Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Boeing 747 Dreamlifter lands at wrong airport

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Boeing 747 Dreamlifter lands at wrong airport

Old 22nd Nov 2013, 13:09
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
KBFI

Intruder, they actualy depart Renton to a variety of airports. The greatest number go to Moses Lake (KMWH); others to Paine Field (KPAE). They occasionally go they occasionally go to Boeing Field (KBFI) or other airports.

Got news for you. They ALL to to KBFI after having left Renton.
Spooky 2 is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 13:12
  #142 (permalink)  
None but a blockhead
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London, UK
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We were discussing this incident elsewhere online, and a friend says that a 747 once landed at Jersey Airport (EGJJ) due to a medical emergency. Pax had to be removed in batches to the UK, the seats removed and a minimum fuel t/o followed - with (he says) the aircraft only just making it. He makes it sound like a carrier take-off, with the a/c dipping down as it cleared the end of the runway over the sea.

Jersey has around 5500' of runway, which on the various examples mentioned in this thread doesn't seem that dramatically difficult. I'm having trouble believing that there wouldn't be better places to put down with little time penalty, and I can't find any reference to such an incident anywhere.

Can anyone confirm this?
Self Loading Freight is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 13:13
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: JFK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The 787 wings are built in Nagoya, Japan, and the fuselage in Grottaglie, Italy. The Dreamlifter was built to bring these assemblies to Seattle and Charleston for final assembly. Almost all Dreamlifter flights are long range across the Atlantic and North Pacific.

The airplane is very draggy and they really could use winglets to cut down on the fuel flow, but there were some airflow issues with the enlarged fuselage and it caused some unwanted vibration. That's why they took them off.
xaf2fe is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 13:18
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,511
Received 58 Likes on 37 Posts
Originally Posted by Willow
whatever set of errors or omissions turn out to have been responsible, thus far, there is no predicate for saying that the junior crewmember was thinking 'this won't end well, but Hot Pants Herbie, I best not say anything about it to the Old Man.'
No, Willow, it could actually be far worse than that. Both the dreamlifter crew may well have not had the foggiest about what was going on! Based on your words (?) at least the asian young'n knew something was astray...
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 14:39
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 782
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Continued

@ Capn Bloggs. Yes sir, point well taken, specifically that this incident could turn out to have involved, or has already been revealed as involving, neither pilot knowing what their position was. I don't see a cultural issue in that factual paradigm (or as law profs like to say, "fact pattern"), and certainly not a theme of extreme deference to seniority. Yes, the errors here may be worse, but it isn't hypocrisy to fail to criticize the crew for a flaw they did not exhibit.

@ Spleener. Sir, I will attempt to restate and clarify: it isn't hypocrisy to fail to criticize the crew for a flaw they did not exhibit.
WillowRun 6-3 is online now  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 14:50
  #146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: KLAX
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Genuine question - is this likely to be a career ender for these guys?
Or a `don't ever do that again' kind of discussion.
The crew will most likely be debriefed, then sent to the sim where they (under intense pressure to save their jobs) will be given a horrific competency check ride designed for them to fail. Once fired, the company will go to the FAA and declare the "problem" corrected.

The sad part is - these fired pilots would be otherwise the last pilots in the world to ever land at a wrong airport again!

Last edited by L-38; 22nd Nov 2013 at 16:44.
L-38 is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 16:00
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Kansas
Age: 85
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Torquelink
So, maybe a silly question, it wasn't the same crew taking it out again?
No, they flew in a new crew from NY.
Ozlander1 is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 16:03
  #148 (permalink)  

Bottums Up
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: dunnunda
Age: 66
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by L-38
The sad part is - these guys will be the last pilots in the world to ever land at a wrong airport again!
Touch wood it's not me but I doubt it.
Capt Claret is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 16:14
  #149 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
No, they flew in a new crew from NY
good thing they didn't come by bus, it probably would broken down as well in this comedy.

I told the wife that I wish they would include something like this in an airplane movie rather than that unrealistic stuff like the movie Flight
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 16:40
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: MA, USA
Age: 54
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"unrealistic stuff like the movie Flight"

Totally let's not go there.
Yancey Slide is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 17:04
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 59
Posts: 2,706
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
a friend says that a 747 once landed at Jersey Airport (EGJJ) due to a medical emergency
Don't think so, a BA Tristar did do so though once (late '70's IIRC) to clear backlog of pax after a foggy day.
Wycombe is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 18:23
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suspect the reason for the two different approach charts is that one was drafted by AF standards and the other by AeroNav standards. I doubt that either of these charts would have been used by the crew as they would undoubtedly be using Jeppesen charts.
beech35 is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 18:26
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But nothing from ATC to caution the Crew of an active airfield so close
It is really not a business of ATC to warn pilots not to land at wrong airports.
olasek is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 18:27
  #154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just as a matter of interest, if you look at the videos of the takeoff roll, it seems to last about 28 seconds -- quite a bit shorter than the usual ~45.
SeenItAll is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 18:41
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Just as a matter of interest, if you look at the videos of the takeoff roll, it seems to last about 28 seconds -- quite a bit shorter than the usual ~45.
Presumably as a result of factors such as full thrust instead of reduced (aka assumed) thrust, higher flap setting and/or reduced weight?
fireflybob is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 20:14
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: chicago
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
olasek


actually it is the business of air traffic control to make sure that a plane of any kind on an IFR clearance is complying with the clearance.

the 747 was cleared for an approach to the air force base

and

the plane didn't comply with that clearance.

not only a moral imperative but a technical one too.


and remember boys and girls, a military airfield in the USA has a beacon which flashes two whites and a green, not just green whitegreen white.
flarepilot is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 20:19
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
actually it is the business of air traffic control to make sure that a plane of any kind on an IFR clearance is complying with the clearance.
He might have closed his IFR flight plan before, he might have declared "airport in sight" in which case the ATC is done with him. The primary responsibility of ATC is separating the traffic from each other (and separating traffic from terrain when on IFR flight plan) everything else is done on time-available basis.
olasek is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 20:36
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The 787 wings are built in Nagoya, Japan, and the fuselage in Grottaglie, Italy. The Dreamlifter was built to bring these assemblies to Seattle and Charleston for final assembly. Almost all Dreamlifter flights are long range across the Atlantic and North Pacific.

The airplane is very draggy and they really could use winglets to cut down on the fuel flow, but there were some airflow issues with the enlarged fuselage and it caused some unwanted vibration. That's why they took them off.
Fuselage center sections are built in CHS.

There are quite a few Dreamlifter flights between CHS and PAE, some stopping at ICT...

Wing flutter problems also led to a redesign of the wing fuel distribution logic.
Intruder is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 20:46
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: chicago
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
olasek

he might have won the lottery. he might have done alot of things.

but why would an ATP cancel IFR while airborne when going to an airport with a control tower in operation? Tell me.

ATC is not done with you if you call the airport in sight.

cancelling IFR is something else, and he wouldn't have done that, when the Tower at the proper destination would have done it automatically upon landing
flarepilot is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2013, 21:12
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
but why would an ATP cancel IFR
I did not say that
I said the pilot might have cancelled his IFR plan, it is pilot's discretion. Yes, when you report airport in sight and accept landing clearance it is NOT a duty of the ATC to monitor your progress.
olasek is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.