"Ahhh, folks, we can't seem to retract the landing gear"
Apr 21, 2008, 10:42 pm
#16
Join Date: Sep 2005
Programs: US Chairman's, Marriott Platinum Premier, Hilton Gold, SPG Gold, Hertz 5*, Etc.
Posts: 403
If I am not mistaken, an Airbus 320 cannot dump fuel - it just doesn't have that capability. In a real emergency, you would land with full tanks and fingers crossed.
Apr 21, 2008, 10:47 pm
#17
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,695
Most narrow body aircraft lack the ability to dump fuel so thats not an option for most domestic flights. Planes can land overweight but they will require an overweight inspection and additional ground time and costs. If the situation is not critical, ops will advise the pilots to burn off fuel and land once the plane is below maximum landing weight.
Apr 21, 2008, 11:12 pm
#18
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: High Point, NC
Programs: None
Posts: 9,171
I'll just second (third?) what PHLDividends and audio-nut said - narrowbody twin-engine aircraft generally don't have fuel dumping capability since they meet the performance requirements without it. I'm not even sure that the A333/B762 have fuel dumping capability.
In the event of a problem necessitating a return for landing, it becomes an issue of which is more important - getting back on the ground as quickly as possible thus landing over max landing weight or burning off fuel to reach max landing weight first.
Jim
In the event of a problem necessitating a return for landing, it becomes an issue of which is more important - getting back on the ground as quickly as possible thus landing over max landing weight or burning off fuel to reach max landing weight first.
Jim
Last edited by BoeingBoy; Apr 21, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Apr 22, 2008, 8:09 am
#19
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: PHL
Programs: Former long-time US GP; now AA dirt
Posts: 4,904
What is the risk of landing over max landing weight? Overshooting the runway, or damaging the plane in some other way?
Apr 22, 2008, 8:50 am
#20
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,256
Apr 22, 2008, 9:35 am
#21
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: High Point, NC
Programs: None
Posts: 9,171
Jim
Apr 22, 2008, 10:06 am
#22
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: PHL
Programs: Former long-time US GP; now AA dirt
Posts: 4,904
Usually it's just an inspection after an overweight landing, with the depth of the inspection determined by how overweight and the rate of descent at touchdown. In theory, if heavy enough and a high enough descent rate at touchdown, significant damage could result but that would be a worst case involving a very "hard" landing that would involve at least an inspection even with "normal" landing weights.
Jim
Jim
Apr 22, 2008, 10:19 am
#23
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: High Point, NC
Programs: None
Posts: 9,171
Yes - normally the crew would request the longer/longest runway available (considering surface wind) if making an overweight landing so runway length would normally not be a problem. If it were, like DCA for example, there's the option of diverting to a different airport. In cases where time is of the essence, like an onboard fire, the least of the worries is the inspection for landing overweight.
Besides, any of the mainline narrowbodies will stop in 3-4,000 ft of runway if necessary, even at max take-off weight.
Jim
Besides, any of the mainline narrowbodies will stop in 3-4,000 ft of runway if necessary, even at max take-off weight.
Jim
Apr 22, 2008, 10:29 am
#24
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
Programs: UA 2P, AA LT Gold, Marriott LT Titanium
Posts: 3,159
Exact same thing happened to me on a UA flight ORD-PHX, captain came on and said the exact same words as this thread title. We returned to ORD, had a 4 hour delay until they found another a/c, and as way of apology UA gave me 17,500 miles. I was pleased with the outcome. Can't recall US ever doing anything that nice even when I was CP and flew the whole way from Europe to PHL in a broken Envoy seat that wouldn't recline (and had been reported by the previous flight crew but not fixed or blocked out).
Apr 22, 2008, 3:05 pm
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Point Place, Wisconsin
Programs: LH HON, BA Gold, EK Gold
Posts: 14,505
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/831061.stm
Apr 22, 2008, 4:19 pm
#26
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Programs: DL 1MM Diamond, UA Silver, AA Gold, Marriott Titanium, IHG Spire, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 594
This was totally a DL issue -- USAirways booked us in the F bucket but at the gate, 35 minutes prior to departure, we were told that there were no more F seats available. There wasn't time to argue there (we were 2 minutes from pushback), but I'm going to write DL a letter about this.
Apr 22, 2008, 4:23 pm
#27
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Programs: DL 1MM Diamond, UA Silver, AA Gold, Marriott Titanium, IHG Spire, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 594
Probably not unless you flew the night before -- our departure was 7:55am from ATL-PHX, so I'm thinking this had to be the first flight of the day for the aircraft. The tail was N628AW.