Possible bird strike UA840 SYD to LA turnback
Thread Starter
Possible bird strike UA840 SYD to LA turnback
http://dailym.ai/29cyv3F
United press release says it was "possible bird strike."
But reported as bird hitting a wing, causing smoke to pour out and requiring an emergency landing.
Above, video of the "smoke" pouring out
Mickjoebill
United press release says it was "possible bird strike."
But reported as bird hitting a wing, causing smoke to pour out and requiring an emergency landing.
Above, video of the "smoke" pouring out
Mickjoebill
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
United Airlines flight UA840 bound for Los Angeles makes emergency landing in Sydney | Daily Mail Online
United press release says it was "possible bird strike."
But reported as bird hitting a wing, causing smoke to pour out and requiring an emergency landing.
Above, video of the "smoke" pouring out
Mickjoebill
United press release says it was "possible bird strike."
But reported as bird hitting a wing, causing smoke to pour out and requiring an emergency landing.
Above, video of the "smoke" pouring out
Mickjoebill
obviously had to dump fuel to land- but why is still unknown - bird strike on wing ??? Uhhhhh
Looks like fuel dump to me!!
The link below is to a fuel dump by a B777 and it looks very similar to the situation described at the beginning of the thread. I reckon it is a fuel dump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlaUOEa2UGY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlaUOEa2UGY
Of course it's a fuel dump. That'll be why the big jets have a pipe sticking out of the wing trailing edge 
Fuelled for Trans-Pacific flight (presumably this flight stops over at Honolulu?) so above max landing weight for return to Sydney.
If you watch the following video from the first link it claims they lost an engine due to bird strike. Unclear how far into the flight they were but that's a long way to go on one engine. ETOPS probably made the decision for the crew.
Fuelled for Trans-Pacific flight (presumably this flight stops over at Honolulu?) so above max landing weight for return to Sydney.
If you watch the following video from the first link it claims they lost an engine due to bird strike. Unclear how far into the flight they were but that's a long way to go on one engine. ETOPS probably made the decision for the crew.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gods Country
Age: 53
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFS the media could do with checking facts but hey, its a story, who gives a rats if we get the details correct. Kinda surprised it wasn't called a Cessna Jumbo.
It was a 787-9, not a 777.
Ive recently seen an A-380 clearly labelled a Boeing Airbus 380A lately. LOL
It was a 787-9, not a 777.
Ive recently seen an A-380 clearly labelled a Boeing Airbus 380A lately. LOL
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: usa
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Ive recently seen an A-380 clearly labelled a Boeing Airbus 380A lately. LOL"
You want a really belly buster?
Popular Mechanics Magazine had an article published while the A380 was under development and stated that it would be the first aircraft with a 1.3 billion pound max takeoff weight !!! Yes BILLION !
You want a really belly buster?
Popular Mechanics Magazine had an article published while the A380 was under development and stated that it would be the first aircraft with a 1.3 billion pound max takeoff weight !!! Yes BILLION !
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see that the headline has been changed in the article from 'smoke' to 'fuel'.
From further down the original article -
So they were onto it at the beginning, but didn't know. Do they read & comprehend their stuff before they publish?
From further down the original article -
The plane landed safety after dumping its fuel, which was captured on video by passengers, and no one was injured.
So they were onto it at the beginning, but didn't know. Do they read & comprehend their stuff before they publish?
FFS the media could do with checking facts but hey, its a story, who gives a rats if we get the details correct.
They don't even know what tea is. It's coffee and doughnuts that they won't serve. 
On topic: looks like the crew and procedures fit the situation just fine, so ... a story about things working out correctly when something went wrong. Good news, albeit a delay in travel for the passengers.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Timbukthree
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Popular Mechanics admitted to the typographical error and subsequently published a correction. A not unusual 'B' for an 'M' error.
A Science channel on TV consistently refers to the A380 as the first double-decker airliner. Not true of course, but they have yet to correct the misstatement.
A Science channel on TV consistently refers to the A380 as the first double-decker airliner. Not true of course, but they have yet to correct the misstatement.
