5 ms·
Several injured in Boeing 787 nose-gear collapse in Frankfurt
- jaydenmilne 5mo ago> That’s not very typical, I’d like to make that point
- binaryturtle 5mo agoI duckduckgo'ed "nose gear collapse" earlier and it seems it may be an issue that's more common than expected? At least there were lots of images of airplanes with broken front wheels and the nose touching the floor.
- dragontamer 5mo agoThis is a joke about "The Front Fell Off", a classic comedy video from a few decades ago.
- buredoranna 5mo agoIf you haven't experienced the awesomeness of "The Front Fell Off", do yourself a favor and seek it out on youtube... you won't be disappointed.
- PyWoody 5mo agoAlso check out All Birds Are Cats by the same duo.
- hulitu 5mo agoJoke ? Those people were serious.
- binaryturtle 5mo agoI learned something new. That also explain why it was a quote and I didn't found the quoted part in the news item itself. :)
- dlcarrier 5mo agoCongratulations, you are one of today's lucky 10,000! https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
- ninju 5mo agoHere is it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM
- redsocksfan45 5mo ago[dead]
- dust42 5mo agoFrom the picture and the text this aircraft was parked at the gate. During a hard landing the nose gear may collapse but not while being parked. And while parked there are protections to prevent retraction. However, these can be overridden by maintenance.
- dragontamer 5mo agoWell this time it at least didn't fall into the environment.
- sigmoid10 5mo agoCan someone tell me if this is just confirmation bias or is Boeing really going down this hard? I mean management was obviously tanking since the McDonnell Douglas takeover, but did it really take almost 30 years for this to shine through? Or were these things underreported in the last decades?
- onetokeoverthe 5mo ago[dead]
- timw4mail 5mo agoConfirmation bias, instant communication, hyper focus on Boeing mishaps, etc.
- ak217 5mo agoThe 777 and 787 programs have never seen a passenger fatality resulting from an engineering defect. That is a monumental achievement in light of the passenger miles served. Boeing has its problems, but that record speaks for itself
- dust42 5mo agoThis and we don't know yet what happened. It could have structurally collapsed - very unlikely, it could have uncommanded retracted, or maintenance has overridden the protections. I'd place my bets on #3, handling error in maintenance mode.
- hulitu 5mo agoFrom 787 wikipedia page: "On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171, an 11-year-old Boeing 787-8 registered as VT-ANB[398] operating from Ahmedabad Airport to London Gatwick Airport, crashed into the hostel building of B. J. Medical College shortly after takeoff. According to the preliminary Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau report released on July 8, 2025, the crash was caused by both engines shutting down after their fuel control switches moved from the "RUN" to "CUTOFF" position.[399]: 13–14 The cause of the switch movement remains under investigation. The report did not recommend any actions to Boeing, or 787 operators.[400][399]: 15 All but one of the 242 people on board were killed, as well as 19 people on the ground.[401] The sole survivor was a British national "
- midiguy 5mo agoSo a plane which has withstood probably countless landings, had its nose gear collapse while sitting statically at a gate of all times and places? Weird.
- rjsw 5mo agoOne post said that the plane was only 4 months old.
- red_admiral 5mo agoThere's a story that during the testing of a fighter plane - I think the F-35 but not sure - the "developers" claimed the new computer systems made most pilot errors all but impossible. QA engineer's first check was, what happens if I try and retract the wheels while the plane is sitting on the ground and not moving. Oops.
- rjsw 5mo agoThere are plenty of older planes with "retract wheels automatically when airborne" buttons that work by detecting a reduction in pressure on the wheels. There are also plenty of runways with slight bumps in them. The two do not work well together.
- 866-RON-0-FEZ 5mo agoThe video looks more like the gear was intentionally retracted.
- sourcegrift 5mo agoThe only reason boeing exists today is because they've paid off Trump
- redsocksfan45 5mo ago[dead]
- focusgroup0 5mo agoGiven that it's their turf, is it reasonable to consider sabotage by an Airbus-affiliated entity?
- heyitsguay 5mo agoIt was the same sniper that blew up that Starship
- creaturemachine 5mo agoAnd New Glenn. This guy gets around!
- vr46 5mo agoAbout as likely as the repairman getting lost in Frankfurt Airport
- netsharc 5mo ago"reasonable"... How insane do you want to sound? "Yeah, let's sabotage a competitor's plane, I'm sure it won't cause a major scandal and millions of dollars of lawsuits if one of them falls out of the sky and kills ~300 people, and they caught us as the cause...". What the hell dictionary are you using where you're asking if the word "reasonable" could apply to this idea? Is your hovercraft full of eels?
- bell-cot 5mo agoCollapsed while it was sitting at a gate, with no passengers yet on board - meaning the the gear was under far lower loads than during a landing. While slowly-failing gear could have collapsed anyway just then, the obvious question is whether the nose gear had just been serviced. By mechanics who (say) forgot to re-install the bolts holding everything together.
- cwizou 5mo agoSame thing happened to British Airways a few years ago on a 787, a misplaced security pin that was inserted in the wrong place during a maintenance operation. There are two very similar holes next to one another that can receive the pin, there's a picture at the bottom here : https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/318989 https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/318989 Wondering if the same mishap is behind it again.
- wvbdmp 5mo agoYikes, mojibake in 2021. edit: actually, how did that happen? The apostrophes show up correctly, they’re just all preceded by a  that doesn’t seem to represent anything?
- netsharc 5mo agoThey're probably Microsoft's "Smart Quotes", which are Unicode. They were presumably stored in UTF-8 but retrieved as ASCII (or ISO-8859-1).
- layer8 5mo agoThe page is declared as ISO 8859-1, but the actual bytes of the text appear to be UTF-8. In UTF-8, characters from U+0080 to U+00AF happen to be encoded as C2 <codepoint value>. For example, U+0092 is encoded as C2 92. C2 in ISO 8859-1 is ””. U+0092 is the control code Private Use 2 in Unicode, and 92 is the same in ISO 8859-1. However, the standard Western Windows code page 1252 extends ISO 8859-1 by assigning “’” (right single quotation mark) to 92. HTML5/WHATWG requires an ISO 8859-1 charset declaration to be interpreted as Windows-1252 (https://blog.whatwg.org/the-road-to-html-5-character-encoding https://blog.whatwg.org/the-road-to-html-5-character-encodin...), hence the displayed result is “Â’”. The original Windows-1252 content must have previously been converted to UTF-8 under the assumption that the source is ISO 8859-1, i.e. mapping 92 to U+0092 (Private Use 2) instead of to U+2019 (Right Single Quotation Mark). The resulting UTF-8 encoding was placed in the web page, which however is declared as ISO 8859-1.
- wvbdmp 5mo ago
- root-parent 5mo agoNot yet at the https://avherald.com/ https://avherald.com/
- Scoundreller 5mo agoyou were a half hour too impatient: https://avherald.com/h?article=53a14f7c&opt=0 https://avherald.com/h?article=53a14f7c&opt=0
- root-parent 5mo agoThanks.
- root-parent 5mo agoNo reason to downvote. The reason is because incidents on avherald get many times lots of comments both from professional pilots as well as mechanics. This one even better: https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1510091&p=25305647&hilit=Lufthansa+Boeing+787+9#p25305647 https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1510091&... https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1twkg45/lufthansa_dabpq_in_frankfurt/ https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1twkg45/lufthansa... Video: https://x.com/flightradar24/status/2062510866981924920?s=20 https://x.com/flightradar24/status/2062510866981924920?s=20
- Havoc 5mo agoI don't understand how that caused several injuries among a pretty small group (staff)? Google says front wheel is about 1.68m. High but not crazy high. Plane body and people fall at same speed and it would be slower than actual freefall since the plane is vaguely balance-ish on rear wheels I'm sure the reporting is right but feels counterintuitive to me
- root-parent 5mo agoIf you are inside the cabin and not expecting, would be sliding down quite a bit.
- Insanity 5mo ago+1. And honestly you can injure yourself pretty badly by just falling down. Especially if you’re a bit older.
- connorbrinton 5mo agoMy uneducated guess is that crew members in the back galley could have been injured by unsecured items they were loading falling or sliding. The service cart itself is 200-250 lbs. With the rear galley accelerating upward, then a sudden halt to the acceleration when the front nose impacts the ground, I could imagine the cart lifting off the ground and landing on feet or legs. Or putting the cart aside, other items such as drink cans, galley appliances, etc. falling from cabinets or counters could cause injury
- cucumber3732842 5mo agoBecause the tow guy called in the problem 10min prior and the mechanics were clustered around it deciding it it was a "get a new plane" sized problem and they did something and dropped it or whatever. Someone's hand got mashed, someone got bonked on the head and the boss spilled his coffee. Meanwhile inside the cabin whoever was febreezing vomit off the wall of the bathroom reached out to grab anything that was nearby when the plane lurched which turned out to be his coworker's ass and the fake nail grazed his eye when he got slapped for that. Some asshole manager probably slipped and fell rushing to chew them all out. And another guy got a bloody nose when he crashed his baggage tractor into a parked forklift at at 3mph because he was watching the whole deal rather than where he was going but he didn't report that one so he's not included in the total. Yeah I'm pulling all that out my ass but I bet I'm closer than anyone around here wants me to be. However mundane and stupid you think ground ops are at an airport triple that and you'll be in the ballpark.
- ortusdux 5mo agoVideo (reddit) - https://www.reddit.com/r/aviationmaintenance/comments/1twmd2t/lufthansa_787_noswheel_collapses/ https://www.reddit.com/r/aviationmaintenance/comments/1twmd2...
- LegitStupid 5mo ago"Lufthansa operates the 787-9 variant" and "is planning to gradually phase out less efficient jets and simplify its fleet." Do the efficiencies come from not having to burn fuel for it to crash into the ground?
- ThePowerOfFuet 5mo agohttps://avherald.com/h?article=53a14f7c&opt=0 https://avherald.com/h?article=53a14f7c&opt=0