July 28 CO Flt 74 EWR-HAM lands in Newfoundland b/c they forgot to load water?
Aug 2, 2011, 4:28 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LAX & EWR/JFK
Programs: Fomerly UA 1K, now Gold... next year, who knows?
Posts: 1,432
July 28 CO Flt 74 EWR-HAM lands in Newfoundland b/c they forgot to load water?
My friend was on this flight and he emails me from Germany that the flight made an "emergency" landing in Newfoundland because someone forgot to "tank water" before the departure from EWR.
Please do not take this too literally, as English is not his primary language, and I don't speak any German at all.
He tells me the pilot initially said they would land in Newfoundland, take on water, and be airborne again in 45 minutes, however they were on the ground for 2 hours 45 minutes.
The whole story sounded a little odd to me. Anyone on FT know the real story?
(Mod - Sorry if I posted in wrong forum. Pls move if appropriate)
Please do not take this too literally, as English is not his primary language, and I don't speak any German at all.
He tells me the pilot initially said they would land in Newfoundland, take on water, and be airborne again in 45 minutes, however they were on the ground for 2 hours 45 minutes.
The whole story sounded a little odd to me. Anyone on FT know the real story?
(Mod - Sorry if I posted in wrong forum. Pls move if appropriate)
Last edited by Phil Level; Aug 2, 2011 at 8:25 pm
Aug 2, 2011, 4:55 pm
#2
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: NY "expat" living in BOS
Programs: AA Gold, rif-raf on most others; MBTA "valued customer"
Posts: 374
Although I cannot comment on the water part, the longer wait on the ground makes sense if any maintenance/ paperwork checks were needed. For instance, the plane would need to be refueled, new flight plan generated, and if the plane landed heavy (very possible), things like breaks would need to be checked before the aircraft could take-off again.