calling on Aviation experts
Discussion
my cousin who is a head stewardess for a main uk airline told me a funny story the other day and i still cant quite fathom it out
they were on something like a 6 hour flight and were about 4 or 5 hours into it with an hour or so to go. she got called to the cockpit and the pilot said that they had to turn round and go back to London to get a part for the aircraft. They said that if they stopped at their destination then the part would cost 4 times as much in that particular country and because of that they would be returning home. She was told to tell the passengers a slightly different story which she did and basically they did turn round, get the part installed back in London and then took off again and eventually got all on board to their destination but almost a day late.
Now what i'm trying to understand is: they preferred to turn back and fly another 5 hours instead of the final 1 hour so clearly this 'part' was not a threat to the safe flight of the aircraft. But also, clearly it was important in some way or has to be checked and 100% correct before each flight otherwise they could have continued to land at the destination, fly back home to London, and then fix it (the flying hours invonlved wouldn't have been much different to the solution they chose). Seems like a strange conundrum to me and doesn't quite add up.
Can anyone shed any light on this ? Heard of anything similar before ? Whats more... what is this part, im really curious ? A dump vale ? A set of wishbone bushes ?
they were on something like a 6 hour flight and were about 4 or 5 hours into it with an hour or so to go. she got called to the cockpit and the pilot said that they had to turn round and go back to London to get a part for the aircraft. They said that if they stopped at their destination then the part would cost 4 times as much in that particular country and because of that they would be returning home. She was told to tell the passengers a slightly different story which she did and basically they did turn round, get the part installed back in London and then took off again and eventually got all on board to their destination but almost a day late.
Now what i'm trying to understand is: they preferred to turn back and fly another 5 hours instead of the final 1 hour so clearly this 'part' was not a threat to the safe flight of the aircraft. But also, clearly it was important in some way or has to be checked and 100% correct before each flight otherwise they could have continued to land at the destination, fly back home to London, and then fix it (the flying hours invonlved wouldn't have been much different to the solution they chose). Seems like a strange conundrum to me and doesn't quite add up.
Can anyone shed any light on this ? Heard of anything similar before ? Whats more... what is this part, im really curious ? A dump vale ? A set of wishbone bushes ?
If the airport they were landing at had no Licensed Engineer to sign of the fitting off the required part, they would have needed to fly an engineer to the aircraft to fit it. Potentially losing the revenue for the following day's flights until the part was fitted probably was a less desirable option. This happens quite often, not the turning back but usually landing at a main base to have the component fitted and certified.
Edited by Richie200 on Monday 10th November 17:30
FourWheelDrift said:
The "part" was the captain's wife's birthday present which he'd left in his locker. So they turned around, flew back and picked it up and blamed the detour on something else.
sounds plausible.the part must have been identified as necessary but not life threatening before take off as they would have had to land and get the part at the destination airport if it was critical.
Also if they had continued, landed, disembarked the passengers, boarded the new passengers , taken off and returned to the origin airport then (as long as they were going back to whence they came) then the plane would only have been in the air for an extra hour! so i cant see that this is either true or that it was really a part for the plane.
hman said:
FourWheelDrift said:
The "part" was the captain's wife's birthday present which he'd left in his locker. So they turned around, flew back and picked it up and blamed the detour on something else.
sounds plausible.the part must have been identified as necessary but not life threatening before take off as they would have had to land and get the part at the destination airport if it was critical.
Also if they had continued, landed, disembarked the passengers, boarded the new passengers , taken off and returned to the origin airport then (as long as they were going back to whence they came) then the plane would only have been in the air for an extra hour! so i cant see that this is either true or that it was really a part for the plane.
Richie has probably nailed it.
If a problem happens in flight, you'll usually have a word with the engineers and decide on a course of action. Sometimes turning around and going all the way back is the most sensible idea, but on a flight of that duration they must have have a shed load of fuel on board!
If a problem happens in flight, you'll usually have a word with the engineers and decide on a course of action. Sometimes turning around and going all the way back is the most sensible idea, but on a flight of that duration they must have have a shed load of fuel on board!
If they were 5 hours into a 6 hour flight it is extremely unlikely they would be carrying enough fuel to return to their start point, 4 hours probably depending on winds etc, if they are they carry way more than we do.
Sure there are "parts" or faults that you cannot take off again without, but it seems unlikely that they could make an in-flight diagnosis accurate enough to know exactly what "part" was wrong and therefore whether it was available, so many in-flight errors clear themselves or are indication faults.
The captain can sign off any work on an aircraft but generally LMEs are available at every scheduled stop, a diversion is different however but it sounds like the option here was go on or go back, so there would most likely be licensed coverage at their scheduled stop.
Sure there are "parts" or faults that you cannot take off again without, but it seems unlikely that they could make an in-flight diagnosis accurate enough to know exactly what "part" was wrong and therefore whether it was available, so many in-flight errors clear themselves or are indication faults.
The captain can sign off any work on an aircraft but generally LMEs are available at every scheduled stop, a diversion is different however but it sounds like the option here was go on or go back, so there would most likely be licensed coverage at their scheduled stop.
willmcc said:
If they were 5 hours into a 6 hour flight it is extremely unlikely they would be carrying enough fuel to return to their start point, 4 hours probably depending on winds etc, if they are they carry way more than we do.
Sure there are "parts" or faults that you cannot take off again without, but it seems unlikely that they could make an in-flight diagnosis accurate enough to know exactly what "part" was wrong and therefore whether it was available, so many in-flight errors clear themselves or are indication faults.
The captain can sign off any work on an aircraft but generally LMEs are available at every scheduled stop, a diversion is different however but it sounds like the option here was go on or go back, so there would most likely be licensed coverage at their scheduled stop.
Utter bSure there are "parts" or faults that you cannot take off again without, but it seems unlikely that they could make an in-flight diagnosis accurate enough to know exactly what "part" was wrong and therefore whether it was available, so many in-flight errors clear themselves or are indication faults.
The captain can sign off any work on an aircraft but generally LMEs are available at every scheduled stop, a diversion is different however but it sounds like the option here was go on or go back, so there would most likely be licensed coverage at their scheduled stop.
ks my friend, a pilot cannot sign off a single entry placed in the TLB. It needs to be a Certified Engineer with type approval and a 145 approval for the organisation issued by the QA dept. Also many operators have no maintenance facilities at their out stationsb4rk3r said:
I doubt they would have had much fuel left. A 6 hour flight, 4 hours into it then 4 hours back? So that's 2 hours extra fuel, that would be well into the reserves, if not over. Not sure how much extra they take on commercial jets but i doubt it would be two hours.
Sometimes 2 legs worth of fuel are carried as the first sector, where they are landing, may charge much more for fuel.
The part could have been one of many things, for example one which could not be repaired/fitted or would be uneconomical to repair/fit at the destination; something that would preculde a departure from the destination when unservicable; or something on the Minimum Equip List (MEL) for the given aircraft or carrier. In essence it could be anything from avionics equipment to an engine line replacable unit (LRU) or even a toilet door.
JuniorD said:
The part could have been one of many things, for example one which could not be repaired/fitted or would be uneconomical to repair/fit at the destination; something that would preculde a departure from the destination when unservicable; or something on the Minimum Equip List (MEL) for the given aircraft or carrier. In essence it could be anything from avionics equipment to an engine line replacable unit (LRU) or even a toilet door.
wahetevr it was it was going to be 4 tiems as expensive in the middle eastb4rk3r said:
I doubt they would have had much fuel left. A 6 hour flight, 4 hours into it then 4 hours back? So that's 2 hours extra fuel, that would be well into the reserves, if not over. Not sure how much extra they take on commercial jets but i doubt it would be two hours.
Bingo.This story (as told) is complete nonsense. There simply wouldn't be enough fuel to return to the departure airport.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff