A320 with gear problem over LA

Heh...

I cruised some channels...

Some of the "Talking Heads" were having a great time with
this one!

Got so bad on one channel I turned the sound off for a
while....

Dave


On 21 Sep 2005 17:56:02 -0700, "Bucky" wrote:

Ben Hallert wrote:
One of the talking heads just said they will foam the runway. I
thought that introduced more problems then it solved for a situation
like this.

I just heard on KABC an interview with an official from the LA fire
department, Jim Wells, who confirmed that they are not foaming the
runways. The radio host must have asked him at least a dozen times, "So
you're not going to foam the runway?" Wells started running low on
patience, "No, we are NOT foaming the runway."

Wells said that they are currently anticipating a landing around
6:05-6:10pm PT. They said they will run firetrucks along with the plane
as it lands and foam the plane if necessary.

Stefan wrote in news:

Most airplanes cannot dump fuel. Only very few, mostly long range types,
can. The point is, there is no need for that feature if they can land at
MTOW.

And FAR Part 25 requires that all aircraft be able to land at MTOW with
a sink rate of 6 fps. At MLW, the required sink rate goes up to 10 fps.
It's just that anything over MLW requires an overweight landing inspection.
Up through the 1980s, the fuel jettison requirement WAS based on the
percentage difference between MTOW and MLW, now , the climb requirement
sets the need for a fuel jettison system.

Bob Moore

You know, considering how the Colorado congressional delegation attacked the
MU-2 it surprises me we haven't heard talk of safety hearings on Airbus
products out of the Washington State delegation.

Speaking of maintenance guys ..we came in late to the footage, but saw
people deplaning - LIVE. Did anyone put a jack under the nose of that jet?
All I saw was the truck with the steps.

Yeah, we were all talking the same thing. I sure as heck wouldn't have
walked under the nose of that plane -- and I didn't see any jack.

And what was up with deplaning? This thing comes sliding to a halt with its
nose gear smoking, and NO ONE gets off the plane for, what 10 minutes? I
understand that there was no reason to "blow the slides" but they sure
didn't seem to have anyone waiting in the wings with the air-stairs for
those poor folks.

Can you imagine being on that plane? I'll bet everyone was standing up
immediately after stopping, clamoring to get off, pronto!

Stranger still, how long did it take those fire trucks to appear in the
screen after the plane slid to a stop? It seemed close to a full minute,
although my memory could be faulty -- maybe it was 30 seconds. Either way,
what happened to the "trucks chasing the plane down the runway?" Shoot, it
looked like they had enough equipment there to place a fire truck every 200
feet on that 12,000 foot runway.

From my oh-so-comfy FoxNews vantage point, it seemed like a less than
stellar performance by LAX -- but, of course, all is well that ends well.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I saw it live and thought the same thing. I'd have figured once the
plane stopped w/engines shut down all the exits would have opened and
slides deployed, but maybe their checklist is different? The strobes
seemed to stay on forever.

I was amused by a reported repeatedly asking (I think an NTSB or FAA
guy) "They're NOT going to foam the runway??" I was a trained ARFF
responder at a regional airport and we'd never foam a runway (not that
we were never asked - it's just Hollywood BS) because there's no
guarantee the pilot wouldn't overshoot the part you foamed. In a
gear-up landing we'd just wait till he stopped sliding and pull up with
the turret deployed looking for any sign of fire. Maybe deploy a foam
handline if it was a small plane but that's about it. A gear collapse
was pretty much a non-event to us.

The airport fire dept. has 3 minutes (FAA mandated) to get to the
scene of the accident (on-airport) so I'd say 30 seconds for the first
LAX fire rigs to show up is acceptable.

In article .com,
wrote:
I saw it live and thought the same thing. I'd have figured once the
plane stopped w/engines shut down all the exits would have opened and
slides deployed, but maybe their checklist is different? The strobes
seemed to stay on forever.


There was no fire, the nose strut held ok... no need to deply the chutes.


--
Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
http://www.carfun.cl | Murphy, la oportunidad.
http://e.nn.cl |
| Yo.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:gDzYe.396264$xm3.210571@attbi_s21...


And what was up with deplaning? This thing comes sliding to a halt with
its nose gear smoking, and NO ONE gets off the plane for, what 10 minutes?
I understand that there was no reason to "blow the slides" but they sure
didn't seem to have anyone waiting in the wings with the air-stairs for
those poor folks.

See comment below.

Stranger still, how long did it take those fire trucks to appear in the
screen after the plane slid to a stop? It seemed close to a full minute,
although my memory could be faulty -- maybe it was 30 seconds. Either
way, what happened to the "trucks chasing the plane down the runway?"
Shoot, it looked like they had enough equipment there to place a fire
truck every 200 feet on that 12,000 foot runway.

The fire trucks stay behind the expected touchdown point (as do the stair
truck(s)) and don't stage every 200 feet down the runway for a very good
reason. The nose gear collapses, the pilot becomes a passenger, and the
airplane goes where it will. The passengers on board all survive, but
you've taken out four fire trucks and god knows how many firefighters when
the airplane swerves off the runway and nails them.


Jim

("Dave" wrote)
I cruised some channels...

Some of the "Talking Heads" were having a great time with
this one!

Got so bad on one channel I turned the sound off for a
while....


Dave's posts are all over the place on my screen (OE 6.0). His are the only
ones that display this way, yet when I "Reply Group" they seem to clean
themselves up into a [more readable] fashion (above).

His posts look almost like they're 'Aligned Center.'

Any thoughts? His end? My end?

I'm not getting the sense it's an HTML send problem - it's maybe formatting,
or something else instead. Maybe it's a special thing he has for the Tab
key?

Dave? On one hand you're unique. On the other, I pull my hair out when your
posts show up - and I don't have much hair left. :-)


Montblack

RST Engineering wrote:

The nose gear collapses, the pilot becomes a passenger, and the
airplane goes where it will.

Not completely. He still has some control via differential braking on the mains.
Not enough, of course, to justify putting the fire equipment beside the runway.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Montblack wrote:
Dave's posts are all over the place on my screen (OE 6.0). His are the only
ones that display this way, yet when I "Reply Group" they seem to clean
themselves up into a [more readable] fashion (above).

It's because he's using a tab at the beginning of each paragraph, like
he's writing a paper or something. =) Your reader is smart enough to
remove the whitespace when quoting it.