User avatar
TK105
Posts: 479
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 4:40 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:38 pm

TK787 wrote:
IIRC, 17/35 been used at the same time. I tried to search but couldn't find those pictures. But I remember clearly I saw photos, 17R is being used for take-offs, 17L planes landing at the same time. Maybe someone else can help. This was at least few years back when runway 5 wasn't used at the current rate.


THY748i wrote:
I remember both 17/35 L and R being used for takeoffs at the same time. Doesn't really increase capacity though since minimum separation needs to be respected due to wake turbulence.


I was on board multiple times for both parallel operations you are mentioning. The case TK787 mentioned is still used during strong southern wind bad weather conditions.

However parallel takeoffs mentioned by THY784i is no more used (to my knowledge), after an incident which both planes started running together at the same time on 35L and 35R. This was also on the news at that time. It was said that, tower had ordered to turn separate directions just after take off to avoid a collusions. There were also jokes about who took off first (like a drag race). Even someone claimed that B737 was the winner against A319 (if I remember well the types).
The future is in the skies.
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 3565
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:24 pm

An "emergency runway" is generally nothing more than a taxiway. Its not an actual runway meant for continual ongoing ops.

A good example of this is LGW. When its single runway is blocked the adjacent parallel taxiway can be utilized.

In the below picture you can see the adjacent LGW taxiway on the right which has some runway markings.

Image
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 3565
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:03 pm

Seems SITA was just appointed to implement IT infrastructure for baggage handling system as well at new airport.

https://www.sita.aero/pressroom/news-re ... om-day-one
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:12 pm

Has TK taken a serious look at the A321neo as a way to deepen its reach into Africa beyond what the B739ER can do, as well as carry a decent cargo load? (Currently a B739 flies as deep as Tanzania.) With a range of 3500 nmi, an A321neo could allow some triangular routes currently served with wide-bodies to become dedicated terminator services. The B739s could then be re-deployed on routes needing more capacity than the B738 or varied with the A320 and A321, or replace the sole B737 and eight A319s upgauged to B738s and A320s.)
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 3565
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:17 pm

TK has both the A321NEO and 737MAX on order.

First of 92 A321NEO will arrive in 2018.
 
User avatar
TK787
Topic Author
Posts: 3471
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:43 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:54 pm

TK just posted this on their Facebook page, and already 22 comments from confused pax.
What does this "Banderole Visa" mean?

"For our U.S. passport-holding passengers travelling to Turkey from outside the United States, the issuing of banderole visas is in effect."

Does it mean, you can get a visa on your US passport if you arrive to Turkey from outside the US??
 
User avatar
OA260
Posts: 22156
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:50 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:10 pm

TK787 wrote:
TK just posted this on their Facebook page, and already 22 comments from confused pax.
What does this "Banderole Visa" mean?



Wasnt Banderole the stickers that were placed in the passports after paying the cash at the visa desks before E Visas came in?
 
User avatar
TK787
Topic Author
Posts: 3471
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:43 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:25 pm

OA260 wrote:
TK787 wrote:
TK just posted this on their Facebook page, and already 22 comments from confused pax.
What does this "Banderole Visa" mean?



Wasnt Banderole the stickers that were placed in the passports after paying the cash at the visa desks before E Visas came in?

Yes, you win :)
Just got a response from TK's Facebook people:

"Hi, visas which are obtained at the border of the Republic of Turkey are called banderol visa."

So, this means, a US passport holder can arrive from a non-US city and go get a visa stamp for $20 and enter Turkey?
I wish they worded this clearer.
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:02 pm

TK787 wrote:
OA260 wrote:
TK787 wrote:
TK just posted this on their Facebook page, and already 22 comments from confused pax.
What does this "Banderole Visa" mean?



Wasnt Banderole the stickers that were placed in the passports after paying the cash at the visa desks before E Visas came in?

Yes, you win :)
Just got a response from TK's Facebook people:

"Hi, visas which are obtained at the border of the Republic of Turkey are called banderol visa."

So, this means, a US passport holder can arrive from a non-US city and go get a visa stamp for $20 and enter Turkey?
I wish they worded this clearer.

Nice try. But mostly useless, of course, for TK. Almost all of their US passengers (US citizens) come from the US. This is more favourable for the European carriers, as a stop in Europe would qualify them for a banderole visa. Makes no sense...but then, none of this does.
 
Tkfan
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 7:30 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:19 pm

TK787 wrote:
OA260 wrote:
TK787 wrote:
TK just posted this on their Facebook page, and already 22 comments from confused pax.
What does this "Banderole Visa" mean?



Wasnt Banderole the stickers that were placed in the passports after paying the cash at the visa desks before E Visas came in?

Yes, you win :)
Just got a response from TK's Facebook people:

"Hi, visas which are obtained at the border of the Republic of Turkey are called banderol visa."

So, this means, a US passport holder can arrive from a non-US city and go get a visa stamp for $20 and enter Turkey?
I wish they worded this clearer.

They can't either. The visa ban applies for passport/citizenship not original destination.

http://m.hurriyet.com.tr/amerikalilar-k ... r-40606296

Two cases reported, one arriving from US and another from AMS.
 
B747forever
Posts: 13213
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:44 pm

Have a question about IST runway ops. Last time I flew through IST, they had alternating take offs from 35L and 17L. Have never seen such set up before and wonder if that is something unique to IST and how often they use that set up?
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
User avatar
TK787
Topic Author
Posts: 3471
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:43 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:54 pm

B747forever wrote:
Have a question about IST runway ops. Last time I flew through IST, they had alternating take offs from 35L and 17L. Have never seen such set up before and wonder if that is something unique to IST and how often they use that set up?

Do you mean; one take off at 35L, next one 17L and back to 35L?? That would be crazy and probably you don't mean that.
 
B747forever
Posts: 13213
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 9:14 pm

TK787 wrote:
B747forever wrote:
Have a question about IST runway ops. Last time I flew through IST, they had alternating take offs from 35L and 17L. Have never seen such set up before and wonder if that is something unique to IST and how often they use that set up?

Do you mean; one take off at 35L, next one 17L and back to 35L?? That would be crazy and probably you don't mean that.


Yes, that is what I mean! Was quite surprised when I saw it. We took off from 35L, and there were a few heavies queuing at the other end for 17L as we passed. While waiting in the take off queue I saw a few airplanes take off toward us from 17L. Anyone has an account on FR24 and can playback for 17/9 around 1445-1510 LT (1145-1210 UTC) to confirm if in fact they used this configuration?
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
B747forever
Posts: 13213
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 9:19 pm

Okay, this confirms what actually took place.

My flight TK1795 35L http://flightaware.com/live/flight/THY1 ... /LTBA/ESSA

Random flight close to time frame (3min before my take off) TK35 17L http://flightaware.com/live/flight/THY3 ... /LTBA/CYUL
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
leftyboarder
Posts: 818
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:38 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:59 am

Wasn't there a claim that especially during summer heavy aircraft took off towards the sea to avoid obstacles to the north?
 
B747forever
Posts: 13213
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 8:12 am

leftyboarder wrote:
Wasn't there a claim that especially during summer heavy aircraft took off towards the sea to avoid obstacles to the north?


Interestingly, I saw mainly A330s use 17L, while everyone else went from 35L.
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
MeCe
Posts: 184
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:19 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:25 pm

B747forever wrote:
leftyboarder wrote:
Wasn't there a claim that especially during summer heavy aircraft took off towards the sea to avoid obstacles to the north?


Interestingly, I saw mainly A330s use 17L, while everyone else went from 35L.


Yes 330 can not take off with max payload from 35 because of engine out climb performance.
 
User avatar
globetrotter94
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 5:05 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:17 pm

These days, I am seeing such articles with some frequency regarding TK's relative lack of destinations in China and India. However, as TK's problem in both countries is governmental limitations, I am struggling to see how any expansion can occur. Any thoughts?

https://www.dailysabah.com/business/201 ... -and-india
All roads may lead to Rome, but every city has flights to Istanbul.
 
User avatar
TK787
Topic Author
Posts: 3471
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:43 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:18 pm

globetrotter94 wrote:
These days, I am seeing such articles with some frequency regarding TK's relative lack of destinations in China and India. However, as TK's problem in both countries is governmental limitations, I am struggling to see how any expansion can occur. Any thoughts?

https://www.dailysabah.com/business/201 ... -and-india

"Third Airport", "third runway", "eight 747-8s" :)
You are right, bilaterals is the only sticking point. I guess TK will keep trying in China, India, Canada to get more frequencies.
 
renaissance
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:41 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 8:01 pm

Delivery brand new Airbus 320 NEO TC-NBL - Pegasus Airlines.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/pegasusun-ye ... -edildi-3/
 
User avatar
globetrotter94
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 5:05 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 8:22 pm

TK787 wrote:
globetrotter94 wrote:
These days, I am seeing such articles with some frequency regarding TK's relative lack of destinations in China and India. However, as TK's problem in both countries is governmental limitations, I am struggling to see how any expansion can occur. Any thoughts?

https://www.dailysabah.com/business/201 ... -and-india

"Third Airport", "third runway", "eight 747-8s" :)
You are right, bilaterals is the only sticking point. I guess TK will keep trying in China, India, Canada to get more frequencies.


Well, good luck to them on that certainly... another idea I was thinking might be, what about investing in local carriers and setting up codeshare networks through Istanbul, with ???-IST-??? flight operated by the local carrier? Might work in India's case, where the Indian government might look at TK's request more favorably if the Indian allotment of the bilaterals were filled up somehow (doesn't have to be O&D traffic)? May be too crazy an idea?
All roads may lead to Rome, but every city has flights to Istanbul.
 
User avatar
mafaky
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:04 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:24 am

TK787 wrote:
You are right, bilaterals is the only sticking point. I guess TK will keep trying in China, India, Canada to get more frequencies.


Wouldn't this be a rather "wishful thinking"???

By definition, "bilateral" works for both sides concerned. In case of India & China, no carriers from these countries fly to Turkey. In case of Canada, AC sometimes comes and then goes. So before the other ends' carriers start regularly flying to Turkey with the same frequencies, the authorities in those countries will not consider Turkey's (for TK), request for increasing the already assigned and agreed frequencies?

The New Istanbul Airport is claimed to overcome "some" problems and shortcomings of IST/AHL Airport; by providing ample slots, pax handling capacity, parking space, even seamless a380 operations. But I think all these arguments are BS in the presence of today's conditions and politics. :ashamed:

Anyone can give a reasonable answer as why China isn't sending in 1 million tourists a year, based upon the agreement (or let's say "promise" made by the Chinese authorities) after Turkey allowed the hulk of Varyag passing the Turkish Straits? :banghead: :evil:
A veteran Electronics & Communications Engineer from Istanbul-Turkey, highly interested in civil and military aviation.
 
User avatar
mafaky
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:04 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:25 am

TK787 wrote:
You are right, bilaterals is the only sticking point. I guess TK will keep trying in China, India, Canada to get more frequencies.


Wouldn't this be a rather "wishful thinking"???

By definition, "bilateral" works for both sides concerned. In case of India & China, no carriers from these countries fly to Turkey. In case of Canada, AC sometimes comes and then goes. So before the other ends' carriers start regularly flying to Turkey with the same frequencies, the authorities in those countries will not consider Turkey's (for TK), request for increasing the already assigned and agreed frequencies?

The New Istanbul Airport is claimed to overcome "some" problems and shortcomings of IST/AHL Airport; by providing ample slots, pax handling capacity, parking space, even seamless a380 operations. But I think all these arguments are BS in the presence of today's conditions and politics. :ashamed:

Anyone can give a reasonable answer as why China isn't sending in 1 million tourists a year, based upon the agreement (or let's say "promise" made by the Chinese authorities) after Turkey allowed the hulk of Varyag passing the Turkish Straits? :banghead: :evil:
A veteran Electronics & Communications Engineer from Istanbul-Turkey, highly interested in civil and military aviation.
 
User avatar
ankaraflyjet
Posts: 366
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:34 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:24 pm

I read at airporthaber that THY is reinstating Ankara Paris Ankara direct flights as of 31 October 2017. Anybody has information on flight details as it is not loaded on TK website yet...
 
User avatar
OA260
Posts: 22156
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:50 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:56 pm

ankaraflyjet wrote:
I read at airporthaber that THY is reinstating Ankara Paris Ankara direct flights as of 31 October 2017. Anybody has information on flight details as it is not loaded on TK website yet...


Tues/Sat flights ESB 0950 CDG 1150 TK 1831
Tues/Sat flights CDG 1250 ESB 1845 TK 1832
 
User avatar
mafaky
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:04 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:32 pm

Interesting: Who would go to Paris from Ankara on a saturday morning?
A veteran Electronics & Communications Engineer from Istanbul-Turkey, highly interested in civil and military aviation.
 
User avatar
TK105
Posts: 479
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 4:40 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:50 pm

mafaky wrote:
Interesting: Who would go to Paris from Ankara on a saturday morning?

Is this a serious question?
The future is in the skies.
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:06 pm

TK105 wrote:
mafaky wrote:
Interesting: Who would go to Paris from Ankara on a saturday morning?

Is this a serious question?

Most definitely. Saturday is the least travelled day of the week, in general. If a flight is operated 6 times weekly, it is most often every day except Saturdays. I agree with my friend mafaky that a twice weekly flight is odd in being operated on a Saturday.
 
User avatar
ankaraflyjet
Posts: 366
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:34 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Fri Oct 13, 2017 2:55 am

Thank you for the information, much appreciated, I do this route a couple of times a year, I wish they started with three weekly frequency but better than nothing.

I am sure it will be popular and also the time of the flights are good, I hope LHR will follow...

OA260 wrote:
ankaraflyjet wrote:
I read at airporthaber that THY is reinstating Ankara Paris Ankara direct flights as of 31 October 2017. Anybody has information on flight details as it is not loaded on TK website yet...


Tues/Sat flights ESB 0950 CDG 1150 TK 1831
Tues/Sat flights CDG 1250 ESB 1845 TK 1832
 
renaissance
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:41 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:39 am

Turkish airlines TK673 Mombasa to İstanbul Atatürk cancelled for bird strike.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/thy-mombasa- ... eri-dondu/
 
renaissance
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:41 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:37 pm

Turkish Airlines TK35 returned İstanbul Atatürk Airport for sick passenger. Now burning fuel Marmara Sea.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/thy-montreal ... geri-dondu Image
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 21827
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:01 am

Reports from within Turkey's defence secretariat suggest that the TRJ program based on Dornier 328 might have been canceled due to being "too costly."
Reports suggest plans enter the commercial aircraft manufacturing industry continue, but would do so by looking at other models and different investments.


Turkey's TRJet regional programme reported to be cancelled
http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/turkey ... elled.html

=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
mafaky
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:04 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 6:20 am

renaissance wrote:
Turkish Airlines TK35 returned İstanbul Atatürk Airport for sick passenger. Now burning fuel Marmara Sea.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/thy-montreal ... geri-dondu


That 333 (TC-LOA), circled around for more than 7 hours to burn fuel and reach the allowable safe landing weight. Apparently it wasn't equipped with a fuel dumping system. I read in Wiki, that Boeing 767, Airbus 300/310/330 models can be ordered with or without fuel dumping systems. Now I wonder:
1) Does any of TK's 332 & 333 birds have fuel dumping systems (including the leased ones and the cargo versions)?
2) If only some do have the said infrastructure, what is the reason why they have sent this particular frame (w/o fuel dumping system) to an ER flight out to Canada: obviously necessiating a take-off at IST at max. allowable payload? What if that pax hadn't just fainted but would be having a hearth attack? Would the captain be brave enough to make an immediate landing taking the risks to break up that bird?
A veteran Electronics & Communications Engineer from Istanbul-Turkey, highly interested in civil and military aviation.
 
User avatar
globetrotter94
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 5:05 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 6:35 am

mafaky wrote:
renaissance wrote:
Turkish Airlines TK35 returned İstanbul Atatürk Airport for sick passenger. Now burning fuel Marmara Sea.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/thy-montreal ... geri-dondu


That 333 (TC-LOA), circled around for more than 7 hours to burn fuel and reach the allowable safe landing weight. Apparently it wasn't equipped with a fuel dumping system. I read in Wiki, that Boeing 767, Airbus 300/310/330 models can be ordered with or without fuel dumping systems. Now I wonder:
1) Does any of TK's 332 & 333 birds have fuel dumping systems (including the leased ones and the cargo versions)?
2) If only some do have the said infrastructure, what is the reason why they have sent this particular frame (w/o fuel dumping system) to an ER flight out to Canada: obviously necessiating a take-off at IST at max. allowable payload? What if that pax hadn't just fainted but would be having a hearth attack? Would the captain be brave enough to make an immediate landing taking the risks to break up that bird?


I was wondering if the fact that TC-LOA is an ex-Skymark bird might have something to do with it, but then saw that the actual aircraft is TC-JOA rather than TC-LOA--and JOA, to my knowledge, is one of TK's factory birds, so that cannot be an excuse.

What is less alarming to me is that some of TK's A330s may not have fuel-dumping systems, but rather that A330s are allowed to be sold without fuel-dumping systems at all! Is it possible that the fuel-dumping system was somehow inoperative, rather than not being present at all?
All roads may lead to Rome, but every city has flights to Istanbul.
 
ist2014
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 9:06 am

Skymark birds are TC-LOA-G
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 3565
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 3:59 pm

Majority of A330-300s are not equipped with fuel jettison capability. Equipping planes with fuel jettison capability adds both cost and weight. The weight of the added plumbing and pumps can instead be used for things like payload, or simply reduced fuel burn.
 
georgiabill
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 4:17 pm

What are the plans for IST after new airport opens? Couldn't TK use it for O&D routes to Europe,Middle East and Africa, while using the new airport as it's hub until additional runways are operational and terminal space allows all TK flights to operate from it?
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:13 pm

mafaky wrote:
renaissance wrote:
Turkish Airlines TK35 returned İstanbul Atatürk Airport for sick passenger. Now burning fuel Marmara Sea.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/thy-montreal ... geri-dondu


That 333 (TC-LOA), circled around for more than 7 hours to burn fuel and reach the allowable safe landing weight. Apparently it wasn't equipped with a fuel dumping system. I read in Wiki, that Boeing 767, Airbus 300/310/330 models can be ordered with or without fuel dumping systems. Now I wonder:
1) Does any of TK's 332 & 333 birds have fuel dumping systems (including the leased ones and the cargo versions)?
2) If only some do have the said infrastructure, what is the reason why they have sent this particular frame (w/o fuel dumping system) to an ER flight out to Canada: obviously necessiating a take-off at IST at max. allowable payload? What if that pax hadn't just fainted but would be having a hearth attack? Would the captain be brave enough to make an immediate landing taking the risks to break up that bird?

It is my understanding that the A330 can make safe overweight landings at MTOW, so there is no need for brave captains. The plane was built to land just fine without dumping fuel.
 
renaissance
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:41 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:18 pm

Today one more divert Turkish Airlines. TK33 İstanbul Atatürk to Houston diverted Roma Fuimicino formedical emergency.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/thy-houston- ... ya-iniyor/
 
Bozk
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 11:02 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:26 pm

In 7 hours the plane could fly to Iceland. I know the pilots knew that but why did they think this was a bad idea?
 
User avatar
globetrotter94
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 5:05 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:53 pm

MalevTU134 wrote:
mafaky wrote:
renaissance wrote:
Turkish Airlines TK35 returned İstanbul Atatürk Airport for sick passenger. Now burning fuel Marmara Sea.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/thy-montreal ... geri-dondu


That 333 (TC-LOA), circled around for more than 7 hours to burn fuel and reach the allowable safe landing weight. Apparently it wasn't equipped with a fuel dumping system. I read in Wiki, that Boeing 767, Airbus 300/310/330 models can be ordered with or without fuel dumping systems. Now I wonder:
1) Does any of TK's 332 & 333 birds have fuel dumping systems (including the leased ones and the cargo versions)?
2) If only some do have the said infrastructure, what is the reason why they have sent this particular frame (w/o fuel dumping system) to an ER flight out to Canada: obviously necessiating a take-off at IST at max. allowable payload? What if that pax hadn't just fainted but would be having a hearth attack? Would the captain be brave enough to make an immediate landing taking the risks to break up that bird?

It is my understanding that the A330 can make safe overweight landings at MTOW, so there is no need for brave captains. The plane was built to land just fine without dumping fuel.


Which then begs the question that if its only a couple extra checklists that need to be done before a landing is possible, why the pilots chose instead to circle for 7 hours to burn fuel...
All roads may lead to Rome, but every city has flights to Istanbul.
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:58 pm

globetrotter94 wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
mafaky wrote:

That 333 (TC-LOA), circled around for more than 7 hours to burn fuel and reach the allowable safe landing weight. Apparently it wasn't equipped with a fuel dumping system. I read in Wiki, that Boeing 767, Airbus 300/310/330 models can be ordered with or without fuel dumping systems. Now I wonder:
1) Does any of TK's 332 & 333 birds have fuel dumping systems (including the leased ones and the cargo versions)?
2) If only some do have the said infrastructure, what is the reason why they have sent this particular frame (w/o fuel dumping system) to an ER flight out to Canada: obviously necessiating a take-off at IST at max. allowable payload? What if that pax hadn't just fainted but would be having a hearth attack? Would the captain be brave enough to make an immediate landing taking the risks to break up that bird?

It is my understanding that the A330 can make safe overweight landings at MTOW, so there is no need for brave captains. The plane was built to land just fine without dumping fuel.


Which then begs the question that if its only a couple extra checklists that need to be done before a landing is possible, why the pilots chose instead to circle for 7 hours to burn fuel...

I would like not to comment on that, mainly because I am not competent to do so, and none of us has all the info of what actually happened up there, but suffice it to say that TK pilots have had all but stellar performances at landings in the past (KTM and other incidents just in the last few years), so maybe it is just as well they didn't try an overweight landing.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 21827
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 8:06 pm

globetrotter94 wrote:
What is less alarming to me is that some of TK's A330s may not have fuel-dumping systems, but rather that A330s are allowed to be sold without fuel-dumping systems at all! Is it possible that the fuel-dumping system was somehow inoperative, rather than not being present at all?


Why is it alarming? Large variety of models including from Boeing do not have fuel jettison capability whatsoever not even an option including the brand new 737MAX family entering service. Certainly, its not seen as an issue by regulators, manufacturers or airlines.

globetrotter94 wrote:
Which then begs the question that if its only a couple extra checklists that need to be done before a landing is possible, why the pilots chose instead to circle for 7 hours to burn fuel...


Its a lot more than just a crew checklist. Maintenance must perform an overweight landing inspection which will take the plane out of service for a bit.
Also overweight landings increase risk of damage or incident obviously.

Bozk wrote:
In 7 hours the plane could fly to Iceland. I know the pilots knew that but why did they think this was a bad idea?


Why go to Iceland and potentially get stuck? Returning to IST allows TK recrew the flight and take care of passengers certainly much better fashion.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
mafaky
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:04 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 9:18 pm

ist2014 wrote:
Skymark birds are TC-LOA-G


Sorry my typo-mistake, while writing in a hurry. The frame that toured around for 7+ hrs. is TC-JOA.
A veteran Electronics & Communications Engineer from Istanbul-Turkey, highly interested in civil and military aviation.
 
abrelosojos
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 6:48 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 9:55 pm

The 787 in TK colors looks very good.

Saludos,
Alex
Live, and let live.
 
stylo777
Posts: 2130
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:32 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 10:55 pm

abrelosojos wrote:
The 787 in TK colors looks very good.

Saludos,
Alex

Where did you see it Alex? ;)
 
User avatar
globetrotter94
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 5:05 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sat Oct 14, 2017 11:11 pm

georgiabill wrote:
What are the plans for IST after new airport opens? Couldn't TK use it for O&D routes to Europe,Middle East and Africa, while using the new airport as it's hub until additional runways are operational and terminal space allows all TK flights to operate from it?


My understanding was that it was to be converted to a convention center, but I don't have any more details other than this.
All roads may lead to Rome, but every city has flights to Istanbul.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 21827
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:05 am

Per the DHMI (State Airport Authority) GM, Ataturk will in short term serve as a general aviation, cargo, flight training and MRO location.

https://www.dailysabah.com/business/201 ... port-opens

TK Technic and Onur Air Technics for example will still need IST as new airport facilities will not be complete for the opening, while the recently expanded Turkish Aviation Academy is also at IST.

Longer term ideas are to turn the airport into mixed use convention facilities, hotels, and commercial business park area along with green space.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
gokmengs
Posts: 906
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 2:48 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:01 am

mafaky wrote:
renaissance wrote:
Turkish Airlines TK35 returned İstanbul Atatürk Airport for sick passenger. Now burning fuel Marmara Sea.
http://www.goklerdeyiz.net/thy-montreal ... geri-dondu


That 333 (TC-LOA), circled around for more than 7 hours to burn fuel and reach the allowable safe landing weight. Apparently it wasn't equipped with a fuel dumping system. I read in Wiki, that Boeing 767, Airbus 300/310/330 models can be ordered with or without fuel dumping systems. Now I wonder:
1) Does any of TK's 332 & 333 birds have fuel dumping systems (including the leased ones and the cargo versions)?
2) If only some do have the said infrastructure, what is the reason why they have sent this particular frame (w/o fuel dumping system) to an ER flight out to Canada: obviously necessiating a take-off at IST at max. allowable payload? What if that pax hadn't just fainted but would be having a hearth attack? Would the captain be brave enough to make an immediate landing taking the risks to break up that bird?

I also thought of the same thing its really bad for emergency health situations, 7 hours do sound a bit too long to reach that landing weight, also from the pictures the gear was up, probably would burn more with gear down with a bit annoying noise for the pax.
I also think on widebody ac the fuel dump sytem should be standart. We all know TK didn't pay 200k for its gaspar fans an 777' ;)
Yaşa Mustafa Kemal Paşa Yaşa, Adın Yazılacak Mücevher Taşa
 
User avatar
mafaky
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:04 am

Re: Turkish Aviation October 2017

Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:03 am

LAXintl wrote:
Longer term ideas are to turn the airport into mixed use convention facilities, hotels, and commercial business park area along with green space.


Anybody sane and sober enough to believe that, particularly after it has been announced by the (mouthpiece) Minister of Transportation and expressing at the very beginning that it's been Erdogan's wishes and "instructions" to be so...??? Come on, it's 12 km2 piece of land in one of the most prestigious part of the town, and there are already two hotels and two convention sites and four office tower blocks in the vicinity!!! And there are already "made" plans to demolish those blocks and the bigger area convention center and re-build a huuuge convention center in their place. :lol: :?: :roll:
A veteran Electronics & Communications Engineer from Istanbul-Turkey, highly interested in civil and military aviation.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos