The video shows that the tire didn't come apart. It looks like the wheel came off with the tire attached. For just the tire to fall off whole, lots of bolts holding the two-piece rims together would have to not be bolted, and half the rim would come off, anyway, vs. one big nut holding the wheel to the hub.
Still, hard to believe either way: The wheel nut should have something like 250nm of torque, and it has a locking device, and swapping a wheel is a two-man job.
Obviously many eyes will be on Boeing given recent history but I don't know that there's a particular reason to suspect them. In this case I'd look first at possible maintenance issues on United's end, or possibly a manufacturing issue with the wheel/tire.
I'm curious what the pilot's experience was like. Do I get a notification right away that a wheel fell off or was it a radio call from air traffic control? While I'm in flight, do I have a little camera or something where I can see the wheels? Because there's no way to actually go look at them when they're tucked away and you're flying, right? In other words how did they determine that they should still attempt a normal landing (I guess there aren't really any better other options though, are there?)
Someone has already stitched together the ATC/plane radio traffic[1], it sounds like the pilots on the plane initially had no idea. Oakland departure had to tell the pilots that people on the ground saw something falling off the plane.
Why did the plane go all the way to LAX rather than landing back at SFO? It clearly seemed to be considered serious since there were emergency vehicles by the runway as a precaution. Is it easier to divert to LAX rather than land back at SFO in this situation?
They were above-weight for an emergency landing at SFO. Also, with the loss of one tire, even if they were within weight for an emergency landing, the additional pressure on the remaining tires from the full fuel takes could have caused a catastrophic incident.
In other words, it was safer for the plane to continue to its destination, since the reduced weight from fuel consumption during the flight would make a landing safer and the remaining tires less likely to explode.
Poor Boeing, this is what happens when you lose your “soul” as a company and you start chasing margins, profit, dividends and you don’t pay attention to you people and your product.
Have seen it happening in many big companies, and I don’t understand why intelligent/educated/competent CEOs don’t see this :-(
Tires are a wear item. They get replaced often, by the airline maintenance personnel. On this >20 year old plane, it's far more likely to be United's issue than Boeing's. I'd expect United to see a share price hit if anyone did.
More likely because it's a maintenance issue at the airline, and not a structural issue at Boeing, especially given the 777's solid track record over decades service.
If it is a maintenance failure, it's a really big one. You would have to change the tire (really the whole wheel) before this flight, not put the wheel nut on, and not put the wheel nut lock on, and close the wheel nut cover without having done that, probably with a second person there, and have the wheel somehow stay on while taxiing. I think I see the brakes still on the axle in the video, so I suppose this is what happened.
Oh I agree. The idea of forgetting to secure a tire, even without knowing the aviation specific bits, is clearly a HUGE mistake.
But I just don’t see any other way this could happen unless the tire was secured and just that part of the axle broke off which seems incredible unlikely in general, let alone compared to human fallibility.
I once saw four tires pop off on a modded hatchback racing down third ring road in Beijing around 2AM in the morning. The only way that could have happened is if the guy just got the car from the shop and someone forgot to add any lug nuts at all. Completely believable in China I guess.
Readit News
Still, hard to believe either way: The wheel nut should have something like 250nm of torque, and it has a locking device, and swapping a wheel is a two-man job.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeGo79nRMwU
landing around 1:17pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkdKhZSZiSM
towed to the gate about 10min after landing
you'll have to scrub because the streams are still live and I don't know how to timestamp a live stream
In other words, it was safer for the plane to continue to its destination, since the reduced weight from fuel consumption during the flight would make a landing safer and the remaining tires less likely to explode.
And there was no reason to think that the landing would go wrong, because the tires are redundant.
At the end of the tour they made everyone say “I ain’t going, if it’s not Boeing” as a way to celebrate their superior plane.
Ironically the mantra now is
“If it’s Boeing, it ain’t going”
Oh how times have changed.
Poor Boeing, this is what happens when you lose your “soul” as a company and you start chasing margins, profit, dividends and you don’t pay attention to you people and your product.
Have seen it happening in many big companies, and I don’t understand why intelligent/educated/competent CEOs don’t see this :-(
Deleted Comment
Probably because it's considered too big to fail. It's pretty much backed by the US gov.
On the funny side of this, I hope their car insurance covers falling airplane tires :-)
But I just don’t see any other way this could happen unless the tire was secured and just that part of the axle broke off which seems incredible unlikely in general, let alone compared to human fallibility.