AF 66 makes emergency landing in Goose Bay
Oct 2, 2017, 3:41 am
#91
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK/FR
Programs: FlyingBlue Platinum, Hertz PC
Posts: 886
This is worth a read:
https://blog.wandr.me/2017/10/af66-g...overy-efforts/
https://blog.wandr.me/2017/10/af66-g...overy-efforts/
The 777 arrived around 3 in the morning and passengers were moved over to it from the A380. It finally departed Goose Bay around 7am but did not go to Los Angeles to deliver its passengers. Instead the plane flew to Atlanta (AF4080). The diverted passengers cleared immigration and customs in Atlanta and then mostly set off on a Delta 777-200LR (DL9860) specially chartered to get them through the final leg to LA.
That last bit, the extra flight and connecting in Atlanta, is particularly interesting. I can only speculate as to the reasons, but I have a couple ideas.
1. Not everyone was going to Los Angeles. Most were, of course, but the Atlanta connection lets anyone not headed to LA connect on a different flight and probably get to their intended destination more quickly.
2. Getting the crew and the 777 back into rotation reasonably quickly is something Air France has to deal with so as to minimize future flight delays and cancelations. As it is the company is without one of its ten A380s for the foreseeable future while Airbus and Engine Alliance engineers work to get a replacement engine transported to Goose Bay and installed on the aircraft while carrying out all the other necessary inspections to make sure the aircraft is fit to fly. Depending on the typical crew staffing (how many pilots are typically scheduled to work the trip) it is possible that they could still get it back to either Montreal or Paris today rather than leaving it out of position another full day. Taking the plane to Los Angeles would’ve almost certainly required such. Of course, the longer ground time in Goose Bay doesn’t help that plan much.
My understanding is that there is a bit of chaos in Atlanta with the transfer there but that passengers are mostly being handled. Evacuating 500 people from a remote strip in Canada is not easy. Air France did not do a perfect job (e.g. no food vouchers in ATL from what I hear) but, weighing all the needs and options, I’d say getting a pair of 777s into position that quickly and moving passengers along is pretty impressive.
That last bit, the extra flight and connecting in Atlanta, is particularly interesting. I can only speculate as to the reasons, but I have a couple ideas.
1. Not everyone was going to Los Angeles. Most were, of course, but the Atlanta connection lets anyone not headed to LA connect on a different flight and probably get to their intended destination more quickly.
2. Getting the crew and the 777 back into rotation reasonably quickly is something Air France has to deal with so as to minimize future flight delays and cancelations. As it is the company is without one of its ten A380s for the foreseeable future while Airbus and Engine Alliance engineers work to get a replacement engine transported to Goose Bay and installed on the aircraft while carrying out all the other necessary inspections to make sure the aircraft is fit to fly. Depending on the typical crew staffing (how many pilots are typically scheduled to work the trip) it is possible that they could still get it back to either Montreal or Paris today rather than leaving it out of position another full day. Taking the plane to Los Angeles would’ve almost certainly required such. Of course, the longer ground time in Goose Bay doesn’t help that plan much.
My understanding is that there is a bit of chaos in Atlanta with the transfer there but that passengers are mostly being handled. Evacuating 500 people from a remote strip in Canada is not easy. Air France did not do a perfect job (e.g. no food vouchers in ATL from what I hear) but, weighing all the needs and options, I’d say getting a pair of 777s into position that quickly and moving passengers along is pretty impressive.
Oct 2, 2017, 4:52 am
#92
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,935
The runway is only 2800m, so hardly a good fit for a 380. Actually according to Airbus' homepage neither SFJ or Goose Bay is certified for category F aircrafts. http://www.aircraft.airbus.com/aircr...compatibility/
Oct 2, 2017, 7:06 am
#93
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
None of the back seat operations specialists bashing AF have any idea what was and was not available at the moment.
Absent a 380, this recovery required at least two aircraft. Given that one of the available aircraft was a 733, not sure who ought to get a seat on it. If not F/J, is it people with status, left-handed people, those with names beginning with "R" or perhaps a lottery with everyone standing around.
Why the 777 was routed to ATL and passsengers sent onward could be for any number of reasons, again relating to not only aircraft, but crew.
The YUL-CDG cancellation is perhaps less of a problem as YUL is a major center and there are other alternatives.
This is what Ops people deal with in these situations. The solutions are rarely perfect and one takes what one can find at a given point in time.
Absent a 380, this recovery required at least two aircraft. Given that one of the available aircraft was a 733, not sure who ought to get a seat on it. If not F/J, is it people with status, left-handed people, those with names beginning with "R" or perhaps a lottery with everyone standing around.
Why the 777 was routed to ATL and passsengers sent onward could be for any number of reasons, again relating to not only aircraft, but crew.
The YUL-CDG cancellation is perhaps less of a problem as YUL is a major center and there are other alternatives.
This is what Ops people deal with in these situations. The solutions are rarely perfect and one takes what one can find at a given point in time.
Oct 2, 2017, 8:19 am
#94
Join Date: May 2010
Location: TPA
Programs: All The Programs
Posts: 2,204
This is a business and brand reputation (rightly) does impact operations and revenue.
Oct 2, 2017, 10:36 am
#96
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Other than the obvious fact that it never helps the brand to divert for highly-visible reason, the public reporting comes down squarely with AF.
Any operating business relying on FT back seat drivers for branding advice won't wind up well.
Oct 2, 2017, 8:26 pm
#98
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 8
[QUOTE=ATL10A;28880053]Goose Bay was once a large joint US and Canadian Air Force Base during the Cold War era and there is still a small Canadian Military component but it's now mainly a regional commercial airport with a small modern terminal geared to handle the CRJs, Q400s and Dash-8s it usually receives. The couple of departure lounges probably seat no more than 150 to 200 and there's a small coffee shop......so passengers were probably just left onboard due to the logistics of processing 500 passengers
But Goose still has the runways and massive ramp area for just these types of diversions and yes they do have airstairs for a A380....
That video was from my site/youtube channel. It made it on ABC world news tonight on 10/1/17
But Goose still has the runways and massive ramp area for just these types of diversions and yes they do have airstairs for a A380....
That video was from my site/youtube channel. It made it on ABC world news tonight on 10/1/17
Oct 3, 2017, 12:53 am
#99
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 532
Like most things these days it's even more complicated than that...
the Low Pressure compressor just behind the fan and now visible in the photos is from a French company SAFRAN, the case round the outside of the fan is Volvo Aero (now owned by GKN). There are lots of other partners and suppliers on the engine, MTU of Germany have a significant risk/reward share and provide many of the components at the hot end of the engine.
Oct 3, 2017, 2:45 am
#100
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: SJC / SFO
Programs: Flying Blue Platinum; Marriott Bonvoy Platinum; Hilton Gold
Posts: 785
2. Getting the crew and the 777 back into rotation reasonably quickly is something Air France has to deal with so as to minimize future flight delays and cancelations. As it is the company is without one of its ten A380s for the foreseeable future while Airbus and Engine Alliance engineers work to get a replacement engine transported to Goose Bay and installed on the aircraft while carrying out all the other necessary inspections to make sure the aircraft is fit to fly.
Oct 3, 2017, 5:05 am
#101
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hong Kong, France
Programs: FB , BA Gold
Posts: 15,557
Silly me is no expert.
But I would assume that replacing an engine and a few wing parts would take less than two weeks, including all necessary tests.
Am I wrong?
But I would assume that replacing an engine and a few wing parts would take less than two weeks, including all necessary tests.
Am I wrong?
Oct 3, 2017, 5:58 am
#102
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 532
It could be a lot longer than 2 weeks and more than a month would not be unexpected.
While removing and replacing the engine in ideal circumstances might take a day (and a bit) you'd need to allow a week to do it somewhere so remote including sourcing and moving the engine to the site etc.
However this is a lot more than just an engine change. It's not normal and it is dependent on what's actually happened.
Firstly: legally this is an accident site and any work will have to be approved and supervised by the state investigation authority. That's a separate concern from the airworthiness authority and will probably add 48-72 hours before any work can start (so about now ish at the earliest and probably much longer)
The damaged engine will have to be removed. The loss of the fan will change the centre of mass of the engine so this will be more complicated than normal. It's possible the normal mounting points for the crane will be unusable.
To conduct a lift of an unstable, damaged, 6 ton(ish) multi-million dollar piece of evidence right next to a multi hundred-million dollar asset and surrounded by people, in field conditions, well there is a couple of days of planning right there.
Once the damaged engine is out of the way a very thorough inspection of the wing and pylon structure will be required. This may require a temporary hangar to be built over that section of the aircraft and specialist staff, tooling and inspection equipment to brought in. If there is any damage then sufficient repairs will have to be made to move the aircraft to somewhere permanent repairs can be made. These temporary repairs might (almost certainly will) need newly designed parts which will have to be approved, fabricated, transported to the site and installed.
Sometimes this temporary work is so extensive its just easier to do the permanent repair where it is and I've seen manufacturers fly in CNC machines and stock materials to build a mini fabrication factory next to the aircraft.
After all this is done a new engine will have to be fitted, tested and signed off.
A useful youtube video of an engine change is here:
Oct 3, 2017, 7:45 am
#104
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,413
I'm sorry, but no to the chorus of AF doing a good job!. Air France did an awful job with rescuing the pax!. They wisked away F and J passengers on the 733 to LAX via a Winnipeg stop for fuel. Y passengers were left to wait a few more hours for a 77W from YUL (IIRC) which then takes them down to ATL where they board a DL jet over to LAX. Obvs, they had to clear customs in ATL. I can't even begin to imagine how tired they were, poor things.
I'm also surprised that DL did not have at least ONE extra widebody sitting around at DTW or MSP that AF could chartered, or was AF being cheap? :-)
It's not like AF likes to make profits anyway! :-)))
Have Y passengers not been through enough!! In AF's haste to reposition that 77W on the East Coast ASAP to op back to CDG, what these passengers had been through clearly did not register with them back at CDG ops. They should have flown that 773 to LAX! (I did not check the update, so not sure if it still went to ATL or elsewhere). Actually, there was easily enough time to fly the 77W to LAX and turn it back to the East Coast for an evening departure, no sweat.
The PR fallout (once everyone gets past the fact that everyone lived) :-) ...is not going to be pretty in the US tomorrow.
I think AF is disgraceful!
I'm also surprised that DL did not have at least ONE extra widebody sitting around at DTW or MSP that AF could chartered, or was AF being cheap? :-)
It's not like AF likes to make profits anyway! :-)))
Have Y passengers not been through enough!! In AF's haste to reposition that 77W on the East Coast ASAP to op back to CDG, what these passengers had been through clearly did not register with them back at CDG ops. They should have flown that 773 to LAX! (I did not check the update, so not sure if it still went to ATL or elsewhere). Actually, there was easily enough time to fly the 77W to LAX and turn it back to the East Coast for an evening departure, no sweat.
The PR fallout (once everyone gets past the fact that everyone lived) :-) ...is not going to be pretty in the US tomorrow.
I think AF is disgraceful!
Oct 3, 2017, 7:50 am
#105
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: MEM
Programs: Starbucks Green Card
Posts: 5,431