Re: in-flight engine shutdown / antiquated ATC equip

From:         kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Chicago Software Works, Menlo Park, California
Date:         01 May 95 02:44:03 
References:   1
Followups:    1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>ATC lost radio contact with a UA jetliner over the North Altlantic as
>the Boeing 767, having lost one of its two engines, headed on an
>emergency course for Bermuda ...

Which immediately led me to think ETOPS.  However, later reports said
the flight was UA 987, JFK-GRU (Sau Paulo, Brazil), which does not
require ETOPS even though it does use ETOPS-rated equipment.

>Controllers say that if the plane had been forced to ditch in the
>water, they would not have had a precise location to send rescuers.

Except, as you note later, the aircraft was in constant contact with
United in Chicago via more modern communications equipment, and thus
its position was known and could have been communicated to resuce
operations should it have been forced to ditch.  The whole article
seemed rather stilted to me, with the real problem (archaic radio for
trans-oceanic ATC) lost in hysteria.

--
Karl Swartz	|INet	kls@ohare.chicago.com
1-415/854-3409	|UUCP	uunet!decwrl!ditka!kls
		|Snail	2144 Sand Hill Rd., Menlo Park CA 94025, USA
 Send sci.aeronautics.airliners submissions to airliners@chicago.com