|
AA 300 (N114NN) hits sign on / about takeoff from JFK and returns (10 Apr 2019)
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/us/am...ign/index.html
I always thought AA JFK-LAX service were assigned low flight numbers (e.g., AA 1, etc.). Flight 300 ... hit a sign adjacent to the runway, Port Authority spokesman Steve Coleman told CNN. The sign "directs pilots as they're going down the runway," Coleman said. The plane hit the sign because it was slightly off center during takeoff, Coleman said. |
Is that a max? The tail looks max-ish....
|
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by enviroian
(Post 30988998)
Is that a max? The tail looks max-ish....
|
Originally Posted by enviroian
(Post 30988998)
Is that a max? The tail looks max-ish....
|
Originally Posted by Fraser
(Post 30989079)
Stock photo....no 737s on JFK-LAX....c'mon, I know you're DFW based but an EXP should know that :D
I’m getting old. |
AA is a garbage airline
:p |
So much for the MAX argument that AA has such expert skilled pilots. I presume that hitting the sign and damaging an aircraft would not be good for one's airline career. It sounds like the incident occurred too far down the runway for the takeoff to be aborted. |
|
I think we will find that this incident happened either during, or just after, rotation.There are very few signs on the left side of the runway (direction of travel taking off R/W 31L), so it was likely a distance-to-go sign. Those signs are close to 200' from the centerline, further out than the runway edge lights by some distance. If the plane wasn't airborne or just about airborne at this point, it was going to have bigger problems.
Too tight a left turn on departure? Gust of wind helping things get a bit less stable? |
I had interpreted the story as implying that the pilot was doing a takeoff with the aircraft not centered (left to right) in the middle of the runway. If the aircraft was moving in a direction at an angle to the runway, the plane might have gone off the tarmac into the grass before leaving the ground, which of course could have caused more damage. |
The aircraft's wingtip is approximately 59 feet away from the center of the aircraft, if the aircraft were to takeoff on the edge line of the runway (far left side w/r/t direction of travel, if they would have inadvertently used the edge line as the center line), the wing tip would still be 15 or so feet away from the sign. Any further off center (say if the pilot inadvertently mistook the edge lights as the center line lights) and they would not have made it past the first few as they are all elevated lights.
|
Also, (sorry, will stop soon) the aircraft's wing tip, which was the striking point from the images, is between 12 and 13 feet high. The tallest signs of that type FAA allows is 5', which means that wingtip would have to be rolling 7-8' , which means it would have been off the ground or performing some sort of lopsided rotation.
|
Too bad it wasn't a Barclays billboard he hit.
|
We will have to wait for a report on this one, as what we have is too ambiguous. The wing height, distance from center line, sign height and requirement for frangible mounting if most impediments close to runways... just too much to speculate about and very little factual information.
|
Originally Posted by enviroian
(Post 30989311)
I thought it was probably a stock photo hence the max question. That plane’s nose looks all 737 to me.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:55 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.