United 777 loses a wheel on takeoff from SFO

y_p_w

y_p_w

Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
12,064
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
The wheel apparently landed in a parking lot and damaged a bunch of cars. But the plane made an emergency landing at LAX.

A United Airlines flight headed to Japan lost a portion of a tire during takeoff, San Francisco International Airport spokespersons said Thursday.​
​
At approximately 11:35 a.m., a piece of a landing gear tire fell off United Flight 35 which was departing to Osaka, spokespersons said. The tire debris landed in an on-airport employee parking lot during takeoff.​

A planespotter was caputuring video at the time and it's visible right at 45 seconds in.



 
Number_35 said:
Would the crew have had an indication of this from instrumentation, or were they notified by the tower?
Click to expand...

There's the ATC chatter where they were notified. I believe there were several who saw it and reported it. I think the last thing they wanted was debris on the runway. They immediately closed off the runway to make sure it wasn't there, although it did end up well away from the runway.
 
atikovi said:
Why inconvenience all the passengers going to Japan by landing in LAX instead of the scheduled stop? It's not like they need that wheel during the flight.
Click to expand...
I can provide dozens of reasons, but one of many reasons is that United does not have an internal maintenance crew at Osaka. I am not sure how large the maintenance crew or parts availability for UAL partner ANA is at Osaka.

UAL has an internal and I believe robust maintenance facility at LAX, very efficient to repair the aircraft and return to service. In Osaka, maybe parts would have to be flown in to repair the aircraft. Maybe another 777 would have to be flown into Osaka to get the PAX waiting to fly out on the 777.

Taking the emergency out of the decision making, having the aircraft fly to a UAL base with robust support was the best way to reduce risk of a stranded aircraft because of parts and technician exposures at a non UA hub airport.
 
Hmmm... I Know! Let's blame Boeing. If I owned one of the ruined cars I could claim PTSD and cash in!
 
GON said:
I can provide dozens of reasons, but one of many reasons is that United does not have an internal maintenance crew at Osaka. I am not sure how large the maintenance crew or parts availability for UAL partner ANA is at Osaka.

UAL has an internal and I believe robust maintenance facility at LAX, very efficient to repair the aircraft and return to service. In Osaka, maybe parts would have to be flown in to repair the aircraft. Maybe another 777 would have to be flown into Osaka to get the PAX waiting to fly out on the 777.

Taking the emergency out of the decision making, having the aircraft fly to a UAL base with robust support was the best way to reduce risk of a stranded aircraft because of parts and technician exposures at a non UA hub airport.
Click to expand...

I thought that SFO was their primary maintenance facility of the west coast. That hangar is immediately recognizable from US-101.
 
It killed a few cars in the parking lot when it bounced on the ground.
Tire.jpg
 
y_p_w said:
I thought that SFO was their primary maintenance facility of the west coast. That hangar is immediately recognizable from US-101.
Click to expand...
Ual does have a large maintenance facility at lax.and yes, ual has a major hub at sfo. Some additional factors may include lax may have had a properly configured spare 777 available if needed, many, many reasons.

Ual being larger at Sfo than lax, doesn't necessarily equate to sfo being the best match to address the issue. Fuel burn, runway length, emergency equipment, runways in service, current spares inventory, how many aircraft already waiting for mission critical work at any one location, replacement reserve air crews if possiblly needed, all could have played a role in why the 777 went to lax instead of returning to sfo.

And I am sure @Astro14 will take my speculation and assumptions , and provide facts.
 
Last edited:
GON said:
Ual does have a large maintenance facility at lax.and yes, ual has a major hub at sfo. Some additional factors may include lax may have had a properly configured spare 777 available if needed, many, many reasons.

Ual being larger at Sfo than lax, doesn't necessarily equate to sfo being the best match to address the issue. Fuel burn, runway length, emergency equipment, runways in service, current spares inventory, all could have played a role in why the 777 went to lax instead of returning to sfo.

And I am sure @Astro14 will take my speculation and assumptions , and provide facts.
Click to expand...
Yep - gonna want another aircraft fueling up …
 
GON said:
Ple


What has any of that have to do with spare aircraft availability at the time of the incident, spare part availability, runway length, amount of ynways in service,potential backlog of aircraft needing critical aervicey, reserve crew availability?
Click to expand...
Yep - waiting to board a Tokyo flight (UA) when something did not check out on the flight deck … London flight quickly lost their plane …
 
  • Like
Reactions: GON
Now I wonder if we'll find out that just hours/days/weeks before, the wheel was serviced and somebody forgot something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

y_p_w
Off-duty pilot in jump seat attempted to shut down engines on Horizon Airlines flight
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
4K
edyvw
wwillson
Flying the Boeing 757-200
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
4K
john_pifer
y_p_w
Trevor Jacob pleads guilty to obstruction for covering up deliberate crash where he bailed out
Replies
13
Views
1K
ctechbob
Jackson_Slugger
A short history of US fighter aircraft — from biplanes to stealth jet
Replies
19
Views
2K
Kira
javacontour
  • Locked
2018 Chevy Equinox L
Replies
9
Views
2K
ryster
Back
Top