B737-200 veers off runway?

[320DRIVER]

Any idea what this was all about?



DATE: 11.01.2005 LOCAL TIME: 16:45 LOCATION: Atlanta-Intl AP (KATL) / GA COUNTRY: USA
AIRLINE: Delta AL TYPE: Boeing 737-200 REGISTRATION: - C/N: - AGE: -
OPERATION: DSP FLIGHT No.: DL 782 FROM: Atlanta TO: St. Louis VIA: -
OCCUPANTS: PAX: 100 CREW: 5
FATALITIES: PAX: 0 CREW: 0 OTHER: 0
INJURIES: PAX: 0 CREW: 0 OTHER: 0
DAMAGE TO AIRCRAFT: minor
During takeoff run on runway 08L, the 737 suffered a "mechanical failure" and veered to the right of the runway. The pilots managed to stop the aircraft when it rolled onto muddy grass beneath the runway.

[OVERTALK]

Same One? Dated 13 Jan

IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 311DL Make/Model: B737 Description: BOEING
Date: 01/13/2005 Time: 2139

Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: None

LOCATION
City: ATLANTA State: GA Country: US

DESCRIPTION
ACFT, AFTER DEPARTING RWY 8R, ADVISED THEY WERE DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, DUE
TO AN ENGINE FAILURE. ATLANTA TRACON VECTORED ACFT BACK TO THE FINAL
APPROACH ON RWY 8L. ACFT LANDED AND NOSE WHEEL ENDED UP IN THE MUD OFF THE
END OF THE RWY . HAPEVILLE, GA

INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 5 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk: 0
# Pass: 104 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk: 0
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk: 0

WEATHER: NOT REPORTED

from http://www.faa.gov/avr/aai/A_0114_Y.txt

[Skylark_air]

Bad aircraft

The B737-200 is in my books, a dangerous aircraft. It's slow, difficult to handle, and I don't know why Boeing can never get the 737 engines right; they went from being too small and too close to the ground, to flat, like a squashed toilet-roll tube.

Take-offs are always worrying, AF190 is a testimont to this.

[eal401]

AF190 is a testimont to this.

Any more details than that?

[Harrier46]

The B737-200 is in my books, a dangerous aircraft. It's slow, difficult to handle, and I don't know why Boeing can never get the 737 engines right; they went from being too small and too close to the ground, to flat, like a squashed toilet-roll tube.

Interesting comment about the best selling jet airliner of all time! Obviously one or two people do not share this view.

[brabazon]

Skylark_air..
So Boeing can't get the engines right on the 737?! Since when did Boeing make engines? If you mean that they had to adapt the nacelle design for the 737Classics onwards to fit the CFM56 in then fair enough, but that's because the original aircraft was designed around the lower bypass ratio and hence diameter of the JT8D engine. To maintain ground clearance they had to flatten the bottom of the nacelle for that CFM56 powered aircraft, not aerodynamically ideal, but I don't think it's hampered the success of the type.

[4468]

Skylark claims to have flown the A330, and he thinks the 737 is dangerous, because it's slow and difficult to handle!!

Interesting perspective!

By the way, what's a BAe 147?

[NoseGear]

Say again?

The 737 is difficult to handle?? Never flown one then I take it

Whats a DHD5,6, and 7? Just while your explaining the 147.........

Nosey

[SeniorDispatcher]

>>>Take-offs are always worrying, AF190 is a testimont to this.

You can't mean Air Florida (QH) flight 90 back from 1982, can you?

If so, I don't even know where to begin...

[TightSlot]

The B737-200 is in my books, a dangerous aircraft. It's slow, difficult to handle, and I don't know why Boeing can never get the 737 engines right; they went from being too small and too close to the ground, to flat, like a squashed toilet-roll tube.

Thanks for the tip Skylark_air. For many, many years I worked down the back of -200's, and foolishly held them in some affection - little realising that I was in such peril! On take-off, they were certainly so noisy that coherent thought or worry about almost anything was beyond us. All of our pilots used to tell us what fun they were having, so I can now appreciate how they were covering up the truth in order to prevent us from excessive worry. What kind chaps they were.

[goinggrey]

Come on guys!
you're not seriously complaining about the Boeing 737? Thousands of hours in both left & right seats of this aircraft have proven to me that its a reliable and trustworthy aircraft, in all weather conditions. In a once-off extreme emergency, I was very glad to land this aircraft, with the loss of all instruments, including stby, in cloud. We couldn't reconnect any generator nor the APU and also lost the STBY AC bus! And have nearly every other failure in the QRH over very many years but the aircraft has always been reliable and vice-free. Long live the simplicity and reliability of the Boeing 737

[UNCTUOUS]

Accident/Incident Report for this event?

GoingGrey

Wouldst make an interesting read (your incident). Loss of all electrics is apparently a few and far between event.

Can you refer us to the incident report for this electrical outage event please?

Was it wiring related, component related, lightning strike?

Or was it an MEL adventure that went further?

UNC

[greyflag]

It (737-300) handled just fine last Sat. night on a gusty (30 kts. or so) snowy ILS approach and landing. I have just made a brief return to the aircraft (back to the 757 next month) and it feels like a comfortable old shoe...

[L337]

I would guess that the closest that Skylark_air has ever been to an aircraft is the perimeter fence.

L337

With 3000+ hours on the 737-200