The airport spokesman says that two tires "deflated" during takeoff forcing the crew to abort:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation- ... 08057.html

Article quote:

"Authorities say a Delta Air Lines jet bound for Oklahoma was forced to abort its takeoff on a runway at Atlanta's airport when two tires went flat. Airport spokesman Reese McCranie tells The Associated Press that passengers were removed from the plane, and no injuries were reported. Atlanta-based Delta said in a statement that Flight 5508, operating as Delta Connection from Atlanta to Tulsa, aborted its takeoff around 9:22 a.m. Wednesday after two tires deflated."

With respect to the thread on the NE Patriots new 767s.... someone call Ted Wells!!

Is that common? How strange! Hopefully the runway is open again.

Anyway, it struck me as unusual because I've heard of burst tires during takeoff, but it sounds like these tires deflated during the acceleration down the runway, which seems more uncommon.

Why don't we hold outself to a higher standard and not call this a Delta flight since it wasn't operated by Delta?

flight152 wrote:

Why don't we hold outself to a higher standard and not call this a Delta flight since it wasn't operated by Delta?

Higher? Seems like the mainlines, by far, are the ones with the most problems overall. And I still think legacy carriers own a big part of trouble regional airlines get into.

What speed did he RTO? Boeing guidance is to not reject above 80 knots for tire failure. Not sure what the other manufacturers advise.

flight152 wrote:

Why don't we hold outself to a higher standard and not call this a Delta flight since it wasn't operated by Delta?

It has DELTA painted on the aircraft, people that buy tickets buy them on DELTA, and DELTA hire the regional carrier. For the general public, it is a DELTA flight.

Aircraft type? I hate it when a news article doesn't say the type of aircraft...just a personal pet-peeve.

b747400erf wrote:

flight152 wrote:

Why don't we hold outself to a higher standard and not call this a Delta flight since it wasn't operated by Delta?

It has DELTA painted on the aircraft, people that buy tickets buy them on DELTA, and DELTA hire the regional carrier. For the general public, it is a DELTA flight.

Please. Spare me the rhetoric. I'm aware of all of this and the article clearly says delta connection. A quick flightaware search said it was operated by Expressjet.

nitepilot79 wrote:

The airport spokesman says that two tires "deflated" during takeoff forcing the crew to abort:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation- ... 08057.html

Article quote:

"Authorities say a Delta Air Lines jet bound for Oklahoma was forced to abort its takeoff on a runway at Atlanta's airport when two tires went flat. Airport spokesman Reese McCranie tells The Associated Press that passengers were removed from the plane, and no injuries were reported. Atlanta-based Delta said in a statement that Flight 5508, operating as Delta Connection from Atlanta to Tulsa, aborted its takeoff around 9:22 a.m. Wednesday after two tires deflated."

I hate to ask the obvious but.....was Tom Brady there?

flight152 wrote:

b747400erf wrote:

flight152 wrote:

Why don't we hold outself to a higher standard and not call this a Delta flight since it wasn't operated by Delta?

It has DELTA painted on the aircraft, people that buy tickets buy them on DELTA, and DELTA hire the regional carrier. For the general public, it is a DELTA flight.

Please. Spare me the rhetoric. I'm aware of all of this and the article clearly says delta connection. A quick flightaware search said it was operated by Expressjet.

Airlines are quick to claim credit for service on their regional partners, and even quicker to run away and say it wasn't mainline's fault when something goes wrong. If they don't want the publicity make the airlines run their flights without the DL banner.

But it departed the gate on time and was not cancelled!!

BoeingGuy wrote:

What speed did he RTO? Boeing guidance is to not reject above 80 knots for tire failure. Not sure what the other manufacturers advise.

Boeing guidance cannot cover all events. I had something like this happen in PHX many years ago when the 727 LMLG deflated during the TO roll, The vibration was incredible and we rejected somewhere near 100+. Got the airplane stopped without really knowing what the exact problem was. Two things stand out, the tower through no fault of there own launched a DC9 behind us as we cleared the runway, and of course he went through the torn up tire casings on the runway. On a post flight inspection we could see rubber marks along side the fuselage close to the #1 engine. A flat no rejects above 80Kts simply does work for all circumstances. No rejects above V1-5 or something along those lines makes a lot more sense. You might note, Boeing trains for the hi speed rejects and seldom if ever addresses the low speed rejects in there training syllabus. Train as you fly, fly as you train is pretty good advice.

flight152 wrote:

b747400erf wrote:

flight152 wrote:

Why don't we hold outself to a higher standard and not call this a Delta flight since it wasn't operated by Delta?

It has DELTA painted on the aircraft, people that buy tickets buy them on DELTA, and DELTA hire the regional carrier. For the general public, it is a DELTA flight.

Please. Spare me the rhetoric. I'm aware of all of this and the article clearly says delta connection. A quick flightaware search said it was operated by Expressjet.

Rhetoric? I explained the reasoning. To the media and the general public, it is a Delta flight, the article said Delta Connection. If Delta does not like being associated with regional carriers that fly under their banner, they can change the routes to mainland.

I'm pretty sure Boeing would recommend aborting a takeoff at 80 knots if BOTH main tires on one side blew??!!! Continuing a takeoff from 80 to 160 knots with only 2 main tires would probably result in at the least a fire and more likely a exit of the runway/accident.

superbizzy73 wrote:

Aircraft type? I hate it when a news article doesn't say the type of aircraft...just a personal pet-peeve.

According to flight history at FlightRadar24 a CRJ9 is used for DL5508.

The flight eventually left about 2 hours late. I don't know if it left on the original aircraft after tires were fixed/replaced.

As for another poster questioning the attribution of this to Delta rather than to Delta Connection or Endeavor, others have already mentioned that, to the public, they are dealing with Delta.

I had Comcast come to my house to check out a problem a few days ago. They sent a subcontractor. I was not dealing with the subcontractor, I was dealing with Comcast.

Same with Delta and their subcontractors.

The difference in the distinction to me is that when I hear "Delta Connection", I think "small jet". When it's a mainline DL aircraft, we could be talking about a 777 ending up with deflated tires on takeoff, which I think would be more interesting than it happening to an RJ.

wjcandee wrote:

The difference in the distinction to me is that when I hear "Delta Connection", I think "small jet". When it's a mainline DL aircraft, we could be talking about a 777 ending up with deflated tires on takeoff, which I think would be more interesting than it happening to an RJ.

Not for those onboard...

wjcandee wrote:

The difference in the distinction to me is that when I hear "Delta Connection", I think "small jet". When it's a mainline DL aircraft, we could be talking about a 777 ending up with deflated tires on takeoff, which I think would be more interesting than it happening to an RJ.

Seriously the four digit flight number beginning with a 5 tells you this was a regional and not a 777.

flight152 wrote:

b747400erf wrote:

flight152 wrote:

Why don't we hold outself to a higher standard and not call this a Delta flight since it wasn't operated by Delta?

It has DELTA painted on the aircraft, people that buy tickets buy them on DELTA, and DELTA hire the regional carrier. For the general public, it is a DELTA flight.

Please. Spare me the rhetoric. I'm aware of all of this and the article clearly says delta connection. A quick flightaware search said it was operated by Expressjet.

It is Delta and Delta seems to know that. The article clearly states that Atlanta based Delta made the statement about the incident.

jetblueguy22 wrote:

Airlines are quick to claim credit for service on their regional partners, and even quicker to run away and say it wasn't mainline's fault when something goes wrong. If they don't want the publicity make the airlines run their flights without the DL banner.

It's not as 1-sided as you seem to believe.

Mainline carriers often have contractual arrangements where the express operator agrees to those very terms:
mainline gets the credit for good news, operator takes the liability for the bad; in exchange for access to the mainline's pax network.

We got a lot of public insight into this during the Colgan crash.

If the regional operator doesn't like it, then they're under no obligation to agree.

LAX772LR wrote:

jetblueguy22 wrote:

Airlines are quick to claim credit for service on their regional partners, and even quicker to run away and say it wasn't mainline's fault when something goes wrong. If they don't want the publicity make the airlines run their flights without the DL banner.

It's not as 1-sided as you seem to believe.

Mainline carriers often have contractual arrangements where the express operator agrees to those very terms:
mainline gets the credit for good news, operator takes the liability for the bad; in exchange for access to the mainline's pax network.

We got a lot of public insight into this during the Colgan crash.

If the regional operator doesn't like it, then they're under no obligation to agree.

And that is exactly why I think it is a must to go against deceptive PR and blame the carrier for problems of subcontractors - catering, baggage handling, regional flying etc.

BravoOne wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

What speed did he RTO? Boeing guidance is to not reject above 80 knots for tire failure. Not sure what the other manufacturers advise.

Boeing guidance cannot cover all events. I had something like this happen in PHX many years ago when the 727 LMLG deflated during the TO roll, The vibration was incredible and we rejected somewhere near 100+. Got the airplane stopped without really knowing what the exact problem was. Two things stand out, the tower through no fault of there own launched a DC9 behind us as we cleared the runway, and of course he went through the torn up tire casings on the runway. On a post flight inspection we could see rubber marks along side the fuselage close to the #1 engine. A flat no rejects above 80Kts simply does work for all circumstances. No rejects above V1-5 or something along those lines makes a lot more sense. You might note, Boeing trains for the hi speed rejects and seldom if ever addresses the low speed rejects in there training syllabus. Train as you fly, fly as you train is pretty good advice.

Thanks for the responses.

b747400erf wrote:

flight152 wrote:

b747400erf wrote:

It has DELTA painted on the aircraft, people that buy tickets buy them on DELTA, and DELTA hire the regional carrier. For the general public, it is a DELTA flight.

Please. Spare me the rhetoric. I'm aware of all of this and the article clearly says delta connection. A quick flightaware search said it was operated by Expressjet.

Rhetoric? I explained the reasoning. To the media and the general public, it is a Delta flight, the article said Delta Connection. If Delta does not like being associated with regional carriers that fly under their banner, they can change the routes to mainland.

Nothing to see here, just more bashing from b747erf. It really get old and so much misinformation from this source.

More importantly that which airline was involved, who made the tires?

wjcandee wrote:

... When it's a mainline DL aircraft, we could be talking about a 777 ending up with deflated tires on takeoff, which I think would be more interesting than it happening to an RJ.

That was the last thing on my mind when I made the title.

wjcandee wrote:

The difference in the distinction to me is that when I hear "Delta Connection", I think "small jet". When it's a mainline DL aircraft, we could be talking about a 777 ending up with deflated tires on takeoff, which I think would be more interesting than it happening to an RJ.

Actually, it would probably be a lot LESS interesting ... because a 777 has many more tires. 1-2 deflating is more of a non-event when there's 12 of them underneath your back end vs 4, or even 2.

Funny. I'm sure I had a post in here that's gone missing.

litz wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

The difference in the distinction to me is that when I hear "Delta Connection", I think "small jet". When it's a mainline DL aircraft, we could be talking about a 777 ending up with deflated tires on takeoff, which I think would be more interesting than it happening to an RJ.

Actually, it would probably be a lot LESS interesting ... because a 777 has many more tires. 1-2 deflating is more of a non-event when there's 12 of them underneath your back end vs 4, or even 2.

You say "tomayto", I say "tomahto".

Not to beat a dead horse but...was this a Patriots charter?