313
submitted 5 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Boeing 747-400 with 468 people aboard was forced to make an emergency landing in Indonesia on Wednesday after one of its engines caught fire and began shooting out flames during takeoff.

The Garuda Indonesia flight was bound for Medina, Saudi Arabia, which is the entry point for many Muslims making their pilgrimage to Mecca. It left from Indonesia’s international airport in Makassar, where clips showed one of the plane’s four engines becoming engulfed in flames during takeoff on Wednesday evening.

Videos of the engine fire were shared online by JACDEC, a plane crash data evaluation firm, which showed that the flames began just as the plane had lifted from the runway.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mercano@lemmy.world 165 points 5 months ago

The last 747-400 passenger plane rolled off the production line in 2005. This is either going to be a maintenance issue or the engine ingesting debris or a bird, not faulty construction. Boeing doesn’t even make the engines, it’s either GE, Pratt & Whitney, or Rolls Royce, depending on the original owner’s preference.

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 45 points 5 months ago

This here. As much as I hate the new Boeing philosophy, they used to build good planes and this issue is most certainly a maintenance problem or bird strike etc....

[-] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 23 points 5 months ago

But it is rumored the bird was actually a suicidal whistleblower.

[-] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

Look, your facts and logic have no place in this angry mob. Either pick up a pitchfork and get with the program, or get out.

[-] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

Ok but how does this stuff keep happening to Boeing planes?

[-] tb_@lemmy.world 30 points 5 months ago

Boeing is under increased public awareness, any issues get picked up and amplified by the news.

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

There's about 100,000 flights a day in the world. Until very recently Boeing was the largest provider of commercial aircraft, and it's still second largest next to airbus. It's basically a duopoly with those two manufacturers providing the vast majority of planes. Even with the small rate of accidents, with so many flights every day involving Boeing planes there's going to be a few.

Editors know anything relating to an airline accident and Boeing right now will get lots of clicks, they just throw that it's a Boeing aircraft in the headline, then bury relevant facts indicating there's really no way this could have anything to do with Boeing quality control in the article. And many of these are about events that happen from time to time anyways but wouldn't normally make any sort of splash in the international news media, so suddenly it feels like you're being bombarded with Boeing news. If the headline writer put GE or Rolls Royce airplane engine fire due to likely accidental bird collision, or Garuda Indonesia airline repair standards are subpar or something, it wouldn't get any clicks.

[-] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 19 points 5 months ago

Ok but how does this stuff keep happening to Boeing planes?

Shit happens to lots of planes. You just hear about the Boeing ones because reporting on them is in vogue.

I recently set up FlightRadar24 to alert me whenever a plane anywhere in the world starts squawking 7700, the emergency code. It’s REMARKABLE how often it happens. At least a few times per day, it seems like. There are well over 100,000 flights every day, and occasionally stuff goes wrong.

(And yet, whenever a fatal commercial air incident occurs it’s global news, because those are still exceptionally rare.)

[-] Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago

Airbus has a ton of new planes grounded due to engine failures since before the door blowout. But you won't hear about it because shitting on Boeing is what got clicks instead.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 61 points 5 months ago

This is another article that claimed a jet engine burst into flames, when all that happened was an engine surge. The engine didn't catch fire, the engine did the jet version of a backfire, and only once during the takeoff roll.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 6 points 5 months ago

But but but muh clicks! Muh ad revenue!! Who the hell cares about my affect on society!? I need muh clicks!

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] madcaesar@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

Thank you for reading the article and educating us. The thumbnail image looks like the plane is about to disintegrate!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Jumi@lemmy.world 55 points 5 months ago

Improper maintenance or birdstrike I'd assume

[-] ladicius@lemmy.world 58 points 5 months ago

Improper bird maintenance.

[-] notabot@lemm.ee 10 points 5 months ago
  • Bird in for service

Bird mechanic sucks teeth: well, the wings are out of alignment and some cowboy's got the quack valve out of alignment. I can fix it, but it isn't going to be cheep. Mind you, if you fly it like this you're likely to have a nasty accident.

Customer: I know your tricks! Stop trying to up-sell me. I only brought it in for a beak polish. I'm going and I'm going to leave a bad review on twitter!

Bird takes off, immediately veers into the path of a plane, which promptly bursts into flames.

Bird mechanic: Told you.

[-] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

They really just flap about and squawk at their subordinates

[-] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago
[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago
[-] thewitchslayer@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 months ago

The drones are fighting back

[-] Dipbeneaththelasers@lemmy.today 12 points 5 months ago

Instrike birdmance

[-] supercriticalcheese@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] StrawberryPigtails 38 points 5 months ago

Looks like the last passenger 747-400 was made in 2005. I think I'm willing to give Boeing a pass on this one. I get the feeling that Boeing personnel probably haven't been anywhere near this plane in at least five, maybe ten years.

Indonesian air travel has been notorious for incidents over recent decades. Each of the country’s airlines were banned over E.U. and U.S. airspace in 2007 but were reinstated in 2016 and 2018. Since then, Garuda has joined the SkyTeam airline alliance, which includes North American carriers Delta Air Lines and Aeroméxico.

[-] Xeroxchasechase@lemmy.world 31 points 5 months ago

Maybe all of the passengers are whistle blowers...

[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago

completed an approximately 90-minute holding pattern before safely returning to and landing in Makassar.

Lol wtf!? I get that it was past the point of no return and had to commit to take off but a 90 min wait to land again seems insane.

[-] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 27 points 5 months ago

747s are designed to lose an engine in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and still be able to return to land safely. Literally.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS

90m isn't ideal, but perfectly fine.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 9 points 5 months ago

It's weird they designed it to lose an engine. They should have designed it not to lose an engine. That would have been better.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Dempf@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago

Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago

My guess is that they wanted the plane to use up most of the fuel before attempting the landing. As long as the plane is flying, the speed of the plane adds a level of safety to the fire. Once the plane lands and slows down, that fire would start affecting the rest of the wing much more, but there can't be a big kaboom anymore if the fuel tanks are empty.

[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 24 points 5 months ago

Long distance 747 flighs usually take off above the maximum landng weight. They need to get rid of the fuel before landing, but the 400 has the ability to dump fuel.

The engine wasn't on fire. The engine had a surge on takeoff. They would have shut the engine off as it might have been damaged, but the plane was not on fire. They would have landed much sooner if it was.

Many articles describe engine surges with language that, while not technically a lie, is written to make readers conclude that the airplane is actually on fire.

[-] Dashi@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

This guy airplanes. Thanks for the info kind person!

[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Plane was not on fire. Passengers were in no immediate danger. Its safer to keep flying and prepare than make a hasty landing for no reason.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] derf82@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Landing overweight can be even more dangerous. The engine was shut down and they can fly just fine on 3 engines.

[-] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

Here come more derpwads that don’t understand that airline maintenance is a thing and Boeing has nothing to do with this

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 May 2024
313 points (93.6% liked)

News

23276 readers
2464 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS