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

Delta emergency @ LAX, dumps fuel on school playground.

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

Delta emergency @ LAX, dumps fuel on school playground.

Old 17th Jan 2020, 20:25
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: USA
Age: 69
Posts: 47
Spooky 2,

"Don't believe there is any requirement to notify anyone when your going to dump fuel, Probably a good idea, but not a requirement.."

Para. 6-3-5. of the FAA's Airman's Information Manual:

Fuel Dumping
  1. Should it become necessary to dump fuel, the pilot should immediately advise ATC. Upon receipt of information that an aircraft will dump fuel, ATC will broadcast or cause to be broadcast immediately and every 3 minutes thereafter the following on appropriate ATC and FSS radio frequencies:

    EXAMPLE-

    Attention all aircraft - fuel dumping in progress over - (location) at (altitude) by (type aircraft) (flight direction).

  2. Upon receipt of such a broadcast, pilots of aircraft affected, which are not on IFR flight plans or special VFR clearances, should clear the area specified in the advisory. Aircraft on IFR flight plans or special VFR clearances will be provided specific separation by ATC. At the termination of the fuel dumping operation, pilots should advise ATC. Upon receipt of such information, ATC will issue, on the appropriate frequencies, the following:

    EXAMPLE-

    ATTENTION ALL AIRCRAFT - FUEL DUMPING BY - (type aircraft) - TERMINATED.
Yes, the term "should" is used (because you wouldn't want to mandate that a crew make that call to ATC if it had more important matters to attend to), but clearly the intent is to advise them - wouldn't you want to know if you were operating on the same route, 1,000' below and about a half-mile in trail?


Last edited by Catwalk Dweller; 17th Jan 2020 at 21:15. Reason: Spelling correction and punctuation
Catwalk Dweller is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2020, 20:47
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 707
And here's the relevant section of Order JO 7110.65, for ATC:

Section 4. Fuel Dumping

  1. INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS
When information is received that an aircraft plans to dump fuel, determine the route and altitude it will fly and the weather conditions in which the operation will be conducted.
  1. ROUTING
Except when it is dumping fuel for emergency reasons, an aircraft in either VFR or IFR conditions may be requested to fly a different route.
  1. ALTITUDE ASSIGNMENT
If an aircraft is dumping fuel in IFR conditions, assign an altitude at least 2,000 feet above the highest obstacle within 5 miles of the route or pattern being flown.
  1. SEPARATION MINIMA
Separate known aircraft from the aircraft dumping fuel as follows:
  1. IFR aircraft by one of the following:
  1. 1,000 feet above it; or in accordance with Paragraph 4-5-1, Vertical Separation Minima, whichever is greater.
  2. 2,000 feet below it.
  3. 5 miles radar.
  4. 5 miles laterally.
  1. VFR radar‐identified aircraft by 5 miles and in accordance with Paragraph 5-6-1, Application.
  1. INFORMATION DISSEMINATION
  1. If you are in contact with an aircraft when it starts dumping fuel, inform other controllers and facilities which might be concerned. Facilities concerned must broadcast an advisory on appropriate radio frequencies at 3-minute intervals until the dumping stops.
PHRASEOLOGY-

ATTENTION ALL AIRCRAFT.
FUEL DUMPING IN PROGRESS OVER (location) AT (altitude) BY (type aircraft) (flight direction).
  1. Broadcast a terminating advisory when the fuel dumping operation is completed.
PHRASEOLOGY-

ATTENTION ALL AIRCRAFT.
FUEL DUMPING OVER (location) TERMINATED.
As Catwalk Dweller suggests, there may not be an absolute requirement to notify ATC of fuel dumping, but it is clearly expected that there typically will be notification and that ATC may "request" that a crew follow a particular route. Except in emergency, of course, but it doesn't appear -- so far -- that such an emergency existed in this case.

Last edited by OldnGrounded; 17th Jan 2020 at 20:49. Reason: Formatting -- which isn't working properly, anyway.
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2020, 21:01
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Originally Posted by retired guy View Post
I am not being picky Onceapilot but they are pretty close!

Hey, you seem to like telling us all about everything, so maybe you could tell everyone how many feet the dump masts are from the wingtips?

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2020, 23:59
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 134
[QUOTE=knackered IV;10663557]Agree with your comments RG, but maybe we can set the record straight with regard to "Air Asia SFO". I don't think AIr Asia need to be lumbered with that accident unnecessarily, they cop enough flak as it is. I know you meant Asiana.[/QUOTE

thanks. Quite right and bad typo. Ariana it was. R Guy
retired guy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 00:09
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by Onceapilot View Post
The dump masts are not at the wingtips.

OAP
Hi Onceapioot. If they are not exactly at the extreme wingtip on a 777, I agree. Wouldn’t be room for the dump chutes. But so close as not to matter. They are near the end of the wing. That ok?
thought your response a little prickly or pedantic - am I missing the point. Are they somewhere else?
on other types they can be further in true.
bestwishes
R Guy

Last edited by retired guy; 18th Jan 2020 at 00:30. Reason: Typo
retired guy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 00:24
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by lomapaseo View Post
Throwing unrelated data into this thread does not support your opinions.

We need to stick to the facts in this incident and not historical what-ifs
Iompaseo,
Good to hear from you.
Historical things are not “what if’s”:but the contrary. Fully knows!

sorry. Why does a previous accident related to dumping in an emergency, and choosing not to dump Irelevant? Ever incident over years builds up our knowledge pool and a 1968 accident illustrates that mostly you’re in no hurry to dump , but in an uncontrolled fire you might just land overweight. No time to dump. And land immediately with no checklist. Don’t think the LAX crew seemed to be in dire straits from the ATC Conversations The point is why were we still dumping at 3000ft on approach?
cheers. RvGuy
retired guy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 02:36
  #187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by retired guy View Post
Iompaseo,
Good to hear from you.
Historical things are not “what if’s”:but the contrary. Fully knows!

sorry. Why does a previous accident related to dumping in an emergency, and choosing not to dump Irelevant? Ever incident over years builds up our knowledge pool and a 1968 accident illustrates that mostly you’re in no hurry to dump , but in an uncontrolled fire you might just land overweight. No time to dump. And land immediately with no checklist. Don’t think the LAX crew seemed to be in dire straits from the ATC Conversations The point is why were we still dumping at 3000ft on approach?
cheers. RvGuy
It's the addition of an uncontrolled fire supplemented with photos that takes it out of the realm of this incidents discussion. In order to tie the two discussions together requires "what-ifs" not in evidence
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 03:05
  #188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 263
Originally Posted by retired guy View Post
Hi Onceapioot. If they are not exactly at the extreme wingtip on a 777, I agree. Wouldn’t be room for the dump chutes. But so close as not to matter. They are near the end of the wing. That ok?
thought your response a little prickly or pedantic - am I missing the point. Are they somewhere else?
on other types they can be further in true.
bestwishes
R Guy
No dump chutes on the modern Boeing airplanes - just fixed nozzles on the trailing edge. On the 777 they are outboard of the trailing edge flaps and inboard of the outboard ailerons.
Dave Therhino is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 03:29
  #189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,904
Originally Posted by retired guy View Post
Originally Posted by knackered IV View Post
Agree with your comments RG, but maybe we can set the record straight with regard to "Air Asia SFO". I don't think AIr Asia need to be lumbered with that accident unnecessarily, they cop enough flak as it is. I know you meant Asiana.
thanks. Quite right and bad typo. Ariana [sic - Airbubba] it was. R Guy
I presume the second typo was intentional.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 06:28
  #190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: France
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by cthruit View Post
A plausible scenario is setting fuel jettison to MLW with the intention of reducing landing weight as much as possible, but willing to accept an overweight landing. Then, forgetting to terminate the jettison as the aircraft descended because of a very busy cockpit.

My best guess as well.
Good memories is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 06:31
  #191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,904
"Students began screaming and crying because their eyes and skin were burning. Fear, dread, panic, and helplessness ensued"

Will the remedy for these ills be money and free tickets?

The shakedown by Harvey Weinstein's former attorney begins...

Los Angeles teachers sue Delta after jet fuel dump over schools, playgrounds

"Students began screaming and crying because their eyes and skin were burning. Fear, dread, panic, and helplessness ensued," according to a teacher. Delta Flight 89, on its way to China, Shanghai, experienced an engine issue that required it to return to LAX shortly after takeoff, the company said in a statement.NBC NewsJan. 17, 2020, 11:05 PM EST

By Alicia Victoria Lozano NBC News

Four Los Angeles teachers sued Delta Airlines less than a week after a China-bound plane dumped fuel over playgrounds and schools, citing emotional anguish and distress and accusing the pilot of failing to follow protocol.

The teachers, who have not been identified, say the airline was negligent by allowing the plane to depart in the first place.

In their suit, the teachers from Park Avenue Elementary School in south Los Angeles County, some 17 miles from Los Angeles International Airport, said they could feel fuel on their clothing, skin and eyes. The exposure caused the women to feel dizzy, nauseated and sick, attorney Gloria Allred said. Young students screamed and cried, she said.

"They also suffered severe emotional distress from the knowledge that they had involuntarily ingested toxins," Allred said in a statement Friday. "Their severe emotional distress includes the reasonable fear that the exposure to and ingestion of jet fuel might produce serious health consequences in the future."

The teachers are seeking compensatory damages.

Delta Airlines did not respond to a request for comment Friday, but has previously said the fuel dump was "required as part of normal procedure to reach a safe landing weight."

On Tuesday, Delta Flight 89, which was headed to Shanghai, experienced engine trouble shortly after takeoff. The pilot declared an in-flight emergency and notified air traffic control personnel that the plane needed to return to LAX. The pilot did not inform the control tower that the plane would need to dump fuel to lighten its load, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

The teachers' lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleged that the Delta pilot "was specifically asked" by air traffic control personnel if he needed to dump fuel and the pilot allegedly replied "negative."

"We’ve got it under control," the pilot said, according to the lawsuit.

Allred said that if the pilot had properly alerted air traffic personnel on the ground, the flight would have been directed to a safe location and altitude from which it could dump fuel without posing a risk to the general public.

The pilot dropped fuel at around 2,000 feet, hitting several schools in its path.

One of the teachers in the suit said her fifth-grade students initially thought the jet fuel was rain. The children looked up "only to have noxious liquid then overwhelm [their] eyes, mouths, noses, lungs and skin," the teacher said in a statement.

"I immediately began to rush my students indoors, as the fumes were stifling," she said. "Students began screaming and crying because their eyes and skin were burning. Fear, dread, panic, and helplessness ensued."Teachers cared for their students rather than decontaminate themselves, she said.

Several people from the school community reported sinus and respiratory problems in the days following the incident.

Another teacher said she worried the fuel smell might have been the result of a terrorist attack. Her kids cried.

"I couldn’t smell anything other than the gas," the teacher said in a statement. "I couldn’t taste anything other than the gas."

The next day, the teacher, a 21-year veteran of Park Avenue Elementary, went to urgent care worried after her pain and nausea did not subside.

"I am scared of what can happen to my health and the health of my students, my friends and my colleagues," she said in a statement.

According to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, jet fuel exposure can cause liver damage, decreased immune response and impaired neurological functions and hearing.
An unidentified girl covers her mouth as she leaves the Park Avenue Elementary school with a relative in Cudahy, Calif. on Jan. 14, 2020.Damian Dovarganes / APAt least 20 children were treated for minor injuries after the incident, according to the Los Angeles County Fire Department. More than 60 people were treated from several schools in the area, the fire department said.

The Federal Aviation Administration said earlier this week that it was looking into reports that schoolchildren had been treated for fuel exposure.

Aviation experts say fuel dumps typically occur to reduce the planes’ weight for unexpected landings because some planes have maximum takeoff weights higher than their landing weights. In most cases, weight is burned off during flights.

At least six fuel dumps were reported last year, including incidents in Orlando, Florida; New York; London; and Canada. They all occurred at high altitudes or on airport tarmacs.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 08:40
  #192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 124
Just a quick question from across the pond.........is LA Democrat or Republican?
a5in_the_sim is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 08:47
  #193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by Airbubba View Post
I presume the second typo was intentional.
Afraid not,! Should’ve gone to Specsavers! ASIANA. Ah, now I can read it properly. Thanks. It was sloppy tying on an iPhone I can hardly see.

In future I’ll just have said - “the one that smashed into the approach lights at SFO because the pilots didn’t know how to do a visual approach” and leave out the airline name! We will all know who it was.
Bit like a thread elsewhere where I said “dump chutes at wingtips” and have drawn flack for blatant inaccuracy. I should have said “ 220 cm (or whatever) from wingtips” or “near” the wingtips”. That would have left less opportunity for sniping on the actual exact location of the chutes. But that wasn’t really my point. It was that you shouldn’t dump fuel on final approach at all. And Certainly never over populated areas at low altitude.
Cheers and sincere thanks for picking that up. I do need to sharpen up on the little things which I tend to be untidy about.
Just seen that I shouldn’t call then dump chutes either. True as well.
After Specsavers I’m going to visit a geriatrician and a linguist.
R Guy

Last edited by retired guy; 18th Jan 2020 at 08:57. Reason: Missed out a phrase
retired guy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 08:54
  #194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by lomapaseo View Post
It's the addition of an uncontrolled fire supplemented with photos that takes it out of the realm of this incidents discussion. In order to tie the two discussions together requires "what-ifs" not in evidence
OK Iomapaseo. Hands up. I admit to thread creep. Won’t mention it again. Might start a new thread though called
WHEN CAN YOU LAND OVERWEIGHT?
R Guy
retired guy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 09:11
  #195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: 900m
Posts: 0
Retired Guy

Do the behaviour, tone, views and capitals seem familiar to anyone who has followed the Max saga?
Twitter is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 10:19
  #196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 1,087
Where are all the pics of these kids drenched in jet fuel?

I have never read such over exaggerated dribble in my life. I thought the Oz media was bad but geesh!

Harden the F%#% up
PoppaJo is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 10:49
  #197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by PoppaJo View Post
Where are all the pics of these kids drenched in jet fuel?

. I have never read such over exaggerated dribble in my life. I thought the Oz media was bad but geesh!

Harden the F%#% up
Hi PoppaJo
I think the word they used was "doused"
LA Times quote (they all say pretty much the same thing).
So I guess you are having a go at the media rather than people here who all agree that this was badly reported. Fair comment. What is true it that lawyers will seek to prove injury despite it being nonsense. And they will succeed which will cost the airline millions.
Now whether or not there should have been any dumping in that region at all , is what seems to exercise people on this thread, and it has a revealed some pretty diverse views, which is the good thing about this forum. I learn a lot here. We all do.
Cheers and thanks
R GuyLA Times
An airplane returning to Los Angeles International Airport on Tuesday morning dropped jet fuel onto a school playground, dousing several students at Park Avenue Elementary School in Cudahy, officials sai
d.

Delta Flight 89 — a Boeing 777 — had taken off from LAX with more than 140 passengers on board and was en route to Shanghai when it turned around and headed back to the L.A. airport.



retired guy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 10:56
  #198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 134
Boeing have an excellent document which covers the entire gamut of this thread I think
https://www.boeing.com/commercial/ae...7_article3.pdf
Happy reading.

R Guy
retired guy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 10:56
  #199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,361
Originally Posted by PoppaJo View Post
I have never read such over exaggerated dribble in my life. I thought the Oz media was bad but geesh!

Harden the F%#% up
That's right, you tell those kids.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 11:00
  #200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Neither here or there
Posts: 216
Originally Posted by PoppaJo View Post
Where are all the pics of these kids drenched in jet fuel?

I have never read such over exaggerated dribble in my life. I thought the Oz media was bad but geesh!

Harden the F%#% up
Taking pics of kids, especially in school is not so easy. I think your Ozzie machismo is a little misplaced on this occasion.
CW247 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.