DAL 1457 emergency about to land in ATL
07-24-2010 | 08:11 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
From: B-737 Right
Question for the fine pilots on this board.
In the case of DL1457 that blew a tire at take off from ATL it circled long enough to burn/dump fuel for a safer landing.
Why not burn the fuel flying to Portland?
Aside from ATL having more (an perhaps longer runways) what is the reason not to complete the flight?
After all, landing with a blown tire statistically (and to the credit of great pilots) is pretty uneventful, and in the event of problems one place is as bad as the other.
In the case of DL1457 that blew a tire at take off from ATL it circled long enough to burn/dump fuel for a safer landing.
Why not burn the fuel flying to Portland?
Aside from ATL having more (an perhaps longer runways) what is the reason not to complete the flight?
After all, landing with a blown tire statistically (and to the credit of great pilots) is pretty uneventful, and in the event of problems one place is as bad as the other.
1. You normally would not want to retract landing gear after a tire failure -- the old saying goes, "A down gear is a happy gear"
2. You normally would not want to retract the flaps after a tire failure since some of the rubber could have been thrown into the flap mechanism, causing potential damage or jamming, and finally,
3. Due to the above stated reasons, they would not have had sufficient fuel anyway for a flight from ATL to Portland with gear and flaps extended.
I don't know what flap setting they landed with, but I suspect they extended the flaps incrementally to minimize control issues in the event that any flaps were damaged or jammed.
07-24-2010 | 08:44 AM
#23
On Reserve
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Question for the fine pilots on this board.
In the case of DL1457 that blew a tire at take off from ATL it circled long enough to burn/dump fuel for a safer landing.
Why not burn the fuel flying to Portland?
Aside from ATL having more (an perhaps longer runways) what is the reason not to complete the flight?
After all, landing with a blown tire statistically (and to the credit of great pilots) is pretty uneventful, and in the event of problems one place is as bad as the other.
In the case of DL1457 that blew a tire at take off from ATL it circled long enough to burn/dump fuel for a safer landing.
Why not burn the fuel flying to Portland?
Aside from ATL having more (an perhaps longer runways) what is the reason not to complete the flight?
After all, landing with a blown tire statistically (and to the credit of great pilots) is pretty uneventful, and in the event of problems one place is as bad as the other.
07-24-2010 | 08:57 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,866
Likes: 178
Question for the fine pilots on this board.
In the case of DL1457 that blew a tire at take off from ATL it circled long enough to burn/dump fuel for a safer landing.
Why not burn the fuel flying to Portland?
Aside from ATL having more (an perhaps longer runways) what is the reason not to complete the flight?
After all, landing with a blown tire statistically (and to the credit of great pilots) is pretty uneventful, and in the event of problems one place is as bad as the other.
In the case of DL1457 that blew a tire at take off from ATL it circled long enough to burn/dump fuel for a safer landing.
Why not burn the fuel flying to Portland?
Aside from ATL having more (an perhaps longer runways) what is the reason not to complete the flight?
After all, landing with a blown tire statistically (and to the credit of great pilots) is pretty uneventful, and in the event of problems one place is as bad as the other.
The 737NG does not use gear doors. The tires fit very tightly in the gear wells to reduce drag. Any damage to the tire could jam the gear in the well. To prevent this there is a pin that would be hit by a blown or damage tire. It prevents that gear from retracting into the gear well and it free falls back down. It would be a long flight to PDX with one gear hanging down.
07-24-2010 | 01:16 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,070
Likes: 1
From: Urban chicken rancher.
It's actually an interesting point for us 73 drivers. DAL's 73Ns have tire pressure gauges but its not DAL policy for us to check them on the walk around. I flew with a CA last month who told me that he's noticed, especially on the first flight of the day, that the tires are routinely under inflated. I've starting taking a look and he's right often. There's a push in the department to change our philosophy to doing exactly that. Apparently, the SWA guys do it. Don't know if this was the case with 1457 but food for thought.
07-24-2010 | 05:12 PM
#27
Looking for a laugh
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Likes: 0
07-24-2010 | 06:07 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
It's actually an interesting point for us 73 drivers. DAL's 73Ns have tire pressure gauges but its not DAL policy for us to check them on the walk around. I flew with a CA last month who told me that he's noticed, especially on the first flight of the day, that the tires are routinely under inflated. I've starting taking a look and he's right often. There's a push in the department to change our philosophy to doing exactly that. Apparently, the SWA guys do it. Don't know if this was the case with 1457 but food for thought.
07-24-2010 | 06:19 PM
#30
Looking for a laugh
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Likes: 0
I always used to look at them when I was on the 73N. Of course, I always used to look at the chip detector lights on the EMB-120 too. Used to get yelled at by the CPO for doing it, even when we called out MX for a light, and they found a piece of metal in the sump that had part of a SN on it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
