LATAM Boeing 777 Tail Strike Caused By Silly Mistake

Several weeks ago, a LATAM jet departing Italy for Brazil suffered a tail strike on takeoff, in what can only be described as a rather strange incident, as reported by The Aviation Herald. Investigators in Italy have now released their preliminary report as to what happened, and goodness, the crew really messed this one up…

LATAM 777 returns to Milan following takeoff tail strike

This incident happened on Tuesday, July 9, 2024, and involves LATAM flight LA8073, scheduled to fly from Milan, Italy (MXP), to Sao Paulo, Brazil (GRU). The flight was operated by an 11-year-old Boeing 777-300ER with the registration code PT-MUG.

At 1:26PM local time, the aircraft took off from Milan Malpensa Airport’s runway 35L. However, while rotating, the jet struck its tail on the runway. It didn’t just do that for a moment, but rather, runway scrapings were identified for a distance of 723 meters(!!!).

The aircraft safely became airborne, and stopped its climb at 5,000 feet. It then entered a holding pattern, then climbed to 6,000 feet, and then started dumping fuel, totaling 72,000 kg. Once at a safe landing weight, the aircraft returned to Milan Malpensa Airport roughly 75 minutes after it first departed.

The flight path for this LATAM Boeing 777

Below you can see a video of the takeoff with the tail strike. The amount of smoke… yow!

Then below are some pictures of the aftermath from the incident.

The flight ended up being canceled. Five days after the incident, on July 14, 2024, the jet was ferried to Sao Paulo without passengers. It hasn’t flown since, so it has now been grounded in Brazil for several weeks.

What caused this unusual tail strike incident

With the number of flights that operate around the globe, of course things are going to go wrong sometimes. Tail strikes happen every so often, though it’s more common to see them during landing than takeoff. That’s because there’s a lot more variability with a landing than a takeoff.

That’s because landing is typically a more manual process. Meanwhile for takeoff, pilots just enter all the flight details into the flight management system (the aircraft’s weight, weather conditions, etc.), and then they’re told at what speed they should take off. It’s supposed to be pretty straightforward, assuming nothing goes wrong.

Italy’s ANSV (National Agency for the Safety of Flight) has now released its preliminary findings from this incident, and my gosh, unfortunately this mistake is as basic as it could possibly be. Long story short, the pilots programmed the flight management system incorrectly. It appears that they accidentally entered the the aircraft’s zero fuel weight (or something close to it) rather than the actual takeoff weight, when calculating the takeoff speed.

How big was the discrepancy?

  • Based on how the computer was programmed, they were given a V1 (decision speed) of 145 knots, a VR (rotation speed) of 149 knots, and a V2 (takeoff safety speed) of 156 knots
  • Based on the correct calculations that were carried out during the investigation, they should have had a V1 of 173 knots, a VR of 181 knots, and a V2 of 186 knots

The pilots started rotating the jet at 153 knots, and by the time the aircraft accelerated to 166 knots, it had a pitch of 8.2 degrees, leading to a tail strike. So yeah, the pilots just messed up the numbers. This is a pretty major mistake — it’s bad enough for this to be programmed in the first place, but the fact that none of the pilots noticed this mistake makes it even worse.

What’s also quite noteworthy is that this was an extremely experienced flight deck crew, with three captains — there was an instructor captain sitting in the right seat (who was flying this segment), a captain-in-training sitting in the left seat, and a relief captain sitting in the jump seat.

You would think that having an instructor captain flying the jet would offer the safest flying imaginable, yet it’s amazing how frequently accidents involve very senior crews. One can’t help but wonder if the cockpit dynamic was a factor here, with the captain-in-training not wanting to question the instructor captain.

Based on my understanding, it should’ve been obvious to the pilots that a fully loaded 777 taking off on a hot day wouldn’t have these takeoff parameters. Yet despite three captains in the cockpit, no one even took a second to question if the numbers were right.

Bottom line

Several weeks ago, a LATAM Boeing 777 suffered a tail strike while taking off at Milan Malpensa Airport. While tail strikes happen, they’re not very common while taking off in routine conditions.

Italy’s investigators have now released their preliminary findings from this incident, and this mistake was really bad. The pilots had entered the wrong information into the flight management system, so they calculated incorrect takeoff speeds. As a result, they rotated way too early, causing runway scrapings 723 meters in length. Worst of all, the person flying this segment was an instructor captain.

What do you make of this LATAM Boeing 777 incident?

Conversations (24)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

ZEPHYR Guest

"Based on my understanding, it should’ve been obvious to the pilots that a fully loaded 777 taking off on a hot day wouldn’t have these takeoff parameters." There's a common problem with people doing something over and over again that they get used to it, and won't contest their decision. Those B777 pilots must have operated several flights with that low TOW and V-speeds that them seeing the numbers, won't look strange to them. In around 2003, Emirates had this issue with the A340 (A340-500 out of Sydney if I'm correct, might be Johannesburg), they entered a TOW about 100t less than the actual weight for a 12+hrs flight. They didn't question the numbers because they do operate flights at around that weight. This LATAM pilots might have fallen victim of that. Though there are checklist to detect this issue, the question now should be was the checklist followed correctly, and why did the error slip. Not whether the pilots knowing their plane should weigh more than they believed it to weigh.

0
‼ 0
Anthony Joseph Guest

With all the AI technology out there, a simple transmit of the flight parameters that were manually entered on "older" planes to the airlines' ground flight control center and this safety check could easily catch these issues (note that the AI is used to validate not set the flight parameters). Also, all the pilots should be fired.... There are pre-flight checklists where the co-pilot independently goes throught the flight parameter settings as entered by the captain. This was obviously not done. Also, on Youtube videos I always see the captain and/or co-pilot do some manual verification/sanity check on things like calculated V1/V2 numbers to ensure that they are getting the same numbers with manual calculation (# of Passengers, cargo weight, fuel weight, environmentally conditions at takeoff.....) Inexcusable. I am getting more and more scared of flying these "third world" airlines.... Are these pilots really taking their jobs seriously or simply "basking" at achieving pilot/captain status and totally depend on avionics automation to do the "work" of flying. The last incident was that Asiana crash in SFO where this was supposedly a captain with umpteen hours in the cockpit.

0
‼ 0
Mick Guest

Why would the computer not beep out a warning? Should be simple to realize that this is not ideal and say “are you sure this is what you want??”

0
‼ 0
Kenny Guest

Unfortunately, not much useful info here. When the video first surfaced, it was pretty obvious what happened. At the end of the day we know what happened but in order to progress, we need to understand why it happened. The experience of the crew is hardly relevant; everyone is human and susceptible to failings. Robust SOP's, with stringent crosscheck procedures are generally used. I cannot imagine a circumstance where a junior pilot would not speak up as the consequences are immediately obvious, so I don't believe that to be a factor. Instead we need to focus on whether the SOP's were followed. If so, is there a critical hole in the procedure? If not, what were the reasons? Distraction? Workload? In this case, can the procedures be improved. Can we introduce technological resources to reduce the risk of such errors. I'm afraid that simply stating things like the pilots were incompetent is naive and does not advance safety. This story still has a long way to run and we will have to see the final report to really understand what happened.

0
‼ 0
Bruce Saunders Guest

What I can't understand is that in This Day and Age with the amount of technology available, why, the aircraft cannot sense it's own weight and then if the crew input the wrong weight then the computer will issue a warning. I'm sure it wouldn't be a big issue to modify the current system of statically weighing the aircraft in the hanger, ie the engineers fit weight sensors between the aircraft and the jacks then jack up the aircraft , this then displays the aircraft weight which the engineers use in their calculations of the aircraft's mass and balance. I would think this would be a relatively simple modification to include these type of sensors during assembly. Can any of the Boffins offer any explanation?

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published