Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Transportation

Delta's Boeing 767 Makes Emergency Landing as Engine Catches Fire Moments After Takeoff (livemint.com) 46

Posted by EditorDavid from the engine-trouble dept.
A new video shows flames emanating from one side of a Boeing 767 moments after takeoff, reports LiveMint.com. "Delta flight 446 was forced to make an emergency landing in Los Angeles," they report, adding "No one was injured. The fire was extinguished upon landing." According to a report by Aviation A2Z, the plane (24-year-old Boeing 767-400 with registration N836MH) had just departed from Los Angeles International Airport when its left engine ignited. The pilots promptly declared an emergency and requested to return to the airport.
Delta faced a similar issue less than three months ago. The article notes the engine of an Airbus also caught on fire in April when pushing back from the gate for departure. CBS News describes that incident: Delta said crew members evacuated the cabin when flames were seen in the tailpipe of one of the plane's two main engines and fire crews quickly responded. According to Delta, the plane, an Airbus 330, had 282 passengers, 10 flight attendants and two pilots on board...

The engine fire marks the latest aviation scare involving the airline in recent months. In February, 21 people were injured after a Delta plane flipped upside down while landing amid wintry conditions at Toronto Pearson International Airport. All of the injured passengers were later released from the hospital. In January, several people were injured after a Delta flight aborted its takeoff at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, forcing about 200 passengers to evacuate the plane through emergency slides. ["A passenger says the engine on the Boeing 757 caught fire," according to CBS's video report in January.]

Delta's Boeing 767 Makes Emergency Landing as Engine Catches Fire Moments After Takeoff More | Reply

Delta's Boeing 767 Makes Emergency Landing as Engine Catches Fire Moments After Takeoff

Comments Filter:
  • Did the doors stay on at least?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Valgrus Thunderaxe ( 8769977 )
      If you want assign blame prematurely, the correct question to ask at this point is "who made the engines", which the fine summary conveniently glosses over, but peppers the word "Boeing" into the summary no less than 19 times.

      • Surprisingly, not Pratt&Whitney for once.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        The next questions should be who installed the engines and who does maintenance?

        • I'd worry about that question after you checked if there were bits of animal in them. Fires in engines are VERY common, on average multiple times a month US airspace alone. Usually the result of bird strikes. "Moments after take off" definitely puts a bird strike within the realms of possibility.

      • GE CF6.
      • It's not the engine manufacturer's name on the side of the plane and it's not like airlines order engine-less planes and then bolt on whatever engine they want after the purchase. Boeing is the company that designed the plane, chose the engine manufacturer, assembled the plane, presumably inspected it for quality, and sold it. If the issue ends up being a manufacturing defect in the engine, then Boeing wouldn't automatically get a full pass because they didn't manufacture that particular part.

        However,
        • It's true that the airline cannot put any engine they want on the plane, but they do unilaterally replace the engines with engines that were approved in the FAA specs for the plane (which came from the manufacturer)

          Boeing does not QA those engines, the engine manufacturer does.
          Boeing may QA the engines on the initial Boeing shipped engines, or not. Ford doesn't do QA for the alternator they installed in my car. It has its own manufacturer, and comes with its own warranty to whoever the buyer is- me or Fo

  • Ban stock BuyBacks (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Sunday July 20, 2025 @01:43PM (#65532838)
    We saw this with Intel and we are now seeing this with Boeing.

    Stock BuyBacks starve companies of the funds they need to function. They also guarantee an economic collapse every 8 to 10 years because companies will do Mass layoffs in order to get the cash to do the stock BuyBacks and those Mass layoffs will reverberate through the economy triggering a recession.

    We know what we need to do we just need to have the will to do it. We need to stop getting distracted by childish moral panics and focus on our pocketbooks.

    It might already be too late. I've said it before but they're coming for your house. We've got about 2,000 people all vying to see who's going to be the first trillionaire. There's simply isn't enough growth in the economy for them to achieve that without seizing other people's property and they're not going to seize each other's, they have class consciousness that we don't.

    So the only way to hit that magic number is going to be the start taking people's property away from them and renting it back.

    They will use the medical system. Most of us old farts have pills and things we need to live and we periodically need surgeries. Before long you'll mortgage your house to afford the stuff you need to live and you'll fall behind on that mortgage. Then it's just a hop skip and a jump from the bank taking the house and for it being snapped up for cheap on an auction.

    The same thing happened in 2008, it was one of the largest wealth transfers in human history All to The top. Only back then at least we still had affordable apartments for people to fall back on. Those are long gone.
    • agree. I think this is a symptom of out of control capitalism. It is clearly not good. We keep going through these cycles of centralized wealth, and distributed wealth. In history, it seems to me that distributed wealth is the best.

      • Exactly and the worse thing is that (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        They want to turn America into Saudi Arabia. For that to make sense you need to understand a little bit about American politics. Not much just a little.

        So Trump doesn't have enough votes in our lower chamber, the US House of Representatives, to cram through The 5 trillion dollars in tax cuts for billionaires he wants. There's a handful of Republican politicians that run on the deficit and they would lose their primary elections if they added 5 trillion to the national debt for anything let alone for tax cut

        • My mind is now on SNAP benefits. How they are being taken away and how that is not intuitive. I keep thinking that SNAP benefits should be offered to every person with a Social Security Number. $200 a month. It would cost about 70 Billion a year. that is less than the cost of Trumps police ICE force. Many "rich" people may not take the benefit. It may cost much less. My thinking is that if every person in America is given the choice to eat food produced by American Farmers, that they would. It

    • Re:Ban stock BuyBacks (Score:5, Insightful)

      by phoenix_V ( 16542 ) on Sunday July 20, 2025 @02:15PM (#65532896)

      Boeing does not make engines. In this case GE made them.

      However neither are to blame on a 25 year old aircraft unless thye engine just came back from major overhaul which is often done by GE (now GE Aerospace) or a subsidiary. I've seen no indications of this.

      Instead the blame goes to the airlines maintenance personnel.Generally speaking Delta is considered world class in this aspect, but when you are one of the largest airlines you will have incidents. Right now the almighty algorithm finds aviation incidents hot and promotes them to peoples feeds.

      • Right now the almighty algorithm finds aviation incidents hot and promotes them to peoples feeds.

        This is so understated. A quick search will yield numbers like 25 complete engine failures in commercial flights per year in US airspace alone. That's once every two weeks. A lot of them are caused by bird strikes. Some of them not. An engine catching fire is an event common enough that you can find countless Youtube videos of it happening.

        A friend of mine works in ATC in Australia. I asked her what makes her job interesting and she pointed out the fact that the control tower deals with a plane having an em

      • Boeing does not make engines.

        I am not saying that the fault lies with Boeing, but even if the aircraft engines are manufactured by another company, they are still controlled by Boeing's hardware and software systems.
        In light of recent events related to Boeing, and lately the lingering questions about the Air India flight, it is not surprising that the press is highlighting these kinds of incidents.

    • Remind me ⦠what kinds of engines does Boeing make?

      Oh right, none. This plane had GE engines. So itâ(TM)s more likely a GE or maintenance

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        Remind me ⦠what kinds of engines does Boeing make?

        Oh right, none. This plane had GE engines. So itâ(TM)s more likely a GE or maintenance

        No, it's more likely to be bird ingestion. Maintenance is second most likely. Design flaws from GE are third.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      You are ranting about a symptom. Such a "ban" (which cannot even be done without basically raping the law) would accomplish nothing. The problem is the people managing an enterprise, not some specific foolishness they conceive and implement.

      • If the "law" stops serving the interests of the people in a Democracy, that "law" should be repealed.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          That is the fascist in you talking. Think carefully about what you just wrote.

          • I would like to return America back to the middle class. So yes, I stand by what I said. I think that the so called "death taxes", should be called Estate Taxes, for example. The Rich and the Wealthy should pay... or more to the point give back to the Country, the United States of America, that gave them their wealth. They did not do that themselves, only a large, crazy large Ego would think that.

      • Can I agree with you on this question despite finding my mood strongly affiliated against most of your other positions?

    • It isn't the buybacks themselves, it is the management focus on increasing stock price without strategic reinvestment. Sometimes that is actually ok-- companies do actually run a course and sometimes it is time for them to down-size and maybe go away. A buyback can help reduce the market capitalization of the company and wind down (more) gracefully.

    • We saw this with Intel and we are now seeing this with Boeing.

      While Boeing has not done well in the last decades or so, this case may not be on Boeing. 1) In this case, the plane was 24 years old and not brand new. At that point, it is more on Delta for maintenance of the plane. 2) Boeing does not make engines.

    • "The same thing happened in 2008, it was one of the largest wealth transfers in human history All to The top."

      Why not see it ss wealth creation by the Fed (i.e. money-printing on a trillion-dollar scale, far eclipsing the measly earnings of the lower class)? Did the lower half ever have enough money to appease the tastes of the rich, or do they simply create the money they demand out of "the alchemy of banking" while useful idiots like yourself distract from this vast ongoing money creation by prattling on

  • Air travel is the safest form of travel, by far, of any way to travel. I prefer to "travel" with VR myself. Constantly reporting on any aircraft failure or deaths seems like a rich persons problem to me. I would prefer to focus on why people are not obsessed with car crashes where average people are in control, and self driving cars are actually safer? Average people driving cars should be a focus at the moment in my humble opinion, that is much more dangerous.

    • What if I drive mostly on country roads where I'm the only moving vehicle in sight, and I usually drive quite a bit under the posted speed limit because I like to check out the landscape and not create more roadkill? Will you eliminate above-average drivers from your model and force me to use your stupid technology, or else jail?

  • News? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by JBMcB ( 73720 ) on Sunday July 20, 2025 @01:48PM (#65532868)

    Why is this news? Three months ago an A330 caught fire in Orlando.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news... [msn.com]

    The month before that a 737 caught fire after sucking a rabbit into an engine. Ditto a FedEx plane hitting a bird. Last year an A320 engine caught fire while rolling at O'Hare. If you are fan of air traffic control Youtube channels, there is a somewhat famous "Kennedy Steve" clip of him rolling a fire crew to a jet whose engines caught fire while they were turned off at the gate. This stuff happens pretty regularly.

    • The month before that a 737 caught fire after sucking a rabbit into an engine.

      A rabbit? How the F does that happen?
      I hope it was, somehow, the rabbit that was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        The month before that a 737 caught fire after sucking a rabbit into an engine.

        A rabbit? How the F does that happen? I hope it was, somehow, the rabbit that was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

        First, someone had to place the rabbit onto the giant trebuchet...

        But seriously, the engines are pretty close to the ground, so anything on the runway tends to get sucked into the engines. Apparently, this isn't even all that rare [jalopnik.com], happening four times last year alone. It's just way less common than bird ingestion.

        • But seriously, the engines are pretty close to the ground, ...

          Right, it was a 737. Just Googled a few images, I forgot how low the engines are. Still, unlucky bunnies.

          It's just way less common than bird ingestion.

          Hopefully, this case only happens on the ground. :-)

          • I forgot how low the engines are.

            Any jet with under wing engines vacuums the runway as they go. It's not a 737 issue. Remember how big a damn plane is and then think about the insane volume of air that gets blown through under the wing to get that thing up to takeoff speed, and remember the engines are not jets, they are fans.

            It doesn't matter where the engines are a bunny is going to have an extremely bad day if it's on the runway.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by dgatwood ( 11270 )

              I forgot how low the engines are.

              Any jet with under wing engines vacuums the runway as they go. It's not a 737 issue.

              Pedantically, the fact that the 737 has under-wing engines makes it kind of a 737 issue. As far as I know, we didn't see MD-80s hoovering up rabbits.

              But yes.

            • and remember the engines are not jets, they are fans.

              I mean... they're high-bypass turbofans. They are jets.
              It's true that on high-bypass turbofans, more thrust is created from the fan... but a good 20-40% is still produced by the jet.

              Frankly, a low-bypass turbofan is going to suck even more, because it's quite a bit less efficient, meaning it displaces a lot more air to get the same amount of thrust at those velocities.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            It's just way less common than bird ingestion.

            Hopefully, this case only happens on the ground. :-)

            Hence why it is less common. Rabbits: Ground only. Birds: mostly below 500 feet (*).

            * Some birds can fly at up to 37,000 feet during their migration. Technically, I suppose, so can a rabbit, so long as it is onboard an aircraft.

            • so long as it is onboard an aircraft.

              Or was at some point, anyway.

            • There is plenty of bird habitat just off the west ends of the runways at LAX. I used to eat lunch and watch aircraft at Dockweiler beach. There is a fenced off region that used to be a housing development, subsequently condemned, directly between the airport and the beach: Palisades del Rey / Surfridge. [wikipedia.org]
      • Tim: "Well, that's no ordinary rabbit! That's the most foul, cruel, and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on! Look, that rabbit's got a vicious streak a mile wide! It's a killer! He'll do you up a treat, mate."

  • Not enough info yet to blame Boeing (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jacks smirking reven ( 909048 ) on Sunday July 20, 2025 @01:51PM (#65532870)

    It's fun to kick them while they're down for sure but Boeing doesn't build engines (767 can have engines from all 3 major builders, GE, Pratt and Rolls, this one had GE engines) nor does Boeing do the maintenance on these engines, that's the airlines responsibility.

    This plane is a 1/4 century old, the 767 is a very mature platform, there has to be more to this than Boeing quality control slipping.

    • There is on average an engine failure every two weeks in the US airspace. Most the result of bird strikes. Many result in fires. The only thing there is about this story is that it's cool to talk about airline problems and Boeing right now despite this likely having nothing at all to do with them.

Slashdot Top Deals

The ideal voice for radio may be defined as showing no substance, no sex, no owner, and a message of importance for every housewife. -- Harry V. Wade

Close