5 ms·

Is it possible that Dubai refused to let them land with a flyable but potentially pretty broken plane?

• ksrm 8y ago
  No
• nindalf 8y ago
  Do you think it's even theoretically possible that an air traffic controller will say "looks like you might be having trouble with your plane... we're not going to allow you to land here. Go elsewhere"
  • nopzor 8y ago
    No. If the pilot declares an emergency the pilot is in command, effectively.
• sokoloff 8y ago
  It is much more likely that Air India dispatch wanted the airplane repaired at a base where they have maintenance. I also suspect it was better for the crew to end their last airline flight as crew in their home country... A few years ago, was on a Delta flight out of Detroit to Boston. Over halfway to Boston, we turned back as the airplane had a maintenance issue that Delta wanted to deal with at DTW rather than BOS. (They do have a permanent presence at BOS, but a larger one at DTW.)
• manigandham 8y ago
  It would be the opposite, every major airport will be open for a plane in trouble.
  • cjbprime 8y ago
    And even non-major ones! I hear you can even land at an air force base in the US as a civilian private pilot without any negative consequences, providing you have declared emergency.
    • manigandham 8y ago
      Yes, if you have nowhere else to go, but it's a last resort and there's definitely a high chance of fines or more serious consequences, especially if it's an active base with sensitive material or operations.
      • cjbprime 8y ago
        I'm not aware of any more serious consequence having ever happened for a legit emergency, and I am aware of fatal accidents where private pilots were e.g. out of fuel and didn't realize the AFB was an option even though they could've made it.
        • bbulkow 8y ago
          You know, it's funny, you save the plane, then you get second guessed about whether you used air Force resources wisely, which can have serious repercussions. Or as a professional, have consequences to your career. It is a crap shoot, based on optics, and partially based on real data. You have to hope your investigator, or boss, sees the data the same way you did.... You made the opposite choice, lose your airframe and your life, and then you should 'clearly' have made the other decision, because the data's in...
      • mveety 8y ago
        No, that almost certainly wouldn't happen. If you declare, you're basically given cart blanche provided you can reasonably justify your actions, and if an AFB is closer than a civilian airport, for example, its absolutely okay to land there (though you should probably give them a call first saying you're landing). Your first priority is not dying; legal consequences don't matter when you're in that situation, and the FAA knows that. If breaking a law will save you they'd rather you do that than die, and they almost certainly won't punish you for it.
        • manigandham 8y ago
          Nobody is arguing that it's not ok, but consequences always exist regardless of conditions. In this case, it's not about the FAA. An military base can choose not to prosecute once they investigate, but don't assume that they are just fine with strangers landing. Emergencies can be staged and, as stated, if there are sensitive combat and intel operations ongoing then it will be a serious incident. This is no different than calling search and rescue to save your life, and then getting a bill afterwards. Still an emergency, and still has consequences.
  • oe 8y ago
    Sure. I just thought that they weren't in as much trouble that they needed to land immediately, but could have caused some trouble after landing.
• pbarnes_1 8y ago
  No. That's really not how anything works.