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

Norwegian Air Boeing 737MAX8 stuck in Iran

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

Norwegian Air Boeing 737MAX8 stuck in Iran

Reply

Old 15th Dec 2018, 20:05
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Chocolatetown
Age: 58
Posts: 83
Norwegian Air Boeing 737MAX8 stuck in Iran

“Due to a technical issue, the flight from Dubai (DXB) to Oslo (OSL) diverted to Shiraz International Airport. The aircraft landed normally and taxied to a gate allowing passengers to disembark. The safety of our passengers and crew is always our number one priority. Passengers are being looked after by airport staff. Norwegian has sent a relief aircraft to Shiraz International Airport to allow passengers to continue their journey to Oslo as soon as possible. We would like to apologise for any inconvenience that this delay may have caused.”

https://aviationanalyst.co.uk/2018/1...stuck-in-iran/

Last edited by climber314; 15th Dec 2018 at 21:32.
climber314 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 15th Dec 2018, 21:05
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: 15km SE of YMML
Posts: 34
Oh I see, a fixing or replacing the broken engine will break restrictions on export to Iran.
c_coder is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 15th Dec 2018, 21:21
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Age: 72
Posts: 207
Would it not be sensible to load the incoming aircraft with support staff and the expected spares, then off load the spares airside directly onto the faulty aircraft. No import as the spares leave on the repaired aircraft and never cross the customs border into Iran. Or is that to simple.
horizon flyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 15th Dec 2018, 21:42
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: 15km SE of YMML
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by horizon flyer View Post
Would it not be sensible to load the incoming aircraft with support staff and the expected spares, then off load the spares airside directly onto the faulty aircraft. No import as the spares leave on the repaired aircraft and never cross the customs border into Iran. Or is that to simple.
Yeah I think thats too simple.
Even though its airside, the Iranians could get their hands on parts, tools, etc. So fixing the airplane is going to take longer than getting the passengers out. The best case might be if an engineer can get the engine working with minimal work and zero parts, then they might be able to fly it out to somewhere like Dubai without the passengers.
c_coder is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 15th Dec 2018, 23:37
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Chocolatetown
Age: 58
Posts: 83
With fuel to burn, a jet certified for ETOPS and one good engine, KWI is only 280 miles.
Iran doesn't make my alternate list unless it's a life or death emergency.
climber314 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 15th Dec 2018, 23:59
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: 15km SE of YMML
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by climber314 View Post
With fuel to burn, a jet certified for ETOPS and one good engine, KWI is only 280 miles.
Iran doesn't make my alternate list unless it's a life or death emergency.
So probably not a quick repair then.
c_coder is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 01:20
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Chocolatetown
Age: 58
Posts: 83
I haven't seen anything new on Twitter and the one thing I did see sounded a little too "glowing" about Iranian hospitality. The Ayatollah's probably trying to figure out how to maximize propaganda from the event? I hope these pax are on their way home soon.

As for the Norwegian Jet, I wouldn't be surprised to see it stripped and resting on cinder blocks like a Cadillac in South Central L.A. I hope I'm wrong.
climber314 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 04:03
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 4,502
Northwest dropped into Tehran with a cargo fire indication on a DC-10 in 2005 and were treated very well.

On June 19, 2005 at 0435 in the morning Tehran local time, Northwest Airlines Flight 41 made an emergency landing at the Mehrabad International Airport in Tehran, Iran, the first American air carrier to land in Iran in 26 years. Iran is considered to be a hostile country by the US Government and relations between the two countries are poor.

NWA Flight 41 was operated with a DC-10 EER aircraft, Ship No. 1243, from Bombay to Amsterdam on June 19, 2005. After a climb through moderate turbulence, the flight was being operated under normal conditions at FL320, at night, in VMC conditions, with smooth air, and no extenuating weather or mechanical conditions. The flight was southeast of Dobas intersection on airway UL124 at approximately 2240z. The Captain noticed a momentary illumination of the forward Master Warning light. All cockpit indications were confirmed to be normal. After several further momentary illuminations it was determined that the nature of the Master Warning light illumination was the Aft Cargo Fire-Warning Indicator.

The flight diverted to Tehran, the capital of Iran due to an aft cargo fire warning. The resulting maintenance issues were resolved, and operational requirements were addressed on the ground in Tehran, the flight departed and continued safely to Amsterdam.

Captain Bo Corby tells the story of Flight 41 in detail. For that reason, and as a matter of making a permanent record to aviation safety, we have not edited that part of the audio. It is a magnificent example of teamwork, communication and resolve – despite NWA operations telling the crew that “they were on their own”.

The incident woke up the President. It was a matter of interest to the FBI, and it is remembered as an incident of national interest.
The hoops Captain Corby had to jump through to get the plane fixed, fueled and flight planned are familiar to many of us who have flown charters or diversions in that part of the world.

Maps, pictures and an interview with Bo Corby on this podcast page:

Episode 4: Bo Corby & NWA Flight 41 into Tehran : Flight Podcast
Airbubba is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 04:06
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 2,795
Originally Posted by climber314 View Post
I haven't seen anything new on Twitter and the one thing I did see sounded a little too "glowing" about Iranian hospitality. The Ayatollah's probably trying to figure out how to maximize propaganda from the event? I hope these pax are on their way home soon.

As for the Norwegian Jet, I wouldn't be surprised to see it stripped and resting on cinder blocks like a Cadillac in South Central L.A. I hope I'm wrong.
Spoken by someone who has never been there .
​​
donpizmeov is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 04:46
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: By the sea
Posts: 3,474
Originally Posted by c_coder View Post
Yeah I think thats too simple.
Even though its airside, the Iranians could get their hands on parts, tools, etc. So fixing the airplane is going to take longer than getting the passengers out. The best case might be if an engineer can get the engine working with minimal work and zero parts, then they might be able to fly it out to somewhere like Dubai without the passengers.
ya think possibly with all the trade between Iran and the UAE specifically Dubai there isn't a chance of this happening anyway? or even more likely some enterprising person in the USA hasn't already facilitated this?
ironbutt57 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 07:42
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 71
Posts: 585
It's all a bit academic. Norwegian sent out a replacement aircraft to Shiraz, picked up the passengers and flew them back to Oslo, arriving on the 15th. FR24 indicates the ferry aircraft was diverted to Warsaw on its way home to Oslo.
KelvinD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 08:32
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 365
Originally Posted by sleeper View Post
Etops has nothing to do with this. You cannot take of on one engine so the faulty one has te be repaired anyway.
Wrong and right.

It cannot depart with only one engine - right.

But the original comment about ETOPS from the OP, 'Climber314' clearly stated:
With fuel to burn, a jet certified for ETOPS and one good engine, KWI is only 280 miles.
Iran doesn't make my alternate list unless it's a life or death emergency.
so they were clearly referring to the possibility of continuing the flight WITHOUT diverting, rather than the possibility of taking off one engine inop!

Last edited by pilotmike; 16th Dec 2018 at 10:28.
pilotmike is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 09:06
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,101
What on earth are you people thinking ?

ETOPS is to allow you to continue when there is no suitable airport to land at, not an excuse to keep flying on one engine because landing might be inconvenient. The single engine landing checklist says “ land at the nearest suitable airport” and the crew did exactly that...... A wise decision !

Iran has a long reputation of behaving correctly when it comes to emergency’s that are threat to life and will no doubt behave correctly in this case.

The US export ban is intended to put pressure on the Iranian govenment NOT strand almost new American supplied aircraft in Iran, part of the export controls allow for special licences to be issued just to allow for cases such as this in this situation the US product is clearly not being supplied to Iran but being fitted to a Norwegian aircraft to enable it to leave Iran.

All a bit of a storm in a tea cup.
A and C is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 09:27
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 928
If that was just an engine shut down for isolated problem, I am not buying decision to divert to Shiraz, while Dubai, Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait were less than 60 min single engine away. There is no danger in diverting to Iran, it is just a logistical and legal nightmare, especially outside Tehran.
CargoOne is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 09:41
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,101
Cargo one

What part of the QRH statement “ land at the nearest suitable airport “ is confusing You ?
A and C is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 09:52
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 928
Originally Posted by A and C View Post
What part of the QRH statement “ land at the nearest suitable airport “ is confusing You ?
This topic has been beaten to death many times before and still I maintain my opinion for this particular occurrence if that was just an oil leak.
CargoOne is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 09:54
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,101
Cargo One

It matters not why the engine is inoperative the QRH statement stands.
A and C is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 11:20
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 812
I think this problem will be solved by a brown envelope stuffed with US dollars being slipped to a convenient Ayatollah.
vctenderness is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 11:47
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,172
This will be fun to follow. Which Norwegian is the operator? Where is the aircraft registered; Norway, Ireland or UK?
What is the nationality of the crew?
I’m sure the company would have preferred a diversion to Kuwait, Saudia or Bahrain, despite the «Land at nearest suitable airport» rule.
If it’s just a repair, it may get solved pretty fast. An engine change will be a nightmare.

ManaAdaSystem is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 16th Dec 2018, 13:29
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 54
Posts: 642
A non event!

Dear me!
Were to start.
Iran is a ICAO country and at all times adhere to international agreements with other ICAO country, namely Norway.
AOG aircraft parts are not " exported", they are often even held at outbases at Bonded stores as agreed with the host country.
Norway and Iran has no issues other then any active UN sanctioned restrictions of which there is non in the aviation operation part of things as per date.
This has NOTHING to do with USA and I am pretty sure Norwegian is fully capable to solve the logistics without any help whatsoever from that side. Furthermore it is Norwegian property that is repaired in an ICAO country with Norwegian parts, to retrieve in a safe and orderly manner to Norway.
Anyone that has a problem with this concept clearly are not remotely familiar with how international aviation works.
This is not remotely similar to Carters predicament!
Nothing to see here.
Regards
Cpt B
Norway

PS Yes, a single engine takeoff is no problem, If you are mad or in a Sim!
Been there done that!
DS
BluSdUp is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service