Boeing 737 MAX suffers landing gear failure, rolls off runway | Hacker News Reader

Boeing 737 MAX suffers landing gear failure, rolls off runway

theguardian.com

105 pointsren_engineer78 comments

Accounts on twitter claiming to have been on the airplane recounted that the aircraft went off the runway first, and that the gear failure, if there was one, happened after the plane left the runway.

"737 Max suffers landing gear failure" is a sexy headline but it may be prudent to wait for a bit more information before jumping to too many conclusions - just because Boeing is fresh in everyone's minds. Wild speculation is inevitable under present circumstances but it doesn't necessarily need to happen here.

Not that Twitter is a great source of reliable information, but, well, nowhere else is either when it comes to something that happened like 2 hours ago.

> it “left the pavement and entered the grass” while exiting the runway for the gate, airport officials said in an interview.

Indeed, seems like it taxi'd into the grass. Could be pilot error, or mechanical, I guess.

Or even both.

One can trigger, or exacerbate, the other.

Accounts on twitter claiming to have been on the airplane recounted that the aircraft went off the runway first, and that the gear failure, if there was one, happened after the plane left the runway.

Boeing stock did not seem to drop much on this news (at least not relative to the S&P 500, which is down), so this scenario would not have worked: https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucebrumberg/2024/01/12/stakes...

Yeah VASAviation posted a video with ATC audio and the runway/taxiway layout [0], which definitely suggests that they were just taxiing and turned wide. Seems most likely to be pilot error, maybe with poor visibility or braking performance or something contributing (weather seems to have been fine but I don't want to pass judgement without all the details).

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryS6w9b6OlE

Speculation is what we do, doesn't harm anyone, and is good to prime the brain for more detailed technical information. I'm fine with it. In fact, I think I learn more about how these systems interoperate by the speculation.

No, there's definitely the potential for harm.

Considering United has had 3 accidents in the past week, dogpiling Boeing for something that might not be their fault has the side effect of potentially letting United off the hook - if they're at fault. Which maybe both are, or maybe neither are, but the dogpile won't help sort that out.

Oh, there’s no doubt United is capable of this all on their own.

I came here to basically say "maybe this is a United problem not a Boeing problem."

John Oliver has a great segment on why Boeing planes are crap https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8oCilY4szc

If that's what you took from that segmwnt, you should watch it again.

Really? I hadn’t watched it, so just invested the 30 minutes into doing that, and that’s EXACTLY what I got out of it.

And that incest, sexual harassment, lying, and contract hanky panky is a big thing in Boeing executive culture.

Marrying your first cousin is not incest. It is weird, and great to make fum of.

Yes, Boeing has a serious culture problem. One regarding engineering, MCAS should never left the meeting room it was discussed in. And one regarding quality, that whole B737 Max door plug cluster fuck is plain unacceptable.

That their planes are shit so isn't true. Because ultimately, the B787 turned out to be a great plane, it should never heve been ruahed through development the way it was. Same for the 737 MAX with regards to MCAS.

The key point, somewhat hidden in the LWTN segment is that the way Boeing is doing things is deeply flawed. Not that the ultimate product is bad.

I say this, because with the quality culture Boeing seems to have, you will ruin even best design plane. And their quality culture, looking in from the outside and without a final FAA report, is ditramental opposed to everything I learned and saw in aerospace.

In general so, the John Oliver segment is good summary of Boeing goeing back to the B787.

If the plane can be taken out of the sky by a stray balloon, its a shit plane. The segment was about quality issues with Boeing. Similar to BMW. Yeah great engineering but crappy quality so IMO they are shit cars.

The fact the headline is probable enough that most people will read it at face value without questioning is undeniably Boeings fault.

> Boeing 737 MAX suffers landing gear failure, rolls off runway

This title implies an order of events that is wrong. It exited the runway likely too fast, went down a small grass embankment, and only then did the [left] "Landing gear fail."

See pictures here:

https://avherald.com/h?article=515e3618&opt=0

The article's actual title is more helpful:

> Boeing 737 Max 8 ran off Texas runway into grass

This happens semi-regularly. It is a huge PITA when a larger aircraft does it, since it can shut down runways or taxiways for half an hour or more. Happens a lot with snow, in particular as that can obscure the edge.

I had no idea air traffic control recordings were public!

"Interesting recordings" are available for download here: https://www.liveatc.net/recordings.php

Direct mp3 link for the incident in question: https://forums.liveatc.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1...

The formal recordings aren't. LiveATC recordings are provided by enthusiasts via scanners/SDRs set up near airports for the most part.

That website is very dangerous... Must not read before flying

All three of the incidents referenced in the lede were United Airlines flights, and to my uninformed eyes seem just as likely to be maintenance issues as manufacturing ones. Boeing is in the title because it understandably gets a lot of clicks lately, but in this case I wouldn't be surprised if these are a sign of bad maintenance on United planes.

If Boeing releases maintenance guidelines for a framistat, United Airlines will work towards those numbers. UA wouldn't double Boeing's framistat-related downtime guidelines without a really good reason, and this might lead to bad results if Boeing is wrong.

I'm not suggesting this wasn't UA's fault, I'm saying the nature of fault is complicated and currently unidentified.

Right, which is pretty much all I'm saying as well.

Because of how messed up Boeing is right now the initial reaction from casual observers is usually to blame Boeing, which may not actually be fair in this case.

If I recall correctly, United only flies Boeings, so any United issues will also appear as Boeing issues.

But these (so far) seem unrelated and would be unreported if it weren't for all the excitement around Boeings.

See this report about something similar but for Airbus, released by a notoriously harsh Airbus commentator: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/landing-with-nosewheels-at-90...

> Video footage captured the moment when the tire from the Boeing 777-200 came off the rear landing gear seconds after the plane took off.

> Records show the plane was delivered from Boeing to United 22 years ago.

This is a 20-year old 777, not a 737 MAX. Where did the title change come from?

I think this is a separate incident, also from this week. Gonna need an app to keep up with this company.

>> The Boeing 737 Max 8, carrying 160 passengers and six crew, was landing at George Bush intercontinental airport on Friday morning when it “left the pavement and entered the grass” while exiting the runway for the gate, airport officials said in an interview. <<

There are two separate incidents here in the same article. Yesterday a tire was filmed falling off a 777 that was 20 years old. The 737 Max that rolled off the tarmac happened today.

Wheels are always weak spots of airplane. Incidents will happen. The same with compressor stalls.

General media just like to produce headlines...

Of course a door plug or manoevering system should not become a weak spot. And systematic failures of gears would also need attention. But a gear of a 737, a wheel of a 777 and an engine stall of yet another type have nothing to do with each other.

Are the recent issues statistically significant or are people just paying more attention?

Just paying more attention.

Yes the issues with the 737 Max 8 are significant.

Major malfunctions are not the norm on airlines.

The door blowing out is something I'd blame on Boeing but these two incidents this week (tire falling off) and whatever happened here seem not likely their fault?

I don't think the lost tyre qualifies for a major malfunction, and the greenery excursion might well be pilot error.

The engine fire I'm not sure about, it being a 21yo plane.

Give the NTSB some time for proper reports...

> I don't think the lost tyre qualifies for a major malfunction,

a tyre dropping off in such a way that it could have easily killed several people doesn't count as a major malfunction to you?

if it went into the grass and the tire fell off that is a bit of a different situation. the landing gear is not meant to stay attached to the plane in all scenarios at all costs, and a 737 is not supposed to be an off road vehicle

People keep saying tire, but the whole wheel came off. Still likely maintenance/inspection related.

Best to find out if the wheel issue led to going off the runway or going off the runway led to the wheel issue.

You're mixing up two incidents, we now have:

- the 737 MAX8 going into the greenery

- the 777-200 losing a wheel

- the 737 (21yo, not MAX) with an engine fire after takeoff (this sounds bad but can be just bird-rich intake air due to very poor luck)

- the 737-8 rudder servo freeze NTSB report (which is the only thing with actual insights available, the servo involved appears out of spec)

> I don't think the lost tyre qualifies for a major malfunction

Just reminding everyone here that on take off planes are loaded with fuel. However minor the cause may seem to our expert HN commentators, if that leaks and ignites almost for sure a significant fraction of the people on board will die.

You're right, but at the same time I've read enough NTSB reports to know tyres (admittedly not entire wheels) fail rather frequently. (Normally during landing.) And getting the fuel ignited is not that easy on modern planes.

But yeah we need to wait for the NTSB.

Statistically insignificant issues regarding flight don't really make the news. Keep in mind that your flat tire is a bummer, their flat tire could kill a thousand people.

> Statistically insignificant issues regarding flight don't really make the news.

Except they do when airline safety is trending in the news. In 2019, the NTSB registered 40 accidents involving damage to a major air carrier or injury to a passenger. That is about 1 major event every 10 days. It's been 18 days since the last major event (door blowing off).

https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/StatisticalReviews/Pages/CivilAv...

I'm suggesting that the types of issues an engineer wouldn't consider to be significant would actually be too boring to report on.

3 Incidents this week

"A United Airlines Holdings aircraft ran off the taxiway into a grassy area after landing at Houston Friday, the third incident this week involving the airline's Boeing planes. From a report:

United Flight 2477, with 160 passengers and six crew, had just landed at George Bush Intercontinental Airport about 8 a.m. local time Friday when it veered into the grass on a turn. No one was injured, and passengers left the plane on a set of stairs before being bused to the terminal, the airline said.

The incident follows the mid-air loss of a tire from a United Boeing 777-200 Thursday, just after the plane took off from San Francisco on a flight to Osaka, Japan, and an engine fire on a United flight from Houston to Fort Myers, Florida, earlier this week. The plane in the Houston-to-Florida flight had to make an emergency landing after one of its engines burst into flames 10 minutes after takeoff. The 21-year-old aircraft was also a 737 -- but an earlier version than the Max, according to FlightRadar24. "

I've subscribed to a bunch of ATC channels on YouTube for a while, minor incidents happen every day. Everyone is looking for Boeing planes getting in accidents and it's no surprise they find them.

That said, Boeing lack-of-engineered themselves into this situation and I have zero sympathy.

This article from yesterday is quite timely:

> US NTSB probes 'stuck' rudder pedal issue on Boeing 737 MAX 8 flight

> The safety board reported the captain said that during the landing rollout, the phase just after touchdown, the rudder pedals did not move in response to "normal" application of foot pressure while attempting to maintain the runway centerline.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-ntsb-p...

This was just a few hours ago too:

Tire falls off United plane after takeoff from SFO

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/san-francisco/united-p...

That was yesterday.

Yesterday was a few hours ago!

Pictures showed tire & wheel, not just 'tire'

Came to HN to see if there was any stories regarding the tyre/wheel falling off the Boeing 777 yesterday and find the story on a 737 MAX incident. Whether or not either of these incidents are Boeing's fault doesn't matter. Their public image has been destroyed.

Update title to remove landing gear failure reference: Boeing 737 Max 8 ran off Texas runway

It is at least possible that the gear collapsed due to an attempt to turn onto a taxiway too sharply, at too high a speed. I'll wait for the investigation results.

https://avherald.com/h?article=515e3618&opt=0

Boeing desperately needs to end up like Takata: fined 250% of their annual EBIT, forcing them to go out of business due to inability to pay their fines, with their assets getting acquired by a random competitor.

It seems that it’s been decided that Boeing, as one of the only large passenger aircraft manufacturers in the world, is too important to our national economy and security to fine out of business.

My job just asked me to do a week across the country this summer. At this rate I'll be looking into the rates of passenger train crashes to see which is safer.

The plane seems like the pinto of planes, by the time Boeing works it all out they will have lost all trust.

s/Pinto/Corvair/ Ralph Nader, who has a horse in this race, should write a new book Unsafe at Any Altitude.

Maybe, but this incident is not evidence of that. Landing gear collapse after a pilot runs off the runway and into the grass is a likely event.

Safest mode of travel strikes again

If you say so.

> The number of deaths per passenger-mile on commercial airlines in the United States between 2000 and 2010 was about 0.2 deaths per 10 billion passenger-miles. For driving, the rate was 150 per 10 billion vehicle-miles: 750 times higher per mile than for flying in a commercial airplane.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_U...

I'll take 1:750 odds.

Per mile is a bad metric, why don’t you calculate per trip?

Not until you tell us why it is a bad metric.

How is it even still legal to operate 737 Max after all its failures? Is Boeing lobbying or something?

Profit doesn't care about legality.

I guess human lives is an "optional extra".

permanently grounding 737 MAX would be tantamount to killing Boeing's commercial aviation products (and possibly the company itself).

Unfortunately, this would have the side effect of destroying America's only viable commercial aviation company - there likely would not be a successor without heavy government bailouts.

That's an extremely expensive and impractical solution. EDIT: By "impractical" I mean that it doesn't help safety much, but does totally wreck US air travel for several years.

I don’t mean to give a free pass to Boeing’s ineptitude but it’s not like people are dying or even injured during these recent failures. Grounding them all permanently would be an overreaction.

Kind of Iceberg Effect.

All these safety issues, might be 'minor'. What we can see.

But having a big up-tick, and you wonder about the 'big-one' about to happen, that is still the submerged part of ice-berg.

I think the company culture itself should require approval. Producing safe planes or achieving a type rating is not sufficient evidence of that. A pilot can land perfectly a hundred times and still be dangerous if they are not behaving properly.

FAA gives Boeing a free pass

Worst case scenario a hundred or so people might lose their lives, best case scenario there might be a few more of the issues we’ve seen. Someone has probably come to the conclusion that it’s worth taking the gamble and not hurting Boeing unless there’s a more serious incident.

What do you imagine is the alternative? Would you prefer people to drive? Because if so that’s a great way to get them killed.

Why not spinoff the maintenance and responsibility of 737 MAX to Foeing and keep the profitable ones on Boeing?

Management is being reckless with shareholder value by not doing that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com