Bos to STT AA flight makes emergency landing

Travel discussion for St. John
Post Reply
FinsUp
Posts: 487
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 2:21 pm
Location: Maine

Bos to STT AA flight makes emergency landing

Post by FinsUp »

Sounds like alls well that ends well..always pretty scary though.... this is the flight we take.. :shock:

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP1707bc9 ... f014a.html
User avatar
ccasebolt
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:56 pm
Location: Boxborough, MA

Post by ccasebolt »

Yikes! Our favorite flight as well - thankfully there were no injuries and everyone made it to STT eventually!
Image
jimg20
Posts: 1840
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 11:43 am
Location: Fayetteville, AR

Post by jimg20 »

That kind of thing can happen on any flight. :shock: That is why they make us listen to that safety briefing before every flight. The reason they were able to manage that incident so well is the training and equipment they have in place. :)

JIM
Man it's like some dream we live down here....

Image
User avatar
augie
Posts: 2376
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:26 am
Location: Where the weather suits my clothes

Post by augie »

There were a lot of unhappy people in the terminal at STT yesterday because this caused the return leg, from STT to Boston to be delayed - as of three hours or so by the time we boarded our flight to MIA.

Just an unfortunate luck of the draw you get with traveling sometimes...
Come see us!
jmq
Posts: 2373
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:32 am
Location: NJ

Post by jmq »

Its been a few years since we've taken it, but the equipment AA runs on that JFK - STT morning NS flight always seemed older than dirt and in fact we have sat on the tarmac while "repairs" were made.

You know the kind of plane I am talking about - looks kinda worn inside, has the big old video monitors, and kind of creaks and groans a lot during take off and landing - the kind of aircraft that makes you count and memorize the number of rows to the exits lol.
When we come to place where the sea and the sky collide
Throw me over the edge and let my spirit glide
sandollar
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:32 pm
Location: MA

AA flight 883

Post by sandollar »

Ditto! That's the flight we usually take also. I guess we'll have to see what the inspection results are and hope general inspections are increased, if needed. Glad the passengers all are okay and continued on to STT. Sorry for the delay on the STT -Boston return but understandable.
jimg20
Posts: 1840
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 11:43 am
Location: Fayetteville, AR

Post by jimg20 »

jmq wrote:Its been a few years since we've taken it, but the equipment AA runs on that JFK - STT morning NS flight always seemed older than dirt and in fact we have sat on the tarmac while "repairs" were made.

You know the kind of plane I am talking about - looks kinda worn inside, has the big old video monitors, and kind of creaks and groans a lot during take off and landing - the kind of aircraft that makes you count and memorize the number of rows to the exits lol.
I think Delta takes the planes that AA no longer thinks meet that criteria and runs them to STT for several more years.


JIM
Man it's like some dream we live down here....

Image
surfnh
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 8:43 pm
Location: Hollis, NH

Post by surfnh »

It was a 757, there are a lot of old ones still flying, they definitely moan and groan alot but I don't recall too many accidents with them?
Image
jmq
Posts: 2373
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:32 am
Location: NJ

Post by jmq »

I know this Boston - STT flight was AA and different equipment, but just a few comments about the 737s that Southwest flys.

I saw quotes from industry people about how SW "really pounds their eguipment" referring to how they are famous for their extremely lean logistics i.e. running the min amount of planes the max amount of time and very quick (industry leading) turn around time so that their planes spend very little time sitting idle. This makes their planes rack up "cycles" (# of takeoffs and landings) very quickly.

It must be a challenge for the preventive maintainence (PM) to keep up. But it also makes you wonder if THAT level of high cycle logistics and the wear and tear associated with that (frequency of expansion and contraction of the fuselage etc.) were considered when the 737 was designed and PM schedule was drawn up.

I mean you and I putting X miles on a car is different than a police car or NYC cab running 24/7 putting X miles on a car, even if the manufacturers PM is followed to a T. I think cars sold to police and cab fleets have heavier duty components to accomodate the heavier use patterns and I suppose you have to assume that the short range 737s that SW uses were built for this.

Indulgent/rambling thoughts over now...
When we come to place where the sea and the sky collide
Throw me over the edge and let my spirit glide
Post Reply