Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

UA627 N26123 DEN-EWR "hard landing"@ EWR, runway disembarkment - 15 June 2019

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

UA627 N26123 DEN-EWR "hard landing"@ EWR, runway disembarkment - 15 June 2019

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 16, 2019, 8:54 am
  #61  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 8,994
Originally Posted by dmurphynj
Or, maybe it’d be quicker to take the insurance money and buy one of the fire-sale new end-of-run 777-300s from Boeing. Even more lift.

Any 787’s white tails available for purchase?

Just brainstorming to see how they can get more international-class lift quickly to backfill ...
I would think that if they took another 789 or 77W, they would put it on a premium TCON route in lieu of an sCO 752 - have to imagine that the international destinations a 752 is being used on doesn’t have the lift needed to support a substantially larger aircraft.
dmurphynj likes this.
PsiFighter37 is online now  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 9:00 am
  #62  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Morris County, NJ
Programs: UA 1K/*G, Avis Pres, Marriott Plat
Posts: 2,305
Originally Posted by PsiFighter37
I would think that if they took another 789 or 77W, they would put it on a premium TCON route in lieu of an sCO 752 - have to imagine that the international destinations a 752 is being used on doesn’t have the lift needed to support a substantially larger aircraft.
Right, that was exactly my thinking. Pick up a larger widebody, get it into the SFO/LAX-EWR rotation...

Even a 78J could work - those are in the transcon rotation for the indefinite future.

It’s clear to me they can use the extra lift on the transcon routes. Those babies hardly ever go out less than full. Then take one of the pmCO 752’s out and replace the busted one internationally.

Mostly a question to Boeing of “what can you get us by Tuesday?”

edit: maybe something like this? https://www.controller.com/listings/...5-boeing-787-9

It has GEnx engines, like the rest of United’s 789 fleet.

Time to get creative, Kirby!


Last edited by dmurphynj; Jun 16, 2019 at 9:12 am
dmurphynj is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 10:18 am
  #63  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Francisco/Sydney
Programs: UA 1K/MM, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Something, IHG Gold, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 8,147
Originally Posted by Silver Fox
Any landing you walk away from is a good one!
The full quote is "If you can walk away from a landing, it's a good landing. If you use the airplane the next day, it's an outstanding landing"

Clearly this was not an outstanding landing...
docbert is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 10:18 am
  #64  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,443
The airplane is in a hangar now awaiting NTSB investigators to look at the landing gear and significant structural damage. Once released, UA TechOps and Boeing consultants will evaluate the damage and the feasibility (cost) of a repair.

I don’t think it’s necessarily assured that this airplane will be a write-off, but from what I hear, there’s a good chance it will be scrapped on-site and harvested for spares.

My bet is we will see N505UA back in service soon.

EWR764 is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 10:22 am
  #65  
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: 100,369
Originally Posted by PsiFighter37


I would think that if they took another 789 or 77W, they would put it on a premium TCON route in lieu of an sCO 752 - have to imagine that the international destinations a 752 is being used on doesn’t have the lift needed to support a substantially larger aircraft.
Capacity discipline. They could fill a bigger plane on whatever international route this bird flew, but not at prices UA would like.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 11:05 am
  #66  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: CO
Programs: UA OG-1K, Marriott Plat, Hertz PC
Posts: 1,360
What is this about the passengers and taking off bags? They disembarked off of stairs, right? That doesn’t sound like emergency conditions. Why would they have to leave their bags?
PushingTin is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 12:20 pm
  #67  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: New York / Hawaii
Programs: UA Global Services, HH Diamond
Posts: 5,176
Originally Posted by PushingTin
What is this about the passengers and taking off bags? They disembarked off of stairs, right? That doesn’t sound like emergency conditions. Why would they have to leave their bags?
I would assume because to damage in the F cabin, they wanted to get people off ASAP due to unknowns about how bad damage was and what would happen next. And wanted to reduce risk of people being injured carrying stuff down the stairs.

Passengers said the F floor buckled when the landing gear was pushed into the cabin and the wall around the exit door became deformed and the FAs and cockpit crew had issues trying to open it. Im guessing they didn't deploy slides in the back because there was no smoke/fire.
Weatherboy is online now  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 12:31 pm
  #68  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bloomfield, NJ
Programs: UA Gold, Million Miler, Marriott platinum, lifetime platinum
Posts: 974
Originally Posted by PushingTin
What is this about the passengers and taking off bags? They disembarked off of stairs, right? That doesn’t sound like emergency conditions. Why would they have to leave their bags?
I wonder how, and when they received their carryon luggage. I'm sure it was hours.
JerseyCityS is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 12:54 pm
  #69  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: New York / Hawaii
Programs: UA Global Services, HH Diamond
Posts: 5,176
I read somewhere that this accident will force UA to cancel 3-5 flights/day from their schedule until new metal makes it was into the system.

Is the UA fleet that tight? I would think there's enough slack in the system to accomodate several jets that may be down for maintenance. I know the MAX issue would keep things in the 737 arena tight, but would the loss of a completely different airframe have enough impact to the fleet to cancel upwards of 35 flights/week?
Weatherboy is online now  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 1:24 pm
  #70  
Moderator: United Airlines
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.99MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,772
Originally Posted by Weatherboy
I read somewhere that this accident will force UA to cancel 3-5 flights/day from their schedule until new metal makes it was into the system. ...
5 might be on the high side as 757s typically does 4-6 hour flights (needing an hour to turn).

Originally Posted by Weatherboy
Is the UA fleet that tight? I would think there's enough slack in the system to accomodate several jets that may be down for maintenance. I know the MAX issue would keep things in the 737 arena tight, but would the loss of a completely different airframe have enough impact to the fleet to cancel upwards of 35 flights/week?
The MAX situation has certainly taken up a lot of the slack (the original 14 and deliveries that were planned for this summer), but the 757 is roughly 0.1% of the UA fleet, while normal cancelations run 0.5 to 1.5% of flights. So the impact will be small but perhaps noticed by some -- mostly likely in irrops recovery.
WineCountryUA is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 1:39 pm
  #71  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Denver, CO
Programs: UA 1K | Marriott Ambassador (LT Plat) | National Exec Elite | Global Entry | HH Silver
Posts: 419
With the MAX situation I was hoping to see some acceleration in the induction of the 4 ex-Shaheen A319s that were acquired in late 2018. With the used China Southern A319s, we saw them enter service ~6-7 months after acquisition. As of the end of May, the first one acquired, N4868U, was sitting at GYR in Shaheen livery, engines missing, with no evidence that it has moved since it was acquired. Obviously 319s do not replace 757s or MAX-9s but when looking at this things year, additional lift is additional lift.
MSPeconomist likes this.
GMoneyCO is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 2:59 pm
  #72  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: PDX
Programs: AS DL
Posts: 9,038
Hi Fly has an Airbus A380 available :P
Toshbaf is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 3:57 pm
  #73  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Originally Posted by Toshbaf
Hi Fly has an Airbus A380 available :P
The A380 is a totally sweet ride. And this plane is well equipped. No way that United would ever get this comfortable of a plane, even for a short period of time. UAL is a carrier that provides ULCC levels of product and service...

Last edited by spin88; Jun 16, 2019 at 10:17 pm Reason: fastair spell check :)
spin88 is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 4:13 pm
  #74  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,685
Originally Posted by spin88
The A380 is a totally sweat ride. And this plane is well equipped. No way that United would ever get this comfortable of a plane, even for a short period of time. UAL is a carrier that provides ULCC levels of product and service...
I’m hoping you think it’s a sweet ride vs a sweat ride, given your praise for it
fastair is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2019, 4:54 pm
  #75  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
Originally Posted by PushingTin
What is this about the passengers and taking off bags? They disembarked off of stairs, right? That doesn’t sound like emergency conditions. Why would they have to leave their bags?
I think they want people off the plane as quick as possible in an emergency. And off the runway too.
N104UA and ExplorerWannabe like this.
dilanesp is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

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.