These people are stupid, look at 1:00 you can see the fuel dump nozzle. It wasn't a LEAK it was a fuel DUMP. Get your facts straight, this is why I cannot watch the news about anything aviation related because they don't know what the heck they're talking about.
@Kpj7466 The fuel does NOT come out of the wing tip, it's farther inward towards the outboard aileron. Look at the video "KLM flight kl888 fuel dump." You'll notice that the nozzle is not below the wingtip as you just stated. And again if you look at 1:00 in this video you will notice the fuel dump nozzle of this United Flight to be in the same exact location, in this video (to give a better idea where to look) look above the last 'N' of the 'CNN' logo on the bottom left of the screen.
Well, here's a few things: That's a fuel dump valve. During emergency, the pilot or copilot will open fuel dumps on both wing tips to dump fuel. My guess is there was a faulty valve or something similar. Since fuel system components are monitored, this would have put a warning up, or at least, the pilot/copilot would have noticed excessive fuel usage. Why didn't they just turn right around and land? The aircraft was overweight, so they burned fuel and landed later in San Fran.
If this was indeed a fuel leak, would it not have made more sense to land the plane in Vancouver or Seattle? I fail to see why the plane made a 45 degree left turn and headed for San Francisco, instead of making a much smaller angle turn towards Vancouver or Seattle. (BOTH major airports)
"We were independently able to verify it was a United Airlines flight". Well done CNN, the worlds leading News Corp, and you can successfully recognise the United white and blue stripes on the winglet. Really needed you for that one.....
Pilots were aware because they have fuel gauges in the cockpit. They would have known there was a leak even without being able to physically lay eyes on the streaming fuel.
CNN know perfectly well that the pilot is full of shit. Now talk to FOX news and they would be like... "of course the pilot could see it" "let us get our expert in here"=Z
@TRYER25 They didn't need to see the leak, cockpit indications would alert them to the situation. You think they also know the engines are running by looking at them? Maybe they have to look at the wings to know the de-icing of the leading edges is working? Actually, I think someone also has to get out on the wing while the plane is in flight and dip the fuel tanks to find out if they still have enough fuel...
Fail. He didn't want to tell CNN who the airline was, and yet he filmed the wing and gave it to them. It's like a giveaway. I didn't even read the title and I knew it before they said it.
Does anybody remember the Air Transat incident. There was a leak and the Captain told the FO to redo a fuel calculation. Eventually both engines shut down.
CNN showing the wrong airport in tokyo on google earth. That's haneda airport. where that flight was headed was narita int'l, which is a bit north of haneda and pretty far from downtown tokyo
And from the cockpit of a 747, you cannot see the wingtips. The only way to know this is losing fuel is to check fuel remaining vs your flight plan-- like I have described below.
I guarantee the pilots either noticed they were over burn, or would have very soon after.
@0m1nous Your right they cannot, but they have a gauge displaying fuel quantity. Most likely they didn't even watch this mans video. The flight attendant told the PIC of the situation, him and the FO looked at the left tank quantity and noticed it was much lower than the right and decreasing at a much higher rate. What you are talking about is located on the FMC which would not be an immediate look.
FAR Part 91.3 "The Captain,the Pilot In Command, has the final authority and responsibility for the operation and satety of the flight" It doesn't say anything about some news hound playing armchair quarterback. for higher ratings for CNN. Stick with REPORTING THE NEWS not embellishing it, your ignorance within the topic is revealed.
Despite his experience, I cannot understand how someone can calculate fuel loss visually... In any case, I simply cant believe the crew wasnt aware of a large fuel leak, assuming it was actually leaking and not being dumped. The purge is there as well. Nice of the media to spin a harrowing tale of distress from a non-incident
@KimmurielBaenre On a flight, pilots have a plan with points all along the route-- at each point, especially on a long haul such as this, the pilot sees how much fuel he is supposed to have remaining vs how much is actually on the plane. By doing this, you can see how much over the normal burn you are. Everything is measured in pounds, so if I cross a fix and my plan says I should have 100,000 lbs of fuel, and I only have 90,000 lbs, I know I am considerably OVER burn.
Of course the pilots were aware of the situation, cause one of the main concerns that pilots have is fuel management... But this looks awfully similar to a normal dumping procedure...
@PInk77W1 I never said it was normal I only said the pilots were for sure aware of the situation unless they had a technical failure of the concerned instruments...
these jets have sensors, indicators, systems and warnings for every little thing...if you take a serious enough shit in the lavatory alarms start blazing...how was this not caught?
@jfsa380 United as a large maintenance base at SFO; I think read somewhere (wikipedia?) that SFO is their ONLY maintenance hub. I'm just speculating, but maybe the pilot figured it would be best to fly to an airport where he knew United would be able to fix the problem--i.e. SFO. If they landed in Seattle, United would probably have to ship the plane to SFO anyway in order to repair it.
But I obviously wasn't in the cockpit as these events transpired, I'm just guessing...
Wingtip has an overfill, wich in this case looks like it is leaking out because It was filled up to the edge probably. nice vid! thanx for posting. This also happens on the ground sometimes!! not much but i have seen it happen.! But again, im guessing!! not sure what the cause was, but as a refueling officer at schiphol, i have seen it leaking from the overfill when it gets filled up to much!! (bad gauges on refueling truck or on the wing fuelinlets)
make a left turn and land all the way in san fran?? hahah the news are the worst when it comes to airlines and airplanes...and just about everything else.
people are idiots. this is a wingtip leak, the wingtip holds such a MINIMAL amount of fuel. what is the big deal? center 1 and 2 are the ones that matter the most if there is a leakage
Thick Mother F***ers, the plane is dumping fuel. They allways do this to make sure the landing weight of the aircraft is bellow the recommended landing weight
@dskxalive oh yeah, so the pilot was dumping fuel. Dude, he was supposed to reach TOKYO, why should he dump fuel like 2 hours after the takeoff from Chicago?
@dskxalive If it was dumping, they wouldn't have directed their flight from Tokyo to KSFO. Besides what kind of retarded pilot would dump 5,400 miles 11 hours from their landing destination?
but why people still going to united airlines flight services whereas it is been notorious to hijacking by terrorist? because people knew that 911 hijacking is not real and fake!!
The fuel is coming out of the fuel dump pipe (you can see it most clearly in the still black & white photo on the far right edge of the photo), but the pilots were not aware of it so the fuel dump valve had malfunctioned or failed on that side allowing the fuel to dump out the pipe designed for it- when the pilots didn't want it to and had no idea. I'd call that a leak!
@WarNerd16 These aircraft have sophisticated warning systems, including fuel imbalance warnings (imbalance between left and right tanks). I'm sure he was WELL aware of the situation, but extra eyes seeing the same thing that the gauges are saying is always a good thing. What would the pilots do if they didn't have passengers to tell them what's wrong???? Come on...
@veldman37 im aware of almost everything involving aircraft. I know. Im just trying to point out that companies love to avert the blame with some b.s. excuse. If they knew about the leak/sumping then why didnt the airline just say that they were dumping fuel? exactly
@MrEliben If you hear the whole story, you would realize that it was a leak and pilots were not aware of the situation and the flight had to diverted.
@MrEliben If it was dumping, they wouldn't have directed their flight from Tokyo to KSFO. Besides what kind of retarded pilot would dump 5,400 miles 11 hours from their landing destination?
@MrEliben it was leaking, dumping true, takes place in that location, however its not past the aileron on the left, nor does it appear from a slit designed to carry fuel away from the bottom of the wing surface.
That is the wrong airport... No plane from the US (except Hawaii, and guam) lands in the Tokyo airport. They land at the "New Tokyo Airport" in Narita.
You said: "@archer49d Uh, I don't even see you having a job, It is my second year so I am getting more pay than my first year
Uh, I don't think so, I have been flying nearly every day, and on my free time, well, I kickback at home, or wherever I am staying, realize that you don't have an ATP License, so I am sure I have more hours than you. "
@SkyWestCRJPilot ATP and FE, currently in a 727, several thousand hours commercially, lost track of the exact number passing 3000. Aloha.
If you wanna turn this into a pissing contest you're going to lose it pretty badly. I probably have double your hours and double your ratings if you're at a regional.
I'd like to think that the instruments would show it but the "guage" is not really a sum of how much fuel has been USED vs how much was loaded. It won't measure leakage. It can't measure the level directly.
@boriseng You got it wrong again, the fuel measuring systems are potentiometer based amd they measure fuel by weight using a potentiometer type measuring unit located in a location within the tank that is least succeptible to influence from airplane attitude and coupled to compensator unit (which accounts for fuel density and temperature) to give an accurate (+/- 3%) reading of the real time in tank fuel level. The indications are real time and indicate actual in tank fuel.
@archer49d You're right it does measure actual fuel. The one I read about claimed 1% accuracy.
Crazy thing is I had already looked it up (thanks google) but I still had the calculation thing stuck in my head so even after reading about it I still got it wrong.
I had read about a case where a number of factors led to an incident where a plane ran out of fuel in flight ("Gimli Glider"), but reading about it again one of those factors was a fault rendering the FQIS nonfunctional.
yep my dad is a pilot for united so am i but he flys the 747's and also as the guy said the captain would probably be able to see the leak from the window or a gauge in the cocpit that gauge would be the EICAS
@archer49d Are the Airlines now adays more worried about the money, rather than the safety of their passengers? If he was leaking fuel, rather than just dumping it, I think they would have landed at the nearest airport with a long enough runway.
@shadowblade145 Considering the leak was in one outboard tank (there are a total of 8-10 tanks depending on configuration) the aircraft still had enough fuel to keep flying for a long time to come, even if that tank had run dry there would probably still have been enough fuel on board to reach the destination, hence San Fran wasn't that big an issue, remember a few years ago a British Airways 747 lost an engine on takeoff from SFO and continued England safely.
@archer49d Hmm. I didn't know that. Guess it makes a bit more sense now. I had no Idea about that 747 a few years ago though, what if they had lost the other engines over the ocean? Crazy fools xD
@shadowblade145 The plane gets lighter as it burns fuel off for one, if they lost one more over the ocean they still would have had two, which is enough to get you somewhere and land when you're light, furthermore, the chances of losing 2 engine on one flight are next to nil (apart some special circumstanaces, for instance when KLM and BA flew into volcanic dust on 2 seperate occaisions and all 4 engines were lost, on both occaisions restarts were made and planes landed safely).
@shadowblade145 Furthermore, look at the 737, 757, 767, 777 and 787... all are (or will be) flying transoceanic and they only have two engines. If you're worred about losing 2 on a 747 I'd be more worried about the thousands of planes that only have 2 in the first place (for the record, I'm not worried).
@Chrispy854 The pilot would have never come back to look for himself if it was standard fuel dump, and secondly, the fuel dump on a 74 has a very clean flow, look it up, this was an actual leak.
There are a lot of fucking retards leaving know nothing comments about this video. It was a fucking fuel leak. God damn, some people here I hope they never have kids
dude!!, was not fuel!, was smoking, he was preparing to do some rolling and looping maneuvers for a red bull air race coming down a few miles ahead. XD
@jesuistahmid I have no clue where you're getting that from...
Position reports (transoceanic/polar flying) are typically given every 5 or 10 degrees longitude, depending on speed, and over designated waypoints there are variations based what part of the world you are in.
Trend data is written down in the aircraft logbook or recorded as a "random event" in a trend data computer if one is equipped.
Throughout the entire flight the crew monitors the plane... There's no "30 minute" rule.
When did this happen?
Icaller1915 1 month ago
Daing
sirArchitect 1 month ago
lmao the cabin shot at 0:57 is a 767 not a 747
airplanecrazy1989 3 months ago
If they were aware of that situation that is BS because they have to let their passenger know of the problem.
Kpj7466 5 months ago
Sometimes the "general" public can be a bit on the retarded side.
That is DUMPING fuel, not "leaking" fuel.
rugby86 6 months ago
@rugby86
As proved by a lot of posters here on this video it would seem.
daro2096 4 months ago
There is probably an idicator that goes off when the fuel drops quicker than the engines can consume it.
101HeyNow 6 months ago 4
These people are stupid, look at 1:00 you can see the fuel dump nozzle. It wasn't a LEAK it was a fuel DUMP. Get your facts straight, this is why I cannot watch the news about anything aviation related because they don't know what the heck they're talking about.
capcadetreece 7 months ago
@capcadetreece the dump comes exactly below the wing tip look on the 747 dump videos on youtube see the fuel come out right about end of wing.
Kpj7466 5 months ago
@Kpj7466 The fuel does NOT come out of the wing tip, it's farther inward towards the outboard aileron. Look at the video "KLM flight kl888 fuel dump." You'll notice that the nozzle is not below the wingtip as you just stated. And again if you look at 1:00 in this video you will notice the fuel dump nozzle of this United Flight to be in the same exact location, in this video (to give a better idea where to look) look above the last 'N' of the 'CNN' logo on the bottom left of the screen.
capcadetreece 5 months ago
That's why you shouldn't fly with united airlines.They are aware that aircraft leaks fuel and they still fly
ceconk123 8 months ago
The pilot was full of crap knowing about it.
catguy1717 8 months ago
this mother fucker saved a lot of lives!!!! credit
jim301288 8 months ago 5
airbus a 330 ıtsnot leakage ıts dumping.
TheGoxel 8 months ago
Well, here's a few things: That's a fuel dump valve. During emergency, the pilot or copilot will open fuel dumps on both wing tips to dump fuel. My guess is there was a faulty valve or something similar. Since fuel system components are monitored, this would have put a warning up, or at least, the pilot/copilot would have noticed excessive fuel usage. Why didn't they just turn right around and land? The aircraft was overweight, so they burned fuel and landed later in San Fran.
SarraPiyopiyo 8 months ago
So many problems with this report, it's not even funny.
germb747 8 months ago
lets clear this up the pilot is a dumb ass.
waldron1robert 9 months ago
triple 7 ? of a380?
FirstFlight271 9 months ago
If this was indeed a fuel leak, would it not have made more sense to land the plane in Vancouver or Seattle? I fail to see why the plane made a 45 degree left turn and headed for San Francisco, instead of making a much smaller angle turn towards Vancouver or Seattle. (BOTH major airports)
Welwyn22 9 months ago
"We were independently able to verify it was a United Airlines flight". Well done CNN, the worlds leading News Corp, and you can successfully recognise the United white and blue stripes on the winglet. Really needed you for that one.....
NickPwnsUTube 9 months ago
Pilots were aware because they have fuel gauges in the cockpit. They would have known there was a leak even without being able to physically lay eyes on the streaming fuel.
nsvr6 9 months ago
CNN know perfectly well that the pilot is full of shit. Now talk to FOX news and they would be like... "of course the pilot could see it" "let us get our expert in here"=Z
TRYER25 10 months ago
@TRYER25 They didn't need to see the leak, cockpit indications would alert them to the situation. You think they also know the engines are running by looking at them? Maybe they have to look at the wings to know the de-icing of the leading edges is working? Actually, I think someone also has to get out on the wing while the plane is in flight and dip the fuel tanks to find out if they still have enough fuel...
veldman37 9 months ago
@veldman37 Good point on the beeping light. Haven't watched an Airplane movie in a while=P
TRYER25 9 months ago
Because it wouldn't be a {VIDEO} if it was on YouTube...
Exla357 10 months ago
Good thing he explained that "oceanic" means "flying over the ocean".
SirTastyCakes 10 months ago 2
Fail. He didn't want to tell CNN who the airline was, and yet he filmed the wing and gave it to them. It's like a giveaway. I didn't even read the title and I knew it before they said it.
airbusisawesome 10 months ago
That was a massive dump. lol.
pjm5678 10 months ago
IF THE PILOT KNEW ABOUT IT THE ENTIRE TIME WHY ONLY AFTER THEY WERE TOLD SOMETHING FROM A PASSENGER DID THEY DIVERT THE PLAN TO LAND IN SAN FRAN
trovonj 10 months ago
Does anybody remember the Air Transat incident. There was a leak and the Captain told the FO to redo a fuel calculation. Eventually both engines shut down.
GuerraOtilio 10 months ago
They were just dumping fuel!
evenairlines 10 months ago
@evenairlines why would the be dumping fuel if they flying over the states heading to Tokyo?
bikerboy674 10 months ago
@bikerboy674 maybe if they had an emergency and they had to land, then they would dump some fuel.
evenairlines 10 months ago
@evenairlines they never said that there was an emergency.
bikerboy674 10 months ago
CNN showing the wrong airport in tokyo on google earth. That's haneda airport. where that flight was headed was narita int'l, which is a bit north of haneda and pretty far from downtown tokyo
Shmaaaaa 11 months ago
If it was such an emergancy they wouldn't of flown from north /central canada and flew right down to san francisco, this news story is utter bs.
pbrew85 11 months ago
He say at 0:36 that it's not a fuel dump!
SAMCAMJAIK1 11 months ago
The messages always make a smart on top.
AirplaneTV 1 year ago
This is definitely NOT dumping.
And from the cockpit of a 747, you cannot see the wingtips. The only way to know this is losing fuel is to check fuel remaining vs your flight plan-- like I have described below.
I guarantee the pilots either noticed they were over burn, or would have very soon after.
0m1nous 1 year ago
@0m1nous Your right they cannot, but they have a gauge displaying fuel quantity. Most likely they didn't even watch this mans video. The flight attendant told the PIC of the situation, him and the FO looked at the left tank quantity and noticed it was much lower than the right and decreasing at a much higher rate. What you are talking about is located on the FMC which would not be an immediate look.
landmark425 11 months ago
Wow... ever heard of fuel dumps?
CincoSnare76 1 year ago
thats a fuel leak?! i thaught that was meant to happen that happened on my virgin blue flight no onder it was so rough!
sempron67 1 year ago
FAR Part 91.3 "The Captain,the Pilot In Command, has the final authority and responsibility for the operation and satety of the flight" It doesn't say anything about some news hound playing armchair quarterback. for higher ratings for CNN. Stick with REPORTING THE NEWS not embellishing it, your ignorance within the topic is revealed.
n3711l 1 year ago
@n3711l Well put!!!
landmark425 11 months ago
Despite his experience, I cannot understand how someone can calculate fuel loss visually... In any case, I simply cant believe the crew wasnt aware of a large fuel leak, assuming it was actually leaking and not being dumped. The purge is there as well. Nice of the media to spin a harrowing tale of distress from a non-incident
KimmurielBaenre 1 year ago
@KimmurielBaenre On a flight, pilots have a plan with points all along the route-- at each point, especially on a long haul such as this, the pilot sees how much fuel he is supposed to have remaining vs how much is actually on the plane. By doing this, you can see how much over the normal burn you are. Everything is measured in pounds, so if I cross a fix and my plan says I should have 100,000 lbs of fuel, and I only have 90,000 lbs, I know I am considerably OVER burn.
0m1nous 1 year ago
Of course the pilots were aware of the situation, cause one of the main concerns that pilots have is fuel management... But this looks awfully similar to a normal dumping procedure...
charlieechovictor 1 year ago
@charlieechovictor do they normally dump fuel between Chi-Tokyo on a 747, for what purpose?
PInk77W1 1 year ago
@PInk77W1 I never said it was normal I only said the pilots were for sure aware of the situation unless they had a technical failure of the concerned instruments...
charlieechovictor 11 months ago
@charlieechovictor what u said was "this looks awfully familiar to a NORMAL FUEL dump."
PInk77W1 11 months ago
@PInk77W1
Pilots like to make it interesting. They tend to dump some of their fuel to see if they can still make it to their destination.
Its Russian Roulette for pilots.
TheMattswish 11 months ago
these jets have sensors, indicators, systems and warnings for every little thing...if you take a serious enough shit in the lavatory alarms start blazing...how was this not caught?
manifestgtr 1 year ago
must have been a slow news day or there was a plane crash in the news earlier that week.
msk7046 1 year ago
"Our captain was aware of the situation" RIIIIGGGHHHT, and the wingtip in the video clearly says its a united airlines plane.
jfsa380 1 year ago
@jfsa380 and why didn't they divert to Seattle or Juneau, instead of flying all the way south to SFO?
jfsa380 1 year ago
@jfsa380 United as a large maintenance base at SFO; I think read somewhere (wikipedia?) that SFO is their ONLY maintenance hub. I'm just speculating, but maybe the pilot figured it would be best to fly to an airport where he knew United would be able to fix the problem--i.e. SFO. If they landed in Seattle, United would probably have to ship the plane to SFO anyway in order to repair it.
But I obviously wasn't in the cockpit as these events transpired, I'm just guessing...
turbodriver430 1 year ago
@jfsa380 Juneau cant handle 747. They could of tried anchorage, but SFO was their best bet
anthony2154 1 year ago
Wingtip has an overfill, wich in this case looks like it is leaking out because It was filled up to the edge probably. nice vid! thanx for posting. This also happens on the ground sometimes!! not much but i have seen it happen.! But again, im guessing!! not sure what the cause was, but as a refueling officer at schiphol, i have seen it leaking from the overfill when it gets filled up to much!! (bad gauges on refueling truck or on the wing fuelinlets)
zaanstreek1980 1 year ago
Comment removed
zaanstreek1980 1 year ago
Comment removed
zaanstreek1980 1 year ago
wait but dosent san fran have a very short runway i thought but could be wrong still a beginer pilot
0696jesse 1 year ago
LIESZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!
bingyyork 1 year ago
make a left turn and land all the way in san fran?? hahah the news are the worst when it comes to airlines and airplanes...and just about everything else.
zazu27604 1 year ago
people are idiots. this is a wingtip leak, the wingtip holds such a MINIMAL amount of fuel. what is the big deal? center 1 and 2 are the ones that matter the most if there is a leakage
srsparky32 1 year ago
um I think the pilots noticed through the intruments -.-
XxNiMr0D7000xX 1 year ago
Thick Mother F***ers, the plane is dumping fuel. They allways do this to make sure the landing weight of the aircraft is bellow the recommended landing weight
dskxalive 1 year ago
@dskxalive oh yeah, so the pilot was dumping fuel. Dude, he was supposed to reach TOKYO, why should he dump fuel like 2 hours after the takeoff from Chicago?
fastestbird 1 year ago
@dskxalive If it was dumping, they wouldn't have directed their flight from Tokyo to KSFO. Besides what kind of retarded pilot would dump 5,400 miles 11 hours from their landing destination?
Sting3733 1 year ago
he probably hit the dump switch and capped it and forgot to hit the switch again, and they didnt have enough fuel so they landed at SFO
KCBOYZ1307 1 year ago
WOW!!! thats just a fuel dump genius!!!
KCBOYZ1307 1 year ago
if they were just fueling dumping then he wouldn't have landed in San Francisco
ILLINOISLOYALTY1 1 year ago
It's Bruce Willis's fault
rioross 1 year ago
They were probably already diverting, and the Captain was dumping fuel.....
msiblini94 1 year ago
but why people still going to united airlines flight services whereas it is been notorious to hijacking by terrorist? because people knew that 911 hijacking is not real and fake!!
KelvongKlein 1 year ago
united airline again? maybe this is flight 175!!!
KelvongKlein 1 year ago
oh ok
510mexicana 1 year ago
it should of just gone to JFK
510mexicana 1 year ago
@510mexicana
To Tokyo they fly over the Pacific, not the Atlantic. The west coast was the only sensible place to land if not Canada.
cinkmoot 1 year ago
CNN REPORT BREAKING NEWS:
HOLY SHIT! WE ARE SO DESPERATE FOR NEWS WE WILL GET A VIDEO OF A PLANE DUMPING FUEL AND SAY ITS LEAKING!
Exilninja 1 year ago
"And here's Ollie Williams with the report."
"'m at the wrong airport!"
"Ok, thanks Ollie."
AkeemKN 1 year ago
The fuel is coming out of the fuel dump pipe (you can see it most clearly in the still black & white photo on the far right edge of the photo), but the pilots were not aware of it so the fuel dump valve had malfunctioned or failed on that side allowing the fuel to dump out the pipe designed for it- when the pilots didn't want it to and had no idea. I'd call that a leak!
StratMatt777 1 year ago
United Airlines covering their asses. "we were aware of the situation" Sure.......
WarNerd16 1 year ago 32
@WarNerd16 there are numerous sensors monitoring fuel systems. any leak would have been known to the pilots.
humbertsin1994 10 months ago
@WarNerd16 They were dumping fuel...
saufi94 10 months ago
@saufi94 why dont i beleive that?
WarNerd16 10 months ago
@WarNerd16 These aircraft have sophisticated warning systems, including fuel imbalance warnings (imbalance between left and right tanks). I'm sure he was WELL aware of the situation, but extra eyes seeing the same thing that the gauges are saying is always a good thing. What would the pilots do if they didn't have passengers to tell them what's wrong???? Come on...
veldman37 9 months ago
@veldman37 im aware of almost everything involving aircraft. I know. Im just trying to point out that companies love to avert the blame with some b.s. excuse. If they knew about the leak/sumping then why didnt the airline just say that they were dumping fuel? exactly
WarNerd16 9 months ago
Comment removed
boeing7971 1 year ago 10
@boeing7971 not on purpose you wouldn't dump unless you were to heavy to land which here they had just departed
Farmerpilot13 1 year ago
@Farmerpilot13 i know, but still...........
boeing7971 1 year ago
@boeing7971 yeah, they just decided to dump before they got to their destination. How smart.
Didnt you hear the pilot/1st officer came out to inspect for himself?
cinkmoot 1 year ago
@boeing7971 dumping is when the pilot wants to get the fuel out. Leaking is when the fuselage has a hole in the fuel container. be aware next time :)
levygonz 1 year ago
@levygonz i know be quiet please
boeing7971 1 year ago
Fuel dump
KubeckDK 1 year ago
@KubeckDK ..dumping fuel while flying over pacific ocean? smart
helyko 1 year ago
It's not leaking it's dumping
MrEliben 1 year ago 48
@MrEliben If you hear the whole story, you would realize that it was a leak and pilots were not aware of the situation and the flight had to diverted.
samraarvin 1 year ago
@samraarvin I did hear the whole story sorry didn't mean to post that
MrEliben 1 year ago
@MrEliben well... the guy with the camera is an Air Force staff sergent and refueling specialist so im sure he knows the difference.
runway34r 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrEliben If it was dumping, they wouldn't have directed their flight from Tokyo to KSFO. Besides what kind of retarded pilot would dump 5,400 miles 11 hours from their landing destination?
Sting3733 1 year ago
@MrEliben It's L-E-A-K-I-N-G not dumping! Click this - 0:36
SAMCAMJAIK1 11 months ago
@MrEliben no its not it clearly says its leaking in the video
infernodood3 9 months ago
@MrEliben it was leaking, dumping true, takes place in that location, however its not past the aileron on the left, nor does it appear from a slit designed to carry fuel away from the bottom of the wing surface.
kj762aa 9 months ago
@MrEliben He just might know what he was talking about, working for the airforce and all.
broLAXgoalie12 7 months ago
@MrEliben Did you even watch the video?
@0:37 The reporter states: "Not a standard fuel dump, this is a big leak."
BluTrollPro 6 months ago
@MrEliben Why would they dump fuel that early? stupidass.
KCBOYZ1307 6 months ago
@KCBOYZ1307 even if they look at the news and still foolish about it.
Kpj7466 5 months ago
That explains the random liquid that fell on me and my friends during our basketball XD
cjw55pokekid 1 year ago
That's where knowing about airplanes would have hurt me because I would have thought it was a fuel dump so I wouldn't have said anything
Cactus732 1 year ago
That is the wrong airport... No plane from the US (except Hawaii, and guam) lands in the Tokyo airport. They land at the "New Tokyo Airport" in Narita.
Syntaktik 1 year ago
@SkyWestCRJPilot Apology accepted, when people push I push back... and now I'm stupid too, I haven't worked at Frontier in 2 years, better fix that.
archer49d 1 year ago
You said: "@archer49d Uh, I don't even see you having a job, It is my second year so I am getting more pay than my first year
Uh, I don't think so, I have been flying nearly every day, and on my free time, well, I kickback at home, or wherever I am staying, realize that you don't have an ATP License, so I am sure I have more hours than you. "
@SkyWestCRJPilot ATP and FE, currently in a 727, several thousand hours commercially, lost track of the exact number passing 3000. Aloha.
archer49d 1 year ago
@archer49d it comes out to approximately every 30 minutes.
jesuistahmid 1 year ago
@SkyWestCRJPilot And it's still not a fuel dump, for once CNN wasn't stupid... you were.
archer49d 1 year ago
@SkyWestCRJPilot How's making 20K/year working out for you?
If you wanna turn this into a pissing contest you're going to lose it pretty badly. I probably have double your hours and double your ratings if you're at a regional.
archer49d 1 year ago
@SkyWestCRJPilot No wonder you work at SKW.
archer49d 1 year ago
I'd like to think that the instruments would show it but the "guage" is not really a sum of how much fuel has been USED vs how much was loaded. It won't measure leakage. It can't measure the level directly.
boriseng 1 year ago
@boriseng It can't? Since when?
archer49d 1 year ago
Comment removed
boriseng 1 year ago
Comment removed
boriseng 1 year ago
@boriseng You got it wrong again, the fuel measuring systems are potentiometer based amd they measure fuel by weight using a potentiometer type measuring unit located in a location within the tank that is least succeptible to influence from airplane attitude and coupled to compensator unit (which accounts for fuel density and temperature) to give an accurate (+/- 3%) reading of the real time in tank fuel level. The indications are real time and indicate actual in tank fuel.
archer49d 1 year ago
@archer49d You're right it does measure actual fuel. The one I read about claimed 1% accuracy.
Crazy thing is I had already looked it up (thanks google) but I still had the calculation thing stuck in my head so even after reading about it I still got it wrong.
I had read about a case where a number of factors led to an incident where a plane ran out of fuel in flight ("Gimli Glider"), but reading about it again one of those factors was a fault rendering the FQIS nonfunctional.
boriseng 1 year ago
So, if the pilot was aware fine and dandy, but if he really was not and this was at night ?????
varigdc10 1 year ago
yep my dad is a pilot for united so am i but he flys the 747's and also as the guy said the captain would probably be able to see the leak from the window or a gauge in the cocpit that gauge would be the EICAS
fly4ever93 1 year ago
@fly4ever93 eicas is not a gauge. more like multiples gauges.
SuperMcfly12 1 year ago
no need for cameras when you have the instruments.
a fuel leak would have definitely have shown up in the cockpit.
12drumup 1 year ago
@12drumup chemtrails haha youtube.com/watch?v=IaPqCMIuEk4
hexenpaladin 1 year ago
really they should have cameras for the pilots to keep and eye on all areas. after this they should consider it
1982FMJ 1 year ago
Why would he head for San Francisco? There are many more airports that are closer...
shadowblade145 1 year ago
@shadowblade145 Are there many airports closer with the ability to eceonomically and efficiently fix the airplane?
SEA, ANC and PDX come to mind depending on where he was over Canada, but I think UAL has a heavy MX facility in San Fran.
archer49d 1 year ago
@archer49d Are the Airlines now adays more worried about the money, rather than the safety of their passengers? If he was leaking fuel, rather than just dumping it, I think they would have landed at the nearest airport with a long enough runway.
shadowblade145 1 year ago
@shadowblade145 Considering the leak was in one outboard tank (there are a total of 8-10 tanks depending on configuration) the aircraft still had enough fuel to keep flying for a long time to come, even if that tank had run dry there would probably still have been enough fuel on board to reach the destination, hence San Fran wasn't that big an issue, remember a few years ago a British Airways 747 lost an engine on takeoff from SFO and continued England safely.
archer49d 1 year ago
@archer49d Hmm. I didn't know that. Guess it makes a bit more sense now. I had no Idea about that 747 a few years ago though, what if they had lost the other engines over the ocean? Crazy fools xD
shadowblade145 1 year ago
@shadowblade145 The plane gets lighter as it burns fuel off for one, if they lost one more over the ocean they still would have had two, which is enough to get you somewhere and land when you're light, furthermore, the chances of losing 2 engine on one flight are next to nil (apart some special circumstanaces, for instance when KLM and BA flew into volcanic dust on 2 seperate occaisions and all 4 engines were lost, on both occaisions restarts were made and planes landed safely).
archer49d 1 year ago
@shadowblade145 Furthermore, look at the 737, 757, 767, 777 and 787... all are (or will be) flying transoceanic and they only have two engines. If you're worred about losing 2 on a 747 I'd be more worried about the thousands of planes that only have 2 in the first place (for the record, I'm not worried).
archer49d 1 year ago
@archer49d Ah OK. I don't have a clue what the Hell I'm really talking about when it comes to the 747 or other huge passenger aircraft xD
shadowblade145 1 year ago
@shadowblade145 a 747-400 is designed to be a 2 engined plane.
seaboo143 1 year ago
Fuck United. I am never flying with these inefficient, rude and ugly bitches ever again.
welcomegohome 1 year ago
Comment removed
trechan 1 year ago
Dude, it isn't a fuel leak it was dumbing fuel!!!! God damn CNN need to learn more!!
Chrispy854 1 year ago
@Chrispy854 If you were paying attention, they said it was a fuel leak!
Sho69607 1 year ago
@Sho69607 if it was a fuel leak the plane will go down and crash :/ so it was dump fuel.
Chrispy854 1 year ago
@Chrispy854 it wouldn't have, it would have lost both engines in about 5 hours, but it wouldnt have crashed as soon as it lost its fuel
JATO457 1 year ago
@JATO457 I mean all of it's engines/
JATO457 1 year ago
@Chrispy854 The pilot would have never come back to look for himself if it was standard fuel dump, and secondly, the fuel dump on a 74 has a very clean flow, look it up, this was an actual leak.
aphil066 1 year ago
@Chrispy854 Yeah, maybe you need to learn more, the fuel is not coming from the dump mast and why would you dump fuel in cruise?
archer49d 1 year ago
wow! and the pilots did not get a warning light in the flight deck instruments???
EWLGtoday 1 year ago
There are a lot of fucking retards leaving know nothing comments about this video. It was a fucking fuel leak. God damn, some people here I hope they never have kids
Vorash2002 1 year ago
dude!!, was not fuel!, was smoking, he was preparing to do some rolling and looping maneuvers for a red bull air race coming down a few miles ahead. XD
tulaconalas 1 year ago
LMFAO!! Stupid assholes, Does Fuel Dump mean anything? lol.
gary666slipknot 1 year ago
@gary666slipknot OMFG Thats what i was think lolol fuel leak, stupid.
MusicLover11325 1 year ago
@gary666slipknot no it wernt a fuel dump it was a leak i dnt think the crew had any idea about it
pilotanthony 1 year ago
CNN Sucks
CrimsonTideAlabama1 1 year ago
it isnt a fucking leak!!! it is dumping fueling!!!!!
ramomar15 1 year ago
@ramomar15 no its acutally a leak. you don't dump fuel at 14000 m asl. you only do this in an emergency landing if you really need to.
Santaclausemikey 1 year ago 2
@ramomar15 its a leak u cock the pilots had no clue
pilotanthony 1 year ago
@pilotanthony unprofessionalism, talking like that if you are a "pilot"...
ramomar15 1 year ago
@ramomar15 im not a pilot i wish i was
pilotanthony 1 year ago
well every half hour pilots has to run a checklist, which includes fuel consumption... so even without the video they would have noticed
jesuistahmid 1 year ago
@jesuistahmid Uhhhh... what? Who the hell makes you run a checklist every half hour?
archer49d 1 year ago
@archer49d i think its faa law to send reports every half hour. i'm not sure exactly but i know they have to check everything every 30 mins.
jesuistahmid 1 year ago
@jesuistahmid I have no clue where you're getting that from...
Position reports (transoceanic/polar flying) are typically given every 5 or 10 degrees longitude, depending on speed, and over designated waypoints there are variations based what part of the world you are in.
Trend data is written down in the aircraft logbook or recorded as a "random event" in a trend data computer if one is equipped.
Throughout the entire flight the crew monitors the plane... There's no "30 minute" rule.
archer49d 1 year ago
thats retarded why not go to Vancover BC or Seattle they are big enough or go to Paine field in Everett WA where it was built
yoyoyoyoshua 1 year ago
@yoyoyoyoshua SFO is a United hub... i guess the extra fuel they burned still saved money somehow?
jesuistahmid 1 year ago
@jesuistahmid Seattle is united's hub too and it won't take as long to ship parts
yoyoyoyoshua 1 year ago
@yoyoyoyoshua no it isn't, and its possible sfo is more accessible
jesuistahmid 1 year ago
@jesuistahmid Yeah so is Paine field and Boeing field I would rather go to the plant but then I don't know if they can do that
yoyoyoyoshua 1 year ago
@yoyoyoyoshua go on the united website.... paine/boeing field is not a hub for UA
jesuistahmid 1 year ago
@jesuistahmid I know that what I'm saying is that why not send back to the plant so it can get fixed faster so.
yoyoyoyoshua 1 year ago
@yoyoyoyoshua i meant that it could be more expensive for united
jesuistahmid 1 year ago
@yoyoyoyoshua When you need your car fixed do you drive it to Detroit or do you take it to your regular mechanic?
Plus Boeing is busy building airplane, they do have AOG teams though, but they go everyewhere EXCEPT KSEA KPAE and KBFI with those.
archer49d 1 year ago