?

Real men have 4 engines.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvVfLZO9CT4
Last edited by sciing on Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
N757ST
Posts: 1032
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:11 pm

reltney wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
dstblj52 wrote:
I mean unless you're going to sue for phycological damage you're going to have a hard time showing damages, and so long as it was dropped 2000 feet above the tallest building on the path it was legal, so no regulatory fines.


Well if AV Herald is correct and they did not request a fuel dump......



Why would they. As an airline pilot I don’t “request “. I tell them...... I am flying the plane not atc. You armchair pilots are really......funny


Yes, but do you make up your own QRH? It’s as easy as this, if the QRH directed them to dump fuel then they are in the clear. If the QRH says dump fuel *(if conditions allow above XYZ altitude) then they probably have a bit of explaining to do. I don’t fly a 777 for delta, so I don’t have access to that QRH. I do operate an Airbus for another major airline, and if I do counter to the QRH I need to have a good reason to do it.
 
kiowa
Posts: 762
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:37 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:14 pm

TYWoolman wrote:
N14AZ wrote:
TYWoolman wrote:
After reading airlinepilotforums.com a bit, my initial opinion is this: Although the fuel dump may have been unnecessary, there may be a legitimate context in the cockpit which necessitated the dump making it excusable/unavoidable.

... so in other words: we simply don’t know what happened as of yet.


Lol... thanks for my own translation. Whoever dumped the fuel may have been following orders from the captain, even though a "negative" was provided over the airwaves. Potentially 4 pilot minds in the cockpit solving the problem contributed to the legitimate context in my referenced post, perhaps.



4 pilot minds in the cockpit may have contributed to the chaos if there was no clear leadership taking place. the number of stripes on the shoulder does not determine the actual leading personality. it's quite possible that the dumping was started without everyone on the same page. i am sure delta and the faa will get some answers but i doubt they will be as public as the event.
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:39 pm

I am laughing that people think fuel dumping is a factor that should be included in the safety decisions of the pilots.

NOTHING should factor into their analysis except maximum probability of getting their passengers on the ground safely. If dumping fuel on the school increased that probability (and did not cause REAL harm to anyone) then that was the perfect decision! The standard here is not "was it necessary to save the lives." The standard is much lower; did it increase the probability of a safe landing... Yes. It didn't end up being critical to their survival. But such decisions CAN end up being the critical factor that saved the lives of everyone onboard. They were mitigating risk, in a context of uncertainty.

It is also not necessary that they fully communicate their evolving decisions with ATC. That's way down the list of priorities.
 
dragon6172
Posts: 1128
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:56 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:49 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
TYWoolman wrote:

I get your point. But we are not talking about aerobatics here. The pilot believed there was an emergency and he dealt with it how he needed to regardless of the consequences IMO.


Yep and compromised the safety of those around him......

Increased the safety of those closest to him though.... fellow crew and passengers.
Phrogs Phorever
 
N757ST
Posts: 1032
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:57 pm

LCDFlight wrote:
I am laughing that people think fuel dumping is a factor that should be included in the safety decisions of the pilots.

NOTHING should factor into their analysis except maximum probability of getting their passengers on the ground safely. If dumping fuel on the school increased that probability (and did not cause REAL harm to anyone) then that was the perfect decision! The standard here is not "was it necessary to save the lives." The standard is much lower; did it increase the probability of a safe landing... Yes. It didn't end up being critical to their survival. But such decisions CAN end up being the critical factor that saved the lives of everyone onboard. They were mitigating risk, in a context of uncertainty.

It is also not necessary that they fully communicate their evolving decisions with ATC. That's way down the list of priorities.


I assume you’re a pilot, and if so you have to again realize that none of us are operating in the wild Wild West where we just make split second decisions and flip buttons on a whim. They had 4 pilots up front, an etops certified airplane, and a pretty handy book that 6 eyes that are not flying the airplane at that moment can look at and reference. There is no rush, and that’s the biggest problem I have in this entire episode is that it seems like they likely rushed to get what they perceived as a sick airplane on the ground as quickly as possible. Even in the case of an engine fire does your sim ever involve immediately after rotation coming back around to the field without first accomplishing a litany of ECAM (or equivalent) items, QRH items, etc? Again, if the QRH told these guys dump fuel regardless of altitude then they are absolutely in the clear. From my understanding there is an altitude in that QRH. Now, the gray area is if the not so sick engine got sicker on the downwind, but even so follow the book. Now, none of this is driving me toward believing that these pilots should be punished harshly or even at all. These kinds of scenarios lead us to update training techniques, scenarios, and training materials. Hopefully this will find a way to close another hole in the Swiss cheese.
 
User avatar
AirKevin
Posts: 626
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:18 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:07 pm

flybucky wrote:
wjcandee wrote:
This may explain it: I just read that the discharge was automatically initiated by the 777-200's MCADUMP software, which Boeing previously had not disclosed to pilots, but which had been disclosed to airlines on page 4785, footnote 3, of the maintenance documentation.

There's an auto fuel dump feature?? Undisclosed to pilots??

Do you have any links to sources for this?

Pretty sure he's being completely sarcastic in reference to the MCAS issue on the 737MAX.
Captain Kevin
 
kraz911
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 5:21 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:09 pm

Hello all,
Years ago, a Delta 777 travelling overseas had a problem with heavy smoke coming from one of the main landing gear on its take off roll reported by several pilots. The crew started dumping fuel all over ATL as ATC vectored them back to a landing on the same runway. They were dumping all the way until final caught on video with ATC on YT. Never heard a peep about that one after that. If the flight crew would have told ATC they were dumping, the buzzard media wouldn't have had the extra oomph to go after this story. If the flight crew can justify that they were thinking of the lives of the pax, crew and the aircraft, they will be fine. delta has a great PR department and this will go away quickly. I agree with others that both black boxes probably will be downloaded but will be kept confidential and we'll all find out when the feds do their investigation...
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:17 pm

Any real updates on the incident other than DL PR (vs) Ambulance Chasers squabble.
All posts are just opinions.
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:31 pm

N757ST wrote:
LCDFlight wrote:
I am laughing that people think fuel dumping is a factor that should be included in the safety decisions of the pilots.

NOTHING should factor into their analysis except maximum probability of getting their passengers on the ground safely. If dumping fuel on the school increased that probability (and did not cause REAL harm to anyone) then that was the perfect decision! The standard here is not "was it necessary to save the lives." The standard is much lower; did it increase the probability of a safe landing... Yes. It didn't end up being critical to their survival. But such decisions CAN end up being the critical factor that saved the lives of everyone onboard. They were mitigating risk, in a context of uncertainty.

It is also not necessary that they fully communicate their evolving decisions with ATC. That's way down the list of priorities.


I assume you’re a pilot, and if so you have to again realize that none of us are operating in the wild Wild West where we just make split second decisions and flip buttons on a whim. They had 4 pilots up front, an etops certified airplane, and a pretty handy book that 6 eyes that are not flying the airplane at that moment can look at and reference. There is no rush, and that’s the biggest problem I have in this entire episode is that it seems like they likely rushed to get what they perceived as a sick airplane on the ground as quickly as possible. Even in the case of an engine fire does your sim ever involve immediately after rotation coming back around to the field without first accomplishing a litany of ECAM (or equivalent) items, QRH items, etc? Again, if the QRH told these guys dump fuel regardless of altitude then they are absolutely in the clear. From my understanding there is an altitude in that QRH. Now, the gray area is if the not so sick engine got sicker on the downwind, but even so follow the book. Now, none of this is driving me toward believing that these pilots should be punished harshly or even at all. These kinds of scenarios lead us to update training techniques, scenarios, and training materials. Hopefully this will find a way to close another hole in the Swiss cheese.


Thanks for the compliment but I am just an ex management employee, so I don't even understand the technical aspects of what you are saying. But I understand the basic goals of the process. If they didn't follow their book, perhaps they had a reason, or can think up a good reason within their discretion. If California can't handle the use of jet fuel, maybe aviation should be phased out in California, that's the overall takeaway I want to say in terms of the news articles and the outcry.

For THOSE news media to try to tell 777 pilots how to fly a 777 strikes me as ludicrous. But yes, if company book proscribes what they did, ok.
 
SeoulIncheon
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:52 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:36 pm

I actually have one question - to pilots.

I recall that some years ago Aeroflot Superjet 100 made an overweight landing and burst into flames. (SU1492) I read the reports and the aircraft was 1.6 tonnes overweight over 41 tonnes MLW. That would be 3.9 per cent overweight landing, and half of the people burnt to death because landing gear collapsed and punctured wing fuel tanks - leading to a large-scale fire.

Reading the thread, this Delta aircraft seems to have been around 260 tonnes before dumping fuel, which is around 47 tonnes above MLW at 213 tonnes. That would have been 22 per cent overweight landing. So could it be said that this Delta aircraft was seriously close to becoming another Aeroflot fireball had it not dumped fuel, or was there anything different from that Aeroflot aircraft (such as Boeing 777 being better-built than SSJ 100 or etc...)?
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5009
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:41 pm

SeoulIncheon wrote:
I actually have one question - to pilots.

I recall that some years ago Aeroflot Superjet 100 made an overweight landing and burst into flames. (SU1492) I read the reports and the aircraft was 1.6 tonnes overweight over 41 tonnes MLW. That would be 3.9 per cent overweight landing, and half of the people burnt to death because landing gear collapsed and punctured wing fuel tanks - leading to a large-scale fire.

Reading the thread, this Delta aircraft seems to have been around 260 tonnes before dumping fuel, which is around 47 tonnes above MLW at 213 tonnes. That would have been 22 per cent overweight landing. So could it be said that this Delta aircraft was seriously close to becoming another Aeroflot fireball had it not dumped fuel, or was there anything different from that Aeroflot aircraft (such as Boeing 777 being better-built than SSJ 100 or etc...)?
no. You can land a commercial aircraft well above max weight it is just going to need an inspection prior to flying again.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:42 pm

N757ST wrote:
LCDFlight wrote:
I am laughing that people think fuel dumping is a factor that should be included in the safety decisions of the pilots.

NOTHING should factor into their analysis except maximum probability of getting their passengers on the ground safely. If dumping fuel on the school increased that probability (and did not cause REAL harm to anyone) then that was the perfect decision! The standard here is not "was it necessary to save the lives." The standard is much lower; did it increase the probability of a safe landing... Yes. It didn't end up being critical to their survival. But such decisions CAN end up being the critical factor that saved the lives of everyone onboard. They were mitigating risk, in a context of uncertainty.

It is also not necessary that they fully communicate their evolving decisions with ATC. That's way down the list of priorities.


I assume you’re a pilot, and if so you have to again realize that none of us are operating in the wild Wild West where we just make split second decisions and flip buttons on a whim. They had 4 pilots up front, an etops certified airplane, and a pretty handy book that 6 eyes that are not flying the airplane at that moment can look at and reference. There is no rush, and that’s the biggest problem I have in this entire episode is that it seems like they likely rushed to get what they perceived as a sick airplane on the ground as quickly as possible. Even in the case of an engine fire does your sim ever involve immediately after rotation coming back around to the field without first accomplishing a litany of ECAM (or equivalent) items, QRH items, etc? Again, if the QRH told these guys dump fuel regardless of altitude then they are absolutely in the clear. From my understanding there is an altitude in that QRH. Now, the gray area is if the not so sick engine got sicker on the downwind, but even so follow the book. Now, none of this is driving me toward believing that these pilots should be punished harshly or even at all. These kinds of scenarios lead us to update training techniques, scenarios, and training materials. Hopefully this will find a way to close another hole in the Swiss cheese.


The QRH never directs you to jettison fuel, rather if the decision to dump fuel is required, it will tell you how how to jettison the fuel. The ELC (Electronic Check List) will guide the process step by step. It's not complicated but it does require some heads down time.
 
SeoulIncheon
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:52 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:48 pm

32andBelow wrote:
SeoulIncheon wrote:
I actually have one question - to pilots.

I recall that some years ago Aeroflot Superjet 100 made an overweight landing and burst into flames. (SU1492) I read the reports and the aircraft was 1.6 tonnes overweight over 41 tonnes MLW. That would be 3.9 per cent overweight landing, and half of the people burnt to death because landing gear collapsed and punctured wing fuel tanks - leading to a large-scale fire.

Reading the thread, this Delta aircraft seems to have been around 260 tonnes before dumping fuel, which is around 47 tonnes above MLW at 213 tonnes. That would have been 22 per cent overweight landing. So could it be said that this Delta aircraft was seriously close to becoming another Aeroflot fireball had it not dumped fuel, or was there anything different from that Aeroflot aircraft (such as Boeing 777 being better-built than SSJ 100 or etc...)?
no. You can land a commercial aircraft well above max weight it is just going to need an inspection prior to flying again.


Well in theory - yes. But we have case of aircraft bursting into flames that landed mere(?) 4 percent overweight. That might indicate that your statement might not be correct in reality or something is seriously wrong with Aeroflot aircraft or pilot who commanded that plane...that is what I am asking about.
If everything goes perfectly according to theory like that there would be no compressor stall in the first place.

So what I am asking is like "In real conditions, with something going slightly wrong - one engine out, and landings conditions not that perfect - what are safety margin like for overweight landings - can something else afford to go wrong or is it like something else goes slightly wrong and somebody gets seriously injured?", not "Does textbook say overweight landing is safe - which would have been tested with perfectly working planes with perfect landing condions - in essence, everyhing perfect but just overweight plane."
Last edited by SeoulIncheon on Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
N757ST
Posts: 1032
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:00 pm

BravoOne wrote:
N757ST wrote:
LCDFlight wrote:
I am laughing that people think fuel dumping is a factor that should be included in the safety decisions of the pilots.

NOTHING should factor into their analysis except maximum probability of getting their passengers on the ground safely. If dumping fuel on the school increased that probability (and did not cause REAL harm to anyone) then that was the perfect decision! The standard here is not "was it necessary to save the lives." The standard is much lower; did it increase the probability of a safe landing... Yes. It didn't end up being critical to their survival. But such decisions CAN end up being the critical factor that saved the lives of everyone onboard. They were mitigating risk, in a context of uncertainty.

It is also not necessary that they fully communicate their evolving decisions with ATC. That's way down the list of priorities.


I assume you’re a pilot, and if so you have to again realize that none of us are operating in the wild Wild West where we just make split second decisions and flip buttons on a whim. They had 4 pilots up front, an etops certified airplane, and a pretty handy book that 6 eyes that are not flying the airplane at that moment can look at and reference. There is no rush, and that’s the biggest problem I have in this entire episode is that it seems like they likely rushed to get what they perceived as a sick airplane on the ground as quickly as possible. Even in the case of an engine fire does your sim ever involve immediately after rotation coming back around to the field without first accomplishing a litany of ECAM (or equivalent) items, QRH items, etc? Again, if the QRH told these guys dump fuel regardless of altitude then they are absolutely in the clear. From my understanding there is an altitude in that QRH. Now, the gray area is if the not so sick engine got sicker on the downwind, but even so follow the book. Now, none of this is driving me toward believing that these pilots should be punished harshly or even at all. These kinds of scenarios lead us to update training techniques, scenarios, and training materials. Hopefully this will find a way to close another hole in the Swiss cheese.


The QRH never directs you to jettison fuel, rather if the decision to dump fuel is required, it will tell you how how to jettison the fuel. The ELC (Electronic Check List) will guide the process step by step. It's not complicated but it does require some heads down time.


I understand that. I’m saying if they went to the QRH to dump fuel I’m not sure if it states something along the lines of “this procedure is to be accomplished above 4000 feet”. If it doesn’t and theirs no non obscure limitation that isn’t bolded and had to be referenced in the inner bowels of a 1000 page flight crew manual then I’m sure they are good. If there was a reference to an altitude limitation in the QRH then they will likely have some explaining to do, and in the end the pilot group will learn from the mistake.
 
airhansa
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:04 pm

They should be a requirement that the pilot prefers to dump fuel over open land or over the ocean, before dumping over a residential/commercial area. A similar method to how there is a preference that a plane flies at a "safe" altitude before being "allowed" to go VFR.
 
N757ST
Posts: 1032
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:15 pm

airhansa wrote:
They should be a requirement that the pilot prefers to dump fuel over open land or over the ocean, before dumping over a residential/commercial area. A similar method to how there is a preference that a plane flies at a "safe" altitude before being "allowed" to go VFR.


This I don’t necessarily agree with. While if practical that great, but what if the only open areas are in mountainous terrain or the ocean requires crossing numerous flight routes or deviating from a engine out sid? These are airliners in often in IFR conditions. These altitude restrictions are set to allow for the atomization of the fuel before it ever hits the ground, that should be sufficient with possibly a note “if available fuel dumping over ocean is preferred”.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6306
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:27 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
BA777FO wrote:
longhauler wrote:
In reading this thread, i wonder if there hasn’t been some “negative training”.

Every time I had a compressor stall in the sim, we always got it back. Slowly advancing the thrust until the engine operated normally. Then ...... about 10 miles on final, as we configured for landing, slowing, with higher thrust, (not good for a stall) the engine stalled again. This time we didn’t get it back.

So ever since, I always prepare for a single engine landing, as it always happened in the sim. So I would most definitely jettison fuel, even if both were still running. It is sad these Gentlemen are being second guessed. In my opinion, they achieved a perfect end. No one was hurt and the airplane was not damaged.

Good work.


Perhaps there was some negative training. My experience of stalls or limit exceedence in the sim is a mix, but most often having to idle or close to idle the engine to bring it back within limits.

Given the flight time, there was no diagnosis. There was no what we call "caging the chimp" - In The Chimp Model, the inner Chimp is the emotional team within the brain that thinks and acts for us without our permission - it acts on emotion and is unable to take a backward step and think logically. This crew reacted on their emotion - they spent no time diagnosing. Time spent on diagnosis is rarely wasted. Aside from smoke, fire or fumes very few incidents require a return to landing as promptly as this crew did. Their chimp was in control, not the calm, logical side of their brain adept at decision making.

Had they spent some proper time diagnosing, or used a decision making tool (we use TDODAR, not sure if or what Delta use but would be surprised if they don't have one) then they'd have realised that they had time to diagnose properly, they could have held out to sea and jettisoned, conducted a proper brief not only among themselves but to ATC and their cabin crew (how much did the cabin crew and passengers know? They didn't give ATC a proper NITS brief so guessing the cabin crew didn't get one) and they could have avoided spraying several schools.

Unless the cabin or flight deck was filling with smoke or there was an uncontrolled fire in the cabin the flight was conducted too expeditiously - they may have got away with it this time but we're always planninh for our next event - that's why we have to go-around if our main gear doesn't touch down in the TDZ - you might away with it on a 4,000m runway in Dubai but if you pattern match and try and do it in Grand Cayman or St Kitts (or Kingston with a 14 knot tailwind like the AA 738) then it goes wrong.

We always conduct a post-flight review after every sector - not always to pick out the bad but also highlight the good and reinforce that. It's about continued improvement. We're humans so mistakes get made but we need to learn from them and I'd surprised if this isn't used in future as a case study in CRM training and future non-normal management for sim checks in how we should be trying to cage that chimp and not act as impusively as this.


Thanks. That's a very good explanation of what should happen. As mentioned earlier, pilots who were in actual grave danger like Alaska 261 and Valujet 592 were still able to keep ATC in the loop.


While perhaps interesting or commendable; what exactly is ATC gonna do, come up and help with the QRH? The only constructive thing is call out the fire brigade and clear the airspace between you and the airport.
 
D L X
Posts: 12680
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:39 pm

SeoulIncheon wrote:
Well in theory - yes. But we have case of aircraft bursting into flames that landed mere(?) 4 percent overweight. That might indicate that your statement might not be correct in reality or something is seriously wrong with Aeroflot aircraft or pilot who commanded that plane...that is what I am asking about.

The problem was not the overweight landing, and the way this flight was handled will likely cost the captain his freedom. "On 2 October 2019, investigators filed charges against the captain. According to a spokeswoman for the Russian Investigative Committee, his actions "violated the existing regulations and led to the destruction and outbreak of fire". Prosecutors are seeking a seven-year jail term." (Wiki)

The long and short of it was that this plane was struck by lightning, lost some computer control, forced the pilots to fly direct law with wild oscillations, and they bounced the landing but didn't go around.

Substantial thread here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1421853&start=800
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:43 pm

SeoulIncheon wrote:
Does textbook say overweight landing is safe - which would have been tested with perfectly working planes with perfect landing condions - in essence, everyhing perfect but just overweight plane.


There is no such claim, but in post Swissair-111 world, landing weight is not a consideration if there is fire in the cabin. First land and think about frame condition later. A fireball on the runway is better than a fireball in the sky.

BTW, narrowbodies don't have a way to dump fuel, they have to burn it off.

So, we know nothing to judge one way or the other.
All posts are just opinions.
 
LTCM
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:35 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:49 pm

dragon6172 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
TYWoolman wrote:

I get your point. But we are not talking about aerobatics here. The pilot believed there was an emergency and he dealt with it how he needed to regardless of the consequences IMO.


Yep and compromised the safety of those around him......

Increased the safety of those closest to him though.... fellow crew and passengers.


That's right.

And now he has to answer for why he made that trade off.

I say we make him answer but putting him on trial.
 
airhansa
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:50 pm

N757ST wrote:
airhansa wrote:
They should be a requirement that the pilot prefers to dump fuel over open land or over the ocean, before dumping over a residential/commercial area. A similar method to how there is a preference that a plane flies at a "safe" altitude before being "allowed" to go VFR.


This I don’t necessarily agree with. While if practical that great, but what if the only open areas are in mountainous terrain or the ocean requires crossing numerous flight routes or deviating from a engine out sid? These are airliners in often in IFR conditions. These altitude restrictions are set to allow for the atomization of the fuel before it ever hits the ground, that should be sufficient with possibly a note “if available fuel dumping over ocean is preferred”.


I would suggest that the "preference" be similar to that of going VFR. Generally speaking, one should attempt to fly using instruments at a clear altitude. If one wants to go VFR at an altitude deemed "unsafe" then there better be good reason.
 
N757ST
Posts: 1032
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 6:00 pm

airhansa wrote:
N757ST wrote:
airhansa wrote:
They should be a requirement that the pilot prefers to dump fuel over open land or over the ocean, before dumping over a residential/commercial area. A similar method to how there is a preference that a plane flies at a "safe" altitude before being "allowed" to go VFR.


This I don’t necessarily agree with. While if practical that great, but what if the only open areas are in mountainous terrain or the ocean requires crossing numerous flight routes or deviating from a engine out sid? These are airliners in often in IFR conditions. These altitude restrictions are set to allow for the atomization of the fuel before it ever hits the ground, that should be sufficient with possibly a note “if available fuel dumping over ocean is preferred”.


I would suggest that the "preference" be similar to that of going VFR. Generally speaking, one should attempt to fly using instruments at a clear altitude. If one wants to go VFR at an altitude deemed "unsafe" then there better be good reason.


Airliners don’t fly VFR, and there are a lot more rules and regulations to go by then simply telling an airliner to stay clear of terrain vfr, while dealing with a fire or failure, check lists etc.
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 6:55 pm

n92r03 wrote:
cat3appr50 wrote:
From calcs. for a B777 200 with 181 passengers and negligible cargo, and block fuel for the KLAX to ZSPD dispatch route (with winds aloft), with normal contingency, reserves, and alternate fuel, and based on the estimated fuel burn from the engine issue diversion point back to KLAX for landing...it would IMO require around 90,000 +/- lbs. of fuel to be jettisoned to land back at KLAX at MLW. The estimated jettison time for that fuel quantity would be around 17 minutes (btw same as actual time from the reported engine issue time to landing Rwy. 25R back at KLAX).


I was going to ask what the fuel dump rate is and how long would it take to dump enough fuel to be under max landing weight... Is that correct, that to would take only 17 minutes to dump enough fuel? I have no training in this, it just seems like a very short amount of time to dump enough fuel.


In reply to n92r03 post #510
With both L and R main tanks and center tank with fuel the jettison rate is around 5,400 Lbs/Min. With fuel only in the L and R tanks the jettison rate is around 3,100 lbs/min. The flight surely had fuel in all tanks, in fact from calcs. the takeoff weight was IMO close to MTOW. 90,000 lbs / 5400 lbs/min = 17 min. (approximately)
Sorry didn't respond earlier. I'm a very busy guy.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:29 pm

SeoulIncheon wrote:
I recall that some years ago Aeroflot Superjet 100 made an overweight landing and burst into flames. (SU1492) I read the reports and the aircraft was 1.6 tonnes overweight over 41 tonnes MLW. That would be 3.9 per cent overweight landing, and half of the people burnt to death because landing gear collapsed and punctured wing fuel tanks - leading to a large-scale fire.
Yes, I saw this mentioned up-thread, and it made my blood boil.
1) It was eight months ago, not years
2) The aircraft landed heavily, very heavily. There is a video showing it bouncing down the runway - not pretty at all.
In case English isn't your first language, I am saying the aircraft hit the runway hard, not because of the landing weight, but because of other factors such as possible windshear, or maybe the pilots were flying manually after years of relying on automation to smooth out their clumsy technique. Like the Delta pilots, they were also probably in a bit of a panic, which is not the best way to fly a plane.

The second bounce impacted the runway at 5.85g, and the third bounce at over 5g. That's equivalent to being 400% overweight!
In simple terms, SU1492 could have landed at minimum landing weight, with the fuel tanks near empty, and the undercarriage might still have failed after such heavy impacts.

Obviously a badly controlled landing (e.g. after a microburst) stands a better chance of survival if the whole aircraft is lighter, but it is percentage points better. Being slightly overweight is not the main issue.
Where the full tanks mostly came into play with SU1492 was that the ensuing fire was much more widespread and lethal.

SeoulIncheon wrote:
...this Delta aircraft seems to have been around 260 tonnes before dumping fuel, which is around 47 tonnes above MLW at 213 tonnes. (22 per cent overweight)
32andBelow wrote:
You can land a commercial aircraft well above max weight it is just going to need an inspection prior to flying again.

SeoulIncheon wrote:
"In real conditions, with something going slightly wrong - one engine out, and landings conditions not that perfect - what are safety margin like for overweight landings - can something else afford to go wrong or is it like something else goes slightly wrong and somebody gets seriously injured?"
The phrase you are looking for is "what if the holes in the swiss cheese line up"?
You might as well contemplate what are the chances of winning the lottery, and then being hit by a bus before you can collect your prize.
Statisticians at insurance companies earn their corn calculating such multiple concurrent events.
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
BA777FO
Posts: 580
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:58 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:38 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
BA777FO wrote:

Perhaps there was some negative training. My experience of stalls or limit exceedence in the sim is a mix, but most often having to idle or close to idle the engine to bring it back within limits.

Given the flight time, there was no diagnosis. There was no what we call "caging the chimp" - In The Chimp Model, the inner Chimp is the emotional team within the brain that thinks and acts for us without our permission - it acts on emotion and is unable to take a backward step and think logically. This crew reacted on their emotion - they spent no time diagnosing. Time spent on diagnosis is rarely wasted. Aside from smoke, fire or fumes very few incidents require a return to landing as promptly as this crew did. Their chimp was in control, not the calm, logical side of their brain adept at decision making.

Had they spent some proper time diagnosing, or used a decision making tool (we use TDODAR, not sure if or what Delta use but would be surprised if they don't have one) then they'd have realised that they had time to diagnose properly, they could have held out to sea and jettisoned, conducted a proper brief not only among themselves but to ATC and their cabin crew (how much did the cabin crew and passengers know? They didn't give ATC a proper NITS brief so guessing the cabin crew didn't get one) and they could have avoided spraying several schools.

Unless the cabin or flight deck was filling with smoke or there was an uncontrolled fire in the cabin the flight was conducted too expeditiously - they may have got away with it this time but we're always planninh for our next event - that's why we have to go-around if our main gear doesn't touch down in the TDZ - you might away with it on a 4,000m runway in Dubai but if you pattern match and try and do it in Grand Cayman or St Kitts (or Kingston with a 14 knot tailwind like the AA 738) then it goes wrong.

We always conduct a post-flight review after every sector - not always to pick out the bad but also highlight the good and reinforce that. It's about continued improvement. We're humans so mistakes get made but we need to learn from them and I'd surprised if this isn't used in future as a case study in CRM training and future non-normal management for sim checks in how we should be trying to cage that chimp and not act as impusively as this.


Thanks. That's a very good explanation of what should happen. As mentioned earlier, pilots who were in actual grave danger like Alaska 261 and Valujet 592 were still able to keep ATC in the loop.


While perhaps interesting or commendable; what exactly is ATC gonna do, come up and help with the QRH? The only constructive thing is call out the fire brigade and clear the airspace between you and the airport.


That is true, but R/T congestion and nuisence calls can be avoided by giving ATC a NITS brief:

N - Nature of problem: engine stall, but under control/back within limits at idle
I - Intention - to turn back to LAX. This bit was sorely lacking because they didn't seem to have used a decision making tool to properly diagnose. They could have then generated options, by "caging their chimp" they'd have realised they had ample time to jettison over the sea and get to MLW before commencing a properly brief approach.
T - Time - let ATC know how long you need, this is why they asked if they needed to hold to dump, they gave ATC no indication of how long they'd need.
S - Special Instructions - require jettison? They said no but then ended up doing it. Require an evacuation after landing or fire services to follow to the gate? How long of a final do they want or track miles to touch down? It seems as though they hadn't thought this through at all and the chimp was well in control.

As another poster said, I think it was LCDFlight, this is the kind of thing where the holes line up in the swiss cheese. A few minutes diagnosing and using a decision making tool is time rarely wasted. A stalling engine that comes back within limits with the thrust lever retarded does not require land as soon as possible, merely land at nearest suitable.

The crew won't be hung out to dry, I'd expect it to be thoroughly debriefed and perhaps some additional sim sessions offered though.
 
flybucky
Posts: 376
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:44 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:41 pm

SeoulIncheon wrote:
we have case of aircraft bursting into flames that landed mere(?) 4 percent overweight. That might indicate that your statement might not be correct in reality or something is seriously wrong with Aeroflot aircraft or pilot who commanded that plane...that is what I am asking about.

I think the main reasons for the Aeroflot 1492 crash was that it was struck by lightning, disabling the autopilot so it was in manual/direct mode, windshear, pilot error, and bouncing the landing. I think if the plane was within the weight limit, it would have had the same result.

An overweight plane in clear weather would not result like that.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10746
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:09 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
SeoulIncheon wrote:
I recall that some years ago Aeroflot Superjet 100 made an overweight landing and burst into flames. (SU1492) I read the reports and the aircraft was 1.6 tonnes overweight over 41 tonnes MLW. That would be 3.9 per cent overweight landing, and half of the people burnt to death because landing gear collapsed and punctured wing fuel tanks - leading to a large-scale fire.
Yes, I saw this mentioned up-thread, and it made my blood boil.
1) It was eight months ago, not years
2) The aircraft landed heavily, very heavily. There is a video showing it bouncing down the runway - not pretty at all.
In case English isn't your first language, I am saying the aircraft hit the runway hard, not because of the landing weight, but because of other factors such as possible windshear, or maybe the pilots were flying manually after years of relying on automation to smooth out their clumsy technique. Like the Delta pilots, they were also probably in a bit of a panic, which is not the best way to fly a plane.

The second bounce impacted the runway at 5.85g, and the third bounce at over 5g. That's equivalent to being 400% overweight!
In simple terms, SU1492 could have landed at minimum landing weight, with the fuel tanks near empty, and the undercarriage might still have failed after such heavy impacts.

Obviously a badly controlled landing (e.g. after a microburst) stands a better chance of survival if the whole aircraft is lighter, but it is percentage points better. Being slightly overweight is not the main issue.
Where the full tanks mostly came into play with SU1492 was that the ensuing fire was much more widespread and lethal.

This basically proves again that bad piloting will kill an aircraft faster and more thoroughly than anything else. Which is why we expect pilots to be trained and tested and redone constantly, to ensure "good piloting".

BA777FO wrote:
The crew won't be hung out to dry, I'd expect it to be thoroughly debriefed and perhaps some additional sim sessions offered though.

This! After all this thread, this is the reality.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24657
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:25 pm

BA777FO wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

Thanks. That's a very good explanation of what should happen. As mentioned earlier, pilots who were in actual grave danger like Alaska 261 and Valujet 592 were still able to keep ATC in the loop.


While perhaps interesting or commendable; what exactly is ATC gonna do, come up and help with the QRH? The only constructive thing is call out the fire brigade and clear the airspace between you and the airport.


That is true, but R/T congestion and nuisence calls can be avoided by giving ATC a NITS brief:

N - Nature of problem: engine stall, but under control/back within limits at idle
I - Intention - to turn back to LAX. This bit was sorely lacking because they didn't seem to have used a decision making tool to properly diagnose. They could have then generated options, by "caging their chimp" they'd have realised they had ample time to jettison over the sea and get to MLW before commencing a properly brief approach.
T - Time - let ATC know how long you need, this is why they asked if they needed to hold to dump, they gave ATC no indication of how long they'd need.
S - Special Instructions - require jettison? They said no but then ended up doing it. Require an evacuation after landing or fire services to follow to the gate? How long of a final do they want or track miles to touch down? It seems as though they hadn't thought this through at all and the chimp was well in control.

As another poster said, I think it was LCDFlight, this is the kind of thing where the holes line up in the swiss cheese. A few minutes diagnosing and using a decision making tool is time rarely wasted. A stalling engine that comes back within limits with the thrust lever retarded does not require land as soon as possible, merely land at nearest suitable.

The crew won't be hung out to dry, I'd expect it to be thoroughly debriefed and perhaps some additional sim sessions offered though.

Actually the first call declaring the emergency provided N (compressor stall) and I (return to LAX). T was omitted initially but provided when asked.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
miegapele
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 12:24 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:39 pm

Would it be possible to press charges against those pilots? For example for reckless behaviour and endangering public safety? I know FAA for some reason considers pilots as godlike creatures who can do no wrong, but is FAA rules above the law in US?
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:56 pm

dragon6172 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
TYWoolman wrote:

I get your point. But we are not talking about aerobatics here. The pilot believed there was an emergency and he dealt with it how he needed to regardless of the consequences IMO.


Yep and compromised the safety of those around him......

Increased the safety of those closest to him though.... fellow crew and passengers.


No it didn’t.....there is nothing dangerous about landing over weight. There is also no reason they couldn’t have dumped fuel over the ocean. All the Crew did was endanger the people around them.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:59 pm

miegapele wrote:
Would it be possible to press charges against those pilots? For example for reckless behaviour and endangering public safety? I know FAA for some reason co
nsiders pilots as godlike creatures who can do no wrong, but is FAA rules above the law in US?


What world do you live in? This is the strangest post yet. THE CREW DID NOT VIOLATE ANY FAA rules to begin with but after 430+ posts you still haven't figured this out. Even the careless and reckless catch all FAA rule would not apply.

Would be very surprised is any additional sim training/checking would apply to this event as well.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:00 pm

kraz911 wrote:
Hello all,
Years ago, a Delta 777 travelling overseas had a problem with heavy smoke coming from one of the main landing gear on its take off roll reported by several pilots. The crew started dumping fuel all over ATL as ATC vectored them back to a landing on the same runway. They were dumping all the way until final caught on video with ATC on YT. Never heard a peep about that one after that. If the flight crew would have told ATC they were dumping, the buzzard media wouldn't have had the extra oomph to go after this story. If the flight crew can justify that they were thinking of the lives of the pax, crew and the aircraft, they will be fine. delta has a great PR department and this will go away quickly. I agree with others that both black boxes probably will be downloaded but will be kept confidential and we'll all find out when the feds do their investigation...


This is a different scenario they were ON FIRE. Wheel Well fires can only be put by air flow.

In this case I would support 100% a crew dumping fuel from the time they break ground until landing in order to minimize the fuel onboard to feed the fire.

In this case WELL DONE and I would have done the same thing.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:04 pm

SeoulIncheon wrote:
I actually have one question - to pilots.

I recall that some years ago Aeroflot Superjet 100 made an overweight landing and burst into flames. (SU1492) I read the reports and the aircraft was 1.6 tonnes overweight over 41 tonnes MLW. That would be 3.9 per cent overweight landing, and half of the people burnt to death because landing gear collapsed and punctured wing fuel tanks - leading to a large-scale fire.

Reading the thread, this Delta aircraft seems to have been around 260 tonnes before dumping fuel, which is around 47 tonnes above MLW at 213 tonnes. That would have been 22 per cent overweight landing. So could it be said that this Delta aircraft was seriously close to becoming another Aeroflot fireball had it not dumped fuel, or was there anything different from that Aeroflot aircraft (such as Boeing 777 being better-built than SSJ 100 or etc...)?


I don’t know the Aeroflot story. A plane can land at max gross weight just fine....I know because Iv done it in the sim and landed overweight in real life.

Did Aeroflot compound the issue with a hard landing?
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5009
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:05 pm

BravoOne wrote:
miegapele wrote:
Would it be possible to press charges against those pilots? For example for reckless behaviour and endangering public safety? I know FAA for some reason co
nsiders pilots as godlike creatures who can do no wrong, but is FAA rules above the law in US?


What world do you live in? This is the strangest post yet. THE CREW DID NOT VIOLATE ANY FAA rules to begin with but after 430+ posts you still haven't figured this out. Even the careless and reckless catch all FAA rule would not apply.

Would be very surprised is any additional sim training/checking would apply to this event as well.

So the controller just has to buy all the deals they have when they run other aircraft 1000 feet below them?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6306
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:08 pm

BA777FO wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

Thanks. That's a very good explanation of what should happen. As mentioned earlier, pilots who were in actual grave danger like Alaska 261 and Valujet 592 were still able to keep ATC in the loop.


While perhaps interesting or commendable; what exactly is ATC gonna do, come up and help with the QRH? The only constructive thing is call out the fire brigade and clear the airspace between you and the airport.


That is true, but R/T congestion and nuisence calls can be avoided by giving ATC a NITS brief:

N - Nature of problem: engine stall, but under control/back within limits at idle
I - Intention - to turn back to LAX. This bit was sorely lacking because they didn't seem to have used a decision making tool to properly diagnose. They could have then generated options, by "caging their chimp" they'd have realised they had ample time to jettison over the sea and get to MLW before commencing a properly brief approach.
T - Time - let ATC know how long you need, this is why they asked if they needed to hold to dump, they gave ATC no indication of how long they'd need.
S - Special Instructions - require jettison? They said no but then ended up doing it. Require an evacuation after landing or fire services to follow to the gate? How long of a final do they want or track miles to touch down? It seems as though they hadn't thought this through at all and the chimp was well in control.

As another poster said, I think it was LCDFlight, this is the kind of thing where the holes line up in the swiss cheese. A few minutes diagnosing and using a decision making tool is time rarely wasted. A stalling engine that comes back within limits with the thrust lever retarded does not require land as soon as possible, merely land at nearest suitable.

The crew won't be hung out to dry, I'd expect it to be thoroughly debriefed and perhaps some additional sim sessions offered though.


Agreed and an excellent post, as usual. The outcome might have been better after ten minutes in a holding pattern
 
GSPSPOT
Posts: 2548
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:44 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:26 pm

I don't think many here would seriously debate the prudence in dumping fuel here, it's just where it was done, and at what altitude it was done that are at issue. Pretty simple.
Great Lakes, great life.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:35 pm

GSPSPOT wrote:
I don't think many here would seriously debate the prudence in dumping fuel here, it's just where it was done, and at what altitude it was done that are at issue. Pretty simple.


Bingo
 
hivue
Posts: 2078
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:57 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
GSPSPOT wrote:
I don't think many here would seriously debate the prudence in dumping fuel here, it's just where it was done, and at what altitude it was done that are at issue. Pretty simple.


Bingo


Looking at the flightaware track in the OP, none of the ground they were over at the altitude they were over it by the time they would have the engine sorted out and sufficient information supplied to ATC appears to be a "good" place to dump. So the issue actually is should they have asked to go some place better and hold while they dumped fuel. If the answer to that question is (for whatever reason) no and if dumping fuel was in fact non-debateably prudent then there's nothing they did wrong.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15100
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:00 pm

GSPSPOT wrote:
I don't think many here would seriously debate the prudence in dumping fuel here, it's just where it was done, and at what altitude it was done that are at issue. Pretty simple.

Truth.

Seems like a rush but we don’t know.

It does seem to me that aviation is the only endeavor where “risk the lives/health of others to reduce risk for me” is an acceptable excuse.

Land on a busy beach or a rushhour freeway? No problem, we are in a plane.

Dump toxic waste on a school? Better them than us, we are pilots.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:03 pm

32andBelow wrote:
BravoOne wrote:
miegapele wrote:
Would it be possible to press charges against those pilots? For example for reckless behaviour and endangering public safety? I know FAA for some reason co
nsiders pilots as godlike creatures who can do no wrong, but is FAA rules above the law in US?


What world do you live in? This is the strangest post yet. THE CREW DID NOT VIOLATE ANY FAA rules to begin with but after 430+ posts you still haven't figured this out. Even the careless and reckless catch all FAA rule would not apply.

Would be very surprised is any additional sim training/checking would apply to this event as well.

So the controller just has to buy all the deals they have when they run other aircraft 1000 feet below them?



What are you even talking about??
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:04 pm

ikramerica wrote:
GSPSPOT wrote:
I don't think many here would seriously debate the prudence in dumping fuel here, it's just where it was done, and at what altitude it was done that are at issue. Pretty simple.

Truth.

Seems like a rush but we don’t know.

It does seem to me that aviation is the only endeavor where “risk the lives/health of others to reduce risk for me” is an acceptable excuse.

Land on a busy beach or a rushhour freeway? No problem, we are in a plane.

Dump toxic waste on a school? Better them than us, we are pilots.


That’s not how I think at all........
 
Mightyflyer86
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:52 pm

MatthewDB wrote:
reltney wrote:
ATCJesus wrote:
Just for reference, ATC only requires 2000 ft above the highest obstacle for fuel dumping.

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publica ... ion_4.html



Negative... I as a pilot can dump fuel anytime anywhere. It you need to do a “controlled dump”. 2000 ft is what the minimum altitude ATC can guide you while your dumping but you as a pilot can dump anytime you want. Indisputable.

When heavy on takeoff I instruct fuel dump with engine failure to the non flying pilot on my command ..well, unless we have a fire. the 747-400 at 870,000 was easy.one possible outcome was V1....ENGINE FAILURE.... rotate, FUEL. DUMP...POS RATE , GEAR UP....400ft...heading mode. Emergency aircraft, I make the rules.
To dump for an overweight landing....might be necessary due to runway length, blown tires...etc... usually doesn’t happen. As for the 777 dumping, he commanded it. I don’t question it as there was a reason. He is flying it His reason is good enough. Let the experts work the details.

Keep in mind, many non pilots and armchair ceo s try and complicate simple stuff. We as pilots are getting our passengers safely back on the ground. If you have a house underneath a departure from a major international airport, expect your swimming pool to have JP in it one day. If you don’t like it, move.

It’s not a bunch of cowboys out there. The planes will climb at gross weight with the loss of a single engine if everything is normal. Compound failure”gear stuck down” or something changes everything.

Cheers


I can relate a story that went down just like that. I was West of PDX out on the Columbia when a Fedex 747 ingested a gose into one of the engines on takeoff. It was slightly after rotation when it happened. They started dumping fuel immediately and rained on us. The airplane was definitely under 1000 feet as it went overhead. It left a heck of a sheen on the water, oiled the boat deck and us. I certainly wouldn't call it as "soaking our clothes" but you could feel the oily layer on everything.

I didn't realize I was supposed to sue afterwards. We just went on with our lives.


I get your point but if I have to take my child to the hospital to have him/her checked, at least I’d expect Delta to pay for my deductible or any out of pocket costs and I don’t think you need to sue for that. I am sure DL would be happy to cut you a small check for that.
 
mcdu
Posts: 1655
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

Re: A DL 772, Flying LAX-PVG, Makes Emergency Landing And Dumps Fuel On School

Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:54 pm

GSPSPOT wrote:
I don't think many here would seriously debate the prudence in dumping fuel here, it's just where it was done, and at what altitude it was done that are at issue. Pretty simple.


At that weight and with the compressor stall recovered there was no immediate need to dump.

Just because you have the ability to dump doesn’t mean you have to dump. That plane could have landed and cleared the runway easily at the TOW for a flight to PVG.

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