Blown Tire on T/O
#21
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,926
"When we were taking off out of Newark, the plane kind of shuddered as the nose lifted. After that, everything was fine. About 90 minutes before we landed, the crew came out, made sure everyone was awake. Told us we were going to have a problem with the landing gear and to prepare for the worst," Kyle Hobbs says.
The central theme here does not regard damage about which one does not know. The question is asked whether one brings up the gear and continues, with a known problem.
Are we really so stupid that we simply proceed because something is routine? Good clarion call for unmanned cockpits, then, isn't it?
How often do I brief events prior to V1? Before every takeoff. While one may continue with a failed tire, and in most cases is best advised to do so, retracting the gear on a failed tire is another matter.
#22
I don't understand why someone who manages to determine they blew a tire on takeoff would "rig the aircraft to survive" an engine failure that hasn't actually occurred.
Tire failure audible warnings (if equipped) are most likely inhibited in the high speed regime during takeoff to help support the go decision. There are numerous reasons that support taking a high speed tire failure airborne but very few that would then support immediate gear retraction.
I don't know the specifics about this crew's knowledge immediately after takeoff or their decision process. I thinks it's entirely possible they didn't know anything about the tire during and after takeoff. Passengers sitting over the gear probably had more immediate cues of an issue than the crew did which is probably what's leading to the media's second guessing approach in the article. Most aircraft these days have a gear page that shows tire pressures, brake temps, etc. The most likely scenario, IMO, is the crew was either alerted enroute via tower observation, tire parts on the runway or a routine systems check of the gear page.
#23
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: 7th green
Posts: 4,378
Had a similar incident on the 737-400 MMGL to LAX. We didn't blow the tire, but threw the tire cap. Never knew about it until I was doing the walk around in LAX and spotted a skid mark on the fuselage by the R2 door.
I wondered how that got there until I saw the tire minus all the tread. When we asked the F/As if they heard anything on takeoff they said one passenger mentioned it but only spoke Spanish so they weren't sure what he was talking about.
The shredded tire cap did some damage the flaps. Aircraft was out of service for 3 or 4 days. The Captain and I had no idea anything happened until we caught it visually.
I wondered how that got there until I saw the tire minus all the tread. When we asked the F/As if they heard anything on takeoff they said one passenger mentioned it but only spoke Spanish so they weren't sure what he was talking about.
The shredded tire cap did some damage the flaps. Aircraft was out of service for 3 or 4 days. The Captain and I had no idea anything happened until we caught it visually.
#24
I am NOT Monday-morning QB-ing this crew (even though it's Monday morning).
But wanted to hear other's philosophical thoughts on continuing a transcon after a tire blow-out on T/O. As opposed to overweight LDG, or burning/dumping fuel near the departure field or other suitable divert site.
I'm *assuming* they knew they had an issue since they prepped the pax for a rough LDG.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united-...rtland-oregon/
But wanted to hear other's philosophical thoughts on continuing a transcon after a tire blow-out on T/O. As opposed to overweight LDG, or burning/dumping fuel near the departure field or other suitable divert site.
I'm *assuming* they knew they had an issue since they prepped the pax for a rough LDG.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united-...rtland-oregon/
Either way you've got to land. Might as well land at destination without all the drama of burning off three hours of fuel to get to landing weight. If you were not initially aware of a blown tire and the gear is already in the hole before you became aware why wouldn't you continue to destination?
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 924
If a crew knows the gear is messed up and proceeds to try to retract it, that in my humble opinion is a serious error in judgment.
The E-170 has a solenoid to prevent gear handle movement when weight-on-wheels. It also has a push button to override the PSEM (Proximity Sensor Electronic Module - determines gear position and integrity) and release the solenoid in case the unthinkable happens and you need to retract the gear to clear a mountain but the PSEM won't let you. All of our abnormal checklists say "only press the PSEM override when required for obstacle clearance."
A few years ago my company had a takeoff from a flatlands airport in Texas in which the PSEM decided not to release the solenoid. The crew pushed the button and got that annoying gear lever to move, then proceeded to their East Coast destination. Surprise surprise, the gear wouldn't properly extend when they got there..........
That being said if the crew only finds out about a gear issue after retraction, I can understand continuing to destination if the route has plenty of safe landing sites, no abnormal indications, above landing weight to return to field, etc.
The E-170 has a solenoid to prevent gear handle movement when weight-on-wheels. It also has a push button to override the PSEM (Proximity Sensor Electronic Module - determines gear position and integrity) and release the solenoid in case the unthinkable happens and you need to retract the gear to clear a mountain but the PSEM won't let you. All of our abnormal checklists say "only press the PSEM override when required for obstacle clearance."
A few years ago my company had a takeoff from a flatlands airport in Texas in which the PSEM decided not to release the solenoid. The crew pushed the button and got that annoying gear lever to move, then proceeded to their East Coast destination. Surprise surprise, the gear wouldn't properly extend when they got there..........
That being said if the crew only finds out about a gear issue after retraction, I can understand continuing to destination if the route has plenty of safe landing sites, no abnormal indications, above landing weight to return to field, etc.
#26
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Posts: 94
Either way you've got to land. Might as well land at destination without all the drama of burning off three hours of fuel to get to landing weight. If you were not initially aware of a blown tire and the gear is already in the hole before you became aware why wouldn't you continue to destination?
It's possible that when retracted into the wheel well, they snag/damage some wiring or hydraulic lines they wouldn't normally touch. It a reason to at least consider staying nearby.
#28
I guess you didn’t read my post,
#30
In that case you might as well continue on if there are no other issues. If you know the tire blew then obviously don’t put the gear up.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post