British Airways 767 Diverted to Shannon?

Billyum

Just looking at flight radar 24, notice a BA 767 from Toronto to Heathrow landing at Shannon about five minutes ago? about 4 pm

galwayjohn89

Was tracking that for a while appeared to be dumping fuel. Not sure what the reason was though.

Skuxx

Spotted it flying over limerick in approach into Shannon! On my flight radar it said it was flying heatrow to sydney, surly was incorrect!

slanystu

Hey all,

It was a medical diversion. The aircraft declared before he went oceanic, and returned to shannon. Had to fly around for a while to burn fuel, landed safely in shannon.

Tefral

This might seem stupid, but why could it not just land with the fuel on board? Weight issues?

A320

Exactly,only a short time into the flight it would of been above its Max landing weight if coming from london

David086

A320 wrote: »

Exactly,only a short time into the flight it would of been above its Max landing weight if coming from london

So an aircraft can takeoff at max weight but not land at max weight? Is it because there's not enough stopping power to land?

Fully Established

David086 wrote: »

So an aircraft can takeoff at max weight but not land at max weight? Is it because there's not enough stopping power to land?

No its got to do with the loading on the landing gear on at touchdown.

Foggy43

David086
No. May not be the best explanation but one factor is the weight on the landing gear on impacting the runway and 2, the stress on the wings. Taking off the wings are lifting up even though full of fuel taking stress off the mounting bolts. On landing the wings are being forced down and also too much weight in them, fuel, adding too much stress. I think it is 26 tonnes of fuel in the wings which none off being yet used. The aircraft still would be using the Centre Tank fuel.

Gar-Bar

Was on Shannon FIR frequency at the time and heard this. It was a single medical incident onboard and crew requested medical assistance on touch down.

niall_b73

hi all, i just came across this post and i have to say i am most courious as to how you seem to be able to track these flights.

is it something that you have to purchase to be able to do it or can any noob like me get into it.

many thanks,
niall_b73

Su Campu

niall_b73 wrote: »

hi all, i just came across this post and i have to say i am most courious as to how you seem to be able to track these flights.

is it something that you have to purchase to be able to do it or can any noob like me get into it.

many thanks,
niall_b73

http://www.flightradar24.com/

Delta Kilo

By chance I happened to be on the apron at Shannon today and saw this going on. I was told at the time that it was a medical emergency, and indeed I saw the ambulance on standby. However the fire brigade were paying a lot of attention to the starboard engine and landing gear area of the A/C a good 40 mins after it had landed... Any reason for this? Something to do with jettisoning fuel?

Suits

Delta Kilo wrote: »

By chance I happened to be on the apron at Shannon today and saw this going on. I was told at the time that it was a medical emergency, and indeed I saw the ambulance on standby. However the fire brigade were paying a lot of attention to the starboard engine and landing gear area of the A/C a good 40 mins after it had landed... Any reason for this? Something to do with jettisoning fuel?

It may still have landed overweight, but by a margin that just requires an inspection. I'd say it was a lot heavier than the crew would have liked and the brakes and reversers may have been stretched a little in getting them stopped.

Turbo Porter

Suits wrote: »

It may still have landed overweight, but by a margin that just requires an inspection. I'd say it was a lot heavier than the crew would have liked and the brakes and reversers may have been stretched a little in getting them stopped.

All the above is correct.The crew stated to tower that they were slightly above their MLW..the runway was quiet damp and a lot of braking and reverse thrust was evident.On roll out to the end prior to back track a lot of smoke was reported by tower coming from undercarriage crew reported that all indications were ok and that it was just heavy vapour from hot breaks.

Rocky Bay

Su Campu wrote: »

http://www.flightradar24.com/

...is there any other site other than flightradar??? T.I.A.?

Billyum

A320 wrote: »

Exactly,only a short time into the flight it would of been above its Max landing weight if coming from london

If I remember correctly, it was actually bound for London, so its flight would have been almost complete! odd much..

galwayjohn89

Billyum wrote: »

If I remember correctly, it was actually bound for London, so its flight would have been almost complete! odd much..

AFAIR It was BA93 going Heathrow -> Toronto

smurfjed

So an aircraft can takeoff at max weight but not land at max weight?

Actually they can land at maximum takeoff weight, but the certified rate of descent is 6 feet per second rather than 10 feet per second. An overweight landing check might be required, as SNN isnt a BA destination, it would be unlikely for them to have engineers on hand to conduct the check, so if possible, it makes sense to reduce weight below the MLW.

This is found in

Fuel jettisoning system.
(a) A fuel jettisoning system must be installed on each airplane unless it is shown that the airplane meets the climb requirements of §§ 25.119 and 25.121(d) at maximum takeoff weight, less the actual or computed weight of fuel necessary for a 15-minute flight comprised of a takeoff, go-around, and landing at the airport of departure with the airplane configuration, speed, power, and thrust the same as that used in meeting the applicable takeoff, approach, and landing climb performance requirements of this part. The MD11 is the only aircraft that I know of where the Takeoff Weight is limited by its inability to comply with 25.119/121 following a return to land. (Takeoff limit code D, shown for some high airports at high temperatures)

(2) With a limit descent velocity of 10 fps at the design landing weight (the maximum weight for landing conditions at maximum descent velocity); and

(3) With a limit descent velocity of 6 fps at the design take-off weight (the maximum weight for landing conditions at a reduced descent velocity).

Apologies for bringing up an old thread, I just found it by accident.

smurfjed