makfan

This probably wouldn't have merited a thread if the original report had this level of information. Sigh.

At any rate, the actual story is better than one about a plane skidding off the runway at DCA.

journalist212

a responsible news director would make sure that this additional info and AA's statement be included in the afternoon and evening newscasts as well as their web report.

I'm sure some of those frustrated will be saying why did only 1 pilot make this call?
Why did these facilities work for so many others while this pilot chose to divert?

JDiver

We can all speculate all we want - but we do not have sufficient facts. Was it the PIC who made the decision? Perhaps Weather or ATC at DCA, AA Dispatch, or others had information that caused the PIC to choose to avoid a riskier landing at DCA, or had lower fuel reserves due to the winds aloft and nonstandard flight track the flight took. We'd be singing a far different tune if the aircraft had landed and gone off the end of the runway or hit a microburst and crashed (now, THAT would have been "all over the TV news this morning in the DCA/IAD Metro area," as well as the rest of the nation.)

Air Florida flight 90 shows how concatenated poor decisions can end - we just don't know why the aircraft diverted; we do know IAD seems to have been completely unprepared to receive the flight, it took too much time to arrange the arrival, and some poor decisions might have been made once on the ground affecting passenger comfort - not passenger safety. (As someone who has been flying a very long time, and who has lost friends and relatives in aircraft accidents due to human factors, I'd rather be inconvenienced than dead, though I'd also rather not be inconvenienced at all.)

sluggoaafa

Last year I did a JFK-MIA-JFK trip. On our return to JFK, the wx got really bad. We did attempt to land, after an hours hold, and it was some of the worse turbulence I had experienced going into JFK.

I heard the automated altitude countdown at 2500, 1000, then 500. After the 500, the engines roared back up and we started climbing. Once able, the captain said that he didn't feel safe landing the full 767 because of the turbulence, however we then had to divert to IAD for more fuel.

Of course, as soon as we landed at IAD, we received reports that JFK just closed down the airport, but we would be the first ones to leave when the airport opens back up. Everyone was on their cell phones to their friends and family and were hearing reports that other planes were landing just fine...even though they were on the same plane with us in that awful turbulence...sure, the airport is closed to those on the ground, not already in the air (people often don't understand closed to aircraft just getting ready to depart vs. planes in the air getting ready to land)

Finally, round two comes, again getting close to the airport, it was again just as turbulent, if not worse than before and I hear the count downs again. This time it got 100, and then the plane dipped and the engines roared again. We started climbing, and of course, us crew and all pax were upset we weren't landing....but the Captain didn't feel safe.

He got on the PA said that he didn't feel safe landing under those conditions, and we diverted to BDL now because of Crew Legalities, which he informed the pax.

I never saw such hatred for a pilot after an announcement, and how people now questioned his ability to fly. I couldn't believe that these people who were just clutching their armrests and each other because of being bounced around in some of the worse turbulence I have experienced, were now demanding this pilots head to be hung in the ringer.

Sure, we were all upset we weren't in our intended destination, but we were safe. Of course, once we landed in BDL, people again were making calls to friends and loved ones and reports were coming in....well other planes are still landing.

Just because other planes are/were still landing doesn't mean that the storm and weather we just experienced, or what this crew experienced, has already passed the airfield to make it a better condition for the next plane.

I remember back in 1990 I was on a UAL 747 ORD-IAD landing into some terrible wx, the captain even had informed us that landing was going to be a challenge...they even turned off Channel 9 so you wouldn't hear the radio chatter, I kept my eyes glued to the window and couldn't see a thing, until just a second before we landed on the runway.

I would rather be safe on the ground at a diverted airport, complaining about not being where I should be, rather than be the 10 O'Clock Eyewitness News feature of "BREAKING NEWS, THIS JUST IN"

kerflumexed

ref Jdiver's post about Palm 90 and the previous post....

Some years ago I was at a safety training class and when we we were discussing the Air Florida accident, a corporate pilot for a Fortune 100 was trying to take off that same night. He was in the long line with flight 90 at DCA, and made the decision to go back and get deiced again.

Apparently the airplane was full of sales and marketing types, and they were unmerciful and hostile about what a wimp he was. The FBO where ya gotta go to get deiced is a long taxi, btw. They did takeoff, before Palm 90, and the next day all were congratulating him on being such a great pilot.

Yes, I want a Captain who "knows his limitations." and will divert even tho others are making it in. Might have been a new Captain on high minimums. Or maybe just one that always needs a little more training and hand holding during recurrent training and PC's.

yjc281

My flight from DFW to BWI was delayed 4 times yesterday for one hour each.
We were stuck near the runway for 3 hours because the pilot didn't want to lose our spot for taking off. He told us he had to "plead" the Air Traffic Control to let us take off. It is true that the weather was bad yesterday afternoon so I suspect the flight to DCA diverted for the same reason.

If I could choose I would rather wait at the terminal than in the plane.
However, the pilot was expecting that we might be able to take off at anytime so he decided the first priority was to get us to the destination asap...

Having been to IAD 3 times, I would certainly prefer BWI but I guess BWI was also fairly crowded due to all the delays yesterday.

I wouldn't trust the media completely due to their tracking records of very biased perspective. They also like to exaggerate to increase ratings or sell more paper.

steve32

BWI would take a plane farther from the weather, but for convenience of the pax and crew, IAD is practically next door to DCA. That late at night you could probably drive it in less than 20 minutes. BWI would be more like 45 minutes.

The supper shuttles might probably hang back if they were informed there was a diverted plane about to unload late.

Steve

TrojanHorse

mobile lounges run 24 hours a day at IAD. they even have call boxes (or is it phone numbers) in the terminal if you need a lounge in the wee hours. So they do run. I still have not seen a valid reason why they (AA/IAD) could not get one to the plane in under an hour? the luggage, thats a whole different issue and I can see where if no one is on site, then what can you do

Deltahater

All completely irrelevant. Your line of thinking is very corporate and limited. If a pilot makes a call to divert a plane, then extraordinary circumstances apply in the air and on the ground.
You can have UA or US employees help out with or without corporate agreements. You only need one person to get the aircraft door opened and one to ensure that pax go into the right door. The production we are used to is not necessary and it clearly can be done with a skeleton staff.
I stand by my claim that there is no reason in 2008 in Washington to keep people on the plane for two hours

Blumie

You seem to be very familiar with airport procedures. Are you an airline or an airport employee? Do you know what the proper procedure is for AA to just call up UA or US employees and get help? Have you ever opened up an aircraft door at IAD without a jetway or a mobile lounge?

Stand by your claim all you want, but it would be very helpful to all of us if it were a claim based on reality and not speculation (like the number of people seeking upgrades on the ORD-DEL route).

mvoight

If the delay was caused by lack of employees, due to the time of the arrival, then it would make sense that it would take awhile to get employees to get the pax off the plane, and a long time retrieving luggage. It's not like AA had a lot of advance notice.

langleyoaker

It seems that AA did not have any ground crew available at IAD to guide the aircraft into a gate or remote stand. I'm guessing that's why the pax were stuck on the aircraft.

GUWonder

Yes. As I said earlier, weather is not the explanation for the sorry excuse for ground handling at IAD.

Blumie

Yup. But it's a reality of air travel in 2008 that when diverted to another airport at 100a, there's not going to be a bunch of airline employees (either from your own airline or from any of the other airlines) who will be sitting around waiting for your arrival. I don't mean to make excuses for AA -- I would have been out of my mind if I were one of those passengers -- but it is the reality of current airline economics that they are all staffed on a "just enough" basis for normal operations, which means that there's no one around to help out during irregular operations; you just gotta wait til they get to you.

GUWonder

Some could fairly say that the airline and/or airport was staffed below a "just enough" basis; that the airline and/or airport should plan in advance for such circumstances; and that, based on the circumstances, switch on a plan for "just enough" staff to deal with situations like this when such situations arise. Of course given that we are talking about a US industry run by short-sighted airline management and airport authorities that fail to properly plan for such circumstances too, these kind of outcomes are expected.

If not that, then maybe the plan continues to be one of not paying for such plans to be implementable -- these kind of outcomes were even happening around DC (and other substantial metro areas) even when airlines were reporting profitable years.