Plane used redundent systems in order to land safely. No one was injured.
http://www.wnbc.com/news/3689646/detail.html
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
-
- nycfuturepilot
- Posts: 773
- Joined:
CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Father, Son, HOYA spirit
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Hopefully someone nice will come forward and inform us of the aircraft's registration.
Fly one thing; Fly it well
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
The aircraft in question was N14735
J
J
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Interesting, glad it got back safely. That is always a scary moment. Anyone out there with some more info I would love to hear in detail what happened.
90 Day Fiancé has taught me that Russian woman are excellent.
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
J... Ship 735 was the swap aircraft.. Ship 727 ... N38727 was the offending machine.
Ship 727 did depart EWR eventually.. as Flt 1835 to PHX
Ship 727 did depart EWR eventually.. as Flt 1835 to PHX
Working Hard, Flying Right Friendly....
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
>>>Anyone out there with some more info I would love to hear in detail what happened.
The 737NG family has a system-A and a system-B, plus a standby rudder system. Most hydraulic system failures involve A or B. It sounds like they lost -one- of those, and were able to return safely using the remaining system..
The 737NG family has a system-A and a system-B, plus a standby rudder system. Most hydraulic system failures involve A or B. It sounds like they lost -one- of those, and were able to return safely using the remaining system..
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Not to criticize CO maintainence (as I'm sure their standards are very high), but is the failure of a hydraulic system something that can just randomly happen to any airline, or is it possibly the fault of bad maintainence?
Once again, I'm not faulting CO. I'm just curious how a loss of a hydraulic system can occur.
Once again, I'm not faulting CO. I'm just curious how a loss of a hydraulic system can occur.
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
>>> I'm just curious how a loss of a hydraulic system can occur.
This may be easier if you first think about your car's "hydraulic system", namely your power steering system. In your car, you have a power steering pump, the actuators, plus hoses, etc., any one of which can develop a leak.
In an aircraft, there are numerous pumps, numerous actuators (for ailerons, spoilers, leading edge devices, rudder, etc.) plus lots of lines that connect them. Sometimes, an individual actuator fails (entirely, or even something as "minor" as a seal/gasket). Sometimes a line fails. It varies, and is something that all airline aircraft are subject to, and not just those of CO.
This may be easier if you first think about your car's "hydraulic system", namely your power steering system. In your car, you have a power steering pump, the actuators, plus hoses, etc., any one of which can develop a leak.
In an aircraft, there are numerous pumps, numerous actuators (for ailerons, spoilers, leading edge devices, rudder, etc.) plus lots of lines that connect them. Sometimes, an individual actuator fails (entirely, or even something as "minor" as a seal/gasket). Sometimes a line fails. It varies, and is something that all airline aircraft are subject to, and not just those of CO.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
-
- spacecadet
- Posts: 3582
- Joined:
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Not to criticize CO maintainence (as I'm sure their standards are very high), but is the failure of a hydraulic system something that can just randomly happen to any airline, or is it possibly the fault of bad maintainence?
No mechanical failure is ever technically "random". They could be due to one of three reasons:
1. Faulty maintenance
2. A production or design fault in a particulart part
3. An improper maintenance schedule or improper maintenance requirements
All major airplane parts follow a maintenance schedule and are changed at their end-of-life limit whether or not the part appears to be working properly or not. Theoretically, if an airline follows the maintenance schedules to the letter they should never have a major mechanical failure. But as we all know, life is not perfect. Defects work their way into parts during production, mechanics make mistakes and supervisors don't catch them, airlines don't follow their maintenance schedules properly or the schedule itself may not be rigorous enough for the way a particular part is designed.
Bottom line being it's always somebody's fault. Airlines, the FAA and the NTSB (if an actual accident had occured) don't just throw up their hands and say "oh well, these things happen" - there's always a reason why something like this happens and they will find out why it happened and see what they can do to ensure it doesn't happen again. This kind of review goes on all the time in the industry and you rarely hear about it unless a major accident occurs.
Now, sometimes the economics are such that an airline may tell the FAA "we've determined that there's a 0.0000001% of this ever happening again if we do nothing, and to bring that chance down to 0.00000001% would cost us $80 billion. We don't think it's worth it." And the FAA will often agree. Especially if it's a simple production defect, sometimes there's not much extra that you can do because the tolerances involved in production of critical parts are already so precise.
No mechanical failure is ever technically "random". They could be due to one of three reasons:
1. Faulty maintenance
2. A production or design fault in a particulart part
3. An improper maintenance schedule or improper maintenance requirements
All major airplane parts follow a maintenance schedule and are changed at their end-of-life limit whether or not the part appears to be working properly or not. Theoretically, if an airline follows the maintenance schedules to the letter they should never have a major mechanical failure. But as we all know, life is not perfect. Defects work their way into parts during production, mechanics make mistakes and supervisors don't catch them, airlines don't follow their maintenance schedules properly or the schedule itself may not be rigorous enough for the way a particular part is designed.
Bottom line being it's always somebody's fault. Airlines, the FAA and the NTSB (if an actual accident had occured) don't just throw up their hands and say "oh well, these things happen" - there's always a reason why something like this happens and they will find out why it happened and see what they can do to ensure it doesn't happen again. This kind of review goes on all the time in the industry and you rarely hear about it unless a major accident occurs.
Now, sometimes the economics are such that an airline may tell the FAA "we've determined that there's a 0.0000001% of this ever happening again if we do nothing, and to bring that chance down to 0.00000001% would cost us $80 billion. We don't think it's worth it." And the FAA will often agree. Especially if it's a simple production defect, sometimes there's not much extra that you can do because the tolerances involved in production of critical parts are already so precise.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Air Returns making the news?
Aren't the Olympics on?
Aren't the Olympics on?
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Bottom line being it's always somebody's fault
Perhaps it's statistical variance's fault?
This thread is stupid.
Air Returns making the news?
Aren't the Olympics on?
Hum, I think the closing ceremonies were earlier this evening.
Perhaps Oprah reruns are on.
Perhaps it's statistical variance's fault?
This thread is stupid.
Air Returns making the news?
Aren't the Olympics on?
Hum, I think the closing ceremonies were earlier this evening.
Perhaps Oprah reruns are on.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
While the article makes no mention of a failed tire the 737 is prone to hydraulic failure due to either FOD or pieces of tire rupturing hydraulic lines above the main gear. I've seen a 737-300 that lost A and B systems on T/O from this and returned using standby only.
Dl757md
Dl757md
757 Most beautiful airliner in the sky!
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
What's is the big deal for an air return. The media just hyped this particular A/R up. The a/c in question came back for a deferrable item, system b hyd low pressure light illuminating. They changed a simple switch,checked the case drain filter, and did an overweight landing check and sent the a/c on its way again.
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
So there really wasn't any failure then? Just a faulty switch?
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Yes, just a faulty switch. Sometimes (most cases) you can't believe what the media reports, it is usually not as dramatic as they say.
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
it is usually not as dramatic as they say.
That is a huge, huge understatement.
That is a huge, huge understatement.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
RE: CO 737 Returns To EWR After Hydraulic Failure
Spacecadet, your statement in reply #9 is very enlightening. Where did you accumulate all your mx experience, was it line or hangar time? Although all airlines/aircraft have their share of a/c being down hard, CO seems to have a pretty high rate. (What they sent to SLC seems to have problems quite regularly.)
psp. lead by example
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: anymaninfc, atal17, B595, BlueTrue, Brianpr3, CanukinUSA, [email protected], Chipmunk1973, concordeforever, CrewBunk, deltacto, FluidFlow, FrenchPotatoEye, GoodRide, GSP psgr, hongming, hooverman, hyd09l27r, intrance, jhdk, jrfspa320, lalib, lifes931, Mini1000, Natesantiago88, notaxonrotax, panamair, PapaWhiskey, phllax, RalXWB, StudiodeKadent, Tdan, Tokushima, USAirKid, zippy, ZK-NBT, ZOASAN and 170 guests