Yellow Bullet Forums banner
21 - 40 of 67 Posts
hard to belive they would do that dump over land.... in the state of fucked up laws and everything will cause cancer......... hey lets dump fuel over a populated area........ an ambulance chasers wet dream
 
IF the Pilot said his intentions to ATC to dump he would have been directed to an area where it was safe to do so, LIKE OVER THE OCEAN! He must not have told ATC about the dump and did it over populated areas on his own and should be back in another Ground School and given some days off.

These days we don't dump anymore because fuel is too expensive, we just land over weight and do the inspections to the aircraft.

Dave
Ahh, ETOPS - Engine Turns Or Passengers Swim :)
There's been a few times in Northwest Airlines history that a fuel dump would happen as the plane returned back across the river and landed.
Basically they handed out car wash coupons for the few that complained. Not many oceans near MSP...
 
If you're going to dump fuel at the wrong altitude over the wrong area and impact tens of thousands of people perhaps consider that they are a majority compared to passengers and crew.
 
LOL. What impact? Perhaps the severity of the possible impact to those few on the plane might be considered in your equation?
Await the fines, penalties, and lawsuits and you'll then understand what I just posted.

This isn't speculation. They will happen.
 
If you're going to dump fuel at the wrong altitude over the wrong area and impact tens of thousands of people perhaps consider that they are a majority compared to passengers and crew.
You're right, the plane should've landed overweight and risk damaging the airframe, sliding off the runway, or worse.

That's a far better option than some people getting misted with fuel.
 
You're right, the plane should've landed overweight and risk damaging the airframe, sliding off the runway, or worse.

That's a far better option than some people getting misted with fuel.
The fuel is atomized into almost nothing if dropped at the correct altitude but you would not really do it unless ATC had blocked out an area so it would not impact people and structures on the ground. It is done at the Captain's discretion but as I mentioned earlier it is not something that is really done any longer and some 121 aircraft cannot even dump fuel. Landing overweight is actually not that uncommon and is practiced in the S.I.M. so it is no big deal, just touch down before the TDZ and let the aircraft settle on the struts slowly while slowing down on the runway, don't plant it, the mechanics do an overweight landing inspection that is in the Maintenance Manual and if it is all good as per the MM they sign it off.

On the 747-300 at Southern Air our max taxi was 830,000#, max take off 815,000#. Common published numbers for the -300 are max take off of 750,000#, max landing 564,000#. We would use up to 15,000# of fuel just in the taxi and you have still taxied the aircraft, made the take off roll at almost full power and put it in the air and are flying so those overweight numbers are dropping fast. The common published numbers with no taxi, no take off roll, no flying difference is 186,000# of fuel. Now take into account the taxi, take off, flying around and getting back to the airport and those numbers drop quite a bit so you are coming back with no dump not as heavy as you might think. You have to take this into account with all aircraft that are out there flying and you will see you will not be as overweight as you might think. Just sayin! Dave
 
IF the Pilot said his intentions to ATC to dump he would have been directed to an area where it was safe to do so, LIKE OVER THE OCEAN! He must not have told ATC about the dump and did it over populated areas on his own and should be back in another Ground School and given some days off.

These days we don't dump anymore because fuel is too expensive, we just land over weight and do the inspections to the aircraft.

Dave
I was about to say the same thing, and it doesn't have anything to do with putting the schoolkids' skin over the safety of the passengers. That's a Boeing 777, equipped with huge engines of 100,000 pounds of thrust apiece, one of which can easily keep the plane aloft (or even climb) despite being loaded with 300,000 pounds of fuel. It's an emergency, of course, but a compressor stall wouldn't be cause for alarm the same as an onboard fire would be - so it sounds like they had more than ample time to do a water dump. I just read where a 777 is designed to fly up to 3 hours on one engine, so it doesn't appear there was an excuse for not dumping over water other than the pilot possibly not wanting to pollute the Pacific with 300,000 pounds of Jet A.

Speculation, of course. None of us know exactly what happened and why certain decisions were made.
 
21 - 40 of 67 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top