What's new
By:

Flt 660 diverts DEN

S

star power

Advanced
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
129
Reaction score
1
WN flight 660 diverts to DEN on 31 DEC before WN start offical service to DEN on 2 JAN, The milk run from RDU-BNA-OAK was having a little problem on the RDU-BNA run, fuel light indication was intermittent, no light problem on the ground. Flt 660 departs BNA-OAK at 1101 hrs, 38 min in flight the intermittent fuel light indication re-appears, but this time it is no longer a intermittent light, its stays on steady, oops we should of put it in the a/c log instead of on those other forms that the F/A use, O-well, will make this a additional proving run to DEN with REV PAXs, they won't mind, will give then lunch and a delay arrival time to OAK. Flt 660 Departed DEN 1835 hrs, with a different a/c and the broke plane sit, The mechanics work on the LH HMU, have a nice ride and a fixing day.
 
Gee KC...told you to watch CNN earlier!!!!
Good thing they taxi at warp speed to get airborne and request directs everywhere...hit helps in all that diversion time...LOL!! You just never know where your going to end up. Think I'll watch FOX now to see if anything else happens...
 
Flufdriver said:
Gee KC...told you to watch CNN earlier!!!!
Good thing they taxi at warp speed to get airborne and request directs everywhere...hit helps in all that diversion time...LOL!! You just never know where your going to end up. Think I'll watch FOX now to see if anything else happens...
Click to expand...
Notice you called yourself "perfect" then too....there but for the grace of God....

Is diverting the act of a "cowboy" pilot? What would a perfect pilot have done? Curious minds want to know.

Also, here's something for you to try sometime...request a direct routing from ATC. You never know...they might just give you one. If you don't have the cajones to do it, don't dis the ones who do.
 
KCFlyer said:
Notice you called yourself "perfect" then too....there but for the grace of God....

Is diverting the act of a "cowboy" pilot? What would a perfect pilot have done? Curious minds want to know.

Also, here's something for you to try sometime...request a direct routing from ATC. You never know...they might just give you one. If you don't have the cajones to do it, don't dis the ones who do.
Click to expand...


Come on KC, he wouldn't want to do that! That would mean he would make up time or arrive on-time. One must remember these guys get paid for BLOCK TIME not by the TRIP like WN guys do. The longer the block time, the bigger the payoff!

I guess this is how they make up for the huge pay cuts they took...
 
NewHampshire Black Bears said:
star power ??????????????????

Are you suggesting that WN WANTED this to happen ??

C'mon man, play fair !!!!!!!

NH/BB's
Click to expand...
NO, its just another LUV heart for DEN. I just thought it was nice for WN to invite the PAXs for lunch, and that WN ground personnel where at their finest in DEN practicing for the 2 JAN, ops takeoff party, I bet they LUV the do drop in. The broke a/c ferry to PHX Flt 8505, 31 DEC. Those HMU's are very tempermental, specailly the HPSOV in the HMU.

I play fair, except when COOKIEE does not, then me and the guys will take the SNACK out.

Have a nice day, and be safe.
 
star power said:
NO, its just another LUV heart for DEN. I just thought it was nice for WN to invite the PAXs for lunch, and that WN ground personnel where at their finest in DEN practicing for the 2 JAN, ops takeoff party, I bet they LUV the do drop in. The broke a/c ferry to PHX Flt 8505, 31 DEC. Those HMU's are very tempermental, specailly the HPSOV in the HMU.

I play fair, except when COOKIEE does not, then me and the guys will take the SNACK out.

Have a nice day, and be safe.
Click to expand...

Yeah those switches are a pain but Honeywell has given us approval to replace those on the line vs. changing the whole HMU.

Can I ask you this thought? Why the hatred toward WN? Did they turn you down for an interview?
 
could that plane have made it to OAK with teh fuel light lit or is it an FAA/Airline policy to get it down quickly?
 
robbed,

As usual, I'll preface this with the statement that my answer is based on 737-200/300/400 flying. If the plane in question was a -700, my answer may not be relevent.

I'm assuming this was one of several possible "fuel" lights.

There's the fuel pump low pressure lites, one for each pump (two pumps per tank). Illumination of one of these means that the pump output pressure is low. Assuming that the light is accurate (there's really no way to tell if it's actually low pressure or a sensing/wiring problem), the amount of unusable fuel in the tank increases (how much depends on which pump in which tank). Possibly not enough usable fuel to reach the destination.

There's the fuel filter bypass lite (one per engine). This one means that fuel is bypassing the fuel filter for some reason (it actually measures the fuel pressure differential across the filter, I believe). Again, assuming the light is valid, this means something is clogging the fuel filter. Possible engine flameout due to insufficient fuel flow if whatever contamination is causing the problem causes further blockage.

There's the fuel valve closed lite, one per engine. This indicates the position of the fuel shutoff valve for each engine. If the valve actually closes, fuel flow to that engine is shut off and engine flameout results.

Last (off the top of my head) is the fuel crossfeed valve lite - one valve that allows/prevents fuel from one wing tank to be supplied to both engines. This is normally closed unless fuel is actually being crossfed - normally to balance the fuel load between wing tanks. That far into a flight, the fuel should be balanced between wing tanks (it should have been fueled that way), so the only need to use the crossfeed valve would be in the case of an engine failure (to keep the operating engine from using fuel from only one tank resulting in an imbalance) or fuel leak (to save/use as much of the fuel in that tank as possible before it all leaked out). However, if they had been crossfeeding to balance the tanks and the valve wouldn't close when they were done, that leaves turning off and on fuel pumps as the only way to maintain fuel balance (there's a good chance that one fuel pump will be "stronger" than the others thus feeding both engines from it's tank).

So, now that I've been long-winded, the short answer is "It depends". One thing for sure, there's not a lot of suitable places to land once you start west over the Rockies till you get to California. So whether required to land or not, probably not a bad decision.

Jim

ps - add: our (US) quick reference handbook doesn't require a landing for any of these - pilot's judgement.
 
KCFlyer said:
Also, here's something for you to try sometime...request a direct routing from ATC. You never know...they might just give you one. If you don't have the cajones to do it, don't dis the ones who do.
Click to expand...

KC,

The more and more I read about your lack of basic knowledge just hammers home my image of you. Direct may be the shortest distance but not always the shortest time or fuel burn. You must factor in the prevailing winds before you consider asking for direct. Most of the real airlines have flight planning software that takes into account these factors. Fuel is a priority and if you fly less time then you might just also burn less fuel. Therefore if you are flying from IAD to LAX you might see yourself routed over MI, WI and then back to the southwest over the rockies to avoid strong winds (we are talking 100-150 mph winds in some areas versus 30-50 by rerouting). This is just one example. To fly you need to think in the tres dimensio'n. Not easy for a guy from KC but think about it sometime.

The old saying is that "direct" is pilot crack. They can't say no when offered it by ATC. At the real airlines we are disciplined to look at our FPF and if neccessary to coordinate with our dispatcher to see if a more direct routing saves time and fuel. So the guy with the real "canjones" is the one that can say "NO" to something that would adversely affect the flight. I suppose you don't want me to elaborate on the evidence of not saying "NO" at your favorite carrier?
 
Just don't, KC. It's not worth it, and we know it's only about flaming.

Ignoring for heart health in '06 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top