This isn’t your typical rough landing…
In this post:
Alaska 737 landing gear punctures wing at Santa Ana Airport
This incident happened on Sunday, August 20, 2023, and involves Alaska Airlines flight AS1288, from Seattle (SEA) to Santa Ana (SNA). The flight was operated by a nearly 15-year-old Boeing 737-800 with the registration code N516AS.
The 2hr39min flight was routine, until it came time to land at John Wayne Airport. There were heavy winds and storms in Southern California yesterday, making for challenging conditions landing at the airport. It’s also worth keeping in mind that Santa Ana Airport has one of the shorter runways used by commercial jets, as it’s just 5,700 feet long.
Anyway, at around 11:15PM local time yesterday, the aircraft landed so hard that the left landing gear punctured the wing of the aircraft. Eventually the left side gear collapsed quite a bit, leading to the left engine dragging on the ground.
Fortunately no one was injured. However, the aircraft could no longer move once it was on the taxiway, so passengers had to be deplaned by stairs, and then taken to the terminal by bus. Below are some photos of the damage.
Below is a video from inside the cabin during the incident (though note that it contains some bad language, and ignore the description about “plane crash”).
Will this aircraft be fixed or written off?
While aviation is incredibly safe, we do see major incidents like this every so often. When they happen, I can’t help but wonder whether the planes involved will be fixed or written off. Assuming the aircraft be fixed, it’s a question of what the aircraft’s value is vs. how much it would cost to fix.
For what it’s worth, this particular Boeing 737 is nearly 15 years old. So while it’s one of Alaska’s older aircraft, it’s far from the oldest, as the Seattle-based carrier has some 20+ year aircraft as well.
Looking at the damage, you certainly have to imagine that this will be a costly and time consuming fix. Presumably some experts will be brought in shortly to assess the damage, and figure out just how bad the damage is. There’s the damage we can see, though there’s also the possibility of further structural damage.
More often than not, it seems like aircraft involved in major incidents like this do get fixed. It also impresses me how quickly planes are put back into service then, as often we see damage like this fixed in a matter of weeks. I wouldn’t be surprised if this aircraft once again enter service, though that’s a decision that will be made between Alaska Airlines and its insurance company.
Bottom line
An Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 had a very rough landing last night at Santa Ana Airport. The weather wasn’t good, so combined with Santa Ana’s short runway, it made for challenging conditions for pilots.
Unfortunately one Alaska Boeing 737 had such a rough landing that the gear ended up puncturing the wing of the aircraft, and the engine dragged on the ground. All passengers were safely evacuated. Now we’ll have to wait and see if this aircraft flies again.
What do you make of this Alaska Boeing 737 incident?
Just got back from an Alaska flight to Loreto, Mexico on 9/10, experiencing one of the hardest landings of my life. It was more of a SLAM into the runway. Everyone on board was still talking about it while going through customs. Definitely was not normal and felt it was bizarre that the pilot didn't acknowledge it.
Hurricane force winds, torrential rain, short runway, darkness; challenging landing attempt for the best pilots. I am a former commercial pilot and flight instructor.
This mishap appears to have had multiple contributing factors. I live very nearby the airport. At the time of the landing (11:15) the wind was gusting to 25mph and was ESE (East South East, 110 to 130). With occasional deflections to South East wind (135). I was closely monitoring wind, as I have several large trees, at the height of the worst of the wind in the area, during Tropical Storm Hilary. The runway they...
This mishap appears to have had multiple contributing factors. I live very nearby the airport. At the time of the landing (11:15) the wind was gusting to 25mph and was ESE (East South East, 110 to 130). With occasional deflections to South East wind (135). I was closely monitoring wind, as I have several large trees, at the height of the worst of the wind in the area, during Tropical Storm Hilary. The runway they used, 20R (is 200 degree heading), so the wind was perpendicular (at 110), or slightly leading. Pilot had to come in faster than typical because no headwind at all, and big gusts. He had to crab like crazy because the wind was 90 degrees to the field. Field is SUPER short at SNA (5300-ish), so you cannot generally "air" correct your flare, not enough runway. In these conditions you land on the harder side, or you touch-and-go abort in a commercial jet (extremely unusual). This plane was 15 minutes PAST the field closure curfew (noise abatement), do to a headwind in flight all the way down the coast from SEA to SNA. From the video, it did appear the pilot was much higher landing speed than typical, landing was probably 2X the normal impact level (at the edge of the envelope), and highly crabbed to handle the large cross wind (for SNA/JSA). Something in that gear snapped, at max impact envelope, and max crab envelope together, too much torque on a fatigued part. FAA probably needs Boeing to field bulletin inspections on these older aircraft. Old 737-800's are very common at SNA (and lots of other places).
Looks to me that this landing gear collapse is more likely be to structural failure than a hard landing. The 737 has had previous incidents of some pin failing , causing the gear to fail, sometimes puncturing the wing.
We'll need to wait for the NTSB to investigate.
Blaming it on a hard landing due to the hurricane is the easy way out and a way for the "news" media to play things up...
Looks to me that this landing gear collapse is more likely be to structural failure than a hard landing. The 737 has had previous incidents of some pin failing , causing the gear to fail, sometimes puncturing the wing.
We'll need to wait for the NTSB to investigate.
Blaming it on a hard landing due to the hurricane is the easy way out and a way for the "news" media to play things up in a way the non-aviation public can relate to.
"We've got the bubble headed bleach blonde, comes on at 5. She can tell you 'bout the plane crash with a gleam in her eyes".
Lucky needs to pull the "hard landing" sentence from his post.
The gear didn’t collapse, it went through the wing.
I've been in many harder landings in SE Alaska with Alaska Airlines and nothing happened to the plane.
Trump stole classified documents…case closed.
Everybody talks about a hard landing, but the video doesn't seem to corroborate that assumption. It may have been a structural failure. Also, there are no indications of an unstable approach
It's a structural failure, 100%. This was not a hard landing and well within the design envelope. Airplane was coming in fast due to winds and the comment about 'why is he turning' is because the airplane was 'crabbing' to counteract the side winds (side slip). Also a condition the airplane is designed for and well within the pilots capabilities. Likely a part that had some sort of stress corrosion cracking and was overstressed with...
It's a structural failure, 100%. This was not a hard landing and well within the design envelope. Airplane was coming in fast due to winds and the comment about 'why is he turning' is because the airplane was 'crabbing' to counteract the side winds (side slip). Also a condition the airplane is designed for and well within the pilots capabilities. Likely a part that had some sort of stress corrosion cracking and was overstressed with the addition of non-typical side slip
Take it to a Tesla service center - they'll give it back to you saying, "It's within spec".
I'll say this about the landing. At least the giant, weeping vag--a (why are we going so fast? Why is he turning-uh?) ran out of things to say. Even the baby cried less.
Still has a good sign in the other side.
The worst part of the video is the person who won't turn off the iphone alarm. I demand a lifetime ban!
Get out the duct tape.
These comments are further proof of just how stupid the traveling public is.
To everyone in the comments. I live next to the airport. The hurricane brought wind and rain, but nothing even compared to a bad day of Santa Ana winds. Sure the landing was problematic but I don’t see any reason to have cancelled flights in and out of the airport.
Aviation is either incredibly safe, or incredibly lucky in recent months if you read the NY Times.
Congratulations to the Pilot! You just qualified to fly for Ryanair!
The pilot did a phenomenal job. No one was hurt. Count your blessings.
That's a flight that should have been cancelled. The tropical storm was in the area at that time of night and SNA is a notoriously hard airport to land at because of that tiny runway. Either that or divert to LAX. SNA is already the one airport where I'm antsy to depart or arrive at with perfect weather, let alone what yesterday had in store.
Wow... had to hit really hard! to bust the strut through the wing!
Here where ADM factors in, or lack thereof.
I thought it has Automatic Flight control CAT-IIIB or C Landing system which enables handsoff landing at zero visibility. Doesn't it?
John Wayne Airport
I'll have the fish
Lookie here. I can dig grease 'n chompin' on some buns and draggin' through the garden.
Back in the late 60's when the 737 first appeared it was standard practice to land hard, wham, for various reasons.
From the video this certainly didn't seem to be above "old normal".
Interesting.
With the shortage of single-aisle airplanes being produced due to OEM supply chain issues that will last for a couple more years, my bet is that this airplane will be repaired.
The Boeing AOG team most likely will be contracted to survey the damage and if repairable will then be up the airline to proceed. Airlines have insurance for these incidents.
In my 47 years in airline maintenance and engineering I’ve never seen anything like this. As a mx controller we’d be asking dispatch/flight control why this airplane was routed in this type weather?
True ultimately it’s the Captain’s decision. I’m thinking there was...
The Boeing AOG team most likely will be contracted to survey the damage and if repairable will then be up the airline to proceed. Airlines have insurance for these incidents.
In my 47 years in airline maintenance and engineering I’ve never seen anything like this. As a mx controller we’d be asking dispatch/flight control why this airplane was routed in this type weather?
True ultimately it’s the Captain’s decision. I’m thinking there was a nasty X wind and/or wind shear just before touchdown. Short runway 5800’ at SNA plus 40’ flaps is not optimal in this sort of situation.
In the words of Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Another happy landing."
For real, glad everyone is ok. Yes, bizarre that they operated given the storm...
It was trying to land at the height of the storm. The eye was only 35 miles away at Dodger Stadium. Why was the airport even open at that time?
Because it was still safe to land airplanes. Even San Diego didn't take nearly as hard a hit as they thought, so it wasn't unsafe to operate at SNA.
Kinda surprised they didn’t cancel beforehand, since Tropical Storm Hilary was forecast to bring very heavy rains to Southern California, starting on Sunday
get home-itis is deadly and well documented.
https://iflyamerica.org/safety_get_home_itis.asp#:~:text=In%20this%20article%2C%20we%20will,%2Dmaking%2C%20and%20basic%20instinct.
Any landing you can walk away from is a great landing.
“And any landing where you can fly the airplane tomorrow, is a great landing.”
- Chuck Yeager
It was pretty windy and wet last night in the region. The pilots seemed like they were trying to plant it down firmly to reduce the chances of a breeze pushing them back up and giving themselves maximum room for braking. No injuries. Seems like they followed their training.
Alaska probably should known about the windy conditions at landing time and delayed/canceled the flight to start with ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Why go around or divert when we can f*ck up the airplane and put everyone's lives in danger! Hope they crucify the pilots.
Kinda funny. I think was the plane failing the pilots, not the pilots failing the plane (and passengers). And likely, nowhere to divert to... Only places to divert to from SNA are:
Los Angeles (LAX) - in the heart of eye of Hilary at 11-11:15
Burbank - Same problem
Long Beach (closed at 11:00, emergencies only).
Ontario (MUCH, MUCH worse wind on Sun, at 11:00, in the storm)
San Diego...
Kinda funny. I think was the plane failing the pilots, not the pilots failing the plane (and passengers). And likely, nowhere to divert to... Only places to divert to from SNA are:
Los Angeles (LAX) - in the heart of eye of Hilary at 11-11:15
Burbank - Same problem
Long Beach (closed at 11:00, emergencies only).
Ontario (MUCH, MUCH worse wind on Sun, at 11:00, in the storm)
San Diego (another 80 miles, not enough fuel because of huge headwind for whole flight)
El Toro - no longer exists.
Carlsbad (Palomar Airport), too short
Pendelton (no airplane strip, Helo's only...)
It was SNA or nowhere. Conditions were not going to improve (and did not, for another hour). One might (I do) question why Alaska would put a plane in the air like that, with all the alternates basically non-viable at the point of take-off. But the answer to that is greed. Pretty full flight on Sun landing at 11:00, but MORE critical to Alaska's greed, is that this was the last landing flight of the night. (Airport actually closed 15 minutes earlier, but exception for in flight weather delay). If no landing at SNA, then no plane in the morning for the 100% full (every seat sold) Monday 6:45 and 7:00am lead off flights from SNA. And cannot fly in in the morning (only the one runway, and its all take-offs) the first 40 minutes.) So, landing that plan at SNA was a high priority money wise - and that affects operational judgement. Pilots just came in fast (no headwind, 0), high crab (25mph 90% crosswind) landed harder (didn't want a bounce flare) and found this old plane was not able to meet its advertised landing envelope. I blame Boeing and Alaska maintenance.
The real question is if someone turned off the iPhone alarm.
AS is clearly hiring ex-Navy pilots....
Caught the 3 wire on landing.
The B-737 800 is a tough plane to get stopped on a wet runway. Unlike the 757 that has 4 wheel boggies, the 737 just has two wheels for braking on each main gear...not much rubber to grip the runway. Every pilot knows runway length is critical when wet, so landing the aircraft in the touchdown zone becomes a priority, not a soft landing. In this case, the pilot definitely landed in the touchdown zone and did not waste runway length by floating.
I agree. Add to that a crappy wing design and fuselage angle... and you get a 737 flying turd that has to touch down about 7-10 knots faster than anything else in order to land.
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing. The wing is shot, likely the engine. But she will fly again,
Those poor spines
What happens to pilots in cases like this? I assume it’s not like the Middle East where they are instantly let go?
That'll buff right out
Yep. It will need at least two rolls of speed tape too.
Doesn’t SNA have an 11 pm curfew?
First thing I thought of as well. Been my home airport for 40 years.
ATC won't stop you from landing. You'll just get a fine in the mail and repeated violations can cause a loss of slots. This is pretty standard practice at airports with curfews.
That’s at airports like SJC that have “soft” curfews. Airports like SNA and ASE have hard curfews. Although I believe there might be a 20 minute extension available (possibly with the fine), arrivals after that are forbidden and go to LAX, or, in the case of ASE, back to DEN.
*Not sure if exceptions are made for storms like last night, but, without unusual circumstances like last night’s storms, arrivals past the SNA are planned for LAX and busses set up.
Given the heavy rain and arrival time (14 minutes past SNA curfew), I'm surprised they did not divert to LAX with its much longer runways.
SNA does close at 11:00pm for landings (and 10:00pm for takeoffs). However, there is a built-in (in the operational rules for SNA) for in-flight weather delays, and that applied here. The plane was late because of a large 40 knott headwind all the way down the coast, until about LAX (where the Tropical storm caused a tailwind along the coast, and an extremely big headwind inland (like at Ontario).
So, they were landing at...
SNA does close at 11:00pm for landings (and 10:00pm for takeoffs). However, there is a built-in (in the operational rules for SNA) for in-flight weather delays, and that applied here. The plane was late because of a large 40 knott headwind all the way down the coast, until about LAX (where the Tropical storm caused a tailwind along the coast, and an extremely big headwind inland (like at Ontario).
So, they were landing at 11:15 under the in-flight weather delay exception. They also had no alternate, as LAX, Burbank, Ontario were all in MUCH worse shape, San Diego is 80 miles south (and plane low on fuel because of headwind), and Long Beach is also closed at 11:00 (so plane would have to declare an emergency, land without runway lights, or tower, at Long Beach.)
So, SNA was the place. And it was very landable. 0 headwind or tail wind, 25mph (perhaps even 25 knot) pure cross wind (90 degrees). That is a big crab, and a fast approach (no headwind), or a short field 5300 I think) but landable. I think they pushed to the edge of the landing envelope, but were within that envelope (based on the video), and known wind conditions (I live very near), and the plane just broke. Torque from the crab and hard(er) landing. The gear should not have snapped in this case. With this in-flight headwind, the plane was likely not ANYWHERE close to maximum landing weight, as it burned a ton of extra fuel flying down the coast in the storm (and hence why it was also late, 15 minutes). So Boeing, and Alaska need to figure out why this gear snapped.
But the answer to that seems obvious to me. (I have flown this exact flight perhaps 50 times). These 737-800's fly from SNA to SEA, and SNA to Portland and back all day, everyday, for years. Landings at SNA are ALWAYS hard(er) than elsewhere, it is a very short field. Every landing is full flaps, harder than average (a lot harder than average), and full thrust reversers, everytime, at SNA. That is a LOT of gear punishment, and I don't think Boeings calculations have taken this route into account. (Sort of like when the skin ripped off the 737 in Hawaii from years of short-flight, high landing cycles). All of Alaska's 15 to 20 year old 737 probably need inspections, especially the one's that have had lots of landing at SNA.
Airlines can PPR for an extension of either the arrival or departure curfew, which is only for commercial and some other jet operations. I'd imagine they're fairly freely granted in these situations.
There is a strong market for -800s right now. It will almost certaintly be repaired.
Unless the airframe is bent in all the wrong places
Wong box and Rear spar is compromised. This bird will go for parts.
Wing*
No. That plane is done and will be parted out. 2.10G is a hard landing for the 737 and this landing was well over the structural limit.