Gonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1675 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 16861 times:
What really confuses me is that first the crew decided to divert to Abilene,TX, but Abilene's runway 17R was closed and airport management had imposed a weight limit on runway 17L which was exceeded by the aircraft....What happened with the NOTAM indicating this critical information for the pilots ?
And the other uncommon situation, they landed finally in Dyess Air Force Base... how often are scheduled passenger flights landing in Air Force Bases in the US ( obviously excluding Joint Civil-military airports ) ?... I guess the number is low giving the big number of facilities available all over the country ?
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8746 posts, RR: 52 Reply 1, posted (10 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 16762 times:
From the article it looks like Abilene was likely filed as the diversion airport without knowledge of the runway limitations. This looks like a mistake by dispatch. It does happen from time to time that the filed diversion airport is not available.
In the case of a fuel emergency, the airplane can land at any available airfield. Obviously an Air Force base is not ideal, but I am assuming those pilots were willing to land anywhere once they found out that they were not able to go to their filed alternate and had to declare a fuel emergency.
Of course the NOTAM also said except in emergency, so they could have landed at Abilene although they may have ended up grounded there if an overweight landing inspection was required on the runway.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
tb727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1375 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (10 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 16758 times:
Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter): What happened with the NOTAM indicating this critical information for the pilots ?
Unless ABI was their flight-planned alternate before they left PHX(which I doubt given the runway closure issue)it would be hard to have the NOTAM's for the airport readily available to them with their paperwork. They probably either received it on the ATIS or from approach and had to go with what they had at hand at that point, they were probably too low on fuel to go to LBB or something like that.
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 4744 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (10 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 16710 times:
If I didn't know any better, it sounds like the pilots wanted to make an example of a perceived ridiculousness of the weight restriction at ABI, since they could have landed on it anyways due to the fuel emergency.
Since I do know better, it sounds like the pilots were just playing it extra safe.
Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter): And the other uncommon situation, they landed finally in Dyess Air Force Base... how often are scheduled passenger flights landing in Air Force Bases in the US
Rare, but not unheard of. I recall an incident about 10 years ago where a Southwest plane landed at Luke AFB (about 20 miles NW of PHX) because they were critically low on fuel. They got a pretty stern talking to by the Air Force, and I think the FAA was all over them for waiting so long to divert somewhere.
Also I recall an incident where an airline flight (NW?) accidentally landed at Ellsworth AFB, mistaking the runway for RAP (whose runways are nearly perfectly aligned about 6 miles apart)
FI642 From Monaco, joined Mar 2005, 1056 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (10 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 16652 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 3): Rare, but not unheard of. I recall an incident about 10 years ago where a Southwest plane landed at Luke AFB (about 20 miles NW of PHX) because they were critically low on fuel. They got a pretty stern talking to by the Air Force, and I think the FAA was all over them for waiting so long to divert somewhere.
Allow me to verify that Luke Field takes things VERY seriously. Oh boy!
737MAX, Cool Planes for the Worlds Coolest Airline.
GEG2RAP From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 838 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (10 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 16295 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 3): Also I recall an incident where an airline flight (NW?) accidentally landed at Ellsworth AFB, mistaking the runway for RAP (whose runways are nearly perfectly aligned about 6 miles apart)
Yep, was a NW A319.
RCA (ellsworth) is 13/31
RAP is 14/32.
PHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4966 posts, RR: 14 Reply 6, posted (10 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 16240 times:
This is a little strange...they didn't fuel the 319 as much as usual, quite obviously. Those things can go trans-con from PHX. I see planes go into holds around PHX all the time and the only time they divert is if they're going to TUS, but usually after circling for about 40-50 minutes. How long were they circling?
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 4744 posts, RR: 6 Reply 7, posted (10 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 16221 times:
Quoting FI642 (Reply 4): Allow me to verify that Luke Field takes things VERY seriously. Oh boy!
Oh, I can vouch for it. Been on the flightline twice, and was told in no uncertain terms to NEVER cross the solid red line and not to even think about wandering off.
I found a recent article from a LUF publication that referenced the landing (it happened in 1998), where one of the Airmen talked about the incident, and how they kept the passengers fed and watered, but I distinctly remember the news reports that the FAA was furious about it.
jetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7336 posts, RR: 52 Reply 8, posted (10 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 16142 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 7): Oh, I can vouch for it. Been on the flightline twice, and was told in no uncertain terms to NEVER cross the solid red line and not to even think about wandering off.
Well, that's pretty much the rule at any AFB, not just Luke. Being an aircrewman in the military and an FA in the airlines, i've seen both being disciplined by Security Forces. I've seen senior flight officers, pilots reamed out by junior enlisted AF Airlines (Argentina)">SF's for crossing the red line, as well as civilian flight crew who are clueless about those rules, having done very few military charters and still being read the riot-act. And I have never seen lax flight-line rules at any USAF instillation, and i've flown into almost all of them. The Navy, that's a completely different story. The Navy doesn't really bother you walking across the flight-line unless you're heading towards an active taxi/runway.
HAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2467 posts, RR: 53 Reply 9, posted (10 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 15664 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6): This is a little strange...they didn't fuel the 319 as much as usual, quite obviously. Those things can go trans-con from PHX. I see planes go into holds around PHX all the time and the only time they divert is if they're going to TUS, but usually after circling for about 40-50 minutes. How long were they circling?
Sure, they can go trans-con - if they fill the tanks up. But no airline ever just 'fills the tanks' for a flight. They look at the planned route, weather, and payload to determine how much fuel the flight will need. Fuel is added for alternates, and often for holding if it's expected. They don't overfill the tanks, because that would be a waste of fuel, since it costs fuel to carry the unused extra around in the tanks. They carry what is necessary for a safe flight, but no more.
The article does not specify how long they held while waiting for the weather to clear at DFW, or where they held either. The Captain has to make the decision on when to divert given the remaining fuel, and how much they need to get to the alternate, plus having some reserve after that.
To say they didn't fuel the 319 as much as usual isn't correct, since you don't know how long they held, and what contingencies they were fueled for in the first place.
HAL
One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
checksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 996 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (10 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 15416 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 3): Rare, but not unheard of. I recall an incident about 10 years ago where a Southwest plane landed at Luke AFB (about 20 miles NW of PHX) because they were critically low on fuel. They got a pretty stern talking to by the Air Force, and I think the FAA was all over them for waiting so long to divert somewhere.
Seriously?? What, did the Air Force tell them...to just crash next time? No way.
The only time a commercial crew would get a stern talking too is if they landed without clearance, or by accident...a crew calling an emergency could request to land at the nearest military installation with a runway that could accommodate the aircraft without recourse from the AF. Not to mention, commercial (chartered) flights land at military airbases all the time so its nothing out of the ordinary...aside from whatever emergency they've encountered.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 7771 posts, RR: 26 Reply 11, posted (10 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 15354 times:
What seems to be the problem to land, in case of an emergency, at an AFB? The tax payers, and that includes corporations, paid for the bases and the air force can bill the carrier for the use and the refueling.
Gonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1675 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (10 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 15002 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 11): What seems to be the problem to land, in case of an emergency, at an AFB?
I guess there is no problem when the AFB is the only and last option, but that was the thing that call my attention in the first place, I found a little strange that in a country with one of the best ( or THE best ) airport infrastructure in the world this crew selected a military airport, where for obvious reasons, you can have some National Security issues ( like people watching to - or taking photos of - facilities and equipments that they shouldn't ) , lack of adequate equipment to bring service to a crowd of civilians, etc. I know the 99.9 % of the people on board of a flight can't say the difference between a F-16 and a C-130, but still, the AFB are restricted to civilians for a reason, and not only in the USA.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 7771 posts, RR: 26 Reply 13, posted (10 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 14709 times:
Quick search at airnav.com results that Dyess AFB is 9 miles from ABI whereas the next nearest nearest alternate is about 40 miles and that runway is real short for an A319.
As to the pictures, not much more than can be seen on google earth is visible from the ground. I remember when that NW 319 landed at ellsworth passengers had to pull the shades down. How many pictiures of B52s are there in the files here?
Most of the times, AFB's have public days, so what's the big deal. Park the aircraft at a remote stand, fuel up and go. The pilots are civilians and not subject to military rules and regulations. If an airman thinks he can "pull rank" over a flight captain, the captain should have some polite words requesting to change his tone.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11708 posts, RR: 52 Reply 14, posted (10 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 14317 times:
Quoting checksixx (Reply 10): What, did the Air Force tell them...to just crash next time?
Any USAF base will accept any aircraft in an emergency at any time. But any unknown civilian aircraft landing at a base unannounced or unscheduled is going to be questioned. The flight crew had better have a good reason. Their presence disrupts the military bases operations, perticularly when weapons are being moved or when they have weapons loaded aircraft parked on the ramp. The USAF is not going to tell you when they are having an exercise or anything about the training when weapons and classified equipment is on or moved to/from an aircraft.
I might point out that DYS B-1Bs and C-130Js currently assigned to the 7th Bomb Wing and the 317th Airlift Group.
tp1040 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 157 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (10 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 13777 times:
Interesting that ABI has a weight limit. Does anyone know why an airport with two 7200 foot runways can't take a 319? That kind of weight limit would seem to be a deterrent to airport business expansion.
My only guess that the restriction is temporary due to the Texas heat and the primary runways are asphalt.
bueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 537 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (10 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 13624 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6): This is a little strange...they didn't fuel the 319 as much as usual, quite obviously. Those things can go trans-con from PHX.
fsnuffer From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 229 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11506 times:
Back in 1987 when I was at Scott AFB, a TWA 767 made an emergency landing due to the right main gear being stuck. The pilot chose Scott AFB over Lambert due to the base hospital being near by and the availability of heavy crash equipment.
vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 8220 posts, RR: 28 Reply 18, posted (10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11179 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1): This looks like a mistake by dispatch. It does happen from time to time that the filed diversion airport is not available.
I'd assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that there are more/better checks in place for ETOPS flights, right? Can't imagine you'd like to lose an engine and then find out your filed diversion airport is closed....
"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
TVNWZ From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 2200 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11147 times:
And it happens the other way around. Last week a C-17 Globemaster mistook tiny general aviation airport's very short runways for MacDill AFB with runways a lot l o n g e r. Quite a surprise for the GenAv folks.
HPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3662 posts, RR: 8 Reply 20, posted (10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 10602 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 13): As to the pictures, not much more than can be seen on google earth is visible from the ground. I remember when that NW 319 landed at ellsworth passengers had to pull the shades down. How many pictiures of B52s are there in the files here?
Ellsworth is a B1 base, so at the time this happened it may have been a little more sensitive. At one time the B1 was considered a somewhat secret aircraft. The general public is overall a lot more aware of the B52.
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5901 posts, RR: 8 Reply 21, posted (10 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 10145 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 13): I remember when that NW 319 landed at ellsworth passengers had to pull the shades down. How many pictiures of B52s are there in the files here?
Ahh, but imagine if they had seen armed guards standing around a bomber with crews working, imagine the press concerning the nuclear bombs that were being loaded, was it for training, ferry to disposal, where they live, etc etc. etc.
A base is usually sealed because a number of private / sensitve / secret things take place, would make satellites a waste of time if nothing could be learned.
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 4744 posts, RR: 6 Reply 22, posted (10 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 10073 times:
Quoting checksixx (Reply 10): Seriously?? What, did the Air Force tell them...to just crash next time? No way
I think it had something to do with the availability of other airports in the area. TUS may have been boxed in, but GYR and PRC are well within reach and can accept 737s.
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8746 posts, RR: 52 Reply 23, posted (10 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9961 times:
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 18):
I'd assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that there are more/better checks in place for ETOPS flights, right? Can't imagine you'd like to lose an engine and then find out your filed diversion airport is closed....
I made some assumptions. First was that Abilene was filed as an alternate in the flight plan which may or may not be true. From the NOTAM in the article it is not clear to me when Abilene’s runway closed. If it closed after the flight plan was created, then I am not surprised that the NOTAM was missed. If the NOTAM was issued before the flight was dispatched, then Abilene should not have been allowed as an alternate and dispatch should not have planned that.
This happened a few days ago, so I don’t know if weather in DFW required a filed diversion airport ahead of time or it was an enroute decision.
ETOPS diversion airports are a different requirement. For an ETOPS flight, the airplane must always be within single engine cruise distance of an airport capable of accepting (but not necessarily servicing) the airplane. Sometimes important diversion airports like KEF closing can impact the routing of airplanes flying ETOPS.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
93Sierra From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 261 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (10 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9432 times:
This seems very uneventful and boring
25 aztrainer: As is IWA, AVW. I also wonder if it was due to the straight shot in from the west that Luke has vs GYR and the mountains to the south? OK, I know the
26 Gonzalo: I think a couple of diversion points already checked and confirmed before take off should be a mandatory practice for all the pilots, regardless the
27 SmittyOne: Where are you getting this from? Civilians most certainly ARE subject to the rules and regulations of the military installation. If a civilian violat
28 Dufo: What exactly is this line, something similar to parking 'boxes' at civilian airports?
29 spink: There are plenty of normal operations that can take place at an air force base, esp a base with a large bomber wing that are not intended for public
30 Viscount724: June 2004. http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123008013
31 ZANL188: A PPR is required for ANY transient aircraft to land at a USAF base, not only to provide notice & receive permission but to ensure the airspace i
32 flightsimer: Here is a much better version of the landing that was spliced into the news video. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l6n29Ie2f7w Lmao that guy in the vide
33 KC135TopBoom: A red line on the flightline of a military base is the security line. Stay on the unsecure side and everthing is alright, cross into the security and
34 IADCA: I don't know any specifics about this situation, but a couple summers ago (on a hot August day) I was on an SJC-DFW flight that got diverted because
35 checksixx: VERY much incorrect sir. While on ANY military installation ALL personnel are subject to the UCMJ and Federal/Local laws. Trust me, any airman that g
36 Maverick623: What I was saying was that even if you're authorized into the restricted area, you can only cross at designated points. There are areas where a barri
37 a/c dxer: Couple of things. First off a air force base can be used as alternate and landed on as a alternate. Elmendorf is good example as it i near Anchorage a
38 txjim: Had a program manager who felt compelled to join the engineering crew working on the electronics in a certain aircraft. He did not take the warnings
39 ZANL188: I think I grabbed the wrong quote..... My point was that this: is not necessarily true.... Jumpers, existing emergency, jettisoned stores etc on the
40 Eskimotail: Talk about taking things seriously: During 21 years as a US Cost Guard Helicopter crew had to seriously violate "Military areas" areas 3 times. 1) Dur
41 type-rated: When I was working on my instrument rating we'd fly practice ILS approaches into Barksdale AFB at night. We could complete the approach and fly down t
Sponsor Message: 
From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1675 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8746 posts, 
From Monaco, joined Mar 2005, 1056 posts, 
From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4966 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 7771 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 537 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5901 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
