prestonh

AP reports that UA spokesperson indicated the wing may have touched the ground. Looks like an extra 1/2 hour circling.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/U...212Z/KORD/KEWR

BOOMER339

Perhaps the positive press for UNITED, as a result of having had a well trained and experienced team on the flight deck during this situation, will persuade UAL management to reconsider the increased use of contractors on the EWR-ORD and ORD-EWR routing.

nycr

they might and that's what the faa would have us believe but they are foolish for doing so. crew experience and quality can vary widely between airlines.

n198ua

The reason I started to fly UA in the first place was because of Capt. Al Haynes and his crew, a lot of people have forgotten about the miracle in Sioux City in 1989.

With all the negative press about airlines over the past decade, I've always heard that UA has some of the best trained crew in the industry.

WildRyan

Glad I was flying AA for my ORD->EWR this morning. Our plane sat at the gate at ORD for a good 30 minutes while ATC sorted out the mess and cleared us to take off.

I got a good glimpse of the plane, emergency vehicles, and crew that were assessing the situation when I landed at noon in EWR. Didn't get a chance to see if there was any damage done to the runway, but the FAA is reporting that there is still a delay due to disabled aircraft and I am guessing that the plane is either still sitting there, or there is enough damage done to the runway that they can't reopen it.

WildRyan

The plane was an Airbus 319 operated by United Airlines (Flight 634)

Here is a better article
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/11/nyregion/11plane.html

aluminumdriver

It's the captain's call, but I would agree with the slides here too. You have a damaged aircraft, with potentially leaking fuel and hydraulic fluid from the damaged engine and wing. The risk to the few who may have issues on the slide versus the risk to the whole plane of people without an evacuation has to be weighed. In this case, I agree with the slides myself.

Many do. But I also think a large segment want to fly with experienced, professional pilots. I know I do which is why I avoid flying express airlines and small foreign airlines because I don't know what I'll get.

Unfortunately, I highly doubt it.

It's no coincidence that United hasn't had a pilot caused accident in over 30 years. It comes from a safety culture that we have taught to us the moment we arrive at United. Managements come and go, and if they attempt to cut corners to save $$, it's the flight crews that bring that to a stop. Without that culture of safety, I doubt that would happen. While I may be sad with where United is and how it treats its employees, I couldn't be happier to be associated with a group of professional aviatars like the United pilot group.

AD

bmvaughn

What does one have to do with the other?! Maybe this will change SEA-LAX back to mainline too

RichG

Following information assembled from multiple public sources:

Day/Date: Sunday, 10 Jan 2010
Flight number: UA 634 ORD-EWR
Aircraft: A319, "tail number" N816UA, in service approx. 11 years

Sched. arrival: 0859
Actual arrival: 0945

Right main gear would not extend fully. Crew circled, presumably to burn off fuel, landed on Runway 4L on left main gear. Pax interviewed on WCBS-TV local news reported calm atmosphere on board, brace instructions given, aircraft slowly tilted to resting position on starboard engine after speed very low or possibly stopped. No reports given of sparking. Pax evacuated on slides and brought to terminal. EWR flight ops suspended for approx. 2 hours, then resumed on two remaining runways besides 4L/22R, where aircraft remained. Flight Safety International reports extensive damage to aircraft, but this was not evident on local TV news video (but that doesn't mean it isn't true).

Comment: I know flight crews train for all manner of gear-up, and partial gear-up landings, but this configuration can't possibly be easy to execute, from my non-pilot perspective. "Capt. Sully"-category job, far as I'm concerned. My level of confidence in United's mainline pilots is only enhanced, if that's possible.

bmvaughn

Curious to know how long planes are typically out of service after an event like this. Hope it's repairable!

gfunkdave

Yeah, I DEFINITELY don't fly United because of cheap fares.

aluminumdriver

Well, leave it to the press to make stuff up, as the airbus cannot dump fuel. Most narrowbody 2 engine aircraft don't have fuel dumping capability, 737, 757, A320/319, etc. I believe the 767 could, but I don't remember for sure. They would just burn down fuel to the acceptable level, then land the plane. Folks may remember the JBLU Airbus that circled around LA for hours burning down fuel before landing with a gear problem.

AD

whakojacko

fascinating picture:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Unite...131/1638252/M/
Looks like the door jammed thus the wheels wouldnt deploy.
Congrats to the pilots for a landing with no injuries.

RichG

Seems to me the first order of business has got to be to jack up the right side of the aircraft and get air bags or a big dolly under there to relieve the stress on the wing spar. True, there's a lot of upward stress under the wing due to the airflow during flight, but I doubt it's too good to leave the aircraft sitting on the engine for too long if you intend to use it again. Wouldn't surprise me if the engine, or at least the cowling, get swapped out on general principles for that matter.

Thank you for the comment regarding fuel dumping. Now I can't find the reference to it I saw earlier. It might have been corrected, or it may have been someone's assumption mentioned during an interview. I'll correct the post above.

CApreppie

Glad to hear the emergency landing went smoothly. I never worry about the competence of the United mainline pilots. The major legacy carriers have very good safety records, especially the mainline pilots and routes. However, AA is getting reviewed by the FAA due to having an unusual amount of pilot error incidents.