So, would the locals where you live be unconcerned if their elementary-age kids were doused with Jet A? Come on, folks, let's not get carried away with our prejudices.

How close to MTOM do you think this triple was? Assuming full pax and 12 hr flight time. I am not familiar with that a/c, only 767/74.

FAA media statement on the fuel dump.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....f49558d0ca.jpg

Partial ATC recording.

Try and repeat this more than once. You don't drop fuel on a school you fool

C'Mon we all know it wasnt fuel. It was chemtrails. Get them whilst they are young. :E

Just needed a bucket of MJU-10s and it could have been urban renewal.

My money is that someone forget to end the jettison as they went back over land again :P

Pretty close to what I got from scrubbing the recordings. I heard 'twelve plus zero zero' for the first fuel report, VAS transcribed it as 212.0.

VASAviation commented:

The 124.9 approach freq that VAS couldn't find is listed on LiveATC as KLAX Final App (North/South). The ARFF freq was a tower helo freq of 127.85. No mention of fuel dump or an engine failure that I heard.

Good job as usual VASAviation! :ok:

USA a country of litigation, now all California attorneys will look for a class actions, people will forget that landing overweight might have caused some serious injuries, however where in the rest of the world attorneys are advertising on television to claim compensation from weed killers to road accidents?

Continuing to dump fuel at 2,800’ (previous posters altitude/ground track comparison) vs stopping at 5000’/6000’ is only about 20,000 lbs weight difference. They wouldn’t have been within 20,000 lbs of their limiting landing weight.

Advised doesn't need to dump fuel and engine under control and not critical. Yet dumped fuel and rushed the approach. That's not how we do it in the sim.

Could it be something other than a fuel dump but a fuel control issue, most aircraft engine valves are fuel pressure controlled so compressor stalls, vsv issue fuel leak, HMU/fcu problem ?

Would that not cause fuel to spray from the affected engine, rather than both dump valves at the wing tips?

I would think that in California, the environmental impact of unburnt aerosol fossil fuel would be considered less than that of burnt fossil fuel?

Maybe thats not how you do it in the sim, on the usual... Maybe they hit a flock of birds, screwed up eng 2, maybe the crew saw birds going to eng 1 and it was bit acting up, would be enough for our crews to hit the emergency dump, esp when heavy. Happened to me on a MD11, hitting the emergency dump at low altitude saved us from making a hole in the ground(BOG).

Does anyone in this thread actually fly a long haul commercial jet? I often wonder at some of the comments?
people seem to make statements rather than ask questions for the experienced aviators to answer eg “ some kids doused in fuel is better than a smoking hole”!

1 overweight landings even up to max takeoff weight are approved in an emergency. Example fire on board.
all that’s required is an inspection.
2 dumping fuel gets you down to max landing weight , or near it, and is recommended if possible.
3 dumping should be conducted at higher altitudes >6ooo ft and over non built up areas and in a straight flight path
4 weight is not critical to safety generally unless on a short limiting runway. On a large jet 2 tones of weight = approx 1 knot.
In short the decision to land overweight depends on the severity of the emergency and the runway length/conditions.
I can think of no excuse at all for dumping so low as shown in the video.
As for the hypothesis that “they forgot”- well OMG. Has pilot training/skills set really sunk that low? I know that in the next 25 years 500,000 pilots are required mainly in developing world. Now there’s a challenge.
R Guy

Good day Wings4
can you elaborate on the rationale that “hitting the dumps saved a smoking hole”.its an unusual scenario?
cheers
Apologies- I’m an older retired guy and maybe becoming a bit forgetful​​​​​​!

From another old retired guy - I have landed at near max weight after what we thought was a fire on board. The landing was a non-event, only at an appropriately faster speed and with no damage at all. I agree with retired guy, there is a lot of foolishness on this thread.

Forgetting is pretty easy in a high workload environment. Its pretty easy to reach task saturation when you're dealing with an engine failure over a populated area in very busy airspace at a congested airport.

This can happen to anyone at any time, just takes a single task more than you can deal with and this has happened in the past to very experienced air crew, eastern 401 is an example of this, unfortunately there the pilots forgot to aviate first.