Just heard that there is an Air Malta flight currently circling Glasgow, burning off fuel planning a precautionary landing due to hydraulic problems.
The news is of course toting this as an emergency. Reports tell of the emergency equipment having been scrambled and now holding short of the runway
By: Bmused55 - 3rd September 2004 at 10:44
So are we saying they physically can’t dump or they don’t actually need to ?
Surely if they can dump, then why not in this case fly out over the Atlantic, dump the required load and get the thing back on the ground, saving a plane load of anxious passengers a 3 hour ordeal in the air ?
They do not have a fuel dump facility.
The aircraft noted can land with the load they take off with. Therefore there is no need for a fuel dump system. I beleive this also helps save weight.
In this case, I think they circled because they knew they had a burst tire and did not want burdon the remaining tires with the full load they had
By: Ren Frew - 3rd September 2004 at 10:40
The 737, 757 and 767-200 do not need to dump fuel as they are certified to land with their max take off weight aboard.
Someone correct me if I am wrong.
So are we saying they physically can’t dump or they don’t actually need to ?
Surely if they can dump, then why not in this case fly out over the Atlantic, dump the required load and get the thing back on the ground, saving a plane load of anxious passengers a 3 hour ordeal in the air ?
By: Bmused55 - 3rd September 2004 at 10:35
The 737, 757 and 767-200 do not need to dump fuel as they are certified to land with their max take off weight aboard.
Someone correct me if I am wrong.
By: Moondance - 3rd September 2004 at 10:29
How come there was no facility to dump fuel? I thought all airlines had that facility.
No – 737,757, 762 cannot dump fuel, 763 can, but then only fuel from the centre tank.
By: Bmused55 - 3rd September 2004 at 09:39
I was fairly certain the 737 was rated to land more or less at MTOW capacity.
Most likely they didn’t want to mess with the gear and let the weight come down a but first
By: dodrums - 3rd September 2004 at 09:17
How come there was no facility to dump fuel? I thought all airlines had that facility.
wondered that myself
By: mongu - 2nd September 2004 at 23:24
How come there was no facility to dump fuel? I thought all airlines had that facility.
By: Bmused55 - 2nd September 2004 at 14:23
I preferd KM when they had 720s and 732s.
Yeah, REAL planes. LOL
By: danairboy - 2nd September 2004 at 14:21
I preferd KM when they had 720s and 732s.
By: MANAIRPORTMAD - 2nd September 2004 at 14:19
Yeah, we used to get loads of B737s of air malta at MAN, now most of them are A32Os with the odd A319!
By: Mark L - 2nd September 2004 at 13:41
6 A320s, 1 A319, and 6 733s although they are recieving new Airbuses quite regularly.
By: Bmused55 - 2nd September 2004 at 13:17
Replacment plane was an A320 however…
Stands to reason.
don;t they have more A320’s that 737’s?
By: Ren Frew - 2nd September 2004 at 13:08
Replacment plane was an A320 however…
By: Bmused55 - 2nd September 2004 at 13:03
I was just curious, didn’t want to start a fight…
didn’t way you were 😉
By: Ren Frew - 2nd September 2004 at 12:38
Anyone know the type? A320 or B737?
Boeing 733 (9H-ADH), 9H-ABR below pictured at GLA last week. The passengers continued on their journey to Malta at 11am this morning. I don’t know if the original aircraft is still at GLA? Possibly been towed round to BAMG for repair and checks.
By: Bmused55 - 2nd September 2004 at 12:34
Anyone know the type? A320 or B737?
does it matter?
By: steve rowell - 2nd September 2004 at 11:22
Media still toting this as a life or death emergency though GRRR
As per usual
By: Bmused55 - 2nd September 2004 at 11:15
Everything went by the book. By chance I was tuned to Glasgow Radar when the Air Malta flight called in on possible partial loss of hydraulic power just after t/o and called for a return once weight was down, report passed from tower that ‘white mist’ seen trailing from the aircraft on departure. A couple of minutes later a runway inspection found tyre debris.
Radar offered a route to dump fuel, but aircraft said there was no facility for dumping fuel, and would have to burn it off. The incident was then raised to a pan. Helicopters from PIK and Strathclyde Police arrived at GLA. Aircraft given a holding pattern to the west, and at 20:45bst a low pass for inspection reported main left inner burst; returned to hold.
Landed at 22:30 after a 12 mile approach on ILS, stopped on runway and passengers disembarked via steps. Everything by the book with minimum fuss. Well done pilots and ATC.
Media still toting this as a life or death emergency though GRRR
By: dodrums - 2nd September 2004 at 11:13
Everything went by the book. By chance I was tuned to Glasgow Radar when the Air Malta flight called in on possible partial loss of hydraulic power just after t/o and called for a return once weight was down, report passed from tower that ‘white mist’ seen trailing from the aircraft on departure. A couple of minutes later a runway inspection found tyre debris.
Radar offered a route to dump fuel, but aircraft said there was no facility for dumping fuel, and would have to burn it off. The incident was then raised to a pan. Helicopters from PIK and Strathclyde Police arrived at GLA. Aircraft given a holding pattern to the west, and at 20:45bst a low pass for inspection reported main left inner burst; returned to hold.
Landed at 22:30 after a 12 mile approach on ILS, stopped on runway and passengers disembarked via steps. Everything by the book with minimum fuss. Well done pilots and ATC.
By: Ren Frew - 2nd September 2004 at 02:28
Diversions to PIK were put in place as part of the “emergency plan”. I gather it all blew over with limited fuss.
Sign In
September 1, 2004 at 10:32 pm