The reason they requested 08R for landing is because 08L is currently being repaved. It'll take a few months. Most commercial jets have been using 04R for landing, but 08R (the "Reef" runway) is longer.
I am beginning to see the need for a camera in every wheel well and equipment bay, Certainly the technology is available. If I can have a backup camera in my Toyota, an airplane that weighs the better part of a million pounds can have a dozen.
Or alternatively....they could pay you to ride in the wheel well to verify gear position. You are the same guy who wanted cameras in all of the lavatories. That really hurt your credibility Hooplesand.
@@RLTtizME It can be quite serious if atc doesn’t get the details right and emergency responders on the ground waste time having to find out what they are dealing with...
It's an ER variant and 150,000 is almost completely full tanks. The max takeoff weight and max landing weight are 100,000 pounds apart. They probably weren't right at max takeoff, but if they were, the most they'd have to dump is 100,000 pounds or 2/3rds of it. $80,000 in fuel dumped at the most.
@@GigsVT Welcome back to Honolulu. As you are exiting the plane, there will be a donation box at each exit to cover the cost of the fuel we dumped. If each of you could chip in about $350 we can have this expense covered. Thank you again for traveling with United on our Honolulu to Honolulu route.
@3:00 this is why USA controllers and airmen are the best in the world, they can handle ambiguity and discretion and they can quickly convey information and ask the right questions and have the answer right away. no way in asia and most of europe would controllers and pilots give open ended discretion like this
This situation is amazing. There seem to be a number of mistakes on the part of controllers and their ability to get it right and also to relay important information along the way. First, as UA262 Heavy is dumping fuel the controller advises other aircraft that the dumping is taking place. He advises that a 777 is dumping fuel and is flying Northeast bound. In fact it was a 767 and at the time, if the video is correct in placement, they were flying Southwest bound before making the Northeast bound turn. ATC has previously asked UA 262 what runway they would like when returning to HNL and they said 8 R. They then asked for 8R again, yet when they were handed off the controler set them up for 4L. Then when handed off again after clearly previously saying the issue was a possible landing gear still deployed at altitude, the controller asks which door it was that was ajar when NOTHING had ever been said about a door being ajar. By the way, if we can have back up cameras in our cars, it seems to me to be a rather simple thing to install a camera that would give a view of the gear and their status.
Pastor, your wheelhouse is religion, not aviation. OMG, the controller stuttered and said 777 and not a 767 fuel dumping. Wow, that controller really compromised safety! These videos are recreations. They are not very accurate portrayals of exactly what, when and where. Therefore, the animation showing southwest versus northeast is inconsequential, just like the 777. Cameras wouldn't do any good here. "Oh it looks like it's down ... but is it safe?" The crew knew exactly the condition of their gear. And lastly, even in the video we are told that some of the communications were not heard ... so there very well could have been communication about a gear door which by the way would trigger a disagree light as stated earlier by the pilot (so I doubt the ATC controller just made that up).
@@JohnSmith-zi9or One more thing. I was wondering why you included this part of your response. "Cameras wouldn't do any good here. "Oh it looks like it's down ... but is it safe?" The crew knew exactly the condition of their gear." The issue was never whether the gear was down and safe as you put it. The issue was whether the gear was stilll hanging out at altitude. A camera would surely be able to solve that question. If a camera showed the gear up and doors closed they could assume it was an indicator issue, but if a camera showed it hanging out they would certainly never continue to fly from HNL to EWR with a gear haning out of the plane. They were actually unsure of whether the gear was in or out as stated by the pilot.
@@pastorjohn4337 " The issue was whether the gear was stilll hanging out at altitude." That's what the gear unsafe light is for. A camera can't tell you what's going on inside the wheel well. Boeing landing gear rest on the gear doors in flight; they are not held up hydraulically. So let's assume we install your camera and a crew looks and says, "Yep, gear doors are up, let's go fast." And then in high-speed cruise flight the gear door opens and out opens and extends a landing gear. Now they're halfway across the water route between Hawaii and California. Now they have to slow down and fly lower because of the drag. Do they now have enough gas to get to a suitable landing field? We don't know. Probably not because gear extended flight is not calculated for the possible divert scenarios in ETOPs airspace.
@user-uy2fi9rc9b I agree that the camera would never be able to tell you if the door was up and locked and would prevent a gear from coming down later in a flight. Yet. It seems to me that it could tell you if the doors appeared shut and the drag issue for the time being was minimal so that you could return to HNL with that information. Certainly a camera would be able to detect a gear that was half way or more hanging down. Bottom line is you have to go with what your instruments tell you about a possible open door or gear hanging down at altitude.
I'm curious...why do aviation people say one-zero-ten-thousand for 10,000? It would seem to mean 1,010,000. Or maybe “one-zero-ten” is to 10 as “niner” is to 9.
it's a compound of one zero thousand and ten thousand -> one-zero- / ten -thousand one-zero = ten ten thousand on it's own might be difficult to understand, that's why pilots like to say it that way. taking a more difficult example: 15 000 (might be understood as 16000, if radio is meh) -> 1 5 - fifteen thousand is clearer idk if my explanation makes sense
@@lyaneris It makes sense, but one-zero thousand and one-five thousand would seem to make even more sense, at least to me. But if it's a standard, then of course everyone's used to it, so that would make it clearer.
@@gshenaut but then one-one-thousand and one-three-thousand sound similar XD Tbh, I'd say it's to have two ways of verifying without really taking more time. (Some use on or the other, some use both, some just have a transition altitude under 10 000ft and have no use for either ^^)
As saxman said, it’s a reiteration. The “one zero” is ten, with thousand understood, but it is repeated with the full thousand stated to ensure there is no misunderstanding. So, “one zero (ten thousand)” is stated for safety reasons. t. retired USAF aircrew
It is just a reference point in the sky. Think of it as giving directions to a driver using landmarks such as "turn right at Walmart". There are 1000s of them on IFR charts each with a five letter name. IFR stands for instrument flight rules meaning a pilot doesn't have to be able to see the ground to navigate.
![[TH] RNT vs SPG - VCT Ascension Pacific - Day 1](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RUTkf8Detj8/mqdefault.jpg)
I love the Ground guy saying "welcome back".
The reason they requested 08R for landing is because 08L is currently being repaved. It'll take a few months. Most commercial jets have been using 04R for landing, but 08R (the "Reef" runway) is longer.
Correct. Was gonna say this.
Great video! Glad they made it back safely.
👍 Thank you for watching 🙂
Same exact thing happened yesterday with UAL 218, HNL to Chicago
Maggie is the safest bet in any emergency :)
I am beginning to see the need for a camera in every wheel well and equipment bay, Certainly the technology is available. If I can have a backup camera in my Toyota, an airplane that weighs the better part of a million pounds can have a dozen.
Too expensive for little benefit.
It makes sense, but it would have to be certified by the FAA, inspected regularly, and be on a pre-flight checklist.
Or alternatively....they could pay you to ride in the wheel well to verify gear position. You are the same guy who wanted cameras in all of the lavatories. That really hurt your credibility Hooplesand.
@@saxmanb777 it's like $1000
@@soccerguy2433 more like millions.
When is a door not a door? When it is ajar.
Gear door, perhaps.
Same thing happened to me. Except on a B777-300ER United
Was that too/from Guam?
It was a flight from HNL to JFK
Graphic and title says 767-400 but the ATC said 777. Fwiw.
Controller did a mistake
Not to worry. Does it matter? No. How are your eyes?
@@RLTtizME man you're a salty keyboard warrior
@@RLTtizME It can be quite serious if atc doesn’t get the details right and emergency responders on the ground waste time having to find out what they are dealing with...
Title says B764... they're both wrong.
120,000 pounds of fuel on board.... how much did they dump before landing? :(
Just enough to make landing weight performance numbers to land on runway 8R
@@SI-lg2vp I was just wondering how much money all that fuel was worth. (whatever they needed to dump to make the landing weight) :)
It's an ER variant and 150,000 is almost completely full tanks. The max takeoff weight and max landing weight are 100,000 pounds apart. They probably weren't right at max takeoff, but if they were, the most they'd have to dump is 100,000 pounds or 2/3rds of it. $80,000 in fuel dumped at the most.
And where?
@@GigsVT Welcome back to Honolulu. As you are exiting the plane, there will be a donation box at each exit to cover the cost of the fuel we dumped. If each of you could chip in about $350 we can have this expense covered. Thank you again for traveling with United on our Honolulu to Honolulu route.
@3:00 this is why USA controllers and airmen are the best in the world, they can handle ambiguity and discretion and they can quickly convey information and ask the right questions and have the answer right away. no way in asia and most of europe would controllers and pilots give open ended discretion like this
I’m not sure but I looked at a chart and I think the held north west of MAGGI not north east. Correct me if I’m wrong.
This situation is amazing. There seem to be a number of mistakes on the part of controllers and their ability to get it right and also to relay important information along the way. First, as UA262 Heavy is dumping fuel the controller advises other aircraft that the dumping is taking place. He advises that a 777 is dumping fuel and is flying Northeast bound. In fact it was a 767 and at the time, if the video is correct in placement, they were flying Southwest bound before making the Northeast bound turn. ATC has previously asked UA 262 what runway they would like when returning to HNL and they said 8 R. They then asked for 8R again, yet when they were handed off the controler set them up for 4L. Then when handed off again after clearly previously saying the issue was a possible landing gear still deployed at altitude, the controller asks which door it was that was ajar when NOTHING had ever been said about a door being ajar. By the way, if we can have back up cameras in our cars, it seems to me to be a rather simple thing to install a camera that would give a view of the gear and their status.
Pastor, your wheelhouse is religion, not aviation. OMG, the controller stuttered and said 777 and not a 767 fuel dumping. Wow, that controller really compromised safety! These videos are recreations. They are not very accurate portrayals of exactly what, when and where. Therefore, the animation showing southwest versus northeast is inconsequential, just like the 777. Cameras wouldn't do any good here. "Oh it looks like it's down ... but is it safe?" The crew knew exactly the condition of their gear. And lastly, even in the video we are told that some of the communications were not heard ... so there very well could have been communication about a gear door which by the way would trigger a disagree light as stated earlier by the pilot (so I doubt the ATC controller just made that up).
@@JohnSmith-zi9or One more thing. I was wondering why you included this part of your response. "Cameras wouldn't do any good here. "Oh it looks like it's down ... but is it safe?" The crew knew exactly the condition of their gear." The issue was never whether the gear was down and safe as you put it. The issue was whether the gear was stilll hanging out at altitude. A camera would surely be able to solve that question. If a camera showed the gear up and doors closed they could assume it was an indicator issue, but if a camera showed it hanging out they would certainly never continue to fly from HNL to EWR with a gear haning out of the plane. They were actually unsure of whether the gear was in or out as stated by the pilot.
@@pastorjohn4337 " The issue was whether the gear was stilll hanging out at altitude."
That's what the gear unsafe light is for. A camera can't tell you what's going on inside the wheel well.
Boeing landing gear rest on the gear doors in flight; they are not held up hydraulically. So let's assume we install your camera and a crew looks and says, "Yep, gear doors are up, let's go fast."
And then in high-speed cruise flight the gear door opens and out opens and extends a landing gear. Now they're halfway across the water route between Hawaii and California. Now they have to slow down and fly lower because of the drag. Do they now have enough gas to get to a suitable landing field? We don't know. Probably not because gear extended flight is not calculated for the possible divert scenarios in ETOPs airspace.
@user-uy2fi9rc9b I agree that the camera would never be able to tell you if the door was up and locked and would prevent a gear from coming down later in a flight. Yet. It seems to me that it could tell you if the doors appeared shut and the drag issue for the time being was minimal so that you could return to HNL with that information. Certainly a camera would be able to detect a gear that was half way or more hanging down. Bottom line is you have to go with what your instruments tell you about a possible open door or gear hanging down at altitude.
Wow really? All that fuel enough to go from Hawaii to new Jersey???
I'm curious...why do aviation people say one-zero-ten-thousand for 10,000? It would seem to mean 1,010,000. Or maybe “one-zero-ten” is to 10 as “niner” is to 9.
it's a compound of one zero thousand and ten thousand
-> one-zero- / ten -thousand
one-zero = ten
ten thousand on it's own might be difficult to understand, that's why pilots like to say it that way.
taking a more difficult example: 15 000 (might be understood as 16000, if radio is meh) -> 1 5 - fifteen thousand is clearer
idk if my explanation makes sense
@@lyaneris It makes sense, but one-zero thousand and one-five thousand would seem to make even more sense, at least to me. But if it's a standard, then of course everyone's used to it, so that would make it clearer.
Just a reiteration that they mean ten thousand and not one one thousand which often get confused.
@@gshenaut but then one-one-thousand and one-three-thousand sound similar XD
Tbh, I'd say it's to have two ways of verifying without really taking more time. (Some use on or the other, some use both, some just have a transition altitude under 10 000ft and have no use for either ^^)
As saxman said, it’s a reiteration. The “one zero” is ten, with thousand understood, but it is repeated with the full thousand stated to ensure there is no misunderstanding. So, “one zero (ten thousand)” is stated for safety reasons. t. retired USAF aircrew
United has had hell flying from/to PHNL
I’m starting to think it might be cursed for them. lol Almost every major incident they’ve had recently was on a flight to or from HNL.
@@Clipper1094 The Hawaii Triangle 🔺️
I wonder how many thousands of dollars of fuel they had to dump. Lol
Guys do you think this is an emergency aircraft? They didn't really make it clear in their radio calls...
Who pays to clean up all the fuel they dump?
No one. It evaporates on it's own.
What the hell is a B764
767-400
UCSATC
👍
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
What does MAGGI mean?
It is just a reference point in the sky. Think of it as giving directions to a driver using landmarks such as "turn right at Walmart". There are 1000s of them on IFR charts each with a five letter name. IFR stands for instrument flight rules meaning a pilot doesn't have to be able to see the ground to navigate.
@@loudidier3891 Good info Thank you
The three wise guys that visited Jesus as a baby
Not a big deal