Yesterday I wrote about a pretty costly mistake that happened while a heavy jet was taxiing. We now have video footage of the incident, and it gives us a clear sense of how this situation unfolded.
In this post:
American Boeing 787 has ground incident in Chicago
This incident happened on the afternoon of Thursday, October 17, 2024, and was first flagged by @xJonNYC. It (indirectly) involves two aircraft, both of which were taxiing to Terminal 5 after completing international flights:
- A six-year-old American Boeing 787-9 with the registration code N834AA, which had landed at the airport at 2:50PM, after operating a 7hr37min flight from London Heathrow (LHR)
- A brand new Air France Airbus A350-900 with the registration code F-HUVG, which had landed at the airport at 2:49PM, after operating a 7hr53min flight from Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG)
Long story short, while on a taxiway enroute to Terminal 5, the American 787 ingested a cargo container into its number two engine, causing damage to the aircraft. CCTV footage shows exactly how this played out.
There’s an airport vehicle service road connecting Terminal 5 to Terminal 3, which crosses the taxiway where the two jets were taxiing. Based on the video footage, it appears that both jets were temporarily not moving, and some vehicles decided to pass between them on the service road.
However, clearly the Air France A350 started to taxi again, and the jet blast from the engines sent one of the cargo containers flying.
It’ll be interesting to see what an investigation determines. Ultimately airport vehicles are supposed to operate around aircraft, and always err on the side of caution. It’s possible that the American pilot had “waved” for the ground workers to pass, but it’s up to the drivers to assess risks, as situations exactly like this can happen.
It remains to be seen if the Air France pilots applying more than the standard amount of thrust for taxiing somehow played into this as well.
As you can see below, @WindyCityDriver has some awesome insights on the situation, from the perspective of someone who has worked on the ramp.
VASAviation also has an excellent video about the incident, including the air traffic control audio.
The good news is that no one was injured, and it also appears that the container was empty at the time of the incident.
I’m curious how long this plane stays out of service
American states that this Boeing 787 has been taken out of service to be inspected. However, I imagine that more than just an inspection is required, as there’s visible damage to the engine.
Engines are the most expensive parts of aircraft, and they can cost tens of millions of dollars. I’m curious if this engine needs to be fully replaced, or if the blades are mostly fine, and it’s just the cowling with substantial damage. After all, the engines are pretty powerful, and can ingest quite some things without any major damage.
Regardless, given American’s shortage of wide body aircraft, this isn’t ideal. Then again, at least this is happening going into the winter season, rather than going into the peak summer season, where American desperately needs every one of its long haul aircraft.
Bottom line
On Thursday, an American Boeing 787 had a pretty unfortunate incident in Chicago, when a cargo container was sucked into an engine. This happened after a service vehicle passed between two heavy jets on a taxiway, and the jet blast from an Air France Airbus A350 caused the container to go flying. Of course it’s on the driver of vehicles to ensure that they operate safely around planes, and clearly that wasn’t happening here.
What do you make of this incident at O’Hare?
while the engine is clearly going to have to be overhauled, is there confirmation there was no damage to the fuselage....
SO...... when is AA going to get its next 787s and will they proportionately be as bad off as UA's 787 deliveries relative to orders?
Supposedly the 777W conversions are also starting later than planned so maybe AA will have plenty of aircraft since they cancelled so many routes in order to free up capacity for those conversions...
“Then again, at least this is happening going into the winter season, rather than going into the peak summer season, where American desperately needs every one of its long haul aircraft.“
Ben I’m sure it’s a major disruption as we are not at off peak season yet. Wonder how many passengers were rerouted or had their travel disrupted ? Glad I’m flying out of JFK to FCO and not ORD.
Next , Air France owes American a new plane or that a350 should be seized by the FAA.
The plane should be seized? LOL.
Oops... Well that engine has flown its last sector.
Question to any commercial pilots that might be here; I’ve recently been watching apron and gate movements and noticed more often than not that the walk around that used to be done of engines, tyres etc by the pilot and first officer prior to push back is not always carried out, is this normal or do individual airlines have varying policies ?
I don’t know about now as I’m no longer in the industry, but back when Virgin America (RIP) was a thing, they had maintenance “pre-inspecting” the planes for the pilots at certain stations, especially on RON aircraft. The pilots were none too happy about it at the time and seemed to think it was going to become more common.
That said, I have seen my flight crew walking the apron on recent flights on AA...
I don’t know about now as I’m no longer in the industry, but back when Virgin America (RIP) was a thing, they had maintenance “pre-inspecting” the planes for the pilots at certain stations, especially on RON aircraft. The pilots were none too happy about it at the time and seemed to think it was going to become more common.
That said, I have seen my flight crew walking the apron on recent flights on AA and NK, so not sure if that kind of thing is unique to certain airlines or if it’s more widespread.
Good question either way.
I recall this also happened to JAL aircraft at LAX in 2009
And according to certain group of people, this is yet another to avoid Boeing planes.
"iF It'S bOeIng, i AIn'T GOiNg!"
Snowflakes.
Do MROs keep spare engines for these emergencies?
American itself or GE has some spares but there is no assurance they are available. GE overhauls this engine
GE has a lease pool where spares can be requested IF AA does not have their own spares available. However as this isn't performance driven I'm sure AA won't be too fond of the cost.
AA does their own engine work on 787 engines in Tulsa, and is reopening the 787 heavy check line there, so they certainly have spares on hand. The airplane will also need to be inspected for any further damage, but I'm sure they can get it replaced relatively quickly.
The engine will be removed as an unexpected engine removal (UER). American has spares and have the ability to request a lease engine if applicable, so the aircraft will be back into service shortly.
The key for the engine shop turn around time will be whether or not the damage extends into the core of the engine (via a borescope inspection). If not, the focus will most likely be on the fan/booster, which should only be a slightly more extended shop visit.
Someone wasn't following ramp procedures and was too close to zones where they should not be with engines running.
on the topic of AA 787s, they need a new engine for this one...which raises the question of how their new 787 deliveries are coming.
United updated its investor guidance with its earnings report to show that they will only receive 3 787s this year - way down from what they expected to receive in 2024......
Someone wasn't following ramp procedures and was too close to zones where they should not be with engines running.
on the topic of AA 787s, they need a new engine for this one...which raises the question of how their new 787 deliveries are coming.
United updated its investor guidance with its earnings report to show that they will only receive 3 787s this year - way down from what they expected to receive in 2024... note that the 787 is not being affected by the Boeing strike so these are 787 specific issues that continue to delay deliveries of that plane.
UA also disclosed that it expects its fleet to end up for 2024 just under 1000 which is not just a miss from its guidance when it placed its massive 787 and MAX orders and its net fleet increase for 2024 will be only 41 aircraft, net of 10 319/320 retirements earlier this year. They expect no other aircraft retirements in 2024 so UA's fleet age will increase.
Boeing's production problems are causing real problems for airlines that are missing all kinds of goals.
UA also said on its earnings call that its aggressive growth in the Pacific has come to an end, China continues to have weak traffic so they will probably not add anything else, and the S. Pacific is seeing weak fares.
AA supposedly needed its new 787s for its DFW to S. Pacific routes so not sure if they are getting those new 787s or will just have to block seats on existing 787s but AA, like UA, is hurting due to Boeing.
This incident doesn't help
WTF has AA's damaged engine got to do with UA's fleet deliveries, you absolute loon??
Context matters. American has commented on 787 delays which matter w aircraft damage. Sorry if it went over your head
On a recent Tell Me Why, within the AA Newsroom, Brian Znotins states the delivery delays for the 787 are accounted for in the summer schedule 2025.
@UncleRonnie He fought so hard to not type the word Delta in this article....
Are you talking about the airline that is getting its non-Boeing wide bodies delivered on time?
Are they? Is that why Delta needed to buy unwanted Airbus aircraft from LATAM and also is flying around substantially less efficient A330Ns than American or United's 787s? Or why United is operationally more profitable than Delta now, and doesn't regularly melt down?
The engine supply chain is separate from the airframe supply chain
@UncleRonnie, I'm not a big fan of Tim most of the time either, but I have zero issues with his statement. He is providing industry insight which was outlined in UAL 3Q24 earnings which probably applies to AA since both airlines have 787s on order. I will agree, their was too much info on UAL. The second paragraph was not needed for any context of the 787 or AAL.
thanks for your commentary. I inadvertently referenced your comments to someone else below
@uncleronnie not only does this incident have nothing to do with UA, notice he also apparently had the time to complete the entire investigation and find the root cause beyond the shadow of a doubt. Impressive.
6 days of your paragraphs are entirely irrelevant. You ignored Delta ?
holy thread drift.
for people that say they want to read less from me and about DL, many of you do a remarkable job of discussing just the opposite.
1. there is no assurance the damage to the AA aircraft is just to the engine. It is those that are pre-judging the damage who think the fuselage has not also been damaged.
2. Engines are not designed to ingest metal. Multiple people have...
holy thread drift.
for people that say they want to read less from me and about DL, many of you do a remarkable job of discussing just the opposite.
1. there is no assurance the damage to the AA aircraft is just to the engine. It is those that are pre-judging the damage who think the fuselage has not also been damaged.
2. Engines are not designed to ingest metal. Multiple people have said that the engine will be overhauled and they are right.
3. roberto is correct that the narrowbody information might have been excessive but AA also is dealing w/ Boeing delivery delays for the MAX. Delivery delays of 787s is affecting airlines including both AA and UA.
4. The A330NEO is just as efficient on certain stage lengths - but most importantly, Airbus is delivering them on-time to at least some customers in stark contrast to 787s and MAXs. DL, since they were mentioned, will receive 7 339NEOs this year - in addition to 7 359s. The total number of 339s or 359s being delivered will probably be more than all of the Boeing widebodies being delivered to all US airlines this year.
5. The first ex-Latam aircraft has entered mods to convert it to DL standard, 3 years after it entered service. As much as some people want to argue otherwise, that is about how long it takes to do major cabin refurbishments. Given that the 35Ls are not in the schedule by the end of next summer, Airbus is apparently planning to finish the conversion for DL of all 9 in the next 9 months or so - a pretty reasonable goal.
6. UA reported OPERATING profit margins higher than DL but that metric excludes relatively minor (sarcasm) stuff like paying interest and accounting for investments. DL had a higher net income margin including because it made money on its airline equity investments which UA lost money on whatever it invests in. Try paying for your food expenses but not paying your mortgage or car payment and associated interest and let us know how that works out
7. DL and UA's revenue metrics are fairly similar. YTD UA has cancelled more flights than DL with DL still with the least number of cancellations of the big 3. WN is leading the big 4 in that metric. DL still has the best on-time of the big 4 YTD. If AA and UA aren't having meltdowns, apparently they run much worse operations than DL on a day in and day out basis.
8. UA has yet to settle with its FAs - which will cost it hundreds of millions of dollars in extra labor costs - which were already higher than DL for the quarter - and take about $500 million or more out of its bank account - which means either that UA has enough cash to afford its $1.5 billion stock buyback plus retro or it doesn't plan to get its FAs up to industry standard pay despite telling employees they would wait til the end of the big 4 pay increases to lift UA employee salaries. AA, DL and WN have all lifted FA pay in some cases multiple times but UA is nowhere near ready to fork over money to FAs.
9. UA's annual income - operating or net - is still expected to trail DL's for 2025 as it has for years. UA has a much more seasonal earnings swing due to UA's weak position in Florida.
anything else you want to discuss or myths that we should debunk or shall we return to AA and their damaged 787?
correction
UA's annual income - operating or net - is still expected to trail DL's for 2024 as it has for years.
Neither DL or UA have given profit-specific guidance for 2025 yet
Tim is absolutely right, Context matters. Except his posts are all out of context.
AA accident = 787 engine = 787 deliveries = UA deliveries = UA earnings call = MAX delays = Boeing delays = China traffic = S.Pacific fares.
WTF!!!!
It's like asking Tim Dunn what is 2+2 and he answers Donald Trump. Because 2+2 is a number which is often thrown out on earnings call that talk about some fluff but the...
Tim is absolutely right, Context matters. Except his posts are all out of context.
AA accident = 787 engine = 787 deliveries = UA deliveries = UA earnings call = MAX delays = Boeing delays = China traffic = S.Pacific fares.
WTF!!!!
It's like asking Tim Dunn what is 2+2 and he answers Donald Trump. Because 2+2 is a number which is often thrown out on earnings call that talk about some fluff but the context is also about the "+" between the numbers which the plus sign is just like Elite Plus which is part of SkyTeam and therefore is about Delta which happens to have a 757 coincidentally another person who has a 757 is Donald Trump.
So Tim's cookie dough fluff answer is 2+2 = Donald Trump.
“ AA accident = 787 engine = 787 deliveries = UA deliveries = UA earnings call = MAX delays = Boeing delays = China traffic = S.Pacific fares.”
HAHAHAHA, that’s funny. Love how he never mentions Airbus delivery delays or A220 P&W engine problems.
Do you have any other hobbies ? I wouldn’t have the time to write multiple paragraphs.
You need to be brief as people get bored after a few lines.
Better still, why not start your own website and blog?
Except that you clearly did read and that is obvious from your response. Voice dictation is a wonderful thing.
I spent far less on aviation websites than you think I do
It’s clearly over your head @Tim Dunn. #context
You’re such a bore. Even with voice dictation it’s the same as when I alluded to writing. Read the room
"the room" doesn't like to talk about real issues such as how massively Boeing's delivery delays are impacting airlines... whether that is the case or not for American, we will see.
Incidents like this raise that question just as it did when DL's A350 sliced off the top of the CRJ - and that A350 still has not flown since.
Most likely the aircraft will have the engine replaced and be back in service within a day or two. The damaged engine will most likely be out of action for weeks, and need extensive maintenance
Air disasters are much less common occurrence in the 21st century. But many crashes have been linked to a damaged part replaced several years before.
American should write it off and prosecute Air France .
Stupid comment. You have absolutely not an iota of evidence of the cause.
That’ll buff right out.