AA Aborts Takeoff - DFW

WingNaPrayer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,742
0
EYW
[BR]
[DIV align=left][FONT size=+1]American Air Plane Aborts Takeoff In Texas [/FONT][/DIV][BR]DALLAS (AP)--An American Airlines plane narrowly averted slamming into two construction trucks at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport as the plane prepared for takeoff.
[P]American Airlines Flight 2421 was a third of the way down the runway Thursday when the pilot noticed the trucks driving across the runway to a nearby construction site, Dallas television station WFAA reported.
[P]The pilot immediately aborted the takeoff, stopping just 4,000 feet shy of the trucks.
[P]They slammed on their brakes suddenly -naturally alarming all the passengers, passenger Tom Windram said.
[P]The Federal Aviation Administration told the television station the air traffic controllers didn''t notice the trucks because they were dealing with a plane taking off after flight 2421.
[P]They were making sure there was enough space between takeoffs and didn''t notice the trucks, FAA spokesman Paul Erway said. They were working on wake vortex spacing at the time and the vehicles managed to get on the runway without them seeing it.
[P]Flight 2421, with 146 passengers and nine crew members, later took off and landed without incident in Los Angeles.
[P]American Airlines spokeswoman Tara Baten told The Associated Press said the airline had no comment.
[P]DFW hasn''t had an incursion for almost 18 months, but national aviation officials did single out the airport last year for being the site of the two worst close calls between planes. Those close calls were among five that occurred nationwide in 2001. [/P]
 
My thoughts exactly.

Considering this was a 777, you can bet it was probably running down one of the 11388 ft. or 13400 ft. runways. This means it would have been 3796 to 4466 ft into its takeoff run. Assuming it had a braking distance of 0 ft. (instantaneous stop), that would have put the trucks at the 7796 to 8466 ft. mark. Of course, you can't stop a 777 that fast :). For a crude approximation, say they were at 1/2 takeoff speed by that point and that's 1/2 landing speed. I'd ballpark guess that would put braking distance at ~1500-2000 ft or so (considering he slammed on the brakes, but also that the plane was at max weight). That means the trucks would have been somewhere around 9200-10500 feet down the runway. Considering the FAA requirement for the 777 would be around 10500 ft max with a full load (which this plane wasn't at), I think its safe to say that it could have made it off the ground easily in time (lets face it, the FAA doesn't put its requirements in with no safety margin).

Yawn.
 
While an incursion is no small matter, this article (at least the lead) is a bit sensationalistic.[BR][BR]In one paragraph, it says the plane narrowly averted slamming into two construction trucks. Later, it's revealed that the plane stopped 4,000 feet short of the trucks.[BR][BR]A mile is 5,280 feet, so this flight was roughly 3/4 or a mile from the trucks. This would be considered a small distance [STRONG]if that figure represents the point where the rejected takeoff began. [/STRONG]However, this is the point where the plane came to a full stop. This implies the crew became aware of the incursion quickly and took proper and prompt action. This is not the same as narrowly averting an accident. [BR][BR]Must be a slow news day in DFW.[BR]
 
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 11/22/2002 3:50:04 PM lownslow wrote:
[P]Considering the FAA requirement for the 777 would be around 10500 ft max with a full load (which this plane wasn't at), I think its safe to say that it could have made it off the ground easily in time (lets face it, the FAA doesn't put its requirements in with no safety margin).[BR][BR]----------------[BR][BR]You're absolutely right, there is a lot of padding for safety...this is a good thing! Even so, the crew did the right thing. Why take off with vehicles on the runway when they obviously had a lot of room to stop the aircraft.[BR][BR]I'd really like to know how close to V[sub]1[/sub] they were when the decision to abort was made. I'm guesstimating somewhere between 50-60% of the calculated decision speed, which may get the adrenaline up a bit, but is hardly a newsworthy item.[BR][BR][/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]
 
When they saw the trucks, they should have just blown the horn.
9.gif']
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/22/2002 7:16:37 PM Diversion wrote:

Even so, the crew did the right thing. Why take off with vehicles on the runway when they obviously had a lot of room to stop the aircraft.
[/blockquote]

Absolutely... it was definitely the right decision to stop when there was clearly plenty of room to do so. I wasn't questioning their decision - I was questioning how ridiculous the media was sounding when it was pretty clear that this wasn't even that close a call.
 
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 11/23/2002 1:31:51 AM lownslow wrote:
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 11/22/2002 7:16:37 PM Diversion wrote: [BR][BR]Even so, the crew did the right thing. Why take off with vehicles on the runway when they obviously had a lot of room to stop the aircraft.[BR][/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]Absolutely... it was definitely the right decision to stop when there was clearly plenty of room to do so. I wasn't questioning their decision - I was questioning how ridiculous the media was sounding when it was pretty clear that this wasn't even that close a call.
[P][/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]Understood, we're basically reiterating each others' points.[BR]
 

Latest posts

Back
Top