Students Treated for Skin Irritation After Apparent Fuel-Dump From Plane Over School

Delta 89 flight track
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL89/history/20200114/1929Z/KLAX/KLAX

The students now have a cool story to tell their Grandchildren some day. This is coming from a guy who used to siphon gas from the car to cut the grass.

In other news, the Park Avenue elementary school lice outbreak has been cured....

I listened to the ATC and the pilots we asked if they wanted to dump and they replied no and then confirmed they'd be landing heavy (but presumably manageable). It's stunning they would do this over a populated area without authorization.

Let’s remember that a departure from an airport where the wx is below landing limits requires a take off alternate within one hour of departure airport. The FAA is saying they are satisfied with the reliability of the remaining engine, a “Sully” situation being the outlier. Unless they were on fire, take a few minutes to get over the water and dump. All that being said, that one hour trip to the take off alternate is a very LOOONG hour!

pilot is in charge... in an emergency pilot makes the decisions... ATC clears everything out of the way giving priority to the emergency... got no problem with this pilot's decision... until we know the scope of the emergency we can't and shouldn't judge... can fly for hours on one engine?? out over the Pacific may be necessary... dump over unpopulated area? if possible OK.... heavy airplane just after takeoff?? dump and land...

According to fragments of tape exchanges ATC seemed concerned about fuel (maybe concerned about/hinting at weight ?). ATC asked several times. Cockpit crew appeared primarily interested in getting back on the ground (maybe if you lose one on a heavy twin you are more worried about losing another than if you have four). Where is landing weight/fuel dump question on the 777 checklist ? CRM - Was the workload at that altitude overwhelming them. Crew also didn't immediately respond to ATC questions about Equipment roll. Maybe a 3 man cockpit provides 50 percent more in an emergency. The CVR will be interesting.

Not getting this one at all. Should have been put in an offshore hold until sufficient fuel was dumped, then brought in as an over ocean arrival to the runway 7L-R complex. Sure, the airport is going to be hung up for a bit until the emergency plays out but why bring him all the way around over the metro area?

They advised no need to dump fuel in the ATC conversations. PM sounded more than stressed, making mistakes. Aircraft was safe but they rushed the return.....

We saw a witness on local TV stating "I knew it was gasoline as soon as I smelled it".

Last time my nose did a sniff test Jet-A smelled VERY different from Auto Gas.

Where do I sign up for my share of the money?

Personal Injury lawyers gathering like vultures for a big payday

They landed safely but you can't say "all's well that ends well" because the crew really buggerd this one up. They and Delta will be answering questions for quite a while.

Unless there is a Santa Anna wind, planes take off toward the water and land from the east over desert and homes. Since the plane wasn't belching smoke or flames, and had time to travel inland for a normal approach, I'd say a couple of figure 8's over the ocean to dump fuel should have happened. When you dump fuel over such a populated area, you're going to have problems. Map here shows that even if the plane returned right away, it had to go over water first. https://www.lawa.org/en/lawa-environment/lax/aircraft-traffic-flow-at-lax

Lota Monday Morning Quarterbacking here about what the pilot "should" have done.

CFR 91.3 applies.

Pilot can do what he likes to ensure a successful outcome - and while he will ultimately have to explain himself - if he says he is not going to dump fuel and 5 secs later changes his mind and doesn't have time to tell anyone AND successfully lands the plane - it's a win.

Jet A evaporates. Everyone on the ground is a bit greasy feeling for a little bit. In the "nett outcome" A couple of folks have some breathing difficulty and there is some washing up to do - but 200 pax survive. It's a win.

More information and Video of fuel dump. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7887443/Aircraft-final-approach-LAX-dumps-jet-fuel-elementary-school-playground.html

ATC Communications : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIA90evz8gs

My opinion is this issue is more than unapproved dumping over a populated area. Hopefully, more information on the flight will be forthcoming. I do think the crew was overwhelmed. If this was a long range overwater flight there should have been 3 or 4 pilots in the cockpit for takeoff. A report of stressed radio comm was mentioned. So who was talking to ATC? It has been almost 20 years since I retired off the 777 so I broke out my OPMAN to go over the issues for the initial problem of compressor stall on one engine and return to the airport.

I see several procedures involved...all on separate pages of the OPMAN. Likely the EiCAS system is easier to access the procedures and I understand now you can plug in your laptop to the a/c system.

The procedures that needed to be completed seem to include COMPRESSOR STALL, 1 ENG APPROACH AND LANDING, OVER WT LANDING, FUEL DUMP, FA BRIEF. These are not Red Box items in the 20 year old manual I have.

Where was #1 FA during this time and did the Cabin have enough time to prepare for landing?

Fuel dump seemed to be rushed for landing and over a populated area.

During 35 years my flights only had 3 engine shutdowns. Two were no engine oil and one fire warning (high pressure, High Temp bleed leak). Aircraft are reliable even on one engine. No big rush unless you are burning or pieces are departing the a/c.

Could automation and less than routine manual flying be an issue that added to this flight event?

Likely, #1 FA got her brief on the flight deck. That gets into being careful with the brief. Returning from HNL on a 747 we lost oil in an engine and shut it down. We had 3 pilots and one FE plus #1 on the flight deck. I turned to the CA and said we had to go down (decend due to high fuel flow and Mach). #1 left the flight deck. A few minutes later the back cabin called up and wanted to know about the impending ditching.

Anyway, this flight could be more than just dumping fuel over LA schools.

LUCKY COINCIDENCE-no one on the ground who got sprayed was lighting a cigarette at the time...

Many schools like 20 different schools. Kids on the play ground for lunch. That entire path is over hundred of schools

When I was in flight school the IP always told us "....just try not to crash into a kindergarten..." guess that in modern day California all those thousands of square miles of empty desert, 5 minutes to the east are verboten and the grade school will just have to do, forget the ocean, the CA hand wringing society is already protesting about the grunion....

To me this was an example of glaring poor airmanship. The pilots got unjustifiedly nervous, instead of requesting vectors for runway 25R and rushing to the airport (I listened the recordings and they were doing 350 knots on downwind leg) they should have requested permission for dumping fuel and vectors to the appropriate área but they never told ATC about fuel dumping over a heavily populated área for they would have been denied to do that. The crew must be doing the sombrero dance before their superiors shortly as this was a violation of existing rules and bad publicity for Delta.

I believe you cannot dump over the ocean.