United flight diverted to remote island

[Hum]

A harrowing United Airlines flight Friday over the Pacific Ocean was forced to land on remote Midway Island because of what an FAA official said was an electrical odor on board.

The United Airlines plane, carrying 335 passengers and 13 crew on a Boeing 777, was flying from Honolulu to Guam when it was forced to land and spend seven hours on the Pacific atoll, said United spokeswoman Mary Clark. A replacement aircraft later carried everyone back to Hawaii on Friday, she said.

When explicitly asked Saturday whether the disturbing smell was smoke or something burning, Clark described the incident as an odor in the cabin.

A passenger, Karen von Merveldt-Guevara of Sedona, Arizona, said the pilot spoke of smoke and failure to the radar and other systems.

"The captain said there was smoke in the cockpit and the radar failed and other electronic systems were failing, so they had to land. I think they landed old-school. They did an amazing job to get there safely," Merveldt-Guevara said.

"At one point there was one drop of about 40 feet. After that turbulence, it got really silent. I thought everybody was praying, and we were coming in on the wings of faith. We were all praying," Merveldt-Guevara told CNN.

She said an odor emanated even before the plane took off. But the jet took flight any way before being diverted to Midway Island, a U.S. territory known as home to a World War II battle.

United is now investigating the plane, a Boeing 777. The new jetliner is one of the most sophisticated in aviation, Clark said Saturday.

more

[gohpep]

As long as no one was hurt, and it's not a problem with all Boeing 777s, all is good.

[FloatingFatMan]

"At one point there was one drop of about 40 feet. After that turbulence, it got really silent. I thought everybody was praying, and we were coming in on the wings of faith. We were all praying," Merveldt-Guevara told CNN.

 

 

No, they were coming in on the skills of the pilot.

[MikeChipshop Member]

No, they were coming in on the skills of the pilot.

 

Absolutely! "Wings of faith" my arse.

 

Even if yu are one of those frankly odd people that believe in a higher being that created us all, then at least acknowledge the pilot skill and the amazing feat of engineering that got them to the ground.

[Rippleman]

"I thought everybody was praying, and we were coming in on the wings of faith. We were all praying," Merveldt-Guevara told CNN."

 

So, you pray and your god (not even saying which god) guides you in and saves the plane, but continues to ignore the 25,000 children that die that day... nice, lucky you!

[DocM]

Good grief, do you have to turn every vague mention of faith into an anti-religion crusade? That's no better than the activist evangelicals you obviously despise. Tedious dude, tedious.

[Charisma Veteran]

^yeah, I'm going to agree this time--people all handle crisis differently. Let people believe what they want... the reporter asked, and nobody would bat an eye if she said "I couldn't stop swearing" or something, haha. Whether they're putting their faith in a pilot or God (in this case both, I guess?) they have no control of it themselves, and that helplessness can be terrifying. People who have never prayed before in their life start praying at times like those :S

[Shiranui]

Good grief, do you have to turn every vague mention of faith into an anti-religion crusade? That's no better than the activist evangelicals you obviously despise. Tedious dude, tedious.

Yes. What people believe is their business, but people should not be allowed to make such statements with a straight face and not be open to ridicule in 2014.

[Rippleman]

Good grief, do you have to turn every vague mention of faith into an anti-religion crusade? That's no better than the activist evangelicals you obviously despise. Tedious dude, tedious.

 

If someone makes ridiculous claims for reasons for not crashing, it is subject to exploration. Sounds like you are offended, does it offend you? If it wasn't stated, no one would be objecting right?

[Mr. Gibs]

"The captain said there was smoke in the cockpit and the radar failed and other electronic systems were failing, so they had to land. I think they landed old-school. They did an amazing job to get there safely," Merveldt-Guevara said.

"At one point there was one drop of about 40 feet. After that turbulence, it got really silent. I thought everybody was praying, and we were coming in on the wings of faith. We were all praying," Merveldt-Guevara told CNN.

I wish people who have no idea about anything aviation related would shut the ###### up. And I wish CNN would stop existing too.

1. Radar failed? Oh golly the on board weather radar failed, I'm sure life became so difficult without the weather radar.

2. Other electronic systems were failing? Plausible but there are multiple layers of redundancy but it's still a chance. Here's the thing from AVHerald though:

 

There is a report on the Internet telling that the aircraft lost transponder, radios and other systems one by one, however, radar data indicate the transponder worked until touchdown.

3. Landed old school? The ###### is landing old school? Pilots land without the auto pilot a ton of times, it's not something new that just randomly pops up out of nowhere.

4. Whoa 40 feet? Really? That isn't much at all, planes drop far more than that pretty regularly. Now if it was constantly 40 feet up and down then yes but the way it was written just sounds like it dropped once by 40 feet. And then you have to remember this was said by a passenger, not the pilot. Passengers constantly think the plane is dropping far far more than it actually is.

5. Wings of faith lol. Nice sensationalism there.

As usual CNN, please ######ing stop doing news. Your news is is so sensationalized and terrible that I seriously wonder if your reporters even graduated high school and it makes the "reporters" at TMZ look like geniuses. Your handling of the missing Malaysian airlines flight pretty much proved how useless you guys really are.

[DocM]

If someone makes ridiculous claims for reasons for not crashing, it is subject to exploration. Sounds like you are offended, does it offend you? If it wasn't stated, no one would be objecting right?

That is no better. In the aftermath of a stressful situation they can say what they damned well want, and reporters will report it to illustrate what they went through. SO WHAT?

And like it or not, in 2014 more people will identify with that statement of faith than you. Gitoverit.

[COKid]

Good grief, do you have to turn every vague mention of faith into an anti-religion crusade? That's no better than the activist evangelicals you obviously despise. Tedious dude, tedious.

 

So when you go on and on about how you feel about guns and Obama, that's not tedious? Ok dude, ok. :wacko:

[Charisma Veteran]

You guys, seriously, keep it about the original story. If this devolves into a war because of one line spoken by one passenger who was interviewed about the whole incident, the thread will need to be closed.

[Rippleman]

That is no better. In the aftermath of a stressful situation they can say what they damned well want, and reporters will report it to illustrate what they went through. SO WHAT?

And like it or not, in 2014 more people will identify with that statement of faith than you. Gitoverit.

 

i don't do it for the numbers. I guess we see who subscribes to popular opinion though. :)

[Hum]

At least this 777 didn't end up like Flight 370 -- however it ended up. :s

[bonalste]

No, they were coming in on the skills of the pilot.

Pilots. People always seem to think there's only one person involved in these things...

[xrobwx71]

No, they were coming in on the skills of the pilot.

They could have been praying to the pilot because right then, he was their Redeemer.  :D

[Buttus]

Good grief, do you have to turn every vague mention of faith into an anti-religion crusade? That's no better than the activist evangelicals you obviously despise. Tedious dude, tedious.

 

some people just aren't happy and they show it any way they can...

 

but anyways, back to the issue with the plane, i'm glad they're safe.  hopefully they can identify the issue and check out the other planes and fix it beforehand

[FloatingFatMan]

Pilots. People always seem to think there's only one person involved in these things...

 

The other one is the co-pilot, so I stand by my words! :p

 

Stop being so sodding pedantic.

[_neutrino Veteran]

I understand that waiting to get on a flight is already annoying however, i wonder why they don't do an inspection prior to each and every flight. I dont see why they cant do it while they clean the plane and refuel it between flights.

[FiB3R]

I understand that waiting to get on a flight is already annoying however, i wonder why they don't do an inspection prior to each and every flight. I dont see why they cant do it while they clean the plane and refuel it between flights.

Pretty sure that would come down to money.

[bonalste]

The other one is the co-pilot, so I stand by my words! :p

Stop being so sodding pedantic.

There's no such thing as a co-pilot. You're stuck in the 80s. The skill was in both pilots. 2 pilots. One is a captain, the other a first officer. Both are pilots. I'm not being 'sodding' pedantic. It's like having two parents, one a mother one a father, but saying that only the mother is a parent, and the father is a co-parent. It's just silly.

Here is why I take I take umbrage with what you said. It is equally as likely that the first officer was in charge of the controls and did the approach, the landing. The other pilot, the one not flying, be it the captain or first officer, would have run through the emergency checklists, carried out any required landing distance calculations, may have briefed the cabin crew and organised the emergency services on the ground, organised routing to the nearest airport. Both pilots would have been heavily involved in the decision making process for where you go and also in the diagnosis process. BOTH pilots used a lot of skill, and to focus on only one is plain wrong. And that you would naturally focus on the captain is a little insulting. I've basically had to take control from a captain before during an emergency, running the whole show by myself because the captain was totally incompetent to deal with the situation. But you'd have thanked the captain, who was awful and might've got you killed, and I'd have been ignored. Lovely.

But thanks for trying to advise me on aviation terminology. I appreciate all the help I can get...

[FloatingFatMan]

Pedant.

 

Here's a newsflash.  Lay people do not care one teeniest little bit.

[bonalste]

You may not care, but you're still wrong and I'm still going to correct you on it. I'll correct anybody who decides that my input in an emergency situation is not worth mentioning. It's frustrating, whether you find it pedantic or not (I don't care whether you find it pedantic, I've corrected you and that's that).

[Mr. Gibs]

I understand that waiting to get on a flight is already annoying however, i wonder why they don't do an inspection prior to each and every flight. I dont see why they cant do it while they clean the plane and refuel it between flights.

Um...they do and it's pretty through. But things can still go wrong.