Juan, on the 767 there's a tilt switch that if the switch is inop, the gear is inhibited to retract. The mindset is to not to retract the gear if not tilted. The gear only fits tilted in the wheel well. I'm pretty sure that's why the gear handle would not initially go up. I'm in favor of fuel dump systems. I started my career on two and four engine airplanes with fuel dump systems, and air turn backs after dumping was a matter of minutes, not hours. Holding for four hours single engine with gear damage, and the possibility of hyd system loss, I'm putting her down and take the overweight landing, with #5 tire blown. Again, superb video.
Hey Juan... from a long time radio guy... This is a great job of reporting. You seemed not so rushed and frantic to think of thoughts. I applaud your efforts. Been watching you religiously since Oroville 1st day....You look healthier too. Hope you get your wings back soon!!!!!!!! I love watching you fly that plane!!!! Patreon here i come...
Have had tire blow outs on the 757 before. Never took out an engine, but we did have a chunk of rubber come forward and take out a leading edge slat one time. I have always thought like you, better to leave the gear down. Rather than retract it and maybe not get it back down. Unless you need it retracted for performance to keep the airplane flying. Not likely a problem in the 757/767. Also helps to burn off fuel with the extra drag. Never know what kind of actual damage you have, or problems with damaged squat switches etc. But, all is well that ends well! Great job by all involved including the crew! :)
@@davidpoulin6961 I am sure that was part of their decision process in raising the gear. Without being there or knowing all of the details of their weight and performance, surrounding terrain, and system malfunctions indicated in the flight deck you can't second guess them. If you need too retract the gear to maintain a certain climb gradient or for safety (keeping the aircraft flying) there is certainly nothing wrong with that. Maybe based on the visual inspection from the other aircraft they felt comfortable raising the gear. But the other consideration is raising a damaged landing gear and possibly creating more systems problems, or not getting the gear back down again. When you have a tire blow out like that, even with a visual inspection from another aircraft, you still don't know the full extent of your damage. Often in a situation like this there is not necessarily a right or a wrong action. It is based on all of the knowledge and information that you have available at the time, previous experience, training and procedure, and often split second decisions. Even though this problem started on the take off roll, the crew had a lot of work ahead of them. They had to complete the takeoff and climb phase. All be it a short climb! Analyze their problems. Run all of the appropriate normal and abnormal checklists. Communicate with ATC, the flight attendants, and company. Consider their fuel load and landing weight. And at the same time fly the aircraft and make decisions on their next course of action. Discuss and brief their plan of action. They were no doubt very, very busy! This crew obviously worked well together and got an aircraft with multiple major malfunctions back on the ground safely. With no injuries. I'd say they all deserved a cold liquid refreshment at the bar after they were all done with their duties! Pilots and flight attendants alike. It takes the entire crew, up front, and in the cabin to have a safe and uneventful outcome like this!
Being a 767 driver for 20 years, I would also tend towards leaving the gear down with a known issue. (actually had to do that one dark night in 2001). That said, it's possible that with the gear down, single engine, they might be pushing continuous thrust limits. Since it sounds like they were really intent on lowering the landing weight, perhaps they were trying to reduce the stress on the remaining engine. For me, after assessing things, I think I just would have put her down nice and gentle on the 13K runway with foamcrete. Single engine, with looming possible hydraulic issues, 4 hours is a long darn time.
I agree with everybody here about the considerations faced by the crew as they processed the the best courses of action not addressed in the checklists. They were lucky that the exploding tire shrapnel didn't take out one or more hydraulic lines/systems! That would have increased the cockpit workload considerably! Well done by all concerned. We shouldn't argue with success by Monday morning quarterbacking.
Greatings from Madrid, Spain. I´m sure that the Madrid tower preffer a rigth turn instead left cause that avoid to have a damage plane fliying at low altitude over the middle of the city.
I think the confusion was not about turning to the west initially, it was about the holding instructions. they were cleared to hold on a radial 20 miles south of PDT and the crew understand to hold at PDT with 20 miles long legs so they started the turn to hold at PDT
Who here replays the intro just for the song? *raises hand* Thanks for all the content Juan. You are doing an outstanding job with the thorough/fast coverage!
If I didn't have to , I probably would have left the gear down . And buzzing around with one engine will make you pucker as well . Everyone OK is proof that they made the right calls for that incident . And if there's a 3 mile long military runway nearby , that sounds like a no brainer . But then all my flying has been done from a passenger seat , the same one i would have crapped myself in .
bull frogger I think leaving the gear down would mean greater drag. Think of the concorde crash. If they had raised the landing gear they might have made it.
@@TheJttv I think it's a bit of levity in a serious situation that was extremely well handled by everyone involved. Perhaps the cabin crew limited the drinks to one with the meal. 😉
The smell of rubber inside...Just because the first compressor stage is also used for compressing the cabin! Well known are the storys about the oil fumes...
This one brings back some memories, Juan. I used to fly F-4's at Torrejon AB, Spain. This incident is fascinating. The crew did an excellent job of handling an almost simultaneous blown tire and engine failure on takeoff. Plus it didn't hurt to have a young, Spanish fighter pilot to scramble and give them a look over. Great video as always Juan.
What ! Another no BS just straight forward report. I sure do like your spin on what you might have done without actually saying it. You new subscribers will pick up on what i am refuring to soon enough. Thanks Juan
I watched this on VAS the day it happened, it was interesting the crew chose to retract the gear as I thought I heard it jammed on the initial retract, that was the reason for the flyby, enough debris must have fallen off eventually that it cleared into the gear bay.
Hi Juan. While not a pilot, my Dad would also think its a good ideal to leave the gear down. He was a passenger on a Hadley Page Dart-Herald departing Charlottetown PE. for Halifax NS., which couldn't get any gear status lights after takeoff. After cycling the gear several times with the tower observing (via binoculars) the crew decided it was a bulb or switch problem, so they put the gear up and headed across the Northumberland straight to Halifax. Dad said he would have rathered they had left the gear down on the way to Halifax, given that the tower had confirmed the gear looked down and locked, and its not a long flight. Cheers
Juan, thank you very much for this review. This emergency was all over the news in Europe. Very happy it all worked out fine! Great cooperation between the crew and the Spanish people. Very happy to see the Spanish pilot being available for assistance. Amazing there was footage of the actual blow out of the tyre.
I smiled when you mentioned Torrejon AFB, my father was deputy base commander 1967 to 1970. What fond memories I have of that assignment of my dads, I enjoy your videos!
You do a great job Juan. Your channel should be viewed by every commercial pilot for the valuable "hanger talk" learning. I would have never thought of UA-cam video as a tool in this situation but now you have helped spread the word on a good idea.
Juan.. Im up here in Reno, started following you when you were reporting on the Paradise fire. Im certainly not into aviation, however, Im becoming more interested all the time because I appreciate your insight so much!!
"We were gonna take the helicopter but it had a flat tire". Never had to check the skid pressure on our 206LIII. Autos to a run on landing were rough on them. Thanks again Juan - you are the best. My ONLY source for accurate aviation news.
Okay, but if you have a compressor stall on a 206, you're REALLY in trouble, depending on altitude, airspeed and what's below you, because you're going down for sure.
@@ljfinger That's why you are taught to stay out of the so-called "Dead Man's Curve" - the "Height Velocity Chart". Basically the slower you fly the higher you must be to autorotate. In a properly flown autorotation you can touch down as gently as a landing with no damage except to your underwear.
ljfinger If one is really being nerdy the vast majority of 206s are single engine. Only a few (13 I think) were converted to 206LT TwinRangers, the real twin engine JetRangers are the 427 and 429 GlobalRangers although they are quite a lot bigger overall, carrying more passengers as well... alright I’m done lol.
Another well done example of the value of redundancy....in this case it applies to the pooled knowledge, much of it gained through years of experience. I'm uneasy as to how this plays out going forward with the ongoing shortages at all levels. Thanks again, Juan. Journey mercies!
Hi Juan, excellent reporting, analysis, and great photos. Thank you so much for your extensive time, expertise and editing to make this video possible to a receptive audience. - Dean from Minnesota
@@rainmaker3700 Or stay sober so you can run like hell. I was on a jet that dumped fuel because the nose gear light would not come on. I was prepared. We landed on the 3rd pass. The night before I was in an earthquake on the 13th floor of a hotel. I put my shoes and pants by the door and went to sleep. Any rumble and I was going to Forrest Gump it.
Kevin Moore..Proven fact you stay more calm, don’t feel as much pain and can run faster while inebriated!! Lol, just giving you a hard time. I like to think I would be calm in that situation as I have had in-flight emergencies as a captain, but in that situation it’s hard to know what you might actually do....especially since you have limited information at the time and with pilot/aircraft knowledge (may have known it was a blowout, and certainly with an ongoing compressor stall, but as Juan pointed out it would be hard to decipher at first) you would be going through all sorts of scenarios in your head. Even if you had been dipping into the Sangria, I would imagine you would sober up pretty quickly in this scenario.
@@specforged5651 Staying sober save your life. In past I break my hip accidentaly at sunday morning, in the empty yard at manufacturing plant. It was -5C and I slip on the ice under shalow water puddle. First feeling was, stupid idiot you will spend day at work in wet clothes. Second strong pain and third - I cant get up. Later I was surprised how calm I was and mind imediately start to find solution from situation, you know that guards wil go around in hour but I was wet and cold. Fortunately my phone was in my front pocket and fifteen minutes later some maintenance guy found me when I was trying to call help, bad signal... I was focused only to survive and rest was unimportant. And this remains in my mind up to leaving hospital.
Thanks Juan. In 1992 virtually the same thing happened to us in a 767-300, even the same tyre! ... except that the tyre rubber hit the fuselage under L1, (left a black skid mark) then hit the right engine and dented the very front of the cowl- ie: VERY nearly went in to the right engine. We were right on max weight, a VERY hot day, so would have been “interesting” had we lost the engine. Early 767- 300’s including ours had no fuel dump capabilities. We also had a “left side brace” or “left drag brace” EICAS message- I forget which- (and did not retract the gear) due damages to the wiring harness and proximity switch. We also circled for a while to burn fuel and work out our strategy .... (though not four hours).
Love Juan's in-depth coverage of the dwindling (fortunately) but still "muy importante occurrence of aviation mishap incidences that still happen. Shout out to his brethren in the Spanish Air Force who handled this tedious situation admirably.
As you can see from the photo from the escort aircraft, the crew had left the gear down after takeoff. The plane must have been stabilized, so no reason to raise the gear. In the wheel well, there isn’t very much room. A blown tire might cause some damage to the hydraulic systems in the w/w. Also, the actuator that tilts the gear could also have been damage, so the gear might damage itself and gear doors or airframe if retracted. One time we had a QF fly from Australia to LAX with a blown a tire on T/O. The gear was already up, so they just continued the flight. They only had to do one landing one way or another. After landing, we changed the wheel after he taxied to the gate.
I always leave Juan's channel understanding a lot more than when entering. Breaking things down to the point where novices can understand what happened in aircraft events and accidents... Another Good Job!
Juan, after the peak safest year in aviation (2017), with all these recents incidents do you think the aviation industry is improving or regressing? I feel it regressing as experienced pilots retire from the "old guard"
@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer There isn't a ground crew shortage. (ground crew meaning baggage handlers, line and shop maintenance, fueling staff, catering staff, cleaning, etc). Data shows hiring and retention levels are nominal across the industry, but there could be *regional* areas that the data doesn't account for. Also, the Pilot shortage seems to be critically short on experienced *Captains*, as the FO hiring trends seem to be "on the line" as they say. It's the Captains however, that usually make/break experience shortfalls. I believe within the next 3-5 years, the FO side of things will also fall behind, and then we will be in interesting times indeed.
Always great when they make it back OK, lots learned here, perhaps retrofitting cameras on all commercial AC would be cheaper than scrambling fighters, but not as much fun ha ha, I`m with you on the gear retraction, there could have been indiscernible damage to the mech or some of those shreds could have jammed.... perhaps some recommendations will come in the future. Thanks for this extremely well done report as always!
Thank you. I am not a pilot, and don’t work in aviation industry, but loved all aspects of aviation since I can remember. I watch most of your videos. Thank you
The "main gear tilt position monitor+sensor", if memory serves, assigns what is essentially a checksum value - as part of the "gear retract command", from the landing gear actuator lever/switch (technically, a detent + toggle??). When they did the "Lauda Fix", a "synchronous sequence go/no-go" system was added in order to lockout the thrust reverser deployment while in flight. The autothrottle disconnect is included in there somewhere, too, but that was 30 years back , and I'm kinda fuzzy on the rest of that minutia. I'm certain, that at the very least, a "check gear before retraction" indication was somehow alerted. I don't remember if the MCDU is part of that system's function monitoring, or not.
I suspect the mcdu doesn't alert on the likely failed position indicators. That's likely what led to the f18 to inspect. Usually in my line of work we just low approach and have someone in the tower check the gear.... why ever would you raise it post inspection blows my mind though....
I've been banging my head against the wall, trying to remember the system's 'override capability'; there was something on the hydraulic side of the system, which triggered an 'alert mode', and one of the resets required MCDU interaction.
Now that we all got used to mobile phone recordings of incidents being available and shown on primetime news the same night, the next level of course here was "check UA-cam to see how it looks" while they were still flying around...
Everyone hatches a plan to relieve The BAR and Duty free trolley of any extra weight for landing... Only to be informed that anything passed passes into a Holding Tank so will not help. Nice thoughts. Lots of love David and Lily recovering from Clara the WIND.
You know Juan, I am going to have withdrawals when you go back to your 9 to 5 job. I will have to go back to the regular news media, though I am one notch smarter now for all your teachings to a non pilot! Thanks and great work...
As always, Juan, excellent review and analysis of this incident. I would only have humbly added that in this situation without a fuel dumping capability, an additional consideration to burning down on-board fuel quantity to reduce landing weight would be to reduce post-landing fuel-fed fire potential should the aircraft depart the runway during roll out. I agree with you about the crew's decision to retract the gear during the lengthy hold. Besides the obvious risk that the left gear might hang up in the well and not extend again, the reduction in drag with gear retracted prolonged the hold by reducing the rate of fuel burn off. I always enjoy all of your podcasts, and I'm trying to watch all of them you made before I discovered Blancolirio. In my career at Continental I flew all three seats on the DC-10, F/O on the 747, and captain on the 737NG, and 757. Of them all, like you, my favorite was the 757 with the RB-211 motors....what a sweet machine! It's sad that it's economics led to its early retirement from the passenger fleets. On the night of the Millenium rollover, I flew one from LAS to EWR with less than a hundred hours since delivery. It smelled like a new car! We were airborne at Millenium midnight, and everything kept working like clockwork, no hiccups! Keep up the good work. You are thoroughly appreciated worldwide throughout the aviation community.
Hi Juan. Thanks for another good video. Just a few things that may be of interest. The tire failure resulted in tread and carcass being ingested into number one engine. This caused extensive fan blade damage along with some acoustic liner damage, This damage caused the engine surge and stall. The crew shut the engine down as I am assuming the EGT was climbing along with a loss of power...... I'm not entirely sure that they tried to retract the gear, but they were aware of loss of pressure on one wheel on that bogey. So I think the quickly put two and two together and decided to keep the gear down. They were probably concerned that there may have been further gear damage and that is probably why they wanted to lighten the aircraft as much as possible before landing. I'm sure the were in touch with SOC, Dispatch, and Maintenance Control to decide on the best course of action. The F-18 was a nice touch and really helpful to reassure he crew that the damage was just a main wheel and probably not structural.
Juan as always your analysys is dead on. Kudos to the air Canada crew as well of all those involved in Madrid and across the Atlantic. Btw Juan you must be an Airbus pilot...Ecam on Airbus and Eicas on Boeing metal 🙂🙂
I was on a Delta MD88 flight out of ORF years ago when we had the same emergency except it was the right bogey and the the number 2 engine at V1. The crew did retract the gear and the smell of burnt rubber was very apparent after liftoff on the remaining engine. It took about 20 seconds before the gear came down again. Once safely airborne and at about 2000’ the first officer came aft and looked through the periscope to see the damage to the right main gear (under my seat). It ended up being a thrown tread and the carcass still looked inflated. We assumed the position for the emergency landing 30 mins later but it was a normal landing and we taxied back to the gate. I thanked the crew for their calm and professional actions on my way out of the cabin. Of course the TV crews didn’t want to talk to me when I exited the jetway because I wasn’t blubbering that I thought I was going to die!!!!
Those tires will do some damage. We had a pilot land in a Super Hornet with the anti skid off. They locked up and the port side blew. It went threw the intake and destroyed the engine. Couldnt beleive it actually went through the side of the intake like that. Also messed up the TEF as well
In relation to your preference of not retracting the gear during this compound incident, it certainly makes more sense to leave the gear down during the entire time. As you mentioned, the added benefit to leaving the gear down increases drag which would, in turn, allow the crew to burn more fuel if their intentions were to land at a lower weight. I would say that there would still be a good reason to retract the gear. Not fully knowing the extent of the damage, you would also want to know if the gear post itself was damaged. The gear post could have been cracked or twisted, brake systems affected, or the truck positioner actuator (levels the fwd and aft tires in a particular config) could have been damaged and would have retracted in the aircraft in an abnormal pitch. While it could have potentially induced secondary damage inside the gear well, it would be good to know the gear responds to both commands to retract and extend to prove the gear in question is safe enough to land with. Thank goodness, the tire didn't damage the gear any further to make an emergency landing much more riskier.
@@williamswenson5315 Yes that particular disaster haunts me even after all of these years. Maybe because it was a dream of mine to grow up and fly on the Concorde one day.
Great analysis Juan ! I will be interested to know why they retracted the gear if they were trying to burn fuel, but it sounds like they did a great job, and kudos to successful outcome.
I think flying around for over 4 hours knowing you only had 1 working engine would have been one long stressful flight, just to land where you took off from.
Thanks for clearing up why they didnt dump fuel and circled for 3 hours. I had no idea that the 767-300 has no fuel dump option. I still cant figure out why they would retract the landing gear. Like you said..."Down gear is a happy gear."
@@jeanburk9539 Good point. That must have been their reasoning, right? That the envelope between normal flight and stall is so close with the gear down and with only one engine, that they made the decision to retract the gear. Risky but probably thoroughly vetted as Juan mentioned with the Sat phone link with maintenance.
I just really enjoy your videos Juan. I feel like we are an old friends even though we’ve never met. Says a lot about your character that you come across the way you do in your videos. Keep up the great work!
Loved the explanation. My first thought was fuel dump. Another thought that ran through my head was, how the heck did that rubber get thrown so far ahead of the tire? Seems like it defies physics. The larger the piece, the more air drag. Looking at the damage, that was a good size piece. One last thought. TG it was the rear tire that blew. My father was a private pilot and owned a couple of semis. Twice he had 3 tires blow on a trailer at the same time. One of the fronts blew and took out the back two. So glad this did not happen here.
@@feetgoaroundfullflapsC I understand inertia. I am looking at the air drag on the projectile. The acceleration of the jet relative to the projectile. And the shear distance it had to fly forward at an angle to be ingested. This was truly a freak occurrence.
Quick FYI - the number of military aircraft that don't have VHF radios is quickly dwindling because of the need for military aircraft to be able to integrate within the civilian airspace system during peacetime operations. UHF is still preferred for operational missions and when available, but there are many times, especially during training, where VHF is the safer option (i.e. when visiting civilian fields during cross-country operations).
It looks to me that it was a recapped tire and the recap tread separated but the tire remained inflated. The high energy separation of the tread can do a lot of damage the engine and fuselage.
I enjoyed how you pointed out how ridicules the holding instructions where , as you know the fmc is going to compute the best entry and turn for that radial, it’s unreal that the controller busters their chops
Great job, Juan. This incident is similar to the recent 777 departing L.A. which developed a compressor stall shortly after takeoff. There the crew shut down the affected engine, declared an emergency and returned pretty much straight away. Instead of holding well away from the airport while dumping the pilot opted to dump during the return without advising ATC. The pilot was then excoriated by the media and even aviation enthusiasts for doing so because some school kids got a snoot full of jet-A. But Juan touched on a point here which is completely appropriate for that incident -- if you have a failed engine, the objective is to get safely on the ground ASAP. Think about this. In the 777 case the engine spontaneously failed. If that were due to improper maintenance the second might fail quickly also and you would all be dead. They saw a golden opportunity to get back and chose to do so. It was widely reported that ATC asked them if they wanted to dump fuel but this is inaccurate. ATC asked: "So do you want to hold to dump fuel or anything like that?" This question is primarily about holding, not dumping. And the pilot responded correctly with no because he may have intended to dump while inbound. As for dumping regulations, a pilot may deviate from any FAA regulation in order to get the ship safely on the ground. Luckily no one was injured by the dumping. So does anyone else think this crew mad a great decision but got a raw deal from folks who didn't think this through?
Same thing happened at Manchester Ringway Airport UK ,during a heavyweight take off a United Continental 'Long Body' B767-300 blew a tyre on the exact same left undercarriage. All late model 'Long Body' B767,s are tyre critical,at take off factoring fuel ,payload requirements some 'Long Bodied' B767 gross over 430-450.000lbs, the B767 Dash 400ERX close on 500.000lbs all spread over ten tyres. Yes there have been advances in the design development of undercarriage parts, wheels, tyres and brakes since the B767-200 'ShortBody' entered service mid June 1983,these upgrades enabled late build Dash 300'Long Body'B767,s to take off 70.000-80.000lbs heavier. But it does not get away from the fact there is a limit to what ten tyres can support in a commercial passenger jet application. It is all down to weight maintenance , fuel economy, range and payload, what goes in the back. Designers of modern twin engine jet passenger carriers are hell bent shaving weight off this and that part to reduce fuel burn and increase productivity, making his or her aeroplane more attractive to a potential buyer,coaxing him or her to sign away on the dotted line millions of dollars of company funds to buy a fleet of sixty odd. If in order to secure said deal ,using ten tyres on the new model,s undercarriage so be it,at a cost of more burst tyres.
I was driving tractor trailer 70 mph and a hunk of retread came off and hit the back of my cab and i damn near shit my pants. The blow out sounded like a cannon and the chunk put a good dent in the back of the day cab right behind my head..
Let's add that two drones flying Madrid (LEMD) airspace that morning caused the airport to "close" its three runways for nearly two hours. After an unusual activity, diverting flights to other airports and managing a stressful queue of aircrafts waiting for landing the Air Canada incident happened. A+ for ATC that day.
Thanks for the review. I had initially heard on the Canadian news about the engine issue and 4 hour circling. I was unaware it was due to a blown tire. I was also wondering why they didn’t dump fuel. Thanks for that information.
I just had to check out Big Jet TV's Channel you referenced a couple of days ago, Great content and some great airliner Videos ! More Aviation fix satisfied ! 6 1/2 hours of crosswind landing craziness.
Great job Explaining Juan .... Good job the other day with BIG JET TV .... Being English I've been following Jerry Dyer for some years now ... Both channels are my main watching ... Brilliant to have you on UA-cam ..... Regards Dean'o ... ;-)
great to celebrate a crew successfully handling an emergency- no casualties! A tire and an engine are far cheaper than an airframe and multiple lives! great job by the Air Canada crew! Well done
I agree with you entirely about not retracting the gear once you know that you have this problem. No advantage is gained, and only downside risks can result. It isn't as if you are considering landing on grass or water... I hope.
Juan. I fly the 767. The 767 can dump fuel but ONLY from the Center tank. The wing tanks hold a total of 80,000 pounds of fuel. Any additional fuel goes into the Center tank. My “guess” is that this aircraft took off with approximately 100K of fuel. Fuel is used by the aircraft from Center tanks first before burning fuel from the wing tanks. By the time they sorted out the issues, they had used all the fuel from the Center tank. Therefore the only way to reduce weight was to just hold and burn it.
Juan, I find your channel so interesting. I do not have any direct aviation knowledge. But, I do enjoy learning about aviation. You are a wonderful educator; not only for aviation buffs, but for those of us who just enjoy learning about aviation. This was another great video.
Another in-depth informative video coverage of yet another aircraft emergency Juan! Great job of getting out the facts as you understand them at that given moment. I also appreciate that you don’t criticize the pilots decisions during this compounding emergency and bring forth to your audience a clear application of utilizing all resources and professionals available to this crew and how they searched out any or all that were made available to them. Love you content Juan and for keeping us out of those news media briar patches that so many sources are will to head into just to keep viewers on for their personal agendas. Kudos Sir! Fly Safe
Seems like the number of incidents are steadily increasing. Or, we are in the loop now and know what’s really going on! Thanks again Juan for you plain English, factual reports! We are praying for your return to excellent health!
Thanks for the brilliant update JB, and the VAS link. You spoil us by having in one place. Btw, copied this excellent update to my AC Capt. buddy. Take care and looking forward to you getting back on the "saddle" 🙏✌
I doubt this exact incident is played out in the simulator so the crew handled the emergency great. This was another incident that has only been reported by you. Great job Juan.
It was all over our news in Canada. In real time. Air Canada has had a few "lucky" or "unlucky" incidents in the last few years. The hard landing-crash of an a320 in Halifax because of pilot error on the glide slope. The near disaster in San Francisco where the Airbus was lined up to land on a taxi way and diverted at the last moment before clipping planes set to take off. Other than that many safe hours of flights with pilots than can fly in almost anything including almost two years of overseas flights in the Max.
It's the magic BB! Wow, what luck these guys had. However, they didn't require luck with the outcome. Good decision making and solid flying skills saved the day!
its going to be an absolute crime when you go back into service juan. ive thoroughly enjoyed your videos over the covid shutdown. you have simplified aviation for so many of us, and made things interesting along the way. kablamo lieutenant pete !
Tire failure on the Concorde threw chunks into the belly and split open the fuel tank and created a huge fire. The ‘why’ the tire blew investigation is worthy of a book in itself. Maybe they found something on the runway at Madrid while clearing the runway....
Bill Howard - The Concorde accident was also the first thing i thought of. I wonder if the investigation on this tyre failure will be as thorough like it was with the Concorde incident? I would imagine it will be because the outcome of this failure could have been a lot worse.
The thing that ruptured the AF Concorde fuel tank was a hydrostatic shock, caused by the reckless decision of the captain to try a test flight outside of SOPs by continuously pressurising the wing tanks with trim fuel from the tail tank in an effort to get the weight and balance into a flyable condition during the take-off roll as the aircraft was over max gross and tail heavy. Why he decided to carry so much fuel is still unknown, as air space is normally left in fuel tanks as air is compressible to dampens any shockwave instead of transmitting it as fuel (like any liquid) does. Tyres had been blown on other Concordes without anything like that level of damage. The original cause of the blown tyre on that occasion was the abysmal maintenance which had left a significant component out of the landing gear, leading the whole wheel truck being misaligned, without which misalignment it would never have hit the debris on the runway, and even if it had, the tyres would have been in better condition to cope, as the tread would not have been largely scrubbed away.
@@phillee2814 thank you for bringing all that up. I was shocked when I found out that the DC10 debris on the runway wasnt the deciding factor in that concorde crash. It was merely a catalyst that started a chain reaction, with the plane being overweight in the rear and missing that essential wheel bogey spacer component. The engine wasnt damaged beyond use when the tire hit the metal piece and blew. But the missing piece in the bogey misaligned the gear and the plane veered into lights on the side of the runway. This is the debris that the engine ingested that caused it to fail.
Wow. Some great photos. I’m thinking that chunk of rubber just sat inside the inlet for a while just getting cheese grated until the caged N°1 eng. I say that because that’s how you’d smell burnt rubber as it made its way from the fan and into the core engine. ... holy cow if it had been a Turbojet instead of the modern Turbofan.... had it been a turbojet, it would have shelled it out... Uncontained Ballistic Event. One other thought on raising the gear.... I’m curious to what the EGT on N°2 was during the dirty portion of the hold. Gear down.. flap dialed in... heavy weight and on engine. When you put together how fast they got the acft configuration cleaned up after the Damage Assessment.... I’m thinking that EGT must have spiked every time the turned with the wind in the tailpipe
also juan, it is important to note that when that tire blows out combined with that intake at full throttle for takeoff: the pieces of the tire can be as much as 20 feet away from the engine and even underneath the engine but that suction emanates from the cowl of the engine for up to 20 feet in all directions: And that is why a bird strike happens so often the bird can be distant from the engine but a mother goose doesn't know about the suction until it is halfway down the pipe
Blancolirio, thank you for making great content. Your videos are helping me stay up to date with aviation news while learning all about airplanes and aircrafts. I’ve just recently started getting in to aviation and love learning more. Keep up the good work and more power to you.
Another reason you didn't mention that would be a good reason to burn off fuel. They are single engine, getting rid of that weight would make a significant difference on go-around performance for the upcoming landing.
I bet the pucker factor went thru the roof untell they landed. Very good are crew and great job to all support people. To the F-18 really good flying and photos.
According to the F18 fighter pilot the landing gear was already retracted when he intercepted the AC aircraft. They slowed down to a safe speed to extend the landing gear for the inspection and retracted it back once inspection was done. There is a nice interview to the fighter Capitan where he does describe the scramble mission.
Pablo Purroy The pilot Did a fine job! Amazing picture he took too! Would you know if the F18 was especially scrambled to give assistance? Or did he just happen to be airborne!
@@cf6282 Specially scrambled according to folks over on VASAviation. This plane was not part of the "Ready 10" but was already preparing for another mission when it was used instead to help in this situation.
@@cf6282 He was specially scrambled. Torrejon AirForce base is just a few Km northwest of Barajas. He said that they usually fit with high definition cameras and some gopro cameras for some missions but they did not have time to set that up for this one as time was pressing. He used his phone to take pictures in case someone in the ground needed them quickly he could lower his altitude and connect to a cell tower to send them.
Hey Juan I just heard a shout out to you on big jet TV at 9:45 AM central time. “ big thanks to Juan and the blancolirio channel” British have trouble with Juan and blank’o li’row 😀😀😀😎. Love it !!
Juan, on the 767 there's a tilt switch that if the switch is inop, the gear is inhibited to retract. The mindset is to not to retract the gear if not tilted. The gear only fits tilted in the wheel well. I'm pretty sure that's why the gear handle would not initially go up. I'm in favor of fuel dump systems. I started my career on two and four engine airplanes with fuel dump systems, and air turn backs after dumping was a matter of minutes, not hours. Holding for four hours single engine with gear damage, and the possibility of hyd system loss, I'm putting her down and take the overweight landing, with #5 tire blown. Again, superb video.
Hey Juan... from a long time radio guy... This is a great job of reporting. You seemed not so rushed and frantic to think of thoughts. I applaud your efforts. Been watching you religiously since Oroville 1st day....You look healthier too. Hope you get your wings back soon!!!!!!!! I love watching you fly that plane!!!! Patreon here i come...
Juan, looking forward to a healthy report shortly.
remain calm, report the facts.
Have had tire blow outs on the 757 before. Never took out an engine, but we did have a chunk of rubber come forward and take out a leading edge slat one time. I have always thought like you, better to leave the gear down. Rather than retract it and maybe not get it back down. Unless you need it retracted for performance to keep the airplane flying. Not likely a problem in the 757/767. Also helps to burn off fuel with the extra drag. Never know what kind of actual damage you have, or problems with damaged squat switches etc. But, all is well that ends well! Great job by all involved including the crew! :)
Do you think being single engine factored into the decision to retract?
@@davidpoulin6961 I am sure that was part of their decision process in raising the gear. Without being there or knowing all of the details of their weight and performance, surrounding terrain, and system malfunctions indicated in the flight deck you can't second guess them. If you need too retract the gear to maintain a certain climb gradient or for safety (keeping the aircraft flying) there is certainly nothing wrong with that. Maybe based on the visual inspection from the other aircraft they felt comfortable raising the gear. But the other consideration is raising a damaged landing gear and possibly creating more systems problems, or not getting the gear back down again. When you have a tire blow out like that, even with a visual inspection from another aircraft, you still don't know the full extent of your damage. Often in a situation like this there is not necessarily a right or a wrong action. It is based on all of the knowledge and information that you have available at the time, previous experience, training and procedure, and often split second decisions. Even though this problem started on the take off roll, the crew had a lot of work ahead of them. They had to complete the takeoff and climb phase. All be it a short climb! Analyze their problems. Run all of the appropriate normal and abnormal checklists. Communicate with ATC, the flight attendants, and company. Consider their fuel load and landing weight. And at the same time fly the aircraft and make decisions on their next course of action. Discuss and brief their plan of action. They were no doubt very, very busy! This crew obviously worked well together and got an aircraft with multiple major malfunctions back on the ground safely. With no injuries. I'd say they all deserved a cold liquid refreshment at the bar after they were all done with their duties! Pilots and flight attendants alike. It takes the entire crew, up front, and in the cabin to have a safe and uneventful outcome like this!
Being a 767 driver for 20 years, I would also tend towards leaving the gear down with a known issue. (actually had to do that one dark night in 2001). That said, it's possible that with the gear down, single engine, they might be pushing continuous thrust limits. Since it sounds like they were really intent on lowering the landing weight, perhaps they were trying to reduce the stress on the remaining engine. For me, after assessing things, I think I just would have put her down nice and gentle on the 13K runway with foamcrete. Single engine, with looming possible hydraulic issues, 4 hours is a long darn time.
I agree with everybody here about the considerations faced by the crew as they processed the the best courses of action not addressed in the checklists. They were lucky that the exploding tire shrapnel didn't take out one or more hydraulic lines/systems! That would have increased the cockpit workload considerably! Well done by all concerned. We shouldn't argue with success by Monday morning quarterbacking.
Greatings from Madrid, Spain.
I´m sure that the Madrid tower preffer a rigth turn instead left cause that avoid to have a damage plane fliying at low altitude over the middle of the city.
And could be the crew opted for a left turn was to turn into the dead engine?
I think the confusion was not about turning to the west initially, it was about the holding instructions. they were cleared to hold on a radial 20 miles south of PDT and the crew understand to hold at PDT with 20 miles long legs so they started the turn to hold at PDT
Who here replays the intro just for the song? *raises hand* Thanks for all the content Juan. You are doing an outstanding job with the thorough/fast coverage!
just go here ua-cam.com/video/joh4rzVk6uY/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/channels/yyBmfMEmwzv291E-QHdEyg.html
Started listen to it on Spotify. So yes☺️
Check out *Aram Bedrosian* The song is titled "Weightless" on his youtube channel
ua-cam.com/video/joh4rzVk6uY/v-deo.html
Aram is one amazing artist
Love the music too
It was an excellent pilot decision and performance, no injured, no major damage on the plane, brilliant, whatever anybody wants to argue about it.
If I didn't have to , I probably would have left the gear down . And buzzing around with one engine will make you pucker as well . Everyone OK is proof that they made the right calls for that incident . And if there's a 3 mile long military runway nearby , that sounds like a no brainer . But then all my flying has been done from a passenger seat , the same one i would have crapped myself in .
bull frogger I think leaving the gear down would mean greater drag. Think of the concorde crash. If they had raised the landing gear they might have made it.
4 hours is a long time to consume all the alcohol in the galley :)
They're Canadian. It can be done, eh.
@@raoulcruz4404 Hey! That's all anti-freeze!
Do you want to be drunk trying to exit a burning plane?
And to fill all the lavatory tanks to overflowing.
@@TheJttv I think it's a bit of levity in a serious situation that was extremely well handled by everyone involved. Perhaps the cabin crew limited the drinks to one with the meal. 😉
The smell of rubber inside...Just because the first compressor stage is also used for compressing the cabin! Well known are the storys about the oil fumes...
At 11:00 : How fortunate that You Tube didn't take down that video immediately because it wasn't 'happy content'!
Bet it got demonitzed
This one brings back some memories, Juan. I used to fly F-4's at Torrejon AB, Spain. This incident is fascinating. The crew did an excellent job of handling an almost simultaneous blown tire and engine failure on takeoff. Plus it didn't hurt to have a young, Spanish fighter pilot to scramble and give them a look over. Great video as always Juan.
Must say, since finding your channel a few months ago, the informed comments and analysis are fantastic, keep healthy 👌
What ! Another no BS just straight forward report. I sure do like your spin on what you might have done without actually saying it. You new subscribers will pick up on what i am refuring to soon enough.
Thanks Juan
I watched this on VAS the day it happened, it was interesting the crew chose to retract the gear as I thought I heard it jammed on the initial retract, that was the reason for the flyby, enough debris must have fallen off eventually that it cleared into the gear bay.
Hi Juan. While not a pilot, my Dad would also think its a good ideal to leave the gear down.
He was a passenger on a Hadley Page Dart-Herald departing Charlottetown PE. for Halifax NS., which couldn't get any gear status lights after takeoff. After cycling the gear several times with the tower observing (via binoculars) the crew decided it was a bulb or switch problem, so they put the gear up and headed across the Northumberland straight to Halifax. Dad said he would have rathered they had left the gear down on the way to Halifax, given that the tower had confirmed the gear looked down and locked, and its not a long flight.
Cheers
Glad it all worked out for the good and everyone is OK. Would imagine the good work by the Spanish F-18 pilot eased a lot of apprehension.
Hope that guy gets some official recognition/award. I'd buy him an Estrella or two.
Juan, thank you very much for this review. This emergency was all over the news in Europe. Very happy it all worked out fine! Great cooperation between the crew and the Spanish people. Very happy to see the Spanish pilot being available for assistance. Amazing there was footage of the actual blow out of the tyre.
Most all modern intercept aircraft usually have dual band UHF/VHF in order to communicate with pilots violating airspace among other reasons.
Have had dual bands for a long time.
and to tune in the 5 oclock news
@@deedsmillar6056 "Not the nine o'clock news" then? (sorry bad joke here)
@@5roundsrapid263 Yea it called an ADF still used today although old tech.
I smiled when you mentioned Torrejon AFB, my father was deputy base commander 1967 to 1970. What fond memories I have of that assignment of my dads, I enjoy your videos!
You do a great job Juan. Your channel should be viewed by every commercial pilot for the valuable "hanger talk" learning. I would have never thought of UA-cam video as a tool in this situation but now you have helped spread the word on a good idea.
Juan.. Im up here in Reno, started following you when you were reporting on the Paradise fire. Im certainly not into aviation, however, Im becoming more interested all the time because I appreciate your insight so much!!
Nevada Dan me too! I wasn’t in to aviation but now I am! Glad we’re both learning together!
Well done by the Air Canada crew, and by the Spanish Air Force F-18 pilot. Handy to have a military field nearby.
Thanks for your great analysis Juan. Victor over at VAS does a great job and provides a great service to all of us!
Always great commentary ... many thnx
I am an aircraft dispatcher for a major US airline, and it does truly expand my view.
Again, many thnx
"We were gonna take the helicopter but it had a flat tire". Never had to check the skid pressure on our 206LIII. Autos to a run on landing were rough on them. Thanks again Juan - you are the best. My ONLY source for accurate aviation news.
Okay, but if you have a compressor stall on a 206, you're REALLY in trouble, depending on altitude, airspeed and what's below you, because you're going down for sure.
@@ljfinger That's why you are taught to stay out of the so-called "Dead Man's Curve" - the "Height Velocity Chart". Basically the slower you fly the higher you must be to autorotate. In a properly flown autorotation you can touch down as gently as a landing with no damage except to your underwear.
@@ljfinger In most twin engine helicopters you can continue a takeoff OEI.
@@tomgardner4217 The 206 I was in was single-engine. I didn't know there were twin engine variants.
ljfinger If one is really being nerdy the vast majority of 206s are single engine. Only a few (13 I think) were converted to 206LT TwinRangers, the real twin engine JetRangers are the 427 and 429 GlobalRangers although they are quite a lot bigger overall, carrying more passengers as well... alright I’m done lol.
And at 7:30 you highlight your ventriloquist skills as well!! LOL.
Next time drink a glass of water!
Charlie McCarthy, eat your heart out!
I thought Juan was brilliant at telepathic reporting...
Another well done example of the value of redundancy....in this case it applies to the pooled knowledge, much of it gained through years of experience. I'm uneasy as to how this plays out going forward with the ongoing shortages at all levels. Thanks again, Juan. Journey mercies!
Hi Juan, excellent reporting, analysis, and great photos. Thank you so much for your extensive time, expertise and editing to make this video possible to a receptive audience. - Dean from Minnesota
A high pressure multiple ply tire probably sounded like a sonic boom when it exploded.
I can't imagine what feelings the passengers experienced.
Quietest four hours in a 767 ever. . . Best possible outcome.
A life insurance agent made good use of the time.
I bet they drank that plane dry.
@@rainmaker3700 Or stay sober so you can run like hell.
I was on a jet that dumped fuel because the nose gear light would not come on. I was prepared. We landed on the 3rd pass.
The night before I was in an earthquake on the 13th floor of a hotel. I put my shoes and pants by the door and went to sleep. Any rumble and I was going to Forrest Gump it.
Kevin Moore..Proven fact you stay more calm, don’t feel as much pain and can run faster while inebriated!! Lol, just giving you a hard time. I like to think I would be calm in that situation as I have had in-flight emergencies as a captain, but in that situation it’s hard to know what you might actually do....especially since you have limited information at the time and with pilot/aircraft knowledge (may have known it was a blowout, and certainly with an ongoing compressor stall, but as Juan pointed out it would be hard to decipher at first) you would be going through all sorts of scenarios in your head. Even if you had been dipping into the Sangria, I would imagine you would sober up pretty quickly in this scenario.
@@specforged5651 Staying sober save your life. In past I break my hip accidentaly at sunday morning, in the empty yard at manufacturing plant. It was -5C and I slip on the ice under shalow water puddle. First feeling was, stupid idiot you will spend day at work in wet clothes. Second strong pain and third - I cant get up. Later I was surprised how calm I was and mind imediately start to find solution from situation, you know that guards wil go around in hour but I was wet and cold. Fortunately my phone was in my front pocket and fifteen minutes later some maintenance guy found me when I was trying to call help, bad signal... I was focused only to survive and rest was unimportant. And this remains in my mind up to leaving hospital.
I watched the VASAviation on that a few days ago. Cool customers.
thanks for being my primary aviation news outlet! The NorCal news is a nice bonus too
Thanks Juan. In 1992 virtually the same thing happened to us in a 767-300, even the same tyre! ... except that the tyre rubber hit the fuselage under L1, (left a black skid mark) then hit the right engine and dented the very front of the cowl- ie: VERY nearly went in to the right engine. We were right on max weight, a VERY hot day, so would have been “interesting” had we lost the engine. Early 767- 300’s including ours had no fuel dump capabilities. We also had a “left side brace” or “left drag brace” EICAS message- I forget which- (and did not retract the gear) due damages to the wiring harness and proximity switch. We also circled for a while to burn fuel and work out our strategy .... (though not four hours).
Love Juan's in-depth coverage of the dwindling (fortunately) but still "muy importante occurrence of aviation mishap incidences that still happen. Shout out to his brethren in the Spanish Air Force who handled this tedious situation admirably.
I remember a DC8 in Jeddah that retracted the gear after losing a tire in takeoff. It started a wheel well fire. The plane was lost with all sob
As you can see from the photo from the escort aircraft, the crew had left the gear down after takeoff. The plane must have been stabilized, so no reason to raise the gear. In the wheel well, there isn’t very much room. A blown tire might cause some damage to the hydraulic systems in the w/w. Also, the actuator that tilts the gear could also have been damage, so the gear might damage itself and gear doors or airframe if retracted.
One time we had a QF fly from Australia to LAX with a blown a tire on T/O. The gear was already up, so they just continued the flight. They only had to do one landing one way or another. After landing, we changed the wheel after he taxied to the gate.
I'm now a patron. You are honest and you know what you are talking about. These vids obviously take some time. Best wishes for you and yours sir!
I always leave Juan's channel understanding a lot more than when entering. Breaking things down to the point where novices can understand what happened in aircraft events and accidents... Another Good Job!
Man you have been busy lately! Keep up the good work.
Juan, after the peak safest year in aviation (2017), with all these recents incidents do you think the aviation industry is improving or regressing? I feel it regressing as experienced pilots retire from the "old guard"
That seems to be the common theme that we will be tracking on this channel, and attempting to improve...
He summed it up perfectly last night: the Pilot shortage is here....
Not just pilots, ground crew as well.
@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer There isn't a ground crew shortage. (ground crew meaning baggage handlers, line and shop maintenance, fueling staff, catering staff, cleaning, etc). Data shows hiring and retention levels are nominal across the industry, but there could be *regional* areas that the data doesn't account for. Also, the Pilot shortage seems to be critically short on experienced *Captains*, as the FO hiring trends seem to be "on the line" as they say. It's the Captains however, that usually make/break experience shortfalls. I believe within the next 3-5 years, the FO side of things will also fall behind, and then we will be in interesting times indeed.
Has there been an increase of incidences in total?
Always great when they make it back OK, lots learned here, perhaps retrofitting cameras on all commercial AC would be cheaper than scrambling fighters, but not as much fun ha ha, I`m with you on the gear retraction, there could have been indiscernible damage to the mech or some of those shreds could have jammed.... perhaps some recommendations will come in the future. Thanks for this extremely well done report as always!
Any landing you can walk away from.....good work by the flight crew.
Thank you. I am not a pilot, and don’t work in aviation industry, but loved all aspects of aviation since I can remember.
I watch most of your videos. Thank you
The "main gear tilt position monitor+sensor", if memory serves, assigns what is essentially a checksum value - as part of the "gear retract command", from the landing gear actuator lever/switch (technically, a detent + toggle??). When they did the "Lauda Fix", a "synchronous sequence go/no-go" system was added in order to lockout the thrust reverser deployment while in flight. The autothrottle disconnect is included in there somewhere, too, but that was 30 years back , and I'm kinda fuzzy on the rest of that minutia. I'm certain, that at the very least, a "check gear before retraction" indication was somehow alerted. I don't remember if the MCDU is part of that system's function monitoring, or not.
I suspect the mcdu doesn't alert on the likely failed position indicators. That's likely what led to the f18 to inspect. Usually in my line of work we just low approach and have someone in the tower check the gear.... why ever would you raise it post inspection blows my mind though....
I've been banging my head against the wall, trying to remember the system's 'override capability'; there was something on the hydraulic side of the system, which triggered an 'alert mode', and one of the resets required MCDU interaction.
Juan, Another great review of an airplane incident. Your expert discussion is always a better than source of information than any news venue.
Now that we all got used to mobile phone recordings of incidents being available and shown on primetime news the same night, the next level of course here was "check UA-cam to see how it looks" while they were still flying around...
Everyone hatches a plan to relieve The BAR and Duty free trolley of any extra weight for landing... Only to be informed that anything passed passes into a Holding Tank so will not help.
Nice thoughts. Lots of love David and Lily recovering from Clara the WIND.
You know Juan, I am going to have withdrawals when you go back to your 9 to 5 job. I will have to go back to the regular news media, though I am one notch smarter now for all your teachings to a non pilot! Thanks and great work...
As always, Juan, excellent review and analysis of this incident. I would only have humbly added that in this situation without a fuel dumping capability, an additional consideration to burning down on-board fuel quantity to reduce landing weight would be to reduce post-landing fuel-fed fire potential should the aircraft depart the runway during roll out.
I agree with you about the crew's decision to retract the gear during the lengthy hold. Besides the obvious risk that the left gear might hang up in the well and not extend again, the reduction in drag with gear retracted prolonged the hold by reducing the rate of fuel burn off.
I always enjoy all of your podcasts, and I'm trying to watch all of them you made before I discovered Blancolirio. In my career at Continental I flew all three seats on the DC-10, F/O on the 747, and captain on the 737NG, and 757. Of them all, like you, my favorite was the 757 with the RB-211 motors....what a sweet machine! It's sad that it's economics led to its early retirement from the passenger fleets. On the night of the Millenium rollover, I flew one from LAS to EWR with less than a hundred hours since delivery. It smelled like a new car! We were airborne at Millenium midnight, and everything kept working like clockwork, no hiccups!
Keep up the good work. You are thoroughly appreciated worldwide throughout the aviation community.
Hi Juan. Thanks for another good video. Just a few things that may be of interest. The tire failure resulted in tread and carcass being ingested into number one engine. This caused extensive fan blade damage along with some acoustic liner damage, This damage caused the engine surge and stall. The crew shut the engine down as I am assuming the EGT was climbing along with a loss of power...... I'm not entirely sure that they tried to retract the gear, but they were aware of loss of pressure on one wheel on that bogey. So I think the quickly put two and two together and decided to keep the gear down. They were probably concerned that there may have been further gear damage and that is probably why they wanted to lighten the aircraft as much as possible before landing. I'm sure the were in touch with SOC, Dispatch, and Maintenance Control to decide on the best course of action. The F-18 was a nice touch and really helpful to reassure he crew that the damage was just a main wheel and probably not structural.
thats what she said
Juan as always your analysys is dead on. Kudos to the air Canada crew as well of all those involved in Madrid and across the Atlantic. Btw Juan you must be an Airbus pilot...Ecam on Airbus and Eicas on Boeing metal 🙂🙂
I was on a Delta MD88 flight out of ORF years ago when we had the same emergency except it was the right bogey and the the number 2 engine at V1. The crew did retract the gear and the smell of burnt rubber was very apparent after liftoff on the remaining engine. It took about 20 seconds before the gear came down again. Once safely airborne and at about 2000’ the first officer came aft and looked through the periscope to see the damage to the right main gear (under my seat). It ended up being a thrown tread and the carcass still looked inflated. We assumed the position for the emergency landing 30 mins later but it was a normal landing and we taxied back to the gate. I thanked the crew for their calm and professional actions on my way out of the cabin. Of course the TV crews didn’t want to talk to me when I exited the jetway because I wasn’t blubbering that I thought I was going to die!!!!
Those tires will do some damage. We had a pilot land in a Super Hornet with the anti skid off. They locked up and the port side blew. It went threw the intake and destroyed the engine. Couldnt beleive it actually went through the side of the intake like that. Also messed up the TEF as well
In relation to your preference of not retracting the gear during this compound incident, it certainly makes more sense to leave the gear down during the entire time. As you mentioned, the added benefit to leaving the gear down increases drag which would, in turn, allow the crew to burn more fuel if their intentions were to land at a lower weight. I would say that there would still be a good reason to retract the gear. Not fully knowing the extent of the damage, you would also want to know if the gear post itself was damaged. The gear post could have been cracked or twisted, brake systems affected, or the truck positioner actuator (levels the fwd and aft tires in a particular config) could have been damaged and would have retracted in the aircraft in an abnormal pitch. While it could have potentially induced secondary damage inside the gear well, it would be good to know the gear responds to both commands to retract and extend to prove the gear in question is safe enough to land with. Thank goodness, the tire didn't damage the gear any further to make an emergency landing much more riskier.
You describing the tire blow out and the rubber flying upward made me think of Air France Flight 4590. I hadn't thought about that in quite a while.
The Concorde at Paris?
@@williamswenson5315 Yes. The flight from Charles de Gaulle with Capt. Marty that ended so tragically.
@@whoopsydaisy6389 It is difficult to forget those pictures of the Concorde lifting off with the left wing on fire. They had exactly no chance.
@@williamswenson5315 Yes that particular disaster haunts me even after all of these years. Maybe because it was a dream of mine to grow up and fly on the Concorde one day.
Great analysis Juan ! I will be interested to know why they retracted the gear if they were trying to burn fuel, but it sounds like they did a great job, and kudos to successful outcome.
also of course no thrust reverse so it's wheel braking and long landing rollout. Nice analysis, thanks JB !
I think flying around for over 4 hours knowing you only had 1 working engine would have been one long stressful flight, just to land where you took off from.
Thanks for clearing up why they didnt dump fuel and circled for 3 hours. I had no idea that the 767-300 has no fuel dump option. I still cant figure out why they would retract the landing gear. Like you said..."Down gear is a happy gear."
Maybe climbing on one engine with the gear down is risky. They couldn't land on it anyway. Landing without gear is a known quantity, so to speak.
@@jeanburk9539 Good point. That must have been their reasoning, right? That the envelope between normal flight and stall is so close with the gear down and with only one engine, that they made the decision to retract the gear. Risky but probably thoroughly vetted as Juan mentioned with the Sat phone link with maintenance.
B767-300 does have fuel jettison system, factory standard. It appears Air Canada have chosen to disable it on their 767’s.
@@mercbendling5798 Okay.
@@mercbendling5798 Not factory standard. Optional.
Your commentary is both fascinating and informative. Your music selection for you videos is excellent as well.
I would agree on the gear down burning fuel faster. Thanks for the updates - love them!
I just really enjoy your videos Juan. I feel like we are an old friends even though we’ve never met. Says a lot about your character that you come across the way you do in your videos. Keep up the great work!
Juan is the Walter Cronkite of aviation news - very informative and interesting!!
Loved the explanation. My first thought was fuel dump. Another thought that ran through my head was, how the heck did that rubber get thrown so far ahead of the tire? Seems like it defies physics. The larger the piece, the more air drag. Looking at the damage, that was a good size piece. One last thought. TG it was the rear tire that blew. My father was a private pilot and owned a couple of semis. Twice he had 3 tires blow on a trailer at the same time. One of the fronts blew and took out the back two. So glad this did not happen here.
@@feetgoaroundfullflapsC I understand inertia. I am looking at the air drag on the projectile. The acceleration of the jet relative to the projectile. And the shear distance it had to fly forward at an angle to be ingested. This was truly a freak occurrence.
Top job Juan, this one sort of had slipped off of my radar (so to speak)
the Spanish 18 pilot looks about 16....handsome lad at that...
Quick FYI - the number of military aircraft that don't have VHF radios is quickly dwindling because of the need for military aircraft to be able to integrate within the civilian airspace system during peacetime operations. UHF is still preferred for operational missions and when available, but there are many times, especially during training, where VHF is the safer option (i.e. when visiting civilian fields during cross-country operations).
and its only an extra $5
It looks to me that it was a recapped tire and the recap tread separated but the tire remained inflated. The high energy separation of the tread can do a lot of damage the engine and fuselage.
Did you hear about the dam failing in Starkville Mississippi? Oktibbeha County Lake.
I was on this flight. It seemed long and uneventful after the engine shut down. Over 3 hours of flying circles is a long time
I heard of this happening on Spirit Airlines when they use to fly MD 82's. Blown tire took out a rear mounted engine. They landed quickly.
Still sounds better than weeks on a cruise ship waiting out coronavirus !
I enjoyed how you pointed out how ridicules the holding instructions where , as you know the fmc is going to compute the best entry and turn for that radial, it’s unreal that the controller busters their chops
Great job, Juan. This incident is similar to the recent 777 departing L.A. which developed a compressor stall shortly after takeoff. There the crew shut down the affected engine, declared an emergency and returned pretty much straight away. Instead of holding well away from the airport while dumping the pilot opted to dump during the return without advising ATC. The pilot was then excoriated by the media and even aviation enthusiasts for doing so because some school kids got a snoot full of jet-A. But Juan touched on a point here which is completely appropriate for that incident -- if you have a failed engine, the objective is to get safely on the ground ASAP. Think about this. In the 777 case the engine spontaneously failed. If that were due to improper maintenance the second might fail quickly also and you would all be dead. They saw a golden opportunity to get back and chose to do so. It was widely reported that ATC asked them if they wanted to dump fuel but this is inaccurate. ATC asked: "So do you want to hold to dump fuel or anything like that?" This question is primarily about holding, not dumping. And the pilot responded correctly with no because he may have intended to dump while inbound. As for dumping regulations, a pilot may deviate from any FAA regulation in order to get the ship safely on the ground. Luckily no one was injured by the dumping. So does anyone else think this crew mad a great decision but got a raw deal from folks who didn't think this through?
Same thing happened at Manchester Ringway Airport UK ,during a heavyweight take off a United Continental 'Long Body' B767-300 blew a tyre on the exact same left undercarriage. All late model 'Long Body' B767,s are tyre critical,at take off factoring fuel ,payload requirements some 'Long Bodied' B767 gross over 430-450.000lbs, the B767 Dash 400ERX close on 500.000lbs all spread over ten tyres. Yes there have been advances in the design development of undercarriage parts, wheels, tyres and brakes since the B767-200 'ShortBody' entered service mid June 1983,these upgrades enabled late build Dash 300'Long Body'B767,s to take off 70.000-80.000lbs heavier.
But it does not get away from the fact there is a limit to what ten tyres can support in a commercial passenger jet application. It is all down to weight maintenance , fuel economy, range and payload, what goes in the back. Designers of modern twin engine jet passenger carriers are hell bent shaving weight off this and that part to reduce fuel burn and increase productivity, making his or her
aeroplane more attractive to a potential buyer,coaxing him or her to sign away on the dotted line millions of dollars of company funds to buy a fleet of sixty odd. If in order to secure said deal ,using ten tyres on the new model,s undercarriage so be it,at a cost of more burst tyres.
I was driving tractor trailer 70 mph and a hunk of retread came off and hit the back of my cab and i damn near shit my pants. The blow out sounded like a cannon and the chunk put a good dent in the back of the day cab right behind my head..
Let's add that two drones flying Madrid (LEMD) airspace that morning caused the airport to "close" its three runways for nearly two hours.
After an unusual activity, diverting flights to other airports and managing a stressful queue of aircrafts waiting for landing the Air Canada incident happened.
A+ for ATC that day.
Thanks for the review. I had initially heard on the Canadian news about the engine issue and 4 hour circling. I was unaware it was due to a blown tire. I was also wondering why they didn’t dump fuel. Thanks for that information.
I just had to check out Big Jet TV's Channel you referenced a couple of days ago, Great content and some great airliner Videos ! More Aviation fix satisfied ! 6 1/2 hours of crosswind landing craziness.
Great job Explaining Juan .... Good job the other day with BIG JET TV .... Being English I've been following Jerry Dyer for some years now ... Both channels are my main watching ... Brilliant to have you on UA-cam ..... Regards Dean'o ... ;-)
great to celebrate a crew successfully handling an emergency- no casualties! A tire and an engine are far cheaper than an airframe and multiple lives! great job by the Air Canada crew! Well done
I agree with you entirely about not retracting the gear once you know that you have this problem. No advantage is gained, and only downside risks can result. It isn't as if you are considering landing on grass or water... I hope.
Juan. I fly the 767. The 767 can dump fuel but ONLY from the Center tank. The wing tanks hold a total of 80,000 pounds of fuel. Any additional fuel goes into the Center tank. My “guess” is that this aircraft took off with approximately 100K of fuel. Fuel is used by the aircraft from Center tanks first before burning fuel from the wing tanks. By the time they sorted out the issues, they had used all the fuel from the Center tank. Therefore the only way to reduce weight was to just hold and burn it.
Juan, I find your channel so interesting. I do not have any direct aviation knowledge. But, I do enjoy learning about aviation. You are a wonderful educator; not only for aviation buffs, but for those of us who just enjoy learning about aviation. This was another great video.
Another in-depth informative video coverage of yet another aircraft emergency Juan! Great job of getting out the facts as you understand them at that given moment. I also appreciate that you don’t criticize the pilots decisions during this compounding emergency and bring forth to your audience a clear application of utilizing all resources and professionals available to this crew and how they searched out any or all that were made available to them. Love you content Juan and for keeping us out of those news media briar patches that so many sources are will to head into just to keep viewers on for their personal agendas. Kudos Sir! Fly Safe
Great pilot...Great training.....All involved .....Help from the guy above👍👍👍
Seems like the number of incidents are steadily increasing. Or, we are in the loop now and know what’s really going on! Thanks again Juan for you plain English, factual reports! We are praying for your return to excellent health!
you just began paying attention, its a common phenom. keep at it.
Thanks for the brilliant update JB, and the VAS link. You spoil us by having in one place. Btw, copied this excellent update to my AC Capt. buddy. Take care and looking forward to you getting back on the "saddle" 🙏✌
I doubt this exact incident is played out in the simulator so the crew handled the emergency great. This was another incident that has only been reported by you. Great job Juan.
It was all over our news in Canada. In real time. Air Canada has had a few "lucky" or "unlucky" incidents in the last few years. The hard landing-crash of an a320 in Halifax because of pilot error on the glide slope. The near disaster in San Francisco where the Airbus was lined up to land on a taxi way and diverted at the last moment before clipping planes set to take off. Other than that many safe hours of flights with pilots than can fly in almost anything including almost two years of overseas flights in the Max.
It's the magic BB! Wow, what luck these guys had. However, they didn't require luck with the outcome. Good decision making and solid flying skills saved the day!
Various news agencies said the engine was damaged, not just stalled.
its going to be an absolute crime when you go back into service juan. ive thoroughly enjoyed your videos over the covid shutdown. you have simplified aviation for so many of us, and made things interesting along the way. kablamo lieutenant pete !
I'll keep posting...
@@blancolirio good on ya mate. all the best. kablamoo !
This gentleman is great clear facts easy to follow ...a fantastic channel .
Better safe than sorry. Well done to all involved and GJ reporting. Cheers!
Tire failure on the Concorde threw chunks into the belly and split open the fuel tank and created a huge fire. The ‘why’ the tire blew investigation is worthy of a book in itself. Maybe they found something on the runway at Madrid while clearing the runway....
Bill Howard - The Concorde accident was also the first thing i thought of. I wonder if the investigation on this tyre failure will be as thorough like it was with the Concorde incident? I would imagine it will be because the outcome of this failure could have been a lot worse.
Good point.
For the Concorde the issue was debris on the runway.
The thing that ruptured the AF Concorde fuel tank was a hydrostatic shock, caused by the reckless decision of the captain to try a test flight outside of SOPs by continuously pressurising the wing tanks with trim fuel from the tail tank in an effort to get the weight and balance into a flyable condition during the take-off roll as the aircraft was over max gross and tail heavy. Why he decided to carry so much fuel is still unknown, as air space is normally left in fuel tanks as air is compressible to dampens any shockwave instead of transmitting it as fuel (like any liquid) does. Tyres had been blown on other Concordes without anything like that level of damage.
The original cause of the blown tyre on that occasion was the abysmal maintenance which had left a significant component out of the landing gear, leading the whole wheel truck being misaligned, without which misalignment it would never have hit the debris on the runway, and even if it had, the tyres would have been in better condition to cope, as the tread would not have been largely scrubbed away.
@@phillee2814 thank you for bringing all that up. I was shocked when I found out that the DC10 debris on the runway wasnt the deciding factor in that concorde crash. It was merely a catalyst that started a chain reaction, with the plane being overweight in the rear and missing that essential wheel bogey spacer component.
The engine wasnt damaged beyond use when the tire hit the metal piece and blew. But the missing piece in the bogey misaligned the gear and the plane veered into lights on the side of the runway. This is the debris that the engine ingested that caused it to fail.
four and a half hours in a holding pattern on one engine with a military plane inspecting the blown tire is not my idea of a fun time.
It beats hell out of a runway excursion and things possibly going kaboom like in Istanbul...
Fly with an F-18, no squawk 7500 necessary!
Wow. Some great photos. I’m thinking that chunk of rubber just sat inside the inlet for a while just getting cheese grated until the caged N°1 eng. I say that because that’s how you’d smell burnt rubber as it made its way from the fan and into the core engine. ... holy cow if it had been a Turbojet instead of the modern Turbofan.... had it been a turbojet, it would have shelled it out... Uncontained Ballistic Event.
One other thought on raising the gear.... I’m curious to what the EGT on N°2 was during the dirty portion of the hold. Gear down.. flap dialed in... heavy weight and on engine. When you put together how fast they got the acft configuration cleaned up after the Damage Assessment.... I’m thinking that EGT must have spiked every time the turned with the wind in the tailpipe
also juan, it is important to note that when that tire blows out combined with that intake at full throttle for takeoff:
the pieces of the tire can be as much as 20 feet away from the engine and even underneath the engine but that suction emanates from the cowl of the engine for up to 20 feet in all directions:
And that is why a bird strike happens so often the bird can be distant from the engine but a mother goose doesn't know about the suction until it is halfway down the pipe
Blancolirio, thank you for making great content. Your videos are helping me stay up to date with aviation news while learning all about airplanes and aircrafts. I’ve just recently started getting in to aviation and love learning more. Keep up the good work and more power to you.
Another reason you didn't mention that would be a good reason to burn off fuel. They are single engine, getting rid of that weight would make a significant difference on go-around performance for the upcoming landing.
I bet the pucker factor went thru the roof untell they landed. Very good are crew and great job to all support people. To the F-18 really good flying and photos.
According to the F18 fighter pilot the landing gear was already retracted when he intercepted the AC aircraft. They slowed down to a safe speed to extend the landing gear for the inspection and retracted it back once inspection was done. There is a nice interview to the fighter Capitan where he does describe the scramble mission.
Pablo Purroy The pilot Did a fine job! Amazing picture he took too! Would you know if the F18 was especially scrambled to give assistance? Or did he just happen to be airborne!
@@cf6282 Specially scrambled according to folks over on VASAviation. This plane was not part of the "Ready 10" but was already preparing for another mission when it was used instead to help in this situation.
@@cf6282 He was specially scrambled. Torrejon AirForce base is just a few Km northwest of Barajas. He said that they usually fit with high definition cameras and some gopro cameras for some missions but they did not have time to set that up for this one as time was pressing. He used his phone to take pictures in case someone in the ground needed them quickly he could lower his altitude and connect to a cell tower to send them.
''All's well that end's well''..well said..and thanks! LOVE the beginning music, Juan's trademark!
Juan I agree. If the plane was flying fine with the gear down I wouldn't of touched the gear handle! Too many what ifs.
Hey Juan I just heard a shout out to you on big jet TV at 9:45 AM central time. “ big thanks to Juan and the blancolirio channel” British have trouble with Juan and blank’o li’row 😀😀😀😎. Love it !!