SWA LaGuardia

Everskyward

Everskyward

Experimenter
Joined
Mar 19, 2005
Messages
33,453
Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
From Dallas Morning News website, posted at 17:20 local

Update at 5:20 p.m.: Southwest just tweeted the following concerning the incident at LaGuardia: “Standby for more information regarding #Flight345 BNA-LGA. We are gathering details and will post a statement soon.”

The photo from Abtahi shows the rear slide deployed, and we presume that passengers previously had evacuated the aircraft there (and perhaps the other side as well).

According to FlightStats.com, the airplane reached the runway at 5:44 EDT, behind its scheduled arrival of 5:10 p.m.

Original item posted at 4:59 pm: We learn, from ex-Dallas City Council candidate Bobby Abtahi, that a Southwest Airlines jet has lost its nose wheels at New York’s LaGuardia Airport. According to Abtahi, the plane was pulling into a gate when it lost its wheels. It was arriving from Nashville.

According to reports via Twitter, passengers are exiting the aircraft via inflatable slides. And NBC is reporting that LaGuardia is currently closed per the Port Authority.

Abtahi saw the whole thing: “Crazy,” he says, simply, via Twitter, where he first posted the photo below and the Vine seen above. CNN already asked for permission to use the photo and video. Others followed suit.

We’ve got calls out to Southwest’s Love Field-based spokespersons.​

LGA-airplane-without-front-wheels-July-22-2013.jpg
 
Looks like a job for Joe Patroni
 
Latest news is 11 people reporting injuries from that. 6 PAX and 5 crew. Seems like alot considering it was a nose gear collapse. Evacuation got out of hand? Perhaps after the Asiana evac delay, they were in a hurry to get folks off?
 
Fearless Tower said:
Latest news is 11 people reporting injuries from that. 6 PAX and 5 crew. Seems like alot considering it was a nose gear collapse. Evacuation got out of hand? Perhaps after the Asiana evac delay, they were in a hurry to get folks off?
Click to expand...
actually it seems like too few, but those were probably the people who had their attorney's number programmed into their cell. The injured tally will rise after people have a chance to get home and look up the number.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Latest news is 11 people reporting injuries from that. 6 PAX and 5 crew. Seems like alot considering it was a nose gear collapse. Evacuation got out of hand? Perhaps after the Asiana evac delay, they were in a hurry to get folks off?
Click to expand...
Seems like it would be a pretty steep slide from the tail but I don't know what is recommended.
 
Wondering how many of those injured decided to get out of thier seats and get stuff out of the overhead bins before the plane stooped at the gate.
 
Everskyward said:
Seems like it would be a pretty steep slide from the tail but I don't know what is recommended.
Click to expand...
I guess I should clarify.....I can see 6 pax reporting injuries...especially if they were trying to grab their carry-on luggage on the way out, but a little suprised at 5 flight crew reporting injuries. That is what suprised me.
 
Can't tell from the photos.... but when/where did the collapse occur? On the runway during the roll out? Or on the taxiway?

.

A question for our "big iron" pilots... I know you train for all sorts of emergencies... is something like this (collapse and flat tires) on the list?
 
So it collapsed while taxiing? Or did they land with it unlocked? I think there is a big difference even with a smaller airplane. I once watched a piston twin run into a concrete parking barrier about 4 inches tall at fast taxi speed that was not flagged. His nose came down pretty quick. I have landed with the nosegear unlocked in a C-320, which I knew in advance, and the nose came down a lot slower.
 
Flightaware shows a peculiar flight path.

It looks to be a straight-in approach at La Guardia, but before that, about halfway through the flight, they flew a big holding pattern over the middle of Virgina, and then flew an odd zig-zag path over Maryland.

edit: I thought that might be significant, but maybe not. The path for this same flight on previous days also had some zigzags, and some weirdly large detours as well.
 
Last edited:
AggieMike88 said:
Can't tell from the photos.... but when/where did the collapse occur? On the runway during the roll out? Or on the taxiway?
Click to expand...


In the photo in your post #2, the signs show the plane is beyond taxiway B and F, so I'd say the photo was taken from a gate in the terminal, and the plane came to a rest on the middle of runway 4. That's consistent with FlightAware, which appears to show a straight-in approach to runway 4.



lga-airport-map-large.png
 
Last edited:
Fox News had a " Professional Pilot" on this morning that said it was a AirBus 320.....

Looks like a 37 to me with those large winglets.... Am I wrong?:dunno:
 
N801BH said:
Fox News had a " Professional Pilot" on this morning that said it was a AirBus 320.....
Click to expand...

Every professional pilot in North America knows that Southwest only flies 737s. These "aviation experts" tick me off... :mad2:
 
When you view the footage from a passenger cell phone you'll see why the nose gear collapsed. There was pretty much no flare. Looked like a carrier landing.
 
NoHeat said:
In the photo in your post #2, the signs show the plane is beyond taxiway B and F, so I'd say the photo was taken from a gate in the terminal, and the plane came to a rest on the middle of runway 4. That's consistent with FlightAware, which appears to show a straight-in approach to runway 4.



lga-airport-map-large.png
Click to expand...

Never looked at the diagram before, but their taxiway lettering system has to be the most confusing I've ever seen.
 
KTVU reports the Cockpit Crew are Capt Don DeNosa and FO U. N. Locke.

Verified by a new Intern at SWA.

Cheers
 
AggieMike88 said:
Can't tell from the photos.... but when/where did the collapse occur? On the runway during the roll out? Or on the taxiway?

.

A question for our "big iron" pilots... I know you train for all sorts of emergencies... is something like this (collapse and flat tires) on the list?
Click to expand...

It's in the manual but its nothing I've ever done in the simulator. Actually there's lots stuff I'd like to see in the sim but there's only so much time. All sim scenarios are reviewed and approved by the carriers FAA POI. If the FAA doesn't make it an issue it doesn't get done.
 
Art VanDelay said:
It's in the manual but its nothing I've ever done in the simulator. Actually there's lots stuff I'd like to see in the sim but there's only so much time. All sim scenarios are reviewed and approved by the carriers FAA POI. If the FAA doesn't make it an issue it doesn't get done.
Click to expand...

Actually all sim scenarios are reviewed and approved by the APM (Aircrew Program Manager) then sent to the POI for signature.

As for nose gear collapse, in my last recurrent I got just that after touchdown on my last landing. Brought the plane under control and did the emergency evacuation procedure.
 
Velocity173 said:
When you view the footage from a passenger cell phone you'll see why the nose gear collapsed. There was pretty much no flare. Looked like a carrier landing.
Click to expand...

Patented Southwest unstable approach?

Either that, or their typical aggressive taxiing causing fatigue faster than maintenance can detect it. In my experience, WN pilots throttle up while making the turn onto the runway much more than other airlines and drop the nose pretty quickly on landing to make the short turnoff to the gate.
 
clear_prop said:
Patented Southwest unstable approach?

Either that, or their typical aggressive taxiing causing fatigue faster than maintenance can detect it. In my experience, WN pilots throttle up while making the turn onto the runway much more than other airlines and drop the nose pretty quickly on landing to make the short turnoff to the gate.
Click to expand...

I don't know but once the aircraft hit the guy filming it dropped his camera after the nose impacted and collapsed. All you see is his face after that. To me it simply looked like a carrier landing, only the nose gear wasn't up to the task.
 
The video I saw looked like a normal landing, except the nose gear didn't hold the nose up as it came down. It definitely wasn't taxiing.
 
Norman said:
Never looked at the diagram before, but their taxiway lettering system has to be the most confusing I've ever seen.
Click to expand...

Looks like someone sneezed after putting a spoonful of alphabet soup in their mouth.
 
clear_prop said:
Patented Southwest unstable approach?

Either that, or their typical aggressive taxiing causing fatigue faster than maintenance can detect it. In my experience, WN pilots throttle up while making the turn onto the runway much more than other airlines and drop the nose pretty quickly on landing to make the short turnoff to the gate.
Click to expand...

Uh huh. And this is what, the fourth incident concerning a SWA landing in forty years of operation? Do you have any real evidence a systemic problem exists regarding SWA approach profiles or taxiing practices?
 
3393RP said:
Uh huh. And this is what, the fourth incident concerning a SWA landing in forty years of operation? Do you have any real evidence a systemic problem exists regarding SWA approach profiles or taxiing practices?
Click to expand...

Ok all you airline drivers out there.......
Do the late model FDR's record landing G forces????:dunno:
 
3393RP said:
Uh huh. And this is what, the fourth incident concerning a SWA landing in forty years of operation? Do you have any real evidence a systemic problem exists regarding SWA approach profiles or taxiing practices?
Click to expand...

Yeah, my freaking eyeballs ! Go out to an airport where SW and other carriers are and just watch.
 
3393RP said:
Uh huh. And this is what, the fourth incident concerning a SWA landing in forty years of operation? Do you have any real evidence a systemic problem exists regarding SWA approach profiles or taxiing practices?
Click to expand...

They've had quite a few in the weeds that didn't rise to the incident/accident level. Not sure how their rate compares to other carriers, but as another poster said, just watch them compared to other carriers. They taxi faster, add power earlier and brake harder than the other carriers. Still within the envelope, but not leaving as much margin for error.

I still fly on them if they are going my way, but don't consider them as safe as the other majors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top