Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Mesa ORD accident this morning

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

SkyW120

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2003
Posts
73
too bad Chuck Norris wasn't riding in the back...glad everyone was okay.

http://www.wsbt.com/news/local/36220324.html

A Middlebury woman whose United Airlines flight headed for South Bend landed without gear in Chicago was safe at home early Tuesday, but told SBT24/7 News the experience shook her up a bit.

Becky Bontreger and her husband, Kent, were returning from a weekend with friends in New Orleans when their connecting flight home to South Bend Regional Airport was sent back to Chicago's O'Hare Airport.
"We were getting ready to land in South Bend and the pilot said we'd be landing in ten minutes," Bontreger said by telephone. "Then, we circled South Bend three times and started back to Chicago."
United spokeswoman Megan McCarthy said United Express flight 7164, operated by Mesa Airlines, landed safely but "it did not come to rest on all of its wheels."
Dave Lachniet with South Bend Regional Airport confirmed early Tuesday that the plane was sent back because of a landing gear problem. McCarthy said the landing gear indicator light alerted pilots shortly after takeoff.
And while Bontreger and the other 27 passengers were not injured, she said she was seated in the front of the plane and knew something was wrong.
"There was another pilot in the row in front of us and they came and got him," she said. Shortly thereafter, the passengers were told the landing gear on the left side did not come down.
The aircraft's fuel was jettisoned over Lake Michigan and flight attendants — who Bontreger described as amazingly calm — prepared the passengers for an emergency landing.
"Everyone on the plane stayed very calm, there was never any outburst," she said. "People were praying."
Twenty to 30 fire engines and ambulances awaited them when they landed at O'Hare, with the plane tilting to the left and the wing scraping sparks down the tarmac.
"It was scary," Bontreger said, adding that she cried all the way home.
But she and her husband opted to board another plane for South Bend. She said some passengers weren't ready for that, so rental cars and other transportation were arranged by United.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 
Thats the second, left gear not coming down accident in 2 days. First off, good job to both crews. Second, can you say the media is going to be all over this now and Larry King will be talking about the CRJ and how its a dangerous plane.
 
Between this and those damned flaps...I keep having this bad feeling that this is going to be a really crappy winter for the CRJ2.
 
I've been hearing about a lot of gear disagrees lately on the -200. Looking forward to another AD / Service Bulletin with another pain in the arse procedure to memorize.
 
Jettisoning fuel is not possible in a CRJ. :confused:


sarcasm

Correct. This feature was disabled for cost savings. Fuel is a large operating cost of an airline.

In fact, the project APU sheriff nearly had a stroke when he found out that the crew found a way to jettison fuel.


/sarcasm
 
Thats the second, left gear not coming down accident in 2 days. First off, good job to both crews. Second, can you say the media is going to be all over this now and Larry King will be talking about the CRJ and how its a dangerous plane.

The CRJ-200 is the biggest POS in the skies. It should not be in airline service of any kind.
 
I get a real kick out of folks saying the CRJ is a piece of sh1t.

Obviously some may have not ever flown giant pieces of sh1t.
 
Hi!

I've heard from a lot of people that the CRJ-200 is better than the ERJ-145.

Also, I'd rather fly a CRJ-200 than a DC-9, as far as the airframe and avionics go.

cliff
GRB
 
Thank goodness Mesa pilots are well compensated for such international news worthy events.
 
Seriously...what is WRONG with you people? Second page? Left to me? Did we all miss our coffee this morning?


MESA SUCKS!

W
 
On what grounds? No passengers in the United States have ever been killed in one of these aircraft due to mechanical failure.

On the grounds that the thing is CONSTANTLY broken, MEL'd etc. I've been commuting for 2 years straight on Delta MD-88s, 737s, and 757s. There have been 5 times total in those two years where we were late because the aircraft was "In Maintenance." How many times in a typical 4 day is your CRJ200 "in maintenance"? For me, if you fly a whole 4 day without being late for mx it's a miracle. And that is not counting all the "Gremlin" things that happen and you don't write up.

Maybe Delta mx is better than here, but THAT much better? The RJ could come out of a D check and still have problems the next leg. Plus, mainline aircraft don't have the gremlin problems that we have.

Finally, lets not even get into the flaps, icing, air conditioning, or the fact that if you have an alternate you are not taking a full payload.

Compare the CRJ-200 to any current 121 jet aircraft and tell me which one is worse.
 
I would say that it is not that DAL mtc is better than ASA, Mesa et al. The fact is that the CRJ 200 and 700 are in essence business jets that were stretched and strengthened to become the jets they are today. There is nothing wrong with these jets. I have over 6K hrs in em. The problem is that they were not designed for 6-12 cycles a day for 20 years like a Boeing product was.
After five to seven years you start to see the effects of 6-12 cycles a day.
N820AS ASA's first crj was put on property in Aug 1997. That jet is eleven and a half years old. It is going to have some mtc problems. These fleets are aging and that will result in added mtc costs
 
I would say that it is not that DAL mtc is better than ASA, Mesa et al. The fact is that the CRJ 200 and 700 are in essence business jets that were stretched and strengthened to become the jets they are today. There is nothing wrong with these jets. I have over 6K hrs in em. The problem is that they were not designed for 6-12 cycles a day for 20 years like a Boeing product was.
After five to seven years you start to see the effects of 6-12 cycles a day.
N820AS ASA's first crj was put on property in Aug 1997. That jet is eleven and a half years old. It is going to have some mtc problems. These fleets are aging and that will result in added mtc costs

the -200 was the business jet redesign, but the -700 is very different than the 200. I would say it was a redesign that managed to keep the same type. The 700 is an airline were as the 200 is a stretched biz jet.
 
I would say that it is not that DAL mtc is better than ASA, Mesa et al. The fact is that the CRJ 200 and 700 are in essence business jets that were stretched and strengthened to become the jets they are today. There is nothing wrong with these jets. I have over 6K hrs in em. The problem is that they were not designed for 6-12 cycles a day for 20 years like a Boeing product was.
After five to seven years you start to see the effects of 6-12 cycles a day.
N820AS ASA's first crj was put on property in Aug 1997. That jet is eleven and a half years old. It is going to have some mtc problems. These fleets are aging and that will result in added mtc costs

funny having a regional jet that is not designed for high cycle usage
 
On the grounds that the thing is CONSTANTLY broken, MEL'd etc. I've been commuting for 2 years straight on Delta MD-88s, 737s, and 757s. There have been 5 times total in those two years where we were late because the aircraft was "In Maintenance." How many times in a typical 4 day is your CRJ200 "in maintenance"? For me, if you fly a whole 4 day without being late for mx it's a miracle. And that is not counting all the "Gremlin" things that happen and you don't write up.

Maybe Delta mx is better than here, but THAT much better? The RJ could come out of a D check and still have problems the next leg. Plus, mainline aircraft don't have the gremlin problems that we have.

Finally, lets not even get into the flaps, icing, air conditioning, or the fact that if you have an alternate you are not taking a full payload.

Compare the CRJ-200 to any current 121 jet aircraft and tell me which one is worse.

Well I wouldn't care to compare it to other 121 jet aircraft because, like you, I haven't had any experience with any other 121 jet aircraft. It would be naive to say I knew anything about them. However, you seem to know everything there is to know. Your must be a very impressive person indeed.

This aircraft has an impeccable safety record so your original quote seems way off base. Aircraft break. Some more than others. But to say it's unsafe is simply not supported by any of the facts and statistics.
 
I'm trying to remember the last time I flew that I had to cancel/delay a flight due to a mechanical .........

<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<still thinking
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<still thinking.........
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<still thinking.

Nope.....can't remember.

I'm being serious. I guess lucky too!
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom