United Airlines flight bound for Japan grounded in San Francisco with engine issues

no one could possibly answer that question, unless they worked for the FAA.

It was answered, vaguely. See door #29, from a flight attendant with 10 years experience. She said it, "Happens all the time".

I was just curious what that means, or how often. Obviously the question hit a nerve with some here. Don't know why. I just wanted to know how many times passenger aircraft, just prior to departure are being cancelled and or aborted due to serious mechanical or airworthiness issues. Seems a bit odd the question would elicit such angry responses.

Didn’t see anyone giving angry responses about the question. Again, it does happen all the time. Again, only the FAA would know the answer to that question.

In a prior life, I made many returns to the gate, for not only serious issues, but also things that I was just not comfortable with. There were many times I could have taken off legally, but decided not to. I was never, ever called on the carpet for using overly safe judgment (in my opinion).

One time I had passengers ask why I returned to the gate instead of taking off. Sometimes it is not just for maintenance, but for marginal weather, or other reasons. Once, I had a passneger upset with my decision, asking why I did not takeoff—as he just saw Delta takeoff. My response was, “Yes, It probably would be safe 99 times out of 100, but that was not good enough for me”. He said nothing after that.

The point is, the pilot is the final say on any aircraft maintenance or other issue. Just because an aircraft aborts, returns to the gate for weather, or otherwise, there is no reason for the type of hysteria you see now in the news (and even here). I won’t even start on returning for a passenger issue.

The bottom line is this, flying is the most incredibly safe mode of transportation, PERIOD. In all of these so-called recent emergencies, was anyone killed or even injured? Tens of thousands of flights per day, every single day. Amazing. We kill the equivalent of a 747 with a full load crashing every single day on our roads and highways.

The news media (any many here) is simply over hyping problems—that are typically nothing more than an over abundance of caution by either the flight crew, maintenance or company policy. It is ridiculous.

Sorry for the he rant.

that are typically nothing more than an over abundance of caution by either the flight crew, maintenance or company policy.

Btw, I wasn't referring to weather delays.

Can you give me an example of a passenger aircraft returning to the gate due to an over abundance of caution type issues. I am guessing you're saying many of these terminated departures are for frivolous issues/company policy issues, having nothing to do with airworthiness of the aircraft.

All major airlines operate with restrictions listed in an MEL (Minimum Equipment List) which must be approved by the FAA. The aircraft may not takeoff unless all items listed there are operating properly.

If a required item is malfunctioning or broken, the malfunctioning item must be repaired. If an item malfunctions prior to takeoff, you taxi back and have maintenance fix, or if the problem takes too long to fix, sometimes an aircraft change is required.

If the item is not something that threatens safety, you still must comply with the MEL. You can get the MEL waiver either back at the gate or via the radio while in the aircraft waiting for takeoff. If you are tight on fuel, the few minutes it takes to get an MEL may even require your return to the gate for more fuel. Examples of the MEL requirements include some stupid things like the ash tray that Ex-con777 mentioned in his post. Other examples might be one radio being inoperative, a radio altimeter inop, a VOR or DME being inop, or other flight instruments like a fuel totalizer guage inop, an engine vibration gauge, fluctuating or being inop, etc. There are dozens and dozens of items that are not safety items by themselves, but still require an MEL waiver for takeoff. Too many to mention.

On takeoff, there are numerous reasons to return to the departure airport and declare an emergency. Most times, the return and the designation of an emergency is precautionary, again because of an over abundance of caution by the pilot. An example would be a passenger or FA thinking she smells smoke in the cabin. Other examples might be if the landing gear would not retract, or a suspected hydraulic or fuel leak. Again there are many other possibilities. Inflight it is totally up to the discretion of the pilot.

A complete response to your post would be much longer and more detailed— as some items by themselves are not show stoppers, but if combined with another problem—can compound to something serious. Again, the pilot’s discretion and judgement is always the controlling factor.

I have no doubt there are volumes of restrictions, guidelines and requirements to comply with. What I continue to find inquisitive is being told passenger aircraft terminate their departures and return to the gate, “All the time” due to any number of issues with the aircraft. To me that does not sound overly reassuring. Sure it’s better to find the issues while still on the ground, but it’s the frequency of these occurrences which seem to jump out in my mind.

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.