Originally posted by 3WE
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Airplane In Trouble Attempting To Land In Miami
Collapse
X
-
Dave ... I suggest you get your facts right before taking such a strong stance.
One of the moderators around here used to fly an aircraft that couldn't dump fuel.
Early model 767's... 737's, DC-9. 717. There are 4 off the top of my head, and I know there are more.
Why? Some "jetliners" are certified to land (in an emergency) at their max take off weight, and so they don't need to dump fuel. In fact, pretty much all jet aircraft can safely land at their MTOW, the difference is just in certification.
For example the 747-400 needs to dump over 100t of gas to get from MTOW to MLW. That takes about 40mins or so. Do you think that if you have a nasty situation after takeoff, that you sit around for 40mins? No.
Some can dump, some can't. Deal with it.
Comment
-
Please, everybody stop the BS.
Why? Some "jetliners" are certified to land (in an emergency) at their max take off weight, and so they don't need to dump fuel. In fact, pretty much all jet aircraft can safely land at their MTOW, the difference is just in certification.
If not, they would not get the type certificate. It's a requirement of 14 CFR, part 25 (a.k.a. FAR 25).
There is an extensive discussion about this subject in this thread of the 737 that dumped fuel (of course it did not, the 737 in all of its versions is one of the planes that can't dump fuel). In short it goes like this:
The design landing ground loads MUST take into account landing at MLW at 600fpm and MTOW at 360fpm, so while the maximum allowed vertical speed at touchdown is reduced for a MTOW landing, it still covers a somehow hard landing, although not as hard as it is allowed for a MLW landing.
I've learned from people in this board that landing above MLW always requires some maintenance job, if a least to check that the landing was in fact not hard. Damaging the airplane due to a hard landing can be a lot of trouble, overweight or not; but because of the reduced allowed vertical speed at MTOW it is more probable to damage it landing at MTOW than at MLW.
I guess that's why procedures call for dump/burn fuel to be within MLW before landing, if not in a big hurry. When time is of the essence (for example a cabin fire), there should be not distraction dumping/burning fuel. Landing must be carried ASAP, and not doing so can and have cost many lives in several accidents.
However, some few data presented in that thread show some overweight landings that required just an hour of maintenance, and some hard non-overweight landings that required months of grounding.
Some planes can dump fuel, some cannot. And the DC-9 family all the way to the MD-90 and 717, what includes the one of this incident, are among those who can't. I don't know of an airworthiness requirement that directly or indirectly forces the manufacturer decision about installing a fuel jettison system on planes or not. AFAIK, it's an operational issue, not a safety one.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by DaveGF4GALL jetliners can dump fuel... it has nothing to do with their range.... they need dump capability to reduce gross weight for emergencies right after takeoff
So, what do you say, do you still want to take me up on that bet?
Again, before you answer, see if you can find a copy of the Federal Aviation Regulations and take a look at FAR part 25.1001. Then give me a summarization of that section in 50 words or less and let me know if you think all commercial aircraft can/must have a dump system.Parlour Talker Extraordinaire
Comment
-
Dumping Fuel
A couple of quotes worth considering.
Originally posted by 3WEALL airliners can dump fuel, it is ALWAYS done when an airplane stalls after takeoff.
Originally posted by DaveGF4GANY airplane can dump fuel - you just crawl out on the wing with a screwdriver and punch some holesTerry
Lurking at JP since the BA 777 at Heathrow and AD lost responsiveness to the throttles.
How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? Sherlock Holmes
Comment
-
Originally posted by flyboy2548mExcellent idea. Are you willing to lead by example?
Now, I'm not perfect. If you kindly directed me to my last BS and explain to me why it is BS, just like I do with other's BS, I'd be more than happy to admit my mistake and learn in the process.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by GabrielI always do. That's my policy.
Now, I'm not perfect. If you kindly directed me to my last BS and explain to me why it is BS, just like I do with other's BS, I'd be more than happy to admit my mistake and learn in the process.
Flyboy, if you choose to reply to Gabriel's challenge, please do so in the off topic forum and keep it civil! No personal attacks!Don
Standard practice for managers around the world:
Ready - Fire - Aim! DAMN! Missed again!
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WEALL airliners can dump fuel, it is ALWAYS done when an airplane stalls after takeoff.
And this too: If you go to coffin corner the aircraft is stressed to it's breaking point....speed up, you break up and die, throttle back, you break up and die.....
When making such post's, please use the appropriate emoticons or make a statement to the sarcastic nature of your post.Don
Standard practice for managers around the world:
Ready - Fire - Aim! DAMN! Missed again!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Airbus_A320Yeah, CNN desparatly trying to prove that the media are idiots... they succeeded as they do time and time again in that respect.
And of course, that page you linked to puts up a pic of DL 722, when the story is about an MD-80.
Very very sensible if you think your nose gear is not locked.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DmmooreFlyboy, if you choose to reply to Gabriel's challenge, please do so in the off topic forum and keep it civil! No personal attacks!
Comment
-
Originally posted by flyboy2548mI think these retorical questions are best asked in the O/T while being kept civil.
Don, pease delete all this BS including this post. (while I could delete my own posts, they would still be there as quotes in Flyboy's posts).
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by GabrielConcur and sorry. My mistake to carry on this OT and NVA discussion here.
Don, pease delete all this BS including this post. (while I could delete my own posts, they would still be there as quotes in Flyboy's posts).Don
Standard practice for managers around the world:
Ready - Fire - Aim! DAMN! Missed again!
Comment
Comment