There's a JetBlue Airbus 320 flight about to make an emergency landing in Long Beach

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,554
951
126
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Pepsei
that was really amazing...i was afraid the flame would blow up the fuel tanks.

Well, the tanks are in the wings, I was more worried about the nosegear shearing off.

I'd imagine they dumped off all but the fuel they required to land safely and NOT turn the thing into a huge fireball if it got real bad. I just caught the very end of it all, so I don't know how long it was circling to burn fuel off before it landed.

No, that plane does not have the capability to dump fuel. That plane has been flying around for about the last 2 hours burning off fuel but I'm sure there is still plenty of fuel on that plane right now.

Why not? You would think it would be a safety standard to allow the pilot to dump fuel. I understand that there are probably a host of other ramifications to dumping fuel, but it seems like it should at least be an option on virtually all passenger airliners. Do you know why?

No, I don't. I do know that Airbus is a European company though...maybe there are some environmental issues in Europe that prevent fuel dumping capabilities in certain sized aircraft?
 

AmigaMan

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
3,644
1
0
Originally posted by: Dasenergi
that landing looked smoother that most ive had with working landing gears

great job

Indeed! I've been on some landings I wasn't sure we would walk away from. Of course they've all been in severe weather too. Thank God there was nice weather in LA.
 

Bootprint

Diamond Member
Jan 11, 2002
9,847
0
0
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Pepsei
that was really amazing...i was afraid the flame would blow up the fuel tanks.

Well, the tanks are in the wings, I was more worried about the nosegear shearing off.

I'd imagine they dumped off all but the fuel they required to land safely and NOT turn the thing into a huge fireball if it got real bad. I just caught the very end of it all, so I don't know how long it was circling to burn fuel off before it landed.

No, that plane does not have the capability to dump fuel. That plane has been flying around for about the last 2 hours burning off fuel but I'm sure there is still plenty of fuel on that plane right now.

Why not? You would think it would be a safety standard to allow the pilot to dump fuel. I understand that there are probably a host of other ramifications to dumping fuel, but it seems like it should at least be an option on virtually all passenger airliners. Do you know why?

No, I don't. I do know that Airbus is a European company though...maybe there are some environmental issues in Europe that prevent fuel dumping capabilities in certain sized aircraft?

"Neither the narrow-bodied aircraft developed for short and medium-haul distances (e.g. A320, B737, B757, MD80) nor the medium-haul wide bodies (A300 and A310) are fitted with fuel dumping nozzles. For these aircraft, the difference between the maximum permitted take-off and landing weights is so minimal that the aircraft can land with excess weight in all cases of emergency."

from link
 

Sphexi

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2005
7,280
0
0
Originally posted by: SNiPeRX
That pilot just got a raise...

I'd say so. Balancing the plane on the back wheels during landing has to be pretty damn hard to control.
 

MBentz

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2005
1,049
0
0
The pilot saved jetBlue's stock from going in the toilet, even though it would be Airbus's problem. (Cant thnk of the company that owns them.)
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,554
951
126
Originally posted by: Bootprint
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Pepsei
that was really amazing...i was afraid the flame would blow up the fuel tanks.

Well, the tanks are in the wings, I was more worried about the nosegear shearing off.

I'd imagine they dumped off all but the fuel they required to land safely and NOT turn the thing into a huge fireball if it got real bad. I just caught the very end of it all, so I don't know how long it was circling to burn fuel off before it landed.

No, that plane does not have the capability to dump fuel. That plane has been flying around for about the last 2 hours burning off fuel but I'm sure there is still plenty of fuel on that plane right now.

Why not? You would think it would be a safety standard to allow the pilot to dump fuel. I understand that there are probably a host of other ramifications to dumping fuel, but it seems like it should at least be an option on virtually all passenger airliners. Do you know why?

No, I don't. I do know that Airbus is a European company though...maybe there are some environmental issues in Europe that prevent fuel dumping capabilities in certain sized aircraft?

"Neither the narrow-bodied aircraft developed for short and medium-haul distances (e.g. A320, B737, B757, MD80) nor the medium-haul wide bodies (A300 and A310) are fitted with fuel dumping nozzles. For these aircraft, the difference between the maximum permitted take-off and landing weights is so minimal that the aircraft can land with excess weight in all cases of emergency."

from link

Yeah, that makes more sense than anything. They kept saying that burning off fuel was more to lower the landing weight than for fear of fire.
 

AmigaMan

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
3,644
1
0
If you look back at the video of this, you'll see that the nose gear just barely deviated from the center line during the entire landing. That pilot has got MAD skillz!
 

Rogue

Banned
Jan 28, 2000
5,774
0
0
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Bootprint
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Pepsei
that was really amazing...i was afraid the flame would blow up the fuel tanks.

Well, the tanks are in the wings, I was more worried about the nosegear shearing off.

I'd imagine they dumped off all but the fuel they required to land safely and NOT turn the thing into a huge fireball if it got real bad. I just caught the very end of it all, so I don't know how long it was circling to burn fuel off before it landed.

No, that plane does not have the capability to dump fuel. That plane has been flying around for about the last 2 hours burning off fuel but I'm sure there is still plenty of fuel on that plane right now.

Why not? You would think it would be a safety standard to allow the pilot to dump fuel. I understand that there are probably a host of other ramifications to dumping fuel, but it seems like it should at least be an option on virtually all passenger airliners. Do you know why?

No, I don't. I do know that Airbus is a European company though...maybe there are some environmental issues in Europe that prevent fuel dumping capabilities in certain sized aircraft?

"Neither the narrow-bodied aircraft developed for short and medium-haul distances (e.g. A320, B737, B757, MD80) nor the medium-haul wide bodies (A300 and A310) are fitted with fuel dumping nozzles. For these aircraft, the difference between the maximum permitted take-off and landing weights is so minimal that the aircraft can land with excess weight in all cases of emergency."

from link

Yeah, that makes more sense than anything. They kept saying that burning off fuel was more to lower the landing weight than for fear of fire.

Excellent, thanks for the info.
 

tami

Lifer
Nov 14, 2004
11,588
3
81
Lurknomore: just for your information, i've flown jetblue 20+ times and have had no regrets. i will be flying on two jetblue A320 flights next week (round trip from JFK to FLL) and still have no regrets for booking that flight. the legitimacy and reliability of the airline has not changed in my mind and i'm sure that the majority still feels that it is very safe to fly on jetblue.
 

Kaervak

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2001
8,460
2
81
Originally posted by: AmigaMan
If you look back at the video of this, you'll see that the nose gear just barely deviated from the center line during the entire landing. That pilot has got MAD skillz!

Also the plane stopped just a few feet after one of the lines ended. If I ever have to fly somewhere, jet Blue it is.
 

GTaudiophile

Lifer
Oct 24, 2000
29,767
33
81
Originally posted by: Sphexi
Originally posted by: SNiPeRX
That pilot just got a raise...

I'd say so. Balancing the plane on the back wheels during landing has to be pretty damn hard to control.

Not at all. You just trim your aircraft up as normal, full flaps for max lift with little power, land on rear wheels, and pull back on the yoke, keeping the nose up as long as possible. I've practiced that doing grass-field landings...so as not to damage the front gear.
 

Lurknomore

Golden Member
Jul 3, 2005
1,308
0
0
Originally posted by: tami
Lurknomore: just for your information, i've flown jetblue 20+ times and have had no regrets. i will be flying on two jetblue A320 flights next week (round trip from JFK to FLL) and still have no regrets for booking that flight. the legitimacy and reliability of the airline has not changed in my mind and i'm sure that the majority still feels that it is very safe to fly on jetblue.

Thanx for the reply:)
I know I screwed up my thread and it was deservedly locked.
But I still think it's important to ask whether they would put this plane back into service, with a new number and all.
After all, the landing gears can be fixed, but the fuselage has already been rapidly aged due to the jarring landing and flames.
 

Dasenergi

Senior member
Sep 23, 2003
361
0
0
im almost positive its the #1 airline in the US now.. and has never has a plane crash .. though its rather new its one of the nicest airlines to fly ... leather seats personal tvs in every seat.. and about $200 cheaper from SLC to NY than Delta :)
 

skyking

Lifer
Nov 21, 2001
22,711
5,840
146
That jarring and flames was nothing in the big picture of airframe cycles. They will insepect it, replace the parts necessary, and put it back in service.
 

Yossarian

Lifer
Dec 26, 2000
18,010
1
81
yay! good job pilot and copilot!

I work about 5 miles from LAX and when I left work I was wondering wtf news helicopters were doing all over the place.
 

Mayfriday0529

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2003
7,187
0
71
That was such an awesome landing. The pilot did a great job. Its a good way to end the day in a positive note.
 

Lurknomore

Golden Member
Jul 3, 2005
1,308
0
0
Originally posted by: skyking
That jarring and flames was nothing in the big picture of airframe cycles. They will insepect it, replace the parts necessary, and put it back in service.

Of course the landing gear will be replaced.
I'm asking about the aluminum skin- obviously, it's already riveted and prolly can't be resectioned piece by piece. That's all.
I mean, if the body and paint of your car is damaged, you can prolly drive it for years without fear of it falling apart.
But when a plane takes off and lands hundreds of times, the stresses build up esp. after a major event like this.
Heh, I know I'm jsut being a worrywort.