Sign in to follow this  
LongTimer V

It's Not Ac This Time,that's Good For A Change

Recommended Posts

Rather than just pasting links can you please post part of what it is so we can not look again if we've already seen it?

Your internet etiquette will be appreciated once you get it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A dangerous diversion....

Bad weather in Toronto forced a transatlantic flight to make a dangerous detour to Ottawa where it landed low on fuel with over 500 people aboard.

The Emirates flight 241 left Dubai International Airport on Friday morning, destined for Pearson International Airport.

A website that tracked the flight path of the aircraft shows it locked in a holding pattern over the Toronto area before it made a beeline to Ottawa, where it landed safely at about 5:30 p.m.

Firefighters were at the airport on standby, but were cleared shortly after the plane landed, fire officials said.

Emirates officials blamed bad weather in Toronto for the diversion and said the plane was expected to leave for Pearson shortly after 6 p.m.

It was expected to land in Toronto about an hour later — it had originally been scheduled to arrive at 3:45 p.m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, this is good reporting;

Incident: Emirates A388 at Toronto and

Ottawa on Jun 1st 2012, precautionary emergency after weather related hold, go-around and diversion

By Simon Hradecky, created Saturday, Jun 2nd 2012 18:00Z, last updated Saturday, Jun 2nd 2012 18:59Z

An Emirates Airlines Airbus A380-800, registration A6-EDD performing flight EK-241 from Dubai (United Arab Emirates) to Toronto,ON (Canada) with 530 people on board, was on approach to Toronto, when the aircraft was instructed to enter a holding due to traffic congestion as result of weather. After holding for about 25 minutes the aircraft was vectored for a final approach to Toronto's runway 15R and was cleared to land on runway 15R, however, the crew needed to go around from about 600 feet AGL due to a wind shear alert, takeoff clearance for another aircraft on 15L was cancelled due to the go-around and a landing clearance on runway 15L was cancelled as well prompting another aircraft to go-around. The crew decided to divert to Ottawa declaring emergency indicating they might need to cut into their final fuel reserve of 30 minutes in case of any delays. The aircraft climbed to FL230 enroute to Ottawa,on approach to Ottawa the crew reported 6.3 tons of fuel/14000 lbs of fuel on board and cancelled their emergency under the condition that they were vectored directly for a RNAV approach to runway 14. The aircraft landed safely on runway 14 about 50 minutes after aborting the approach in Toronto with more fuel than final reserve remaining and after coming to a stop discovered they needed to backtrack the runway all the way long to be able to turn off to the apron causing another approach to Ottawa to be delayed.

Weather conditions at Toronto Airport were difficult throughout Jun 1st, tower reported winds from 110 degrees around 30 knots gusting up to 40 knots and there were multiple wind shear alerts, also instructing a number of arrivals to go around due to oncoming strong gusts. As a result, a number of aircraft involving domestic and international arrivals needed to declare minimum fuel.

The Aviation Herald would normally not report this occurrence as it is basically a weather related diversion and the crew remained on the safe course of action at all times declaring emergency as a precaution only to avoid any delays during their diversion and to avoid of getting into fuel trouble indeed as result of such delays. However, due to widespread media reports suggesting the aircraft nearly crashed, ran out fuel or landed at 5000 lbs of fuel remaining below final fuel reserve The Aviation Herald decided to cover this flight.

Metars Toronto:

CYYZ 012341Z 10019G26KT 4SM -RA BR OVC005 14/ RERA RMK SF8

CYYZ 012317Z 09015G28KT 4SM -RA BR OVC004 13/ RERA RMK SF8

CYYZ 012300Z 10022G27KT 2 1/2SM +RA BR OVC004 13/13 A2953 RMK SF8 SLP003

CYYZ 012200Z 10022G29KT 2 1/4SM +RA BR OVC005 13/13 A2956 RMK NS8 SLP013

CYYZ 012125Z 09018G32KT 5SM -RA OVC004 13/ RMK SF8

CYYZ 012100Z 10023G30KT 15SM OVC004 13/12 A2961 RERA RMK SF8 SLP028

CYYZ 012053Z 09018G30KT 15SM OVC004 13/ RERA RMK SF8

CYYZ 012022Z 10017G26KT 6SM +SHRA OVC005 13/ RMK SF8

CYYZ 012000Z 09017G25KT 12SM VCSH OVC007 13/12 A2964 RMK SF8 SLP040

CYYZ 011951Z 10015G26KT 15SM OVC006 13/ RMK SF8

Metars Ottawa:

CYOW 020100Z 07014G19KT 8SM -RA OVC058 12/10 A2982 RMK SC8

CYOW 020000Z 06011G17KT 5SM -RA BKN061 OVC095 12/10 A2986 RMK SC5AS3 SLP113

CYOW 012300Z 08007KT 10SM -RA OVC058 13/10 A2990 RMK SC8 SLP127

CYOW 012200Z 06008KT 15SM -RA SCT050 OVC095 13/10 A2992 RMK SC3AS5 SLP133

CYOW 012100Z 07011KT 15SM -RA FEW060 OVC090 13/09 A2993 RMK SC2AS6 SLP137

CYOW 012000Z 06009KT 12SM -RA SCT065 OVC080 13/10 A2996 RMK SC3AS5 SLP149

CYOW 011900Z 06009KT 15SM -RA SCT065 OVC095 14/08 A2998 RMK SC4AS4 SLP156

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the length of the duty day for the crew by the time they got to YYZ? It must have been around 20 hrs. What are the UAE rules?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A dangerous diversion....

Forgive me, but who's quote is that? Those that fly those types of flight know full well that any diversion will result in a landing at the alternate with close to legal minimum legal fuel.

As far as the crewing issue goes? Who knows. Maybe there was sufficient relief crew onboard to complete the itinerary.

Regardless, seems like a job well done by the Emirates' crew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If EK plans to use YOW or any other airport as an alternate going forward that's not capable of supporting the 380’s weight and consequently requires special ground procedures that tie up the facility; shouldn't TC & the air carriers consider the issue as a special item for 'contingency fuel flight planning’ purposes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If EK plans to use YOW or any other airport as an alternate going forward that's not capable of supporting the 380’s weight and consequently requires special ground procedures that tie up the facility; shouldn't TC & the air carriers consider the issue as a special item for 'contingency fuel flight planning’ purposes?

And since this government believes in user pay for airline passengers, shouldn't any costs be passed on to the airlines flying such aircraft. No Canadian carrier is likely to fly A380s - ever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this