Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A United Airlines flight made an emergency landing at New Jersey's Newark airport after circling over the Atlantic
cnn ^ | By Gregory Wallace and Pete Muntean,

Posted on 09/22/2022 8:33:05 AM PDT by BenLurkin

An initial maintenance inspection suggests an issue with a hydraulic pump on the aircraft, which had 256 passengers on board for the flight, United Airlines said. Sparks flew off the plane as it climbed after takeoff, according to a video posted online that purports to show the flight.

The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating what happened with Flight 149, which departed Newark airport late Wednesday night, then declared an emergency. The Boeing 777-200 aircraft had been headed to Sao Paulo, Brazil, before returning to Newark, the FAA said. The hydraulic system on the Boeing 777 runs key systems, such as the landing gear, flaps and brakes. There are three redundant hydraulic systems on the plane, meaning two can fail and the airplane can still operate normally.

The flight circled over the Atlantic Ocean to burn fuel before returning to the airport about two hours after departure, flight tracking data shows.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: boeing777; emergencylanding; newarkairport; unitedairlines
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 09/22/2022 8:33:05 AM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

They don’t like to land with a full load of fuel, apparently.


2 posted on 09/22/2022 9:10:18 AM PDT by ComputerGuy (Heavily-medicated for your protectionbrA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

It would have made the news if it were the a Trump family member.


3 posted on 09/22/2022 9:12:29 AM PDT by rovenstinez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

“after circling over the Atlantic...”

Well, their left turn signal was stuck in the “On” position, what else were they supposed to do?


4 posted on 09/22/2022 9:13:26 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ComputerGuy
They don’t like to land with a full load of fuel, apparently.

No, they don't. Max takeoff weight for many commercial airliners is greater than max landing weight. Fuel is heavy.

5 posted on 09/22/2022 9:16:42 AM PDT by NorthMountain (... the right of the peopIe to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

Gotcha.


6 posted on 09/22/2022 9:18:31 AM PDT by ComputerGuy (Heavily-medicated for your protectionbrA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

A flight to Rio from Newark is full of fuel.

They circled to burn and dump fuel, making the plane much lighter before emergency landing. Reduce risk of fire on landing less stress on the plane.

Plus if it was a hydraulic problem possible landing gear or flaps/ speed brakes won’t work properly on landing.


7 posted on 09/22/2022 9:19:22 AM PDT by Col Frank Slade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Col Frank Slade

6 gallons of gas per mile or 150 gallons per passenger so maybe 18000 gallons of fuel or slightly more than 100.000 pounds of fuel which is the weight of a fully loaded freight truck, cargo, truck and everything.


8 posted on 09/22/2022 9:33:20 AM PDT by Colt1851Navy (What was wrong with Nixon?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ComputerGuy

“ They don’t like to land with a full load of fuel, apparently.”

I believe it has to do with preparing to crash in case the gear doesn’t work. Fuel tends to explode


9 posted on 09/22/2022 9:38:32 AM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stanne

That too


10 posted on 09/22/2022 9:39:40 AM PDT by ComputerGuy (Heavily-medicated for your protectionbrA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: stanne
"I believe it has to do with preparing to crash in case the gear doesn’t work. Fuel tends to explode."

I have heard jet fuel is close to kerosene. Would that be less volatile than gasoline? Maybe a smart freeper can enlighten me.

11 posted on 09/22/2022 9:50:20 AM PDT by MikeSteelBe (The South will be in the right in the next war of Northern aggression.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Circling the Atlantic must have taken 2 whole days


12 posted on 09/22/2022 10:12:13 AM PDT by dsrtsage ( Complexity is just simple lacking imagination)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MikeSteelBe

I am sure that to newark and surrounding structures and aircraft gasoline Vs kerosene vs jp4 no one cares as long as they contain the explosion to relatively small

No one watches “Speed” on a regular basis as we do around here, I guess


13 posted on 09/22/2022 10:19:26 AM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ComputerGuy

That would put the plane above the Maximum Landing Weight (MLW).


14 posted on 09/22/2022 11:04:15 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stanne; ComputerGuy

The the landing gear isn’t designed to land at weights above the maximum landing weight which is lower than the maximum takeoff weight. Landing overweight can cause damage to the structures of the plane. This can be especially dangerous if much of the excess weight is fuel. The fuel tanks could rupture and cause a fire.


15 posted on 09/22/2022 11:10:43 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ComputerGuy

There are take off weight limits AND landing weight limits. Just because it could take off with that weight doesn’t mean they can safely land with it. (Usually landing gear concerns)

Key word “safely”.

Also, they would use the time dumping fuel to assess their situation, go through various check lists and prepare for a non-standard (emergency) landing.


16 posted on 09/22/2022 11:17:51 AM PDT by faucetman (Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Awhile back, we missed our flight in Ft Sill, OK because the plane coming from Dallas, TX had been 100% refueled and that short flight distance would not have used enough fuel for it to land.

They had to defuel the jet in Dallas before it could make its way to Ft. Sill.


17 posted on 09/22/2022 11:26:10 AM PDT by CodeJockey ("The duty of a true Patriot is to protect his country from its government.” –Thomas Paine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Interesting. Of course

The landing gear are utilized differently take off vs landing


18 posted on 09/22/2022 11:32:28 AM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MikeSteelBe

Haven’t you heard ? - jet fuel (kerosene) burns hot enough to literally melt steel I beams


19 posted on 09/22/2022 11:48:31 AM PDT by atc23 (The Matriarchal Society we embrace has led to masks and mandates and the cult of "safety")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

There are numerous comments on here about reducing landing weight due to stress on the landing gear. That is partially true. But the main reason is braking energy. If the plane is over the maximum gross landing weight, then the landing distance calculations are invalid.


20 posted on 09/22/2022 4:21:40 PM PDT by CFIIIMEIATP737
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson