United 767-300 Has Fuselage Buckled by Hard Landing at IAH July 29, 2023

SubieRubyRoo said:
Astro, I was completely joking, in jest at the whole AP poke. I’d trust two people at the controls more than the computer… the onboard pilots actually have incentive to execute a successful landing. And yes, even though I’ve got plenty of exposure to watching Navy jets fly and land, I’ve only ever flown a Piper Warrior II myself. Didn’t mean to imply I was ignoring commercial or military pilots’ skill.
Click to expand...
Ah, OK, I missed the intent. Sorry about that.

Lots of folks who don’t understand how airplanes work think that an autopilot can do every thing a pilot can, and, of course, that they themselves can do everything a pilot can.

But it took me longer to become fully trained to be a pilot than it took my daughter to become a doctor.

Flight attendants see us when we’re not busy and think, “Oh, that job is so easy” but they fail to consider that they’re prohibited from talking with us except in an emergency when we’re below 10,000 feet. Because that’s when the workload is high.

There is a lot more to flying an airplane than driving a car. It’s hundreds of times more complex because it has to be operated in three dimensions, lift isn’t a simple thing like traction, lift alone requires management of several factors, engine thrust and response isn’t simple.

Navigation is complex and you often can’t see outside. Communication is complex. And you must comply with complex three dimensional procedures and clearances given by ATC.

And that’s when things are easy. Throw in weather, or an aircraft systems failure, or an engine failure, and it just got a lot harder.

Driving a car and flying are as far apart as being able to peel a potato and being a graduate of the Cordon Bleu.

I get frustrated with these discussions because so many think what I do is easy. It’s not.

Until you’ve actually flown an airliner, you simply have no idea. I’ve had a couple of guests in my simulator - they can tell you about how complex an airplane is both from a systems perspective and from an operational perspective.

Back on topic…

This airplane has structural damage. Sometimes that can be fixed. Sometimes not. This airplane had a new interior installed recently, for about $5 million. We need the lift, the seats, that this airplane added to the fleet. So, will it get fixed? Probably not, but that decision can’t be made until Boeing looks at it and gives us a cost estimate. We need the airplane to support our international routes.

The only new replacement is a 787, which retails for about $250 million. Not an attractive option, but perhaps the only open option.

The used 767-300 market is tight, because Amazon wants them for freighters. We got three used airplanes from Hawaiian a few years ago, and then Amazon started outbidding us on every available airframe.

As for the crew? This is why Check Pilots are so highly regarded, and why Check Pilot bonus pay quadrupled in ourcurrent negotiations. Teaching pilots who are new to the airplane always comes with elevated risk. We do it on revenue flights in the operation.

An accident investigation will take place. Data will be examined and analyzed. More crew training will take place. If this was during OE (a new pilot being trained by a check pilot) then there will be both pilot training and a review of the check pilot performance.

We don’t discipline or fire pilots for honest mistakes - but we do discipline and fire pilots who willfully violate rules. I don’t know what happened in this case, but we tend towards rehabilitation, not retribution, when crews make a mistake.

This looks a lot like a mistake.
 
Astro14 said:
Who programs the autopilot?

Who configures the airplane?

Who selects the runway, flap setting, approach speed, autobrakes?

How does the airplane taxi once landed?

All of those functions are currently done by a trained crew. Autopilots cannot do that. Remote pilots cannot do that.

You need to understand how an airplane actually operates before making suggestions on how they can be flown.
Click to expand...

Case in point - Asiana 214.
 
Astro14 said:
The only new replacement is a 787, which retails for about $250 million. Not an attractive option, but perhaps the only open option.

The used 767-300 market is tight, because Amazon wants them for freighters. We got three used airplanes from Hawaiian a few years ago, and then Amazon started outbidding us on every available airframe.
Click to expand...

Does KC-46 production feature into future 767 availability? Or is that completely separate?
 
y_p_w said:
Does KC-46 production feature into future 767 availability? Or is that completely separate?
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the KC-46 (a 767-300 airframe with 767-400 cockpit and systems before getting the USAF equipment) is taking up all of that production line. No new 767 are being offered for sale right now.

I could be wrong about that, and maybe the 767 will be offered for sale in the future, but…

One other point - the 787 production orders are booked out for a decade. Boeing has sold every airplane they can build for the next ten years.

Further, the 787 does just about everything better than the 767. It’s faster, flies higher, has a more comfortable cabin, is longer range, and uses a lot less fuel.

If you’re going to buy a new airplane, then a 787 is a better choice.

If you already have a 757/767 fleet, then a new 767 is attractive because it offers much lower overhead in training and crew costs.
 
y_p_w said:
Carbon fiber isn't likely to buckle though, like aluminum alloys would. Any damage could be more dramatic.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the 787 is much easier to fly - particularly when de-rotating the nose.

Which makes this kind of structural load (and subsequent damage) much less likely.
 
I believe it's the oldest 767 in the UA fleet. If it's assessed that it can't be fixed with Flex Seal, it'll be written off, meat picked off the bones and then scrapped.
 
This old girl will likely parted to support the rest of the fleet with her remains scrapped.
What happened was likely a shear right before or immediately following touchdown with the resultant abrupt loss of airspeed and there was little the crew could have done. Abrupt increase in tailwind or decrease in headwind would have caught any crew out at that point.
The 767 will not be built after 2027 since no engines from GE, PW or RR are available that meet the required CO2 emissions requirements after that year and Boeing has indicated that there won't be any re-engine program. FWIU, the current backlog is sold out and the buyers are Fedex and UPS. It has been ten years since a pax 767 was delivered. I've read that United approached Boeing with the idea of purchasing additional passenger 767s and Boeing replied that since their interior suppliers no longer had the tooling to make the parts that was not possible.
The 787 is also not a good replacement for the 767 since the lightest 787 has to haul around another 80,000 lbs of structural weight.
For routes needing the extra fuel capacity and seat potential of the 787, this is fine, but for the routes on which the 767-300 is the ideal aircraft it isn't.
We've flown on 767s and the 2-3-2 configuration in coach is awesome.
 
The only time I have seen wrinkles in the fuselage was from a pilot pushing forward after a bad landing and porpoising.

Our airline has had to replace the landing gear due to hard landings but none had wrinkles in the fuselage.

Two were training flights on widebodies ( one had a tail strike also ).
 
Last edited:
john_pifer said:
EDITED TO ADD: Drinking won't help anything. If I were that pilot, I'd feel bad, but I'd be doing everything I possibly could to show how sorry I was that it happened, and that I was willing to do anything and everything possible to prevent anything of the sort from ever happening again. I would think the worst thing they could do would be to show any kind of arrogance. I'd want to show a willingness to take every training and sim class they wanted me to take. If you're him, you have to accept that it happened and move on with a resolve never to let it happen again (Indeed, if he was at fault. We don't know any of the details. There could be circumstances we don't know about, of course.)
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree with that first sentence, it certainly gave me the courage to tell the wife I ran over a new chainsaw! o_O I agree with the rest though.

I cant imagine the stress this pilot is under right now, but it has to be intense. This story is all over the news feeds and the keyboard mobs are really hammering him, with almost no details or facts available to any of us. I dont have the credentials to pass judgement on whatever happened during this landing, so all I can say is hopefully his career isnt over and whatever wrongs get righted. I really feel bad for the guy, whoever he is.

This isnt the first 767 to get this type of damage from a hard landing but due to its age I dont see it flying again, I could be wrong.... I've been involved first hand in these types of repairs and the amount of time, inspections, labor, and money involved is absolutely astronomical. What a mess.

I dont know if I want to be a pilot anymore.....
 
RedSpider said:
Not sure I agree with that first sentence, it certainly gave me the courage to tell the wife I ran over a new chainsaw! o_O I agree with the rest though.

I cant imagine the stress this pilot is under right now, but it has to be intense. This story is all over the news feeds and the keyboard mobs are really hammering him, with almost no details or facts available to any of us. I dont have the credentials to pass judgement on whatever happened during this landing, so all I can say is hopefully his career isnt over and whatever wrongs get righted. I really feel bad for the guy, whoever he is.

This isnt the first 767 to get this type of damage from a hard landing but due to its age I dont see it flying again, I could be wrong.... I've been involved first hand in these types of repairs and the amount of time, inspections, labor, and money involved is absolutely astronomical. What a mess.

I dont know if I want to be a pilot anymore.....
Click to expand...
What’s interesting about the judgment is this:

Those without the understanding to judge are the first to pass judgement without even knowing the facts.

Those with the understanding to judge are withholding judgement until the facts are known.
 
Exactly. And right now as I sit here listening in on a meeting at work, I'm scrolling my Facebook on my phone and on one of the aviation pages I subscribe to, comment after comment the mob is saying "he's a new hire, just fire him" and "doesnt belong in a cockpit" and all sorts of garbage, with no knowledge whatsoever as to what actually transpired. Meanwhile these overconfident mouthy meatheads who couldnt land a Cessna 150 at 60 kts on a calm day without cartwheeling it into oblivion if you gave them the entire Bonneville salt flats to land on are calling for this guys fledgling career to be terminated for something that he may or may not even have had any control over. People just need to shut up sometimes.

Shame we cant just go back to newspapers.....
 
Astro14 said:
Ah, OK, I missed the intent. Sorry about that.

Lots of folks who don’t understand how airplanes work think that an autopilot can do every thing a pilot can, and, of course, that they themselves can do everything a pilot can.

But it took me longer to become fully trained to be a pilot than it took my daughter to become a doctor.

Flight attendants see us when we’re not busy and think, “Oh, that job is so easy” but they fail to consider that they’re prohibited from talking with us except in an emergency when we’re below 10,000 feet. Because that’s when the workload is high.

There is a lot more to flying an airplane than driving a car. It’s hundreds of times more complex because it has to be operated in three dimensions, lift isn’t a simple thing like traction, lift alone requires management of several factors, engine thrust and response isn’t simple.

Navigation is complex and you often can’t see outside. Communication is complex. And you must comply with complex three dimensional procedures and clearances given by ATC.

And that’s when things are easy. Throw in weather, or an aircraft systems failure, or an engine failure, and it just got a lot harder.

Driving a car and flying are as far apart as being able to peel a potato and being a graduate of the Cordon Bleu.

I get frustrated with these discussions because so many think what I do is easy. It’s not.

Until you’ve actually flown an airliner, you simply have no idea. I’ve had a couple of guests in my simulator - they can tell you about how complex an airplane is both from a systems perspective and from an operational perspective.

Back on topic…

This airplane has structural damage. Sometimes that can be fixed. Sometimes not. This airplane had a new interior installed recently, for about $5 million. We need the lift, the seats, that this airplane added to the fleet. So, will it get fixed? Probably not, but that decision can’t be made until Boeing looks at it and gives us a cost estimate. We need the airplane to support our international routes.

The only new replacement is a 787, which retails for about $250 million. Not an attractive option, but perhaps the only open option.

The used 767-300 market is tight, because Amazon wants them for freighters. We got three used airplanes from Hawaiian a few years ago, and then Amazon started outbidding us on every available airframe.

As for the crew? This is why Check Pilots are so highly regarded, and why Check Pilot bonus pay quadrupled in ourcurrent negotiations. Teaching pilots who are new to the airplane always comes with elevated risk. We do it on revenue flights in the operation.

An accident investigation will take place. Data will be examined and analyzed. More crew training will take place. If this was during OE (a new pilot being trained by a check pilot) then there will be both pilot training and a review of the check pilot performance.

We don’t discipline or fire pilots for honest mistakes - but we do discipline and fire pilots who willfully violate rules. I don’t know what happened in this case, but we tend towards rehabilitation, not retribution, when crews make a mistake.

This looks a lot like a mistake.
Click to expand...

It is impossible to overstate how important this is. Retribution for honest mistakes is the modus operandi in Russia and systems like that. It is to provide a sacrificial lamb to society and not further investigate what might surface systematic issues. blah, blah, blah.
UAL cannot afford to go that route. Once you have developed that culture, you might put turn off the lights in the company, put the key in the lock, and forget about it.
If this was an honest mistake, the trainee might need some mental and emotional counseling too.
 
SubieRubyRoo said:
I’ve been on some sketchy landings, especially into Sea-Tac when it was a downpour at night and what felt like a pretty good side wind…. Puckered up for sure!!
Click to expand...
I think landings in the rain are supposed to be extra hard to avoid hydroplaning.
 
Owen Lucas said:
I think landings in the rain are supposed to be extra hard to avoid hydroplaning.
Click to expand...
Depends on runway length, approach speed, and a few other factors but a slippery runway is generally not the time to “grease” it on… as the reduced fraction makes it harder to stop.

Sort of like stopping on snow or ice in your car - you want every extra foot you can get.
 
Astro14 said:
What’s interesting about the judgment is this:

Those without the understanding to judge are the first to pass judgement without even knowing the facts.

Those with the understanding to judge are withholding judgement until the facts are known.
Click to expand...
Which is the reason that I gave the pilots the benefit of the doubt in my post.
No first world airline has idiots sitting up front and almost all have embraced a just culture to ensure that the lessons are learned from any mishap lest it be repeated.
The flight crew in this case were well experienced and the 767 is not exactly a mystery to operated consistently.
The cause will be identified and the lessons learned will be used to prevent any future similar event.
I still think that the crew did nothing wrong, but my flight experience doesn't extend beyond the C172, which anyone with a little sense and dual time can safely operate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom