ATC says "Have a good day".....the pilot, having just been informed that he's missing a wheel, without hesitation responds with "we're gonna try". I love this stuff
@@YouCanSeeATC yeah, I remember that one. I guess that for all the issues they seem to have on the approach/landing recently, at least when on the ground, they have good situational awareness
One of the best, most complete videos I’ve ever seen on an ATC channel. Nice work and great find with all these frequencies and the situation as a whole.
This one made me laugh. Everyone: "You lost a wheel." Delta Pilots: "Ok, cool. It seems fine. See you on the ground." I get it: they are well-trained professionals that 100% know how to deal with this. But, their nonchalantness was hilarious to me.
Delta has their best facilities at Atlanta. Also sounded like pilots were not so confident those doing the reporting saw what they said they saw. "Didn't feel a thing. No indication."
For my understanding as well I watched a video on this and apparently these aircraft are designed where they can at least lose one wheel and still land safely but I imagine it would still scare the heck out of you 😆
@@gpslightlock1422 tbh, not the kind of pilot I'd want flying me. ATC informs them that 2 planes ( so at least 4 pilots) saw the wheel physically come off and they respond with "oh yeah well which wheel was it then?!". As if that's some kind of gotcha. Does he think if he argues well enough that the wheel wont have come off?
15:30 "Which wheel would that have been?" they don't know, they were too busy trying to figure out where it is instead of paying attention to which one it was and then advising you of the fact.
I have 18,000 hours in Boeing 767. Seems like one or more main landing gear tire and wheel were recently changed on a previous flight. Most likely it was not secured properly, with whatever nuts hold the wheel onto the main gear truck assembly. At high speed during the takeoff roll, it spun off at 145 knots! Good that it didn’t hit Jet Blue, that was holding to cross runway 22R. Years ago, I was taxiing out for takeoff at JFK during rush hour. In the grass I saw a large wheel and tire. An airplane ahead of us had one apparently spin off the gear. I later found that it was a Russian made airplane. They landed uneventfully in russia! Whenever this happens, the runway needs checked by fire department for debris-other metal parts may have come off, and an airplane landing or taking off could run over missing parts.
@@Landrew1208 not clear on your question. The delta plane decided to continue to Atlanta, for convenience. No real need to return to JFK. As for Russian plane, I don’t think they were told about loosing a wheel (discovered by maintenance after parked at gate). Lastly, when an airplane looses parts, the runway needs inspected for debris, with no one landing or taking off of that runway, until visual inspection is performed. Atlanta and Jfk did a good job on that
The capt has decided to continue the flight to Hartsfield Airport because delta airlines maintainace center is overthier Was that a good decision.?? After the capt has received confirmation of a missing wheel he made normal approach to RWY 9 instead of asking to flyby for further wheel inspection It's a wrong decision, I wonder why he did it ? Because if the 2 main wheels were missing that will be emergency landing and he should request fire trucks on standby ? I wonder on what base has he made the decision to continue for landing?
Did make me laugh the Delta bloke asking "Which wheel is it" FFS it bounced past Jet Blue nearly taking him out and Air France watched it land. The best way he could have found out is asked his company "which wheel was changed at JFK lol
bill b Yes, it doesn't really matter so much, in the grand scheme, WHICH wheel is missing. The important aspect, Mr. Pilot, is that your aircraft has shed a tire/wheel assy. Your landing may be a bit sketchy.
@@John-Andersen Well, if I were flying a plane that just lost a wheel, I'd certainly want to know which one it was. Missing left main requires different inputs on landing than missing right main - both sketchy of course. Having that knowledge certainly makes it easier to physically and mentally prepare for your landing actions. Also, it could help to direct your attention more specifically toward any potential system failures that could occur as a result of the specific wheel lost.
@@John-Andersen I assumed it was so that they could concentrate on checking that gear notice when they put the gear down. Judging by the "The takeoff was smooth we didn't feel any tyre blow" I think they were thinking that ATC was saying they had a tyre pop not that they lost an entire wheel.
Truly bizarre! I'm sure the duty pilot in ATL was working the problem with the crew and possibly a Boeing engineer. Delta has duty pilots in the Command Center, kind of like the CAPCOM position in NASA. They landed on 9L, the longest runway, normally used for heavy departures. The 767-400 is a long range airplane and even if the weather in ATL was bad they were relatively light for the takeoff. If it wasn't the result of a freak material failure someone in maintenance is going to have a very bad day. It probably helped that it was a tire on the rear axle- the 767 MLG is tilted front down until touchdown so the forward axle tires touchdown first.
I understand continuing to ATL, but why not do a complete flyby prior to the landing attempt? They're told it looks good right before touchdown, while they're missing a wheel. Do the flyby, get more data, and make an informed decision.
What’s a fly by going to prove? “You’re missing a wheel”. “Yes, we know”. More risk than benefit. Planes are designed to land with punctures, so a missing wheel isn’t any more of a problem.
@@EdOeuna What's the risk of a flyby? And based on the incomplete communications, the pilots wouldn't have actually known if they were missing a tire, a wheel, a strut, etc. They shouldn't assume "missing a wheel" means exactly that, it means something on one (or more) of their landing gear was damaged. What if they were missing the front gear? You'd certainly want to adjust your landing for that
@@ABlochead - since the wheel was found then someone would be able to determine if it’s a main wheel or a nose wheel. They’d also determine if it was still attached to part of the hub/brake assembly or on its own. This can then be communicated to the pilots who can then make an assessment and change the way they lane. At the end of the day except for “being gentle” with the landing there isn’t any other way to get the plane on the ground. Regardless of what fell off or what is left attached to the aircraft. Relying on a visual inspection by an unqualified person on the ground isn’t particularly helpful and exposes the aircraft to slightly more risk with an approach and missed approach plus, potentially, cycling the gear and/or flaps. At my airline they’re forbidden. At my previous airline the only thing that ATC could advise is if they can see the nose taxi light on as this only illuminates when the nose gear is down and locked.
Nobody listening properly? He was talking to ground, who was talking to fire and another plane on approach. "If there's three, we land." that was the statement. Meaning if one gear is missing entirely or has no wheels, he'd go around and plan for something else. A missing wheel is no huge catastrophe. He likely would've been on the horn with maintenance, too. They'd have told him what was (improperly) serviced, in this case probably one wheel, giving a good assessment if something else could break.
He was a tire guy. Delta, we found out later, had sent the guy to tire “college” for three days. Well, apparently he was sick on LUG NUT DAY, but they still let him work on the plane…
You have to Love the ATCs in New York the ground sounds she’s from the south shore in Long Island. Also the woman on the departure frequency was in lala land lol 😅
I’m not saying they were wrong to continue to Atlanta or not return to New York, because I can see the benefits of burning the fuel in route and having a lighter weight landing, but also, at the same time, you’ve had something come off your airplane and you don’t necessarily know if it has done some damage that will become apparent when you pressurize the plane “just because it was smooth”. I just think if I were an airman, I probably would have been more conservative and returned to New York after burning off fuel and not have risked a decompression incident.
Yeah it's a weird one. They were already around 10k when they were informed and everything looked normal. Of course, if there was some sort of belly damage that got worse during flight... shudder to think of the consequences. I guess they thought it smart to land at their tech ops base? Still warrants some investigation on what to do in such a situation. A small puncture to the fuselage could become a big crack in no time under pressure.
Around the wheel 'box' is the cargo area, which is not pressurised. If there would be dammage it should be on the cargo area, not the pressurised 'human space'. Even if the call was a bit weird, nothing was wrong with it. Also, by the time it was confirmed they were already about to land at their destination. So let's suppose that it was not true. They would have turned around the airport for no reason, and then possibly didn't had enough fuel to continue to their destination (they bring in the minimum fuel required, more fuel = heavier = burn more fuel = cost more to fly). And once confirmed they still have to land. You can land on the hyper busy JFK or at a busy atlanta. So when you look at it, there is many reasons to continue the flight, and little to stay in JFK airspace. So it was a good call.
Atlanta would also be the best place to fix a broken aircraft being a maintenance base as opposed to JFK where spares (and manpower) would likely be more limited.
@@AndyWhite Not for Delta. JFK is a huge hub for them as well. Definitely big enough to manage their 767 fleet which flies a lot of their transcon routes + atlantic routes.
Decision-making is not easy. I'm going to assume the pilots asked cabin crew if they noticed anything, and contacted maintenance too. Returning to New York airspace does not seem great, and there are other airports along the short route. Climbing to altitude with possibility of a compromised fuselage or fuel tank ... is ... not intuitive to me. But it's hard to argue for risk of a compromised fuselage after a smooth takeoff. Maintenance could have access to more live parameters than flight crew. Focusing on planning for a non-normal landing could be a better use of time for flight crew.
IMHO the Captain should have done a fly-by in order to asses the situation with all possible information. Nothing serious happened, but the decision to try a landing first not knowing the exact situation was a risk. There was no preparation for an emergency landing. Imagine a landing gear collapse, was the crew and the passengers informed? It does't seems so. It was a uncalculated risk, not good while carring people aboard.
Yeah I found that part strange as well. All it takes was just one inattentive pilot transmitting on the frequency at the exact same time when they attempt to land to spoil their plan.
There's one big thing missing here, the Delta flight can, and likely did, contact company with information. They could have been informed that one wheel assembly was serviced, meaning the remaining wheels on that strut would be OK. The ground crews at the departing airport cold have also reported just what was recovered, meaning just a wheel and retaining hardware.
They already had a plan in place and multiple vehicles and aircraft watching. 3 wheels they continue (hence pilots call out “landing”) - if the main landing gear bogie was damaged and/or missing more than one wheel, they’d go-around and run additional checklists and probably start foaming the runway, etc.
@@EstorilEm thanks. Maybe it was from the video editing but it sounded like they only got to know for sure they were missing a wheel when they were on the runway. But if it was a calculated risk, that would make more sense to me.
More so than from other airports' controllers who are regularly heard on this channel, the New York area controllers seem to ask "Say again" more frequently when they receive a first notification of trouble. Sometimes "say again" twice. I think that their typical workload might be too high -- they don't have "bandwidth" for the unexpected.
Could have not properly torqued down the axle nut and not installed the axle nut retaining bolts. This scenario is even worse as any wheels on the left side of the landing gear truck would have the axle nut loosened by the forward motion of the wheel which would be rubbing against the axle nut in a counter-clockwise motion.
Correct decision to continue. As long as their is no damage to the flight controls, flaps etc., continuing means the aircraft will be lighter on landing and ATL being their larger base
So has there been a report regarding what was lost at JFK as well as what came off the aircraft on touchdown at ATL? Seems the mechanics have a bit of explaining to do...
“Hey Delta you left your gear at JFK”, “Roger were gonna work it on the way”, … “Delta to Atlanta Tower, were gonna put it on the runway and see what happens”. Must have been their friday!
So let me ask you this... Waste fuel, dump fuel around the New York area and return, or burn the fuel en route to Atlanta (which has the same emergency response AND more Delta maintenance if need be). I know which one I am choosing if it is not a Pan Pan or MAYDAY.
For those that didn’t know like me, when he tells Delta to go-around for FOD on the runway, FOD stands for foreign object damage. It’s a generic term they use to describe any kind of object or debris that fell off an aircraft or just happens to be on the runway.
Makes sense to continue the flight. They are already airborne and the missing wheel won't affect the flight. That and it will burn off all the fuel for landing.
I don’t mind that they continued to Atlanta, that made sense. I do think the pilot seemed to not even believe anything was wrong with the wheel most of the time, which seemed like a bit of dismissive arrogance to me.
Atlanta had more resources and maintenance to deal with a problem like that, so them continuing to Atlanta made sense rather than hold for hours over the New York area.
Pilots are trained to trust their instruments - and his gave no indications of any failures - so that was healthy skepticism - not dismissive arrogance. Delta pilots are some of the best trained and most professional pilots in the world.
@@jacobnyhart6862 i agree delta has some of the best pilots but you’re making a blanket statement. It’s not all about relying on indications as a pilot, which can sometimes be false. It’s about taking everything into consideration whether it be reports or indications and going from there.
Reminds me of the good reason that a semi-truck has multiple wheels. Not just for the weight but in case one tire goes the others can help to keep control. Really fascinating to hear this. I also freaked and wanted them to return. But yeah, why return? Just get to where you're going and deal with it there if there's nothing that could be done and nothing dire. Makes perfect sense.
Amazes me that with the amount of cameras and views in just about every vehicle….these planes have no cameras to show the engines, wheel wells….nothing.
I find it disturbing that the Delta pilot didn’t believe his wheel was missing after two planes reported it. Also that it was reported By the ground that the landing gear looked fine, so he landed without verifying with a complete go around the first time. This seems like an almost horrendous disaster with mistakes by both the Delta pilot and the Verifying plane that could have cost hundreds of people their lives. Luckily it had a good ending.
@@oldcynic6964 The pilot would have known which wheel was missing and to prepare for the likely impact. And tower would have been able to coordinate following aircraft and for ground units to clear the FOD. By sheer luck, the missing wheel was on the rear gear and did not affect the landing (although it did spray metal FOD all over the runway).
That pilot wanted to get home fast. Lost a wheel? We're still going to destination. Want a fly by? Nah. We get three greens, we're landing. Want to stop on the runway? Nah - we'll turn off here. Tug? Nope - just follow us to the gate.
Nothing much. 767 has 4 wheels per main gear (so 4 per side main gear, plus 2 nose). Sounds like only one came off. When the pilot said "if we have less than 3, we'll go around" he was referring to wheels on a single bogie (main gear set), not total.
Too sweet? too creepy? 6:52 "Tower said it appears that you're missing a wheel." [long pause] _"Uhhh ... _*_say that again?!"_* _Add:_ 13:52 He lost another wheel while landing!
Why controllers fail to give altitude on go around which is required and pretty standard makes no sense. For years this has been an issue the FAA has been unable to correct.
Think the FAA needs to do some serious evaluation here , NY definitely Had FOD and runway and taxiways should have been closed,inspected and swept. The plane could have had fluid leaking ( fire hazard or fuselage damage or other systems damaged in wheel well, they should have landed immediately, ATL was negligent by allowing the plane to taxi around airport, possibly dumping fluids and FOD all over the place, or possibly damaging the tarmac, or collapse the whole gear and cause more damage to plane, plus they let a fire hazard pull up to a gate. ( We'v all seen overheated tires start on fire and spread to wing tanks) I think a hard stop on runway and evacuation could have been justified) But let's not risk our on time record, right. I fly alot, I'd be very Po'ed if I was a passenger in this flight.
There's a reason the fire truck did an inspection and subsequently followed them to the gate. If there were fluid leaks or FOD, they would have seen it. The plane's going to have to be moved regardless, unless you are suggesting they leave it on the taxiway and have the repair work done out there.
As a 50 year plus pilot retired airline 121 ops and corporate aviation. Atlanta did and outstanding job with the coordination of this situation! NY not as good! For the crew outstanding guys!
I can certainly understand the decision to continue to Atlanta - it gives you time to talk to company/maintenance, perform checklists, burn fuel, etc, but... What is absolutely unforgivable was to commit with ANY intent of landing on a first pass. There are all the resources in the world in Atlanta. What if this was a NOSE gear and the observing aircraft missed it at first as they did here. They had NO idea before they landed. Not performing an inspection pass is negligence frankly. Given available fuel, all that's sacrificed is a bit of fuel and time in the name of safety and that's a small price to pay for WAY more situational awareness.
100% agreed. Absolute unprofessional behavior from both sides. ATC and the pilot’s. Can’t believe that this company does not have a procedure which is to follow for an incident like this. Looks to me like the pressure to land ‚on time‘ is so high that wrong decisions were made. Delta flights - no thanks - my conclusion
There's always a published missed approach procedure that's supposed to be flown if Tower doesn't give any different instructions or if radio communications are lost (NORDO). In this case, the procedure is climb straight to 2000 then climbing left turn to 4000 to intercept the R-190 radial of JFK VOR. Lets say there's a catastrophic accident on the runway and Tower doesn't have time to tell you anything other than "Go around," then this is what you'd fly. It's good to proactively ask for instructions, but it's also fine if Tower can't get back to you. Every approach briefing includes this procedure, with the understanding that ATC will probably issue different instructions, but you always brief the published procedure.
Pretty normal he's pressing on instead of going back. The AC will be lighter and pax timely on destination. Not much else he could've done anyway, no catastrophe landing with one main whl missing. Pretty funny though and great work on the reporting.
What are the chances they could have had ancillary damage to the aircraft from the wheel or components of the wheel bogie, so many things come to mind ruptured fuel tank, damaged hydraulic lines..
I know there was a few people criticizing the pilots decision to continue the flight. They had no indications or warnings to warrant them turning around. With the decision to continue the flight, they have ample time to talk to ATC and maintenance as well as each other to formulate a well thought out plan which clearly paid off. They landed on the longest runway, used a long precision approach, had numerous pilots at the approach end of the landing runway watching for external abnormalities, and all the ARFF equipment at their disposal. This was executed beautifully and the outcome was positive. I really don’t see any problems with this.
Bad choice to carry on once informed, and another bad choice to land without doing a low pass to verify the situation. Glad all ended well but forcing a situation without all the relevant info is what leads to accidents.
they only lost a tire, confirmed by the firetruck, they just landed on it, it should be fine to roll to the gate, the firetruck followed if there were issues (more dropped parts) they have plenty of wheels so they can lose a few without issue
I have noticed before with US controllers, and here it is again, pilots whose first language is not English are generally interrogated about what they saw and asked over and over. The Air France pilot reported clearly what he saw and the location of the wheel. The discussion went on for ages, yet the minute the Jet Blue pilot reported it, he was believed, and action was taken. Says a lot about their attitudes. I also hate how they gabble communications, and it is miraculous that anyone understands them at all!
How is this not recorded as an incident? Could've been a fatal accident. It was wayyyy to dangerous to have only one aircraft looking for the wheels and land immediately... And I mean... a piece of metal blew off when it landed. Just wow...
@@jonathanhermansson4553 when they pull up the gear nothing is falling off and if they couldn't have closed the wheelwells they would have turned around
@@YouCanSeeATC Gear was already retracted and they were in the climb. There’s zero difference at that point - “if there’s damage” there’s damage, doesnt matter where they land. What DOES matter is their landing weight though; even with perfect landing gear, they’d likely be too heavy to land immediately without dumping fuel (possibly not as that’s a short flight for a 767-400) - but regardless, continuing on and burning all that fuel puts a LOT less stress on the landing gear and greatly reduces the risk of the adjacent tire blowing out. Also with the insane airspace around NYC, it’s not a place you’d want to dump fuel - they’d have to vector him all over the place to get out to the Atlantic coast end come back in. By the time they told him about the wheel, he was already nicely established on a climb to ATL. 👍
!["CANCEL TAKEOFF CLEARANCE!"; Kennedy Controllers Prevent Collision on Runway [ATC audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GHblBtuVxJc/mqdefault.jpg)
ATC says "Have a good day".....the pilot, having just been informed that he's missing a wheel, without hesitation responds with "we're gonna try". I love this stuff
Was gonna make this comment. No need. 😂😅
That is a professional on the job.
Good on the Air France and Jet Blue pilots for noticing and reporting the situation!
There was another video on my channel where Air France noticed that Ita Airways hit them on the apron, JFK.
@@YouCanSeeATC yeah, I remember that one. I guess that for all the issues they seem to have on the approach/landing recently, at least when on the ground, they have good situational awareness
👍
AirFrance has always been such a professional airline in every video I've seen, and also my own experience flying with them.
Well they have the best pilots in the world ;)
Embarrassingly, the wheel is still going round and round in the JFK baggage claim.
It could be rolling around the taxiways.
I won't fit in the SUV, so no one will claim it!
I just spit my water out reading that, that was awesome. Should be on the next Airplane Sequal. Miss those types of movies.
One of the best, most complete videos I’ve ever seen on an ATC channel. Nice work and great find with all these frequencies and the situation as a whole.
You need to watch more videos, because many are great as well
And yet he still ruined it with an obnoxious clickbait video title.
@@fanta12345 obnoxious clickbait video title? It’s what happened!
This one made me laugh.
Everyone: "You lost a wheel."
Delta Pilots: "Ok, cool. It seems fine. See you on the ground."
I get it: they are well-trained professionals that 100% know how to deal with this. But, their nonchalantness was hilarious to me.
I guess it's better to burn their fuel off than try to land a heavier aircraft with a missing wheel. Great pilots!
Delta has their best facilities at Atlanta.
Also sounded like pilots were not so confident those doing the reporting saw what they said they saw. "Didn't feel a thing. No indication."
For my understanding as well I watched a video on this and apparently these aircraft are designed where they can at least lose one wheel and still land safely but I imagine it would still scare the heck out of you 😆
@@gpslightlock1422 tbh, not the kind of pilot I'd want flying me. ATC informs them that 2 planes ( so at least 4 pilots) saw the wheel physically come off and they respond with "oh yeah well which wheel was it then?!". As if that's some kind of gotcha. Does he think if he argues well enough that the wheel wont have come off?
@@pikekeke I guess they wanted to confirm they still had the nose wheel. I suspect that would make a difference...
"Um... Uh... Say that again please?" Gotta love pilot-speak for 'escuze the f*ck?' lol
You picked a fine time to leave me loose wheel 🎶
😂
th-cam.com/video/mJIn6gMlo6A/w-d-xo.html I had to look that up, brilliant :D
Too funny!
😂😂😂
Now that's funny right there! 🤣🤣🤣
This was well done with the various perspectives. Interesting to see how the airport was impacted while the flight continues on.
Stitching all the pieces of this story together is awesome. Great channel. 🙂
Thank you 😎
15:30 "Which wheel would that have been?" they don't know, they were too busy trying to figure out where it is instead of paying attention to which one it was and then advising you of the fact.
I have 18,000 hours in Boeing 767. Seems like one or more main landing gear tire and wheel were recently changed on a previous flight. Most likely it was not secured properly, with whatever nuts hold the wheel onto the main gear truck assembly. At high speed during the takeoff roll, it spun off at 145 knots! Good that it didn’t hit Jet Blue, that was holding to cross runway 22R. Years ago, I was taxiing out for takeoff at JFK during rush hour. In the grass I saw a large wheel and tire. An airplane ahead of us had one apparently spin off the gear. I later found that it was a Russian made airplane. They landed uneventfully in russia! Whenever this happens, the runway needs checked by fire department for debris-other metal parts may have come off, and an airplane landing or taking off could run over missing parts.
Just as with Concorde, FOD can kill!
At the end, why did they land the plane before being informed of the visual inspection, that the left main tire was missing?
@@Landrew1208 not clear on your question. The delta plane decided to continue to Atlanta, for convenience. No real need to return to JFK. As for Russian plane, I don’t think they were told about loosing a wheel (discovered by maintenance after parked at gate). Lastly, when an airplane looses parts, the runway needs inspected for debris, with no one landing or taking off of that runway, until visual inspection is performed. Atlanta and Jfk did a good job on that
Yeah I don't know why they were so fussy about where exactly it was because they were going to have to inspect the whole runway anyway.
The capt has decided to continue the flight to Hartsfield Airport because delta airlines maintainace center is overthier
Was that a good decision.??
After the capt has received confirmation of a missing wheel he made normal approach to RWY 9 instead of asking to flyby for further wheel inspection
It's a wrong decision, I wonder why he did it ? Because if the 2 main wheels were missing that will be emergency landing and he should request fire trucks on standby ? I wonder on what base has he made the decision to continue for landing?
Did make me laugh the Delta bloke asking "Which wheel is it" FFS it bounced past Jet Blue nearly taking him out and Air France watched it land. The best way he could have found out is asked his company "which wheel was changed at JFK lol
bill b Yes, it doesn't really matter so much, in the grand scheme, WHICH wheel is missing. The important aspect, Mr. Pilot, is that your aircraft has shed a tire/wheel assy. Your landing may be a bit sketchy.
@@John-Andersen Well, if I were flying a plane that just lost a wheel, I'd certainly want to know which one it was. Missing left main requires different inputs on landing than missing right main - both sketchy of course. Having that knowledge certainly makes it easier to physically and mentally prepare for your landing actions. Also, it could help to direct your attention more specifically toward any potential system failures that could occur as a result of the specific wheel lost.
I suspect that at the time he asked “which wheel” what he was really saying was “yeah right - wasn’t us, we would have known, someone if full of it.”
@@philr6829 It did kind of sound like that 🤷🏼♀️
@@John-Andersen I assumed it was so that they could concentrate on checking that gear notice when they put the gear down. Judging by the "The takeoff was smooth we didn't feel any tyre blow" I think they were thinking that ATC was saying they had a tyre pop not that they lost an entire wheel.
What percentage of the plane has to arrive at the destination that a Delta flight counts as completed?
Presumably just the seats (pax) and luggage. Otherwise it's just a flesh wound.
The nose gear drive the time to blocks.
🤣
Loved the graphics where you showed all the planes landing!
I like that part too😎 but spent a lot of time for that.
@@YouCanSeeATC I'll bet!
So glad that rolling tire didn’t hit another aircraft! Excellent job to all!
a good reason for runway clearways
Turn volume up at 2:00. You can hear a female in the tower say “Holy Shit”
I thought I heard that 😂
Good work Sir depicting several ATC frequencies and visuals, must have been some work!
Yup, it took a bit more time. Thank you.
Just a great video @You can see ATC - putting together all those different conversations was a LOT of work. Cheers and thanks!
Truly bizarre! I'm sure the duty pilot in ATL was working the problem with the crew and possibly a Boeing engineer. Delta has duty pilots in the Command Center, kind of like the CAPCOM position in NASA. They landed on 9L, the longest runway, normally used for heavy departures. The 767-400 is a long range airplane and even if the weather in ATL was bad they were relatively light for the takeoff. If it wasn't the result of a freak material failure someone in maintenance is going to have a very bad day. It probably helped that it was a tire on the rear axle- the 767 MLG is tilted front down until touchdown so the forward axle tires touchdown first.
That control tower tape would be interesting.
Really excellent work putting this together, coordinating all the parties involved, thank you!!
I understand continuing to ATL, but why not do a complete flyby prior to the landing attempt? They're told it looks good right before touchdown, while they're missing a wheel. Do the flyby, get more data, and make an informed decision.
What’s a fly by going to prove? “You’re missing a wheel”. “Yes, we know”.
More risk than benefit. Planes are designed to land with punctures, so a missing wheel isn’t any more of a problem.
@@EdOeuna What's the risk of a flyby? And based on the incomplete communications, the pilots wouldn't have actually known if they were missing a tire, a wheel, a strut, etc. They shouldn't assume "missing a wheel" means exactly that, it means something on one (or more) of their landing gear was damaged. What if they were missing the front gear? You'd certainly want to adjust your landing for that
@@ABlochead - since the wheel was found then someone would be able to determine if it’s a main wheel or a nose wheel. They’d also determine if it was still attached to part of the hub/brake assembly or on its own. This can then be communicated to the pilots who can then make an assessment and change the way they lane. At the end of the day except for “being gentle” with the landing there isn’t any other way to get the plane on the ground. Regardless of what fell off or what is left attached to the aircraft.
Relying on a visual inspection by an unqualified person on the ground isn’t particularly helpful and exposes the aircraft to slightly more risk with an approach and missed approach plus, potentially, cycling the gear and/or flaps.
At my airline they’re forbidden. At my previous airline the only thing that ATC could advise is if they can see the nose taxi light on as this only illuminates when the nose gear is down and locked.
Nobody listening properly? He was talking to ground, who was talking to fire and another plane on approach. "If there's three, we land." that was the statement. Meaning if one gear is missing entirely or has no wheels, he'd go around and plan for something else.
A missing wheel is no huge catastrophe. He likely would've been on the horn with maintenance, too. They'd have told him what was (improperly) serviced, in this case probably one wheel, giving a good assessment if something else could break.
He was a tire guy. Delta, we found out later, had sent the guy to tire “college” for three days. Well, apparently he was sick on LUG NUT DAY, but they still let him work on the plane…
Ok Ron White 🤣
You have to Love the ATCs in New York the ground sounds she’s from the south shore in Long Island. Also the woman on the departure frequency was in lala land lol 😅
I’m not saying they were wrong to continue to Atlanta or not return to New York, because I can see the benefits of burning the fuel in route and having a lighter weight landing, but also, at the same time, you’ve had something come off your airplane and you don’t necessarily know if it has done some damage that will become apparent when you pressurize the plane “just because it was smooth”. I just think if I were an airman, I probably would have been more conservative and returned to New York after burning off fuel and not have risked a decompression incident.
Yeah it's a weird one. They were already around 10k when they were informed and everything looked normal. Of course, if there was some sort of belly damage that got worse during flight... shudder to think of the consequences. I guess they thought it smart to land at their tech ops base? Still warrants some investigation on what to do in such a situation. A small puncture to the fuselage could become a big crack in no time under pressure.
Around the wheel 'box' is the cargo area, which is not pressurised. If there would be dammage it should be on the cargo area, not the pressurised 'human space'.
Even if the call was a bit weird, nothing was wrong with it. Also, by the time it was confirmed they were already about to land at their destination.
So let's suppose that it was not true. They would have turned around the airport for no reason, and then possibly didn't had enough fuel to continue to their destination (they bring in the minimum fuel required, more fuel = heavier = burn more fuel = cost more to fly).
And once confirmed they still have to land. You can land on the hyper busy JFK or at a busy atlanta.
So when you look at it, there is many reasons to continue the flight, and little to stay in JFK airspace.
So it was a good call.
Atlanta would also be the best place to fix a broken aircraft being a maintenance base as opposed to JFK where spares (and manpower) would likely be more limited.
@@AndyWhite Not for Delta. JFK is a huge hub for them as well. Definitely big enough to manage their 767 fleet which flies a lot of their transcon routes + atlantic routes.
@JG the 768 is a plane of the 80’s 😂
Decision-making is not easy. I'm going to assume the pilots asked cabin crew if they noticed anything, and contacted maintenance too. Returning to New York airspace does not seem great, and there are other airports along the short route. Climbing to altitude with possibility of a compromised fuselage or fuel tank ... is ... not intuitive to me. But it's hard to argue for risk of a compromised fuselage after a smooth takeoff. Maintenance could have access to more live parameters than flight crew. Focusing on planning for a non-normal landing could be a better use of time for flight crew.
This is the perfect channel for someone terrified of flying
Reminds me of the 1970s Kenny Rogers tune: "You picked a fine time to leave me, loose wheel."
IMHO the Captain should have done a fly-by in order to asses the situation with all possible information.
Nothing serious happened, but the decision to try a landing first not knowing the exact situation was a risk.
There was no preparation for an emergency landing. Imagine a landing gear collapse, was the crew and the passengers informed? It does't seems so.
It was a uncalculated risk, not good while carring people aboard.
Yeah I found that part strange as well.
All it takes was just one inattentive pilot transmitting on the frequency at the exact same time when they attempt to land to spoil their plan.
There's one big thing missing here, the Delta flight can, and likely did, contact company with information. They could have been informed that one wheel assembly was serviced, meaning the remaining wheels on that strut would be OK. The ground crews at the departing airport cold have also reported just what was recovered, meaning just a wheel and retaining hardware.
Why didn't they just do a fly by first? Could have given them time to assess the situation (?)
My thoughts exactly
They would have done a go around if they saw less than 3 tires. They only lost 1 out of 4 on that gear set.
They already had a plan in place and multiple vehicles and aircraft watching. 3 wheels they continue (hence pilots call out “landing”) - if the main landing gear bogie was damaged and/or missing more than one wheel, they’d go-around and run additional checklists and probably start foaming the runway, etc.
Oh the drama
@@EstorilEm thanks. Maybe it was from the video editing but it sounded like they only got to know for sure they were missing a wheel when they were on the runway. But if it was a calculated risk, that would make more sense to me.
Awesome communication, everyone was calm, and made sure the plane was safety flying. Nobody injured.
More so than from other airports' controllers who are regularly heard on this channel, the New York area controllers seem to ask "Say again" more frequently when they receive a first notification of trouble. Sometimes "say again" twice. I think that their typical workload might be too high -- they don't have "bandwidth" for the unexpected.
it was the pilot who asked to have it said again.
Great video, must’ve been a lot of work! 👍
Yup, you are right 👍
Wouldn't they loose temp and pressure indications on that wheel ?
there are no sensors for individual wheels. This is not the space shuttle.
super cool situation - lots of info.
It’s not every day when your widebody FODs out a runway on takeoff AND landing. 🙈🤣
I dunno…. my own wide body FODs out daily because my jewellery and lanyard is always falling off. 😆
Could have not properly torqued down the axle nut and not installed the axle nut retaining bolts. This scenario is even worse as any wheels on the left side of the landing gear truck would have the axle nut loosened by the forward motion of the wheel which would be rubbing against the axle nut in a counter-clockwise motion.
Correct decision to continue. As long as their is no damage to the flight controls, flaps etc., continuing means the aircraft will be lighter on landing and ATL being their larger base
Not to mention less busy than JFK!
Are you joking? He should turned around for a flyby! Idiots pressed on like cowboys
Thank you for this great video.
Thank you for watching 👍
So has there been a report regarding what was lost at JFK as well as what came off the aircraft on touchdown at ATL? Seems the mechanics have a bit of explaining to do...
Good coverage of a difficult situation for all concerned.
Picked a fine time to leave me loose wheel
😁
This deserves more thumbs up.
Would love to know if the pilots would have had all PAX in brace position for landing.
Maybe didn’t announce a thing about.
“Ladies and gentlemen were getting an escort to the gate! Because we’re special.”
@@larryscott3982 😁
“Hey Delta you left your gear at JFK”, “Roger were gonna work it on the way”, … “Delta to Atlanta Tower, were gonna put it on the runway and see what happens”. Must have been their friday!
Imagine if it was the wing.
"Could all passengers kindly stick your arms out the window and flap?"
As opposed to doing what exactly?
We could loiter to burn off fuel, dump fuel and return, or burn the fuel and Atlanta had the same emergency responders. So… yeah.
So let me ask you this...
Waste fuel, dump fuel around the New York area and return, or burn the fuel en route to Atlanta (which has the same emergency response AND more Delta maintenance if need be). I know which one I am choosing if it is not a Pan Pan or MAYDAY.
For those that didn’t know like me, when he tells Delta to go-around for FOD on the runway, FOD stands for foreign object damage. It’s a generic term they use to describe any kind of object or debris that fell off an aircraft or just happens to be on the runway.
Either that for Foreign Object Debris. :)
Makes sense to continue the flight. They are already airborne and the missing wheel won't affect the flight. That and it will burn off all the fuel for landing.
Seriously, how many pilots have to report FOD before someone in the tower records it and sends a vehicle to remove the FOD?
And despite a pretty accurate description of its whereabouts by Air France, there were still people in the loop asking where it was!!!!
I don’t mind that they continued to Atlanta, that made sense. I do think the pilot seemed to not even believe anything was wrong with the wheel most of the time, which seemed like a bit of dismissive arrogance to me.
Atlanta had more resources and maintenance to deal with a problem like that, so them continuing to Atlanta made sense rather than hold for hours over the New York area.
Pilots are trained to trust their instruments - and his gave no indications of any failures - so that was healthy skepticism - not dismissive arrogance. Delta pilots are some of the best trained and most professional pilots in the world.
Agree delta is one of top in the industry not like AA always something happening with their planes
@@jacobnyhart6862 i agree delta has some of the best pilots but you’re making a blanket statement. It’s not all about relying on indications as a pilot, which can sometimes be false. It’s about taking everything into consideration whether it be reports or indications and going from there.
@@gnnascarfan2410 never said that going to Atlanta was a poor choice.
Where did you say that wheel is? They are probably still looking for it.
🤣
@2:00 "The tire in on the left side, about one hundred feet before the displaced threshold of runway three one left..."
Now we need to find out what fell out of the sky from an airliner in Augusta, ME two months ago…
Wasnt this a bit risky to just land without flyby? Why risk it
Reminds me of the good reason that a semi-truck has multiple wheels. Not just for the weight but in case one tire goes the others can help to keep control. Really fascinating to hear this. I also freaked and wanted them to return. But yeah, why return? Just get to where you're going and deal with it there if there's nothing that could be done and nothing dire. Makes perfect sense.
Also it burns more fuel in case things go wrong, and I imagine the plane being lighter has less chance of blowing out the remaining tire
You return immediately because you don't know the status of the aircraft.
Really great work on the video.
Thank you 😊
Great video!! I loved getting the whole story
Amazes me that with the amount of cameras and views in just about every vehicle….these planes have no cameras to show the engines, wheel wells….nothing.
I find it disturbing that the Delta pilot didn’t believe his wheel was missing after two planes reported it. Also that it was reported By the ground that the landing gear looked fine, so he landed without verifying with a complete go around the first time. This seems like an almost horrendous disaster with mistakes by both the Delta pilot and the Verifying plane that could have cost hundreds of people their lives. Luckily it had a good ending.
If he had gone round what would that have achieved? He's got to land the plane, whatever the state of the bogey
@@oldcynic6964 The pilot would have known which wheel was missing and to prepare for the likely impact. And tower would have been able to coordinate following aircraft and for ground units to clear the FOD. By sheer luck, the missing wheel was on the rear gear and did not affect the landing (although it did spray metal FOD all over the runway).
Definitely should have done a go-around, and not assume where the missing tire is.
That pilot wanted to get home fast. Lost a wheel? We're still going to destination.
Want a fly by? Nah. We get three greens, we're landing.
Want to stop on the runway? Nah - we'll turn off here.
Tug? Nope - just follow us to the gate.
What would have happened if no aircraft actually spotted the wheel that fell off?
Nothing much. 767 has 4 wheels per main gear (so 4 per side main gear, plus 2 nose). Sounds like only one came off. When the pilot said "if we have less than 3, we'll go around" he was referring to wheels on a single bogie (main gear set), not total.
Too sweet? too creepy? 6:52 "Tower said it appears that you're missing a wheel." [long pause] _"Uhhh ... _*_say that again?!"_*
_Add:_ 13:52 He lost another wheel while landing!
Captain Maggie: Oh shit, here we go again.
Jesus took the wheel.
The most awesome yet underrated comment yet.
That southern accent is GOLD!
11:12 smart call by tower
So did they lose another wheel on landing?
Back left main wheel - good enough?
Delta captain's callsign "Yard Sale."
Why controllers fail to give altitude on go around which is required and pretty standard makes no sense. For years this has been an issue the FAA has been unable to correct.
I heard clearance to 2,000 issued by tower to GA a/c
@@DM-ve8vb it’s on every procedure chart, they know it already
The level of ah shi* in the pilot’s voice when told he was missing a wheel. 😂😂
Think the FAA needs to do some serious evaluation here , NY definitely Had FOD and runway and taxiways should have been closed,inspected and swept. The plane could have had fluid leaking ( fire hazard or fuselage damage or other systems damaged in wheel well, they should have landed immediately, ATL was negligent by allowing the plane to taxi around airport, possibly dumping fluids and FOD all over the place, or possibly damaging the tarmac, or collapse the whole gear and cause more damage to plane, plus they let a fire hazard pull up to a gate. ( We'v all seen overheated tires start on fire and spread to wing tanks) I think a hard stop on runway and evacuation could have been justified) But let's not risk our on time record, right. I fly alot, I'd be very Po'ed if I was a passenger in this flight.
There's a reason the fire truck did an inspection and subsequently followed them to the gate. If there were fluid leaks or FOD, they would have seen it. The plane's going to have to be moved regardless, unless you are suggesting they leave it on the taxiway and have the repair work done out there.
As a 50 year plus pilot retired airline 121 ops and corporate aviation. Atlanta did and outstanding job with the coordination of this situation! NY not as good! For the crew outstanding guys!
I can certainly understand the decision to continue to Atlanta - it gives you time to talk to company/maintenance, perform checklists, burn fuel, etc, but...
What is absolutely unforgivable was to commit with ANY intent of landing on a first pass. There are all the resources in the world in Atlanta. What if this was a NOSE gear and the observing aircraft missed it at first as they did here. They had NO idea before they landed. Not performing an inspection pass is negligence frankly. Given available fuel, all that's sacrificed is a bit of fuel and time in the name of safety and that's a small price to pay for WAY more situational awareness.
100% agreed. Absolute unprofessional behavior from both sides. ATC and the pilot’s. Can’t believe that this company does not have a procedure which is to follow for an incident like this. Looks to me like the pressure to land ‚on time‘ is so high that wrong decisions were made. Delta flights - no thanks - my conclusion
Don't you just love all the armchair pilots throwing their two cents in!
Well some Maint guy is trying to determine what his next career move is going to be.
"Uh, let's see..." Not really what one wants to hear from the tower. Good for the go-around pilot becoming assertive and insistent.
There's always a published missed approach procedure that's supposed to be flown if Tower doesn't give any different instructions or if radio communications are lost (NORDO). In this case, the procedure is climb straight to 2000 then climbing left turn to 4000 to intercept the R-190 radial of JFK VOR. Lets say there's a catastrophic accident on the runway and Tower doesn't have time to tell you anything other than "Go around," then this is what you'd fly. It's good to proactively ask for instructions, but it's also fine if Tower can't get back to you. Every approach briefing includes this procedure, with the understanding that ATC will probably issue different instructions, but you always brief the published procedure.
Makes perfect sense to continue, very over weight to go back, gives time to burn off fuel.
A Hal Roach production at Kennedy. Whew!
You picked a fine time to leave me loose wheel
nice incident follow, thanks to Air France and Jetblue crew to report that
Pretty normal he's pressing on instead of going back. The AC will be lighter and pax timely on destination. Not much else he could've done anyway, no catastrophe landing with one main whl missing. Pretty funny though and great work on the reporting.
Odd that the captain just wanted to proceed to his destination after the advisory, right?
What do you need wheels for? They just make the landings boring.
What are the chances they could have had ancillary damage to the aircraft from the wheel or components of the wheel bogie, so many things come to mind ruptured fuel tank, damaged hydraulic lines..
Other sensors would have lit up
Ehh probably not
Possible ingestion if a nose wheel came off before liftoff
I know there was a few people criticizing the pilots decision to continue the flight. They had no indications or warnings to warrant them turning around. With the decision to continue the flight, they have ample time to talk to ATC and maintenance as well as each other to formulate a well thought out plan which clearly paid off. They landed on the longest runway, used a long precision approach, had numerous pilots at the approach end of the landing runway watching for external abnormalities, and all the ARFF equipment at their disposal. This was executed beautifully and the outcome was positive. I really don’t see any problems with this.
An 747 dreamlifter had a wheel fall off on takeoff from Taranto today
Bad choice to carry on once informed, and another bad choice to land without doing a low pass to verify the situation. Glad all ended well but forcing a situation without all the relevant info is what leads to accidents.
Pilot feels OK….good luck to you sir.
I’ve seen a few of these lately on large aircraft
It was stuff falling off someone else's plane that caused the Concorde disaster. The pilot is way too nonchalant about what others are reporting.
Can’t believe they taxied to the gate not knowing the condition of their gear.
1.) They needed to get the runway clear ASAP for that line of 5 aircraft.
2.) They had someone in a car escorting them to the gate for a reason.
they only lost a tire, confirmed by the firetruck, they just landed on it, it should be fine to roll to the gate, the firetruck followed if there were issues (more dropped parts) they have plenty of wheels so they can lose a few without issue
LoL don't worry they have someone following them to pick up the parts they leave every where they go! 🤣
Right about the 2 minute mark....in the background....hahahahaha
Wow, I hadn't noticed that! 😂
I have noticed before with US controllers, and here it is again, pilots whose first language is not English are generally interrogated about what they saw and asked over and over. The Air France pilot reported clearly what he saw and the location of the wheel. The discussion went on for ages, yet the minute the Jet Blue pilot reported it, he was believed, and action was taken. Says a lot about their attitudes. I also hate how they gabble communications, and it is miraculous that anyone understands them at all!
I think JetBlue reported it about the same time as Air France, but to a different controller/different frequency.
Random mechanic report...MLG Wheel Quantity Gauge reads 7...
Wow. That sounded like a right clusterF :(
N2596X managed just fine
How is this not recorded as an incident? Could've been a fatal accident. It was wayyyy to dangerous to have only one aircraft looking for the wheels and land immediately... And I mean... a piece of metal blew off when it landed. Just wow...
767-400 has 4 main wheels per side. It wasn't that risky.
@@jonathanhermansson4553 when they pull up the gear nothing is falling off and if they couldn't have closed the wheelwells they would have turned around
That was honestly smart of him to continue to ATL as it is Delta's main hub and they have a huge maintenance hanger there
But if there was some damage?
@@YouCanSeeATC Gear was already retracted and they were in the climb. There’s zero difference at that point - “if there’s damage” there’s damage, doesnt matter where they land.
What DOES matter is their landing weight though; even with perfect landing gear, they’d likely be too heavy to land immediately without dumping fuel (possibly not as that’s a short flight for a 767-400) - but regardless, continuing on and burning all that fuel puts a LOT less stress on the landing gear and greatly reduces the risk of the adjacent tire blowing out.
Also with the insane airspace around NYC, it’s not a place you’d want to dump fuel - they’d have to vector him all over the place to get out to the Atlantic coast end come back in. By the time they told him about the wheel, he was already nicely established on a climb to ATL. 👍
@@EstorilEm Well said
@@EstorilEm I agree.
Ehh you don't need a hangar to change a few tires
Oh that's why there was a pilot behind me in the lost and found line 🤣
HELP WANTED, A&P mech JFK DELTA MAINT
Wow. Well, that mechanic is fired!
The three mechanics…. and wouldn’t another mechanic do an inspection before sign-off?
@@larryscott3982 Yes, the QA is the final sign off after work is completed.
Don't they check the lug nuts ?
The actually wheel 🎡 and tire assembly ,fell from the spare tire holder bracket which is bolted under the Wing 🍗