Delta 747-400 takes a beating over China
And, in some cases like this, the repair will be done, even if it doesn't appear to make sense economically just to avoid a 'hull loss' which can drive up fleet insurance rates. Or, look bad for the airline 'Rainman' safety record e.g. QF1 at BKK.
Then again I have seen airlines who gladly attempt to write off what appears to be repairable in order to get something newer.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just the insurance angle. The 26 year old airframe would be worth in the region of $10 to $15 million max. but would have very little chance of resale so possibly even less than $10 Million. Because of the low value Delta may only insure liabilities, (pax and third party plus War) and self insure the hull, another possibility is that, given the age of the airframe, its book value has been written down to zero.
If the hull is insured with underwriters then the decision to repair or write-off rests with the insurers, in consultation with Delta, Delta's options are then likely to be: accept the pay-out, minus the deductible/excess, (and possibly buy the salvage), or cough up the amount of the deductible towards the cost of repair. An incident such as this won't effect Delta's premiums at next renewal, their overall fleet value is far too large and this is small beer.
If the hull is insured with underwriters then the decision to repair or write-off rests with the insurers, in consultation with Delta, Delta's options are then likely to be: accept the pay-out, minus the deductible/excess, (and possibly buy the salvage), or cough up the amount of the deductible towards the cost of repair. An incident such as this won't effect Delta's premiums at next renewal, their overall fleet value is far too large and this is small beer.
One article I saw quoted the aircraft value at between $6 and $10 million. Given a significant portion of that would be the four PW4000 engines and readily salvageable avionics, I think it's safe to say this airframe's future is beer cans. Especially since Delta has ready 'spares'.
As to the actions of the aircrew, hindsight is always 20-20. I'll wait until I see some sort of official report before I condemn their actions.
As to the actions of the aircrew, hindsight is always 20-20. I'll wait until I see some sort of official report before I condemn their actions.
Another ploy to avoid weather in China is to ask for "direct routing due weather ahead". It does start the dialogue with a possible solution and the lowly Controller who is possibly operating in the dead of night and virtually alone has an 'opt out' rather than being accused later of allowing an aircraft off track just for the 'direct' option. The response to "Fly flight plan route" can be countered by stating unequivocally that it is "Not possible due weather ahead affecting safety of aircraft". Then, "Mayday" etc.
I know I wasn't there and I do sympathise but the one thing you don't do in the tropics (or the MidWest in USA - or anywhere) is blunder into a CB! You have no idea what is going to happen next and, in this case, they stumbled out of the CB having written off the aircraft but now didn't even have a serviceable radar making it quite likely that they will repeat the performance until, presumably, they crash! Not a good plan whether I was there or not IMHO.
I know I wasn't there and I do sympathise but the one thing you don't do in the tropics (or the MidWest in USA - or anywhere) is blunder into a CB! You have no idea what is going to happen next and, in this case, they stumbled out of the CB having written off the aircraft but now didn't even have a serviceable radar making it quite likely that they will repeat the performance until, presumably, they crash! Not a good plan whether I was there or not IMHO.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 80
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During the mid 80,s I saw a 737 - 200 which diverted into Riyadh of all places after sustaining hail damage.The leading edges of all aerofoils were literally beaten flat, the engine intakes and bullet fairings looked as though someone had worked them over with a ball peen hammer. Judging by the radius of the indentations the hailstones were possibly about golf ball size. The black coating was stripped from the radome and paint removed on the forward fuselage curved section. The surprising thing was that the first stage compressor blades were all intact with no visible distortion. It would seem that hail is not unknown in Saudi as I saw a news report showing hailstones about golf ball size being bulldozed off a mountain road. I was in Riyadh for seven years and never saw hail,I did see the most torrential rain that I ever encountered in Riyadh - I have been in typhoons and tropical monsoons but never saw anything that remotely approached the few hours of rain I saw on that occasion.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The leading edges of all aerofoils were literally beaten flat, the engine intakes and bullet fairings looked as though someone had worked them over with a ball peen hammer.
The surprising thing was that the first stage compressor blades were all intact with no visible distortion
when I saw the pictures of hail damage on this 747, my first thought was, "I've seen much worse hail damage". The composite radome will and does break, but I didn't see much damage to leading edges and engine inlet cowls, no cracked windshields (may be the pictures though). Here's a random example of worse looking damage: bmi G-MIDJ, where the accident report stated "the manufacturer later confirmed that the aircraft was in a safe condition to continue to its destination". There's been some airliner accidents where storm cells with hail and rain caused flameouts due to water ingestion, but engines have been modified as a result (continuous ignition, fan shape). My point being, modern airframes are remarkably resilient, and while this is no excuse for risk-taking, I'm sceptical to the drama in media reports without seeing a full accident investigation. Just like I'm sceptical to pilots blaming fellow pilots based on hearsay. Medical doctors don't usually blame their brethren without clear and very convincing evidence, but a few pilots always seem to rush to vilify their colleagues. No blame culture my a**. Yet airline incidents seem to invoke some kind of primeval response in many people, and pilots get to be either villains or heros (both labels can be equally undeserved). I remember some psychologist who had a good explanation for this behaviour, I'll search for it
We may never get to know much more about this particular incident though:
Delta notified the the National Transportation Safety Board about the incident, but reported no injuries, "no substantial damage" to the aircraft and no airframe penetration, NTSB spokesman Eric Weiss said. The incident is not under investigation, he added. He declined to provide more information.
The surprising thing was that the first stage compressor blades were all intact with no visible distortion
when I saw the pictures of hail damage on this 747, my first thought was, "I've seen much worse hail damage". The composite radome will and does break, but I didn't see much damage to leading edges and engine inlet cowls, no cracked windshields (may be the pictures though). Here's a random example of worse looking damage: bmi G-MIDJ, where the accident report stated "the manufacturer later confirmed that the aircraft was in a safe condition to continue to its destination". There's been some airliner accidents where storm cells with hail and rain caused flameouts due to water ingestion, but engines have been modified as a result (continuous ignition, fan shape). My point being, modern airframes are remarkably resilient, and while this is no excuse for risk-taking, I'm sceptical to the drama in media reports without seeing a full accident investigation. Just like I'm sceptical to pilots blaming fellow pilots based on hearsay. Medical doctors don't usually blame their brethren without clear and very convincing evidence, but a few pilots always seem to rush to vilify their colleagues. No blame culture my a**. Yet airline incidents seem to invoke some kind of primeval response in many people, and pilots get to be either villains or heros (both labels can be equally undeserved). I remember some psychologist who had a good explanation for this behaviour, I'll search for it
We may never get to know much more about this particular incident though:
Delta notified the the National Transportation Safety Board about the incident, but reported no injuries, "no substantial damage" to the aircraft and no airframe penetration, NTSB spokesman Eric Weiss said. The incident is not under investigation, he added. He declined to provide more information.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North America
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never had any issues diverting for weather over China. In fact, at least in Beijing airspace, they have been quite proactive in vectoring around weather on arrival and departure. Once, declaring a low fuel situation as a result of and unexpected hold with no EFC time, vectored immediatly direct to PEK and then they flipped the landing runway to accommodate us.
OTOH, Japanese controllers can be quite obstinate. Requested direct to the oceanic entry point, bypassing the previous one due to weather. Never approved despite a few requests. OK, then proceeded to that waypoint I wanted to avoid, but then could not proceed to the oceanic waypoing as a build-up was in the way, and the controller was then going ape-**** because we were proceeding into oceanic airpsace without clearance in that area, unable to turn. Finally had to fly through what I didn't want to fly through and I relented because the radar returns were yellow at altitude. Secured the cabin and got some moderate chop. It seemed to be me to be a pissing contest, as the controller probably figured I wanted to cheat and take a short-cut, using weather as a pretext. Not very professional at all. Chinese controllers sometimes have difficulties with language, especially en-route, but nevertheless found them to be professional.
I expect that the controller responsible for the Delta incident is heading off to the salt mines.
OTOH, Japanese controllers can be quite obstinate. Requested direct to the oceanic entry point, bypassing the previous one due to weather. Never approved despite a few requests. OK, then proceeded to that waypoint I wanted to avoid, but then could not proceed to the oceanic waypoing as a build-up was in the way, and the controller was then going ape-**** because we were proceeding into oceanic airpsace without clearance in that area, unable to turn. Finally had to fly through what I didn't want to fly through and I relented because the radar returns were yellow at altitude. Secured the cabin and got some moderate chop. It seemed to be me to be a pissing contest, as the controller probably figured I wanted to cheat and take a short-cut, using weather as a pretext. Not very professional at all. Chinese controllers sometimes have difficulties with language, especially en-route, but nevertheless found them to be professional.
I expect that the controller responsible for the Delta incident is heading off to the salt mines.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Another plane
Age: 46
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft being damaged due to CBs and ATC refusals to deviate happens alot in China. I see Wechat pictures all the time from my Chinese first officers of some poor aircrafts radome damage etc. There is very seldom any CAAC report published (accessible and in English almost never) anyway.
Our feedback and tips from my Chinese airline on this issue is that the civilian controllers are often working under a lot of pressure from the military , and CANNOT authorise certain deviations on the tapes (they must cover their ass like everything in China) any greater than the military supervisor who is milling around the ATC consoles or sipping green tea in the cafe as approved him to.
Even if the airspace is clear of the military exercise at that moment (eg lunch time break) they still cannot (instant dismissal) clear civilian aircraft deviate into that zone. Sometimes these zones are not on the charts or notams. The CAAC charts my first officers use differ in areas and routes from the jeppesen charts foreign captains use.
I have been told numerous times by my management pilots , when faced with impenetrable bad weather to :
1) request deviate one side....x miles or a heading
2) request deviate the other side x miles or a heading
If both options denied do a 180.....and land if needed.
Most airlines in China live in fear of punishment from the authorities for any transgressions so will always prefer an operational delay or cost as opposed to a investigation , punishment and sanctions.
China airspace and ATC issues have no real focus on operational effectiveness or safety , only a power fight between the PLAF and the CAAC. With everyone covering their own personal ass on the day. The unfortunate foreign captain on this day learnt about flying in China the hard way.
Delta should push ICAO , IATA , and Flight Safety Foundation etc to look into these issues and contraventions in China .....but I predict like everyone else Delta won't want to upset the powers at be in Beijing and keep the money rolling in.
Our feedback and tips from my Chinese airline on this issue is that the civilian controllers are often working under a lot of pressure from the military , and CANNOT authorise certain deviations on the tapes (they must cover their ass like everything in China) any greater than the military supervisor who is milling around the ATC consoles or sipping green tea in the cafe as approved him to.
Even if the airspace is clear of the military exercise at that moment (eg lunch time break) they still cannot (instant dismissal) clear civilian aircraft deviate into that zone. Sometimes these zones are not on the charts or notams. The CAAC charts my first officers use differ in areas and routes from the jeppesen charts foreign captains use.
I have been told numerous times by my management pilots , when faced with impenetrable bad weather to :
1) request deviate one side....x miles or a heading
2) request deviate the other side x miles or a heading
If both options denied do a 180.....and land if needed.
Most airlines in China live in fear of punishment from the authorities for any transgressions so will always prefer an operational delay or cost as opposed to a investigation , punishment and sanctions.
China airspace and ATC issues have no real focus on operational effectiveness or safety , only a power fight between the PLAF and the CAAC. With everyone covering their own personal ass on the day. The unfortunate foreign captain on this day learnt about flying in China the hard way.
Delta should push ICAO , IATA , and Flight Safety Foundation etc to look into these issues and contraventions in China .....but I predict like everyone else Delta won't want to upset the powers at be in Beijing and keep the money rolling in.
If both options denied do a 180.....and land if needed.
I'm a bit frustrated by this seemingly damned if you do damned if you don't. Are we saying that it's unsafe to fly in China or just inconvenient?
I wouldn't look for outside help at ICAO until the problem is better defined from a safety standpoint. If its just sniping about who's at fault, then nothing is going to happen.
I wouldn't look for outside help at ICAO until the problem is better defined from a safety standpoint. If its just sniping about who's at fault, then nothing is going to happen.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ankh Morpork, DW
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In 1996, one of N664NW's stablemates encountered worse hail after departing KDTW for RJAA, if I recall.
I saw this plane in the hangar at looked to be much worse off than 664. I can't seem to find any reports on that one. It could have been 664 then, too, actually.
I saw this plane in the hangar at looked to be much worse off than 664. I can't seem to find any reports on that one. It could have been 664 then, too, actually.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Philippines and UK
Age: 77
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't Judge
Personally feel that it is very difficult to judge any Captain's actions based on such flimsy evidence, let's wait and see. Observationally though....
On contract to a fare east airline some years ago, during the Monsoon season, operating DAC/RGN/BKK large jet, we encountered and unbroken squall line with cells joining cells etc about 1 hour after take off - nightmare on radar. 3 crew aircraft, one local one and one, like me, on contract, turned back to our base with full load of pax.
Having previously worked on contract for a (the?) ruthless east midlands based operator, I was concerned about my reception at base. On landing back at departure point, the operations controller merely said "no problem Captain, safety first". No paperwork, no reports, no explanations beyond my one verbal statement. No aftermath. How refreshing that was after the blame culture up the M1.
Refreshingly sensible approach to safety in a much derided area of the world.
Merely an observation, we weren't there, give the Captain a chance to wait of the report.
It is not the third world.
On contract to a fare east airline some years ago, during the Monsoon season, operating DAC/RGN/BKK large jet, we encountered and unbroken squall line with cells joining cells etc about 1 hour after take off - nightmare on radar. 3 crew aircraft, one local one and one, like me, on contract, turned back to our base with full load of pax.
Having previously worked on contract for a (the?) ruthless east midlands based operator, I was concerned about my reception at base. On landing back at departure point, the operations controller merely said "no problem Captain, safety first". No paperwork, no reports, no explanations beyond my one verbal statement. No aftermath. How refreshing that was after the blame culture up the M1.
Refreshingly sensible approach to safety in a much derided area of the world.
Merely an observation, we weren't there, give the Captain a chance to wait of the report.
It is not the third world.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: El Dorado
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The lightheartedness and the complete nativity with which some people here suggest to "just do it anyway" and "you're the PIC and China is an ICAO member" is really mind boggling.
"Being a PIC" of a 777 would not have impressed a BUK missile if Kiev would have replied "negatiwww, due to lestliction" when an unfortunate crew would have deviated 20-30nm off track due to weather, contrary to ATC instructions.
Indeed it's not. China is a totalitarian communist police state (try surfing to Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter or any blogsp*t, and while you're at it, have a look at who's the number one nation worldwide in executing people) with a large military and air force.
Now I'm absolutely not suggesting that it's a good idea to fly near or through a TS, but with the Chinese police state and MH17 in mind, I can definitely understand the great hesitation that some crews can have in deliberately ignoring a "negative" from ATC when asking for a deviation around weather.
The current inflexibility of ATC in China is outright dangerous and needs to be addressed as soon as possible before a real accident happens!
p.s. I find it a big coincidence that people who have "HKG" or "hong kong" as location on their pprune profile never seem to experience many problems with ATC in China. Are national Chinese and Hong Kong airlines ("one nation, two systems") treated differently as opposed to European, North American or other Asian airlines?
"Being a PIC" of a 777 would not have impressed a BUK missile if Kiev would have replied "negatiwww, due to lestliction" when an unfortunate crew would have deviated 20-30nm off track due to weather, contrary to ATC instructions.
It is not the third world.
Now I'm absolutely not suggesting that it's a good idea to fly near or through a TS, but with the Chinese police state and MH17 in mind, I can definitely understand the great hesitation that some crews can have in deliberately ignoring a "negative" from ATC when asking for a deviation around weather.
The current inflexibility of ATC in China is outright dangerous and needs to be addressed as soon as possible before a real accident happens!
p.s. I find it a big coincidence that people who have "HKG" or "hong kong" as location on their pprune profile never seem to experience many problems with ATC in China. Are national Chinese and Hong Kong airlines ("one nation, two systems") treated differently as opposed to European, North American or other Asian airlines?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are national Chinese and Hong Kong airlines ("one nation, two systems") treated differently as opposed to European, North American or other Asian airlines?
no, they're not. Both CAAC, chinese pilots, and chinese civilian ATCO are equally frustrated. The real root issue is this imho: China has lifted an unprecedented amount of people out of poverty, and there's a rapidly growing middle class that couldn't previously afford to fly, which fuels a huge growth in aviation. The military has always been the primary way to project power for the party, and is intimately interwined with the party, and they're very reluctant to give up their "old ways", even for seemingly innocent things like delegating something to civil ATC; laws/regulations/infrastructure/education can't keep up with the rapid economic growth. One communist official I know told me he feels managing the regulatory/legal/civil society changes is like riding a bicycle downhill on a steep slope...they know if they hit the brakes too hard they will fall, so they can't do that, but they're terrified of the speed and try to keep braking as much as they can.
no, they're not. Both CAAC, chinese pilots, and chinese civilian ATCO are equally frustrated. The real root issue is this imho: China has lifted an unprecedented amount of people out of poverty, and there's a rapidly growing middle class that couldn't previously afford to fly, which fuels a huge growth in aviation. The military has always been the primary way to project power for the party, and is intimately interwined with the party, and they're very reluctant to give up their "old ways", even for seemingly innocent things like delegating something to civil ATC; laws/regulations/infrastructure/education can't keep up with the rapid economic growth. One communist official I know told me he feels managing the regulatory/legal/civil society changes is like riding a bicycle downhill on a steep slope...they know if they hit the brakes too hard they will fall, so they can't do that, but they're terrified of the speed and try to keep braking as much as they can.
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DL 159 passenger
I was on this flight. Delta has been rude and uncooperative in providing any information as to what exactly happened. I am also amazed that an incident like this is not investigated by the NTSB, in order to better understand what happened.
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Delta flies hail-damaged NWA Boeing 747 to Arizona boneyard
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who would Delta supply this information to other than the FAA and the NTSB at this time? Certainly not some random passenger such as yourself. How were they rude to you? Why do I suspect your'e a lawyer?
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a passenger on this flight (and all others on board), endured a very scary incident. I simply requested that they provide all passengers with some sort of report or explanation as to what happened. I don't think that is asking too much considering what happened. Given that no one at this point seems to want to explain what happened (Delta, FAA, NTSB), I guess you simply shrug and say 'these things happen' and try and forget it. I would bet that if you were on the flight, you'd want to have some sort of explanation as well. BTW, not a lawyer. Just a somewhat educated average traveler.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Reading
Age: 41
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personalyl I'd rather, and I'm sure most passengers, that airlines said 'if weather means we can't get to where we should we won't try and push on regardless and hope for the best'. I'm sure this is how most operate, but it seems there are some pilots who will push through. It's never that important to get somewhere. If a train sees a tree on the line it doesn't try and bulldoze through it and hope it works out. It scares me when I see pilots talking about flying through things they didn't want to. Passengers don't pay to be on test flights.