AA emergency landing in Santiago!

T

Transat

New member
Jan 1, 2002
318
0
0
Nobody was injured in yesterday AA emergency landing in Santiago.
According to the news papers the pax 156 in total where evacuated from the plane.

Once on the ground the pilot noted that on the runway dispersed fragments of the engine were found, lost during the roll before take off.

They lost power on one of the engines turn that one off and return to the airport.
 
E

eli

New member
Jun 10, 2003
382
0
0
The important thing is everybody made it back ok. As i've said in the past S**t happens to the best of them.
 
T

Transat

New member
Jan 1, 2002
318
0
0
eli said:
The important thing is everybody made it back ok. As i've said in the past S**t happens to the best of them.
Click to expand...


Your right Eli!

When something like that happens believe me IS NOT VERY FUNNY!
 
S

simpson Homer

Bronze
Nov 14, 2003
559
6
0
Hard to trust

What I was thinking that the airline company has mechanic to check the entire plane before depart from any airport. I dont have idea how old are those airplane. is scare to think about what was wrong.
 
T

Transat

New member
Jan 1, 2002
318
0
0
simpson Homer said:
What I was thinking that the airline company has mechanic to check the entire plane before depart from any airport. I dont have idea how old are those airplane. is scare to think about what was wrong.
Click to expand...


Its nothing with the age o the aircraft its just something with the engine, sometimes on takeoff thers so much thrust aplied to it that sometines just blowup, But now the investigation is concentrated on de debris left behind on the runway,to find out what happen on that flight.

The flight was inbound for JFK so im 100% sure was a A-300-600
 
E

eli

New member
Jun 10, 2003
382
0
0
Transat said:
Its nothing with the age o the aircraft its just something with the engine, sometimes on takeoff thers so much thrust aplied to it that sometines just blowup, But now the investigation is concentrated on de debris left behind on the runway,to find out what happen on that flight.

The flight was inbound for JFK so im 100% sure was a A-300-600
Click to expand...

The truth of the matter is that it's a mechanical object which can fail at any moment no matter how much maintenance is devoted to it, it's just way of things you have engines that go forever with their due maintenance periods and you have brand new engines that have catastrophic engine failures it's just the way it is.
 
T

Transat

New member
Jan 1, 2002
318
0
0
santobonao said:
AA should retired those freaky A300-600 aircraft soon. its a danger to have those aircraft service in the air.
Click to expand...

No i dont think so the A-300-600 its a very reliable aircraft,its just that happens on any other aircraft type.

You still can see DC-3 flying around and that aircraft its 60 years of age GOOD MAINTENANCE thats all.

The A-300 its a very good aircraft and as Eli says something like that just happens.

Ely says "you have engines that go forever with their due maintenance periods and you have brand new engines that have catastrophic engine failures it's just the way it is." AND SHES TOTALLY RIGHT EXAMPLE
Lauda Air a brand new 767-300 in 1991.

"Shortly after takeoff, a REV ISLN message appeared on the aircraft's EICAS system alerting the crew that there was a malfunction with the thrust reverser isolation valves. The crew opted to continue the flight, and as the aircraft approached FL310, the no.1 engine thrust reverser engaged. The incredible force on the aircraft caused the airframe to break apart within several seconds."
 
F

Flakko

New member
Dec 5, 2003
168
0
0
Nothing personal, but...

Why only AA planes are having troubles in DR??? I haven't heard 'bout CO, NA, US or any other U.S. air carrier.

Because of the press or because the conditions of the ones they use to fly into Dom. Rep???

About the type of aircraft, mmm...

Well an AA Boeing 777 had another tech. failure on a flight JFK-NRT and had to return to JFK.
The 777 it's a pretty new aircraft.

And I don't know if you remember the AA A300 that had an engine on fire on a flight from San Juan, Puerto Rico it was caught on tape!!!

So...
Maybe, maybe, they should check the whole A300 fleet for security concerns...
 
T

Transat

New member
Jan 1, 2002
318
0
0
Flakko said:
Nothing personal, but...

Why only AA planes are having troubles in DR??? I haven't heard 'bout CO, NA, US or any other U.S. air carrier.

Because of the press or because the conditions of the ones they use to fly into Dom. Rep???

About the type of aircraft, mmm...

Well an AA Boeing 777 had another tech. failure on a flight JFK-NRT and had to return to JFK.
The 777 it's a pretty new aircraft.

And I don't know if you remember the AA A300 that had an engine on fire on a flight from San Juan, Puerto Rico it was caught on tape!!!

So...
Maybe, maybe, they should check the whole A300 fleet for security concerns...
Click to expand...


Flakko you just brought a good one!!
 
E

El Tigre

El Tigre de DR1 - Moderator
Jan 23, 2003
2,306
57
0
I have something to add...

I spent this past christmas in the D.R. and this is what happened upon my return to JFK.

Sunday Jan, 4
Flight #2054 Airbus A300-600

We pushed back made our way to the runway to commence takeoff roll. Halfway down the runway the pilot aborts take off. NICE. Everyone was freakin out. I knew this was nothing major. Have been in aborted take-offs before. We go back to the gate and the pilot anounces that they lost power on the #1 engine. DOUBLE NICE. Now there I was freaking out. I know that airplane can fly only on one engine. But not TAKE-OFF with only one. Imagine if we were at V1 gears up, plane in full power??? POBRE DE NOSOTROS. They didn't "fix" the "problem" until next day when they had to fly in a mechanic from JFK.

In my opinion. And I'll say it again IN MY OPINION - THEY SHOULD RETIRE THOSE A300s. I know how profitable they are to AA but to me they are just a disaster waiting to happen.
 
D

Dominicanoxp

New member
Dec 19, 2002
68
0
0
Siguen Con Los A300

miren any AC at MTW can take off using 90% of total power once every takeoff pilots apply full power y no creo que un vuelo de rd a jfk venga con maximun payload

i don't know you peeps just talk about the 300's to be retired but the only airline in the world having issues with them is AA- why fed ex has more 300's than AA and use them for cargo and never have any problem
dejemos el coro
que i've heard of 77 GE-90 blown up

focus on american mechanics all with few yrs of experience and the senior are retired , evading bancarota"

hablen de eso
y yo hablo no por hablar hablo por que se y el que quiera discutir yahoo me or msn me same name
 
T

Transat

New member
Jan 1, 2002
318
0
0
Dominicanoxp said:
miren any AC at MTW can take off using 90% of total power once every takeoff pilots apply full power y no creo que un vuelo de rd a jfk venga con maximun payload

i don't know you peeps just talk about the 300's to be retired but the only airline in the world having issues with them is AA- why fed ex has more 300's than AA and use them for cargo and never have any problem
dejemos el coro
que i've heard of 77 GE-90 blown up

focus on american mechanics all with few yrs of experience and the senior are retired , evading bancarota"

hablen de eso
y yo hablo no por hablar hablo por que se y el que quiera discutir yahoo me or msn me same name
Click to expand...

Diste en el blanco yo sigo insistiendo que los AIRBUS 300 son fiables nothing wrong with the aircraft, yo no me haria preguntas en volar uno de esos.

Engines and maintenance thats another question,yo pienso que tienes razon cuando hablas de mecanicos han hecho muchos laidoff para economisar dinero.
 
C

cara

New member
Feb 21, 2003
205
0
0
Mis amigos,
La maquina mas perfecta es el avion..............
pero algo siempre pasa.
AA es muy buena, pero sin deseo de molestar.....sus mecanicos siempre estan en la mejor dsiposicion de mantener los equipos 100 por ciento confiables.

Somos una nacion categoria 2* pero............................
nuestros pilotos son inferiores a ellos............................., cuando son entrenados alla.?
nuestos mecanicos son inferiores a ellos....................................., cuando son entrenados a alla.?

Yo si entiendo que nuestras autoridades no son 100 por ciento CONFIABLES, pero y ellos si son confiables.

Esto es mas que politica
Conozco nuestra aviacion de siempre, se de nuestros errores, co?o, pero ellos alla son mejores que nosotros...........................

lo que nesecitamos es ense?ar a nuestros operadores, es que tenemos que cumplir con las regulaciones por nuestro bien, no porque queremos.
Si no es por que es mejor para todos.

De verdad estoy cansado de ser menos, co?o algun dia seremos los mejores.........
 
S

Stanley Joaqu?n

Bronze
Jan 1, 2002
783
0
0
cara said:
Mis amigos,
La maquina mas perfecta es el avion..............
pero algo siempre pasa.
AA es muy buena, pero sin deseo de molestar.....sus mecanicos siempre estan en la mejor dsiposicion de mantener los equipos 100 por ciento confiables.

Somos una nacion categoria 2* pero............................
nuestros pilotos son inferiores a ellos............................., cuando son entrenados alla.?
nuestos mecanicos son inferiores a ellos....................................., cuando son entrenados a alla.?

Yo si entiendo que nuestras autoridades no son 100 por ciento CONFIABLES, pero y ellos si son confiables.

Esto es mas que politica
Conozco nuestra aviacion de siempre, se de nuestros errores, co?o, pero ellos alla son mejores que nosotros...........................

lo que nesecitamos es ense?ar a nuestros operadores, es que tenemos que cumplir con las regulaciones por nuestro bien, no porque queremos.
Si no es por que es mejor para todos.

De verdad estoy cansado de ser menos, co?o algun dia seremos los mejores.........
Click to expand...

cara no estoy de acuerdo con tu opini?n, pero la respeto.
 
J

JOSE MARTINEZ

New member
Dec 15, 2003
44
0
0
Hey Einstein, When people are laid off is in reverse seniority. Ie from the bottom up. All the junior guys are on the street, while the senior remain at work not the other way around.
 
J

JOSE MARTINEZ

New member
Dec 15, 2003
44
0
0
El Tigre said:
I spent this past christmas in the D.R. and this is what happened upon my return to JFK.

Sunday Jan, 4
Flight #2054 Airbus A300-600

We pushed back made our way to the runway to commence takeoff roll. Halfway down the runway the pilot aborts take off. NICE. Everyone was freakin out. I knew this was nothing major. Have been in aborted take-offs before. We go back to the gate and the pilot anounces that they lost power on the #1 engine. DOUBLE NICE. Now there I was freaking out. I know that airplane can fly only on one engine. But not TAKE-OFF with only one. Imagine if we were at V1 gears up, plane in full power??? POBRE DE NOSOTROS. They didn't "fix" the "problem" until next day when they had to fly in a mechanic from JFK.

In my opinion. And I'll say it again IN MY OPINION - THEY SHOULD RETIRE THOSE A300s. I know how profitable they are to AA but to me they are just a disaster waiting to happen.
Click to expand...


You couldn't be more incorrect. Most of AA training consist of losing and engines at the worst possible time. You lose an engine: Declare emergency, Dump fuel if able, uneventful landing. Nothing more nothing less. is not that drastic. Don't make it bigger than what it is.
 
F

Flakko

New member
Dec 5, 2003
168
0
0
Mr Martinez:

Could you please explain me or us, how can you drop fuel on an Airbus A300-600???
Because I am not a professional in your area, but I've heard and read that the A300 does not have that capability...
Correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks in advance.

Another thing, it's not only about the A300, it's about those in that airlines, cuz I wrote, why only their A300's are confronting dificulties flying to DR???

Lufthansa also operates A300's, but maybe, maybe, it's possible it's related to the maintenance in the specific airline we are talking about.

They have had several issues on flights to D.R.
So, I'm just saying maybe they should check the fleet of planes flying to the Caribbean and the A300 fleet.
You can check (I'll try to provide you a link) websites where you can read that what happened on AA's flight from PR, the A300 with an engine on fire was because of a failure of the airline to ensure the installation of an adapter bolt.

Ok, I have the link:
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1999/AAB9903.htm

Well, that's it for the moment...
 
E

El Tigre

El Tigre de DR1 - Moderator
Jan 23, 2003
2,306
57
0
JOSE MARTINEZ said:
You couldn't be more incorrect. Most of AA training consist of losing and engines at the worst possible time. You lose an engine: Declare emergency, Dump fuel if able, uneventful landing. Nothing more nothing less. is not that drastic. Don't make it bigger than what it is.
Click to expand...

Dude, I don't want to get into a confrontation with you. I was simply explaining what had happened on my return flight. And you know what. IT WAS DRASTIC. To me it was. I HATE FLYING AND I'M AFRAID OF FLYING. If I didn't have to fly I WOULDN'T. Unfortunately I have to. And what Flakko said is true. AA is always having issues with those damn A300s. I was flying one to MIA a few years ago and we had to return to JFK due to some "engine" problems.

Another thing Jose is that I said everything I commented on was "IN MY OPINION" I'm no aviation expert and I don't pretend to be one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom