Croatia Airlines Airbus A220-300 veers off the runway during an aborted take-off at Split airport, Croatia
Posted by madman320@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 270 comments
cvl37@reddit
Grateful for runway strips, graded portions and shoulders with adequate strength
Old-Library5546@reddit
Glad no injuries to those on board
ZCEyPFOYr0MWyHDQJZO4@reddit
What about the brave pants that were soiled that day?
Several-Eggplant4460@reddit
Eddy is probably going to get in trouble for sharing the video though, his mates who posted this aren't very smart
voda_od_limuna@reddit
Eddy is a plane spotter — no reason to get in trouble. But yes Croatia/EU has very strong privacy laws under GDPR. Sharing CCTV footage could get you in big trouble.
Klutzy-Residen@reddit
Why would this be a GDPR issue?
I wouldn't be surprised if sharing CCTV footage breaks company policy, but don't see why this would be a privacy issue.
Mr_Biro@reddit
Well since he is behind the wire in the public space it's free game... if he was one of the officials inside then yeah mybe
maschayana@reddit
Why is that?
Analogsilver@reddit
It's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, than to be in the air wishing you were on the ground.
Good job by the crew.
Ok-Delivery216@reddit
This is the correct answer. I have never heard that one before so thank you. Reminds me of the better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it quote which is versatile.
Hi_Trans_Im_Dad@reddit
Either way, it's drug tests for the whole cockpit!
ZCEyPFOYr0MWyHDQJZO4@reddit
Can we drug test the engines too?
Legal-Suspect-1590@reddit
Totally excellent outcome. Everyone safe if a little frightened. They will get to use the aircraft again.
1000 times better than getting airborne and piling-in fifteen seconds later with all aboard killed.
The grass will grow again.
iou88336@reddit
Can’t this particular aircraft fly on one engine?
alexos77lo@reddit
All airliners are required to fly and take off with 1 engine off, but you want to try your luck?
superspeck@reddit
If the pilot doesn’t want to go flying, and I don’t know a pilot that doesn’t always wish they were flying, I don't want to go flying.
obxtalldude@reddit
Good way to sum it up. Watching "Pilot Debrief" on youtube has shown me the wisdom of the first part.
Onemorechick89@reddit
Seriously…I’ve learned so much from his videos.
Chaotic_Lemming@reddit
Good news! You'll be getting your wish.
possibly_oblivious@reddit
You'll be on the ground in no time
Tyraid@reddit
EMERGENCY! HEADS DOWN STAY DOWN!
PigSlam@reddit
It's amazing what the landing gear assemblies can sustain while looking like toothpicks.
ForgotenSlayer@reddit
Outside damage visible in this image :
DullMind2023@reddit
I imagine the engine suffered FOD damage as it was thrust reversing at the time!
janchuks0073@reddit
The engine is toast
IcyTable6584@reddit
You mean the cowling ? Because the engine looks ok otherwise
janchuks0073@reddit
Well, i work on the A220. And i can tell you a 10000% that the engine is getting replaced.
Accidental-Genius@reddit
Would you fly it?
Gluecksritter90@reddit
No worries, P&W will have a replacement engine shipped by June 2032.
KeyboardGunner@reddit
Does Pratt and Whitney have a reputation for slow deliveries or something?
FilipM_eu@reddit
1 in 5 A220 is grounded waiting for spare engine or parts due to PW1500G problems.
KeyboardGunner@reddit
That does sounds pretty bad. Do you know how that compares to a company like Rolls Royce? I'm just curious what other how other engine manufacturers compare.
ph0on@reddit
I often dip into the grass to lose speed rapidly too in my flight sims
xchoo@reddit
Loss of thrust in engine #1?
tojejik@reddit
Is there a general rule for which engine is considered #1?
xchoo@reddit
If you look from above, with the nose pointed up, the engines are numbered from left to right starting at 1.
For twin jets, it's: #1 |_body_| #2
For tri jets (like the DC10, MD11), it's: #1 | #2 | #3
For quad jets (like the B747, A340, A380), it's: #1 #2 |_body_| #3 #4
biggsteve81@reddit
And then there is the b-36 peacemaker, which has:
J1, J2, #1, #2, #3 |_body_| #4, #5, #6, J3, J4
Testimones@reddit
I agree, but would not a loss of trust on the left side during reversal induce right yaw? I see left yaw.
charlie_30@reddit
The yaw starts when you lose the engine, plane starts to veer and you identify that the engine has failed, pull the trust levers and reversers but you might not have been quick on the rudder pedals so off you go.
Testimones@reddit
Ahh, so sudden switch to forward thrust (much stronger than reverser) on the right side, that makes it easier to understand!
I_am_Mun_C@reddit
Asymmetrical TR impulse doesn’t result in noticeable yaw. I’m type rated on the 220, and whenever I’ve had a TR deferred, you really can’t tell much of a difference.
Testimones@reddit
Alright, I learn every day, thank you, so might the pilot have overreacted and veered left?
spacecadet2399@reddit
A320 pilot here. There's no real reason to use manual braking at all in that situation, so the most likely explanation is actually some kind of problem with the braking system itself. We set autobrakes max at every takeoff, and that's going to stop you at least as efficiently as you'd be able to do yourself, and typically with zero risk of any sort of yaw like this. So I'm going to give the pilots the benefit of the doubt and say it's more likely that there was uneven brake wear or a popped tire or something like that.
I also concur with the other pilot who said the yaw is in the wrong direction for a loss of thrust, and that anyway a loss of thrust isn't really a big deal in this situation. Something's going on with the brakes.
disillusioned@reddit
How do the autobrakes work? Does the system detect that the thrust differential between the two engines has gone past a certain threshold and then initiate an abort with TR and brakes, without pilot intervention?
charlie_30@reddit
For my aircraft the airplane needs to be on the ground, groundspeed above 85kts and all thrust levers closed to activate RTO when it's armed.
disillusioned@reddit
So you have to throttle down manually when a flame out occurs and then it automatically brakes? That makes sense. Does RTO mode do anything else to change the configuration once it's triggered?
charlie_30@reddit
It will also deploy all spoilers and I think it might dump the pressurization schedule to prep for a possible evac but don't quote me on that. The above is Boeing logic so there might be a few differences on others.
The speed condition is set high because you don't want RTO if you hit 20kts on taxi and then the brakes slamming on when you're slowing to turn onto the runway. I can only guess about why we need all thrust levers closed, the plane probably wants you to be really sure that rejecting is what your game plan is and you're not just trying to clear a single engine surge/stall by pulling that one engine idle.
Yul_8994@reddit
Essentially yes
Yul_8994@reddit
Startle factor self induced manual breaking?
spacecadet2399@reddit
It's possible, but still, I'm going to give the pilots the benefit of the doubt. The autobrakes are going to engage before you even have a chance to do anything. And we train for this constantly.
Yul_8994@reddit
Oh I know 220 pilot here, it’s from being in the sim and seeing the startle factor and jumping on the breaks is what makes me wonder.
Lost_Cockroach6702@reddit
Yeah, I am going to assume pilot error before I’d assume the auto brakes caused this. I don’t fly bus, but I’ve never flown an aircraft where brake wear or a failed tire will cause auto brakes to send it off the runway.
nineyourefine@reddit
I may be misreading your comment but why do you think that? It looks like a left engine failure/rollback (No obvious damage/ingestion on the video posted). Left failure will initiate a left yaw, which is what occured here. Also from the video it seems like the autobrakes did engage, as around the 5 second mark you see the ground spoilers deploy and the nose drops from brake application, which would coincide with thrust idle and engagement of autobrakes. Now if the crew clicked the off after they engaged, who knows, but this video seems to indicate a high speed RTO after the failure of the left engine. The one thing I don't see in the video is rudder input after the initial left yaw.
Also as mentioned above, asymetric TR deployment isn't strong enough to pull the aircraft one way or the other. I've landed with deferred TR's so many times and it's an absolute non issue. The average person assumes that thrust reverse does all the braking, when the reality is that the TRs are a very small percentage of it, which is why many companies want minimal (idle) TR use in order to prevent wear and tear on the engine and instead use brakes as they're much much cheaper to replace.
aftcg@reddit
And same for the 737 and 767
charlie_30@reddit
Look man disagree all you want but that's what happened, you have an initial engine #1 failure and TOGA acting from the right engine which sends the aircraft off the left side of the runway. Reverse helps but if the aircraft is pointed to the left it's going left.
Testimones@reddit
Probably not the cause: https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1tewrzi/comment/om5k1sl/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Left thrust reverser (pushing the left wing Backwards!) would result in a right yaw, if I pulled on your shoulders backwards and let go on the left side, what direction would you rotate? Right or left?
charlie_30@reddit
If you have a left engine failure please tell me how the left thrust reverser works at reversing the now non-existent thrust.
You'll have to dumb it down for me because I'm only a Boeing widebody pilot so I'm new to all this...
Testimones@reddit
Not wanting to fight, thrust reversers reverse thrust, right? There is a force on the aircraft slowing it down, just as brakes and spoilers.
So I'll use that as an analogy - if you lose all braking and spoilers on the left side, wouldn't you veer right?
aftcg@reddit
A little. But TRs don't have that much effect compared to spoilers and brakes.
Testimones@reddit
So, the pilot overreacted to the sudden right yaw by pushing a lot of left rudder?
aftcg@reddit
You have that backwards. Left engine quit, pilot had a MAJOR delay correcting with right rudder and initializing the abort. That delay made the pilots loose control and wind up off the runway. In the airline world, we are trained to not have this happen. It's quite embarrassing actually. This is quite a major fail for the pilot.
Testimones@reddit
This has been debunked, and by an actual pilot of the actual aircraft in this thread, thrust imbalance isn't that relevant apparently, we were both wrong.
ps2sunvalley@reddit
No but in a twin like this getting those throttles to idle and reverse is paramount. Doing this scenario in the A320 sim it’s very difficult to keep the plane on the runway
aftcg@reddit
No, it's not that hard to keep a twin engine airliner on the centerline with an engine failure. 1000's of pilots get tested on this very scenario every recurrent training with much success. The sims make it harder, and if a pilot can do it in the sim, they can do it better in the airplane.
In recurrent training, if the pilot fails the engine failure aborted takeoff task, they retrain to proficiency and retest. They cannot pass training without being able to complete this task.
itszulutime@reddit
The aircraft would yaw in the direction of the dead engine.
MrDannyProvolone@reddit
Usually yes, but we are talking recerse thrust. So wouldn't it be the opposite?
Nexus772B@reddit
Yes but not nearly as much to reverse the yaw direction from the few seconds of asymmetrical forward thrust at the beginning.
Remember, full reverse thrust barely moves an aircraft backwards.
Fenton_Ellsworth@reddit
The loss of thrust occurred prior to rejecting the takeoff
No_Character_336@reddit
He's in the grass on the left side which is going pull the aircraft to that side. Plus by this time he harder on the pedals to straighten the aircraft out.
noncongruent@reddit
Looks like it. No thrust reverser debris from that side, should have been a massive cloud of it from the grass and water.
JaaacckONeill@reddit
Yep. Also, how fast were they going, maybe 60 knots or so? It's hard to tell, but rejected takeoffs can actually be more difficult at those speeds, as the rudder authority is still pretty low, just like the nose wheel authority.
Puda_ref990@reddit
123 kts to 131 kts are the information I am getting. In any case, serious rejected takeoff speed.
grogi81@reddit
Wow, at that speed you're in high speed regime already.
If they rejected, they were still under V1, but that is some serious speed to reject anyway...
ScreamingVoid14@reddit
Probably under V1.
Besides human error in deciding to abort after V1, it is also possible that the pilot decided that taking the plane off roading was safer than trying to make it fly given whatever condition they were dealing with. They may also have been on an unusually long runway where they weren't actually past V1 yet.
theLuminescentlion@reddit
Nose wheel authority is 0 when it's not on the ground. They are already veering off course by the time they meet up again.
adjust_your_set@reddit
And looks like a wet runway too so a little more susceptible to Isaac Newton’s whims.
Capnmarvel76@reddit
*Wet surface and a crosswind, how you like *them* apples?*
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your comment or post has been automatically removed from /r/aviation. Posts/Comments from new accounts are automatically removed by our automated systems. We, and many other large subreddits, do this to combat spam, spambots, and other activities that are not condusive to the sub. In the meantime, participate on Reddit to build your acouunt age and this restriction will go away. Also, please familiarize yourself with this subreddit's rules, which you can find in the sidebar or by clicking this link. Do not contact the moderation team unless you feel you have received this message/action in error. We will not manually approve comments or posts from new accounts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
dubov@reddit
Does "planes can take off with one engine" only apply if they've already left the ground?
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
No, it's any time at or above V1.
Sometimes V1 and VR are the same speed, but can also be 30kt apart, so if an engine fails at V1, you then keep accelerating on the runway despite a failed engine, until you get to VR and then rotate and continue the takeoff.
It sounds unnatural, but it's all taken into account during takeoff performance calculations.
asmrhead@reddit
There are pre-defined and calculated speeds based on the density altitude and aircraft weight that the pilots call out during every takeoff. If you're below the "V1" speed you abort because while you could probably get airborne you still have enough runway to stop and being on the ground is preferable to being airborne with one engine.
Past V1 you continue on because you don't have enough runway to stop and being airborne with one engine is preferable to being a cartwheeling fireball past the end of the runway.
dubov@reddit
The point I was trying to get at was more, would losing a single engine cause a plane to veer like this? Which seemed to be what the comment I replied to was suggesting, unless I misunderstood it.
maxstryker@reddit
Absolutely. That’s why high speed engine failures are trained for every sim ride.
Embarrassed_Art5414@reddit
Pilot probably just leaned down to change the radio station.
SnooDonkeys3848@reddit
Or pick up his cigarette
HappiestAnt122@reddit
Seems plausible, also little to no spray coming up around that engine, particularly as compared to engine 2.
planchetflaw@reddit
Tourism ads are going too far. Well played, Slovenia
mpg111@reddit
extra style points for going through those yellow boars!
SpitefulSeagull@reddit
Pilot just wanted to play the new Forza
Happy_Harry@reddit
Or burnhout paradise.
spideyghetti@reddit
Only has the Standard edition
GlumWestern9847@reddit
Oh yeahh! Koolaid’s here!
alphagusta@reddit
It's how you unlock the hidden routes in the racing games obviously
ilijakr@reddit
Hahaha it was on purpose 😂
emptyminder@reddit
They’re like the slalom route markers apparently.
cntUcDis@reddit
Non pilot here. Are these twin engine aircraft are capable of maintaining a climb rate if an engine quits? Wouldn't it be safer to continue the take off and then return to the runway and land? Or, if it's under a certain speed just abort?
AntiPinguin@reddit
For every takeoff pilots calculate the decision speed V1. Above that speed you always continue takeoff because it wouldn’t be safe to stop with the remaining runway. Below that and above 80kts you only abort for serious emergencies like a fire, the plane being uncontrollable or an engine failure.
While the plane can fly on one engine, an engine failure during takeoff is the worst possible timing as you have very little margin in climb performance and obstacle clearance. In that case it is better to stay on the ground if you can.
Usually an aborted takeoff wouldn’t lead to a runway excursion like in this case. The plane is designed to still be controllable in that situation. But even here, there was only damage to the aircraft and some ground equipment. Everyone on board was safe.
shekurika@reddit
what are those yellow boxes the plane drives into in the video?
snuepe@reddit
V1 doesnt mean it's not safe to stop above it, but it is a decision speed.
AntiPinguin@reddit
That is incorrect. V1 is calculated as the latest point where an aborted takeoff is still feasible on the remaining runway. It’s called the decision speed because it is the latest point where you can still decide to abort the takeoff. V1 is limited by Accelerate Stop Distance. It‘s also the lowest speed at which after an engine failure the required minimum climb gradient must still be reached. Meaning an engine failure below V1 might not give you enough acceleration to clear obstacles after rotation.
TLDR: V1 is the speed above which you are committed to taking off.
Unless the airplane physically cannot fly anymore, there is no stopping after V1. How exactly you define “safe to stop“ is a bit more complicated but I tried to keep it simple as I was replying to someone who isn’t a pilot.
ntilley905@reddit
V1 is sometimes limited by Accelerate Stop Distance. There are actually several things that can limit V1, and quite often on long runways its rotation speed as it doesn’t make sense to have a V1 above that. It can also be Accelerate Go Distance, especially if there are obstacles in the departure corridor. It could be brake energy limitations, climb gradient restrictions, so many things. ASDA is actually not all that common of a V1 restriction.
AntiPinguin@reddit
Ok and what of these factors are not safety limitations? They all determine until when a safe rejection can be initiated.
snuepe@reddit
No, V1 is calculated at the latest point where an aborted should be made, but not the physical limit of the aircraft being able to safely stop. You can have hundreds or even thousands of meters of stopping margin on a long runway. It is the case normally unless the V1 is field limited.
But yes, V1 is the speed where you decide to stop or continue and you are correct in the hard rule that there is no stopping after V1, as you are saying. But don't confuse it with physics.
AntiPinguin@reddit
If the runway is that long V1 is just equal to Vr. It makes no sense to have a V1 higher than Vr, even if it would technically be that way. Because the calculation doesn’t cover delaying rotation it is the last point to decide to abort takeoff. After you have rotated you obviously cannot abort the takeoff anymore…
It’s also because V1 is the minimum speed at which an engine failure can occur and you are still guaranteed to be able to achieve the minimum climb gradient. If you rotate late obstacle clearance cannot be guaranteed and therefore V1 cannot be higher than Vr.
But when V1 is limiting, it is by definition the highest speed at which a takeoff can safely be rejected within ASDA.
LudasGhost@reddit
That’s exactly the way they do it. The decision speed is called V1 and is based on various factors like aircraft type, takeoff weight, and runway length. Once past V1 the pilot must continue with the takeoff, as there is not enough runway left to stop.
snuepe@reddit
Not true, there can be plenty of runway. V1 is just a decision speed, usually balanced to optimize aircraft performance and safety where the distance required for stopping and continuing the take-off too 35 (wet)/50ft (dry) is the same.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
It's been a while since I sat my ATPL exams, but is it not 35ft dry and 15ft wet?
BigJellyfish1906@reddit
It’s always safer to stop if you can. And pilots know the exact point where that is. It’s called V1 and it’s calculated for every takeoff. And the other pilot has to call out “V1” to let the flying pilot know they’re going flying no matter what. This looked well below V1 so aborting is automatic. They were a little slow on the counter-rudder though. They should have been able to keep it on the runway.
BackgroundGrade@reddit
Yes, but the climb rate is similar to an A340 with all engines.
bem13@reddit
Something something 5 APUs...
Expo737@reddit
Gentle curvature of the Earth...
jawshoeaw@reddit
Climb yes, but at lower speeds on the ground, losing an engine makes you veer towards the bad engine. If you’re moving fast enough, that airplanes rudder can correct for it. Losing an engine on the ground usually means you come to a stop.
True-Industry-4057@reddit
Yes, they are. There's a safe single-engine climb out speed, but as you said that's only done when the plane is already going too fast to safely stop.
Striking-Extreme-408@reddit
This is a heels down guy
ArctycDev@reddit
Ah the classic video of a video
sockpuppetinasock@reddit
Dude blew though the taxi signs like the Koolaid Man.
ExtensionFly4481@reddit
Why does it look like the a/c lifts it’s nose as soon as it’s veering to the left? Or was it actually at Vr?
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Hard to say, but spoilers deploying typically give a slight pitch up effect.
Altruistic_Door_8937@reddit
Depends on airframe.. mainly center of lift and CG. My inboards cause pitch up and outboards cause pitch down.
FlyJunior172@reddit
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/570487
It’ll be interesting to see the cause as more information comes out
anun4h@reddit
There are plenty of comments in this thread that have already fully investigated and explained the situation. I don’t think there is any need for the authorities to investigate further - just print this thread as a PDF and call it the final report.
thitmeo@reddit
You can do that?
amnesteyh@reddit
Crying over people speculating what could have happened when your profile is full of doing the same in this very subreddit is peak. You're pathetic.
HardlyAnyGravitas@reddit
Yep. People on an aviation subreddit speculating as to what might have happened is truly shocking.
We should all just watch in awe and never say anything other than "Wow. Look at that!"
Anything else, and the "Let's not speculate" police will come around and arrest you.
spideyghetti@reddit
Thanks, Eddy Mestrovic
goljanrentboy@reddit
How much do those signs cost to replace?
Heban@reddit
You're worried about the signs?
airpab1@reddit
Pretty much loss of power #1 engine
Challenging to control
Samurlough@reddit
It’s really not.
airpab1@reddit
So what do you think happened ?
Samurlough@reddit
If engine related: poor response to their training or poor training.
If gear related (including brakes): they did the best they could
Hydraulic issues possibly locking up nose wheel: they did the best they could
There’s many other possibilities that could come from either pilot fault or mechanical and they did what they could. But just straight on engine failure, it’s not difficult to maintain centerline. I’m not an airbus expert but id wager that the nose wheel is still connected to the rudder peddles so even if below Vmc-g, they’ll still have directional control.
Simply_Red1@reddit
But why would they need brakes if they were taking off?
Samurlough@reddit
No no that’s a valid question based on how I phrased it.
You’re right, they don’t.
But hydraulics or mechanical issues can throw off various systems like the antiskid or auto brakes causing faults or triggers when they’re not supposed to. So it’s possible that a brake system failed causing asymmetrical braking. Not as likely as an engine failure, but still possible me.
I personally have had to abort a takeoff (at like 2kts, barely moving) due to a failed antiskid right on takeoff. So it can happen.
HardlyAnyGravitas@reddit
It looks like the spoilers were only deployed on the starboard wing. Any idea what that might mean?
Samurlough@reddit
that requires more systems knowledge of the A220. even with an engine failure on takeoff, each hydraulic system would have a backup so all should have been pressurized regardless. it did initially appear that only one side deployed, but that can be parallax from camera angle as it appears the port side was deployed as the aircraft gets closer. could also have been one of the pilots trying to drive like its a car, using the side stick to "drive" the plane back to the right out of habit instead of rudder peddles, which could cause only right side to deploy but that would need some confirmation from someone familiar with the A220.
airpab1@reddit
Interesting. Guess it turned out pretty well for the folks onboard
lilion12@reddit
Change of underpants for the pilots
notthisonefornow@reddit
Lets film it from a camera, instead of uploading the original.
Xitztlacayotl@reddit
Photo fo the engine
RBeck@reddit
The cowling can be replaced but likely the engine injected FOD. But it was likely the one that failed so it was going to be worked on and inspected anyway.
Theaspiringaviator@reddit
girl_incognito@reddit
Annihilated that taxiway sign 😛
C0RDE_@reddit
Taxiway sign owed that engine money
aleopardstail@reddit
will get a time penalty for leaving the track like that
-Aces_High-@reddit
Pulling some SOPs from Honda Jet, nice
shadowsofthelegacy@reddit
Respect to those gear struts. Airbus frowns on off-roading.
photoengineer@reddit
I mean, guess they have their all terrain aviator wings now. Congrats on saving the passengers and aircraft. Nicely done.
ogunshay@reddit
I think you misspelled Bombardier.
You know, the same Bombardier as Bombardier Recreational Products, i.e. quad bikes and snowmobiles. So, yeah .....checks out.
(Yes, this is now an Airbus product, yes, Bombardier didn't actually manufacture the gear, and yes, BRP was spun off from Bombardier Inc long before this aircraft was certified. No need to sharpen pitchforks)
memostothefuture@reddit
You misspelled Liebherr.
Liebherr-Aerospace designs, produces, and supplies the complete landing gear system for the A220, including both the main and nose landing gear struts.
Yes, that Liebherr, one of the world's leading manufacturers of construction and mining equipment. That tower crane you saw comes from the same maker.
ogunshay@reddit
Nah, I didn't - see my second disclaimer: "yes, Bombardier didn't actually manufacture the gear". You're completely right about Liebherr being the system provider, but the above was enough to make it clear Bombardier didn't actually make the gear for anyone who isn't in the know, and those already aware don't need to be told. Getting into the detail of what 'design' means when talking about the development, integration and certification of complex aerospace systems is probably done elsewhere than Reddit.
Though tbh there's a 50/50 chance I would misspell Liebherr 😅 and that's after spending several years integrating an aircraft system that shares functional and digital Interfaces with a Liebherr system
Zovort@reddit
I wasn't gonna pitchfork but I was looking up the proper spelling of "akshually... "
ogunshay@reddit
Pretty sure you nailed it, full points.
Jetcap747400@reddit
Only frowned upon if off-road tires not installed and Free Bird (Skynard) not playing on the radio.
cdnav8r@reddit
Canadian engineering at it's finest. 🍁👍
tracernz@reddit
The LG was designed and is built by Liebherr in Germany. Sorry to burst the bubble.
memostothefuture@reddit
It's made by Liebherr-Canada in Laval though. They have delivered more than 1,000 landing gears by now.
BackgroundGrade@reddit
Nope. Finally dressing of the gear is done in Laval. Most of the parts are made in Germany with some in the Montreal area.
The Laval facility is more of a service and support center than anything for Liebherr's heavy equipment and aerospace divisions. A sprinkle of engineering too.
Ok-Delivery216@reddit
That’s funny the company that makes absolutely gigantic mining and earth moving equipment makes planes. Must be one tough airframe!
tbust02@reddit
Anddddd fridges. I’ll go off-roading with my fridge soon, let you know how it goes.
Techhead7890@reddit
Finally, a fridge that can go running with me
cdnav8r@reddit
Well then it's very fine German landing gear. I would expect nothing less from German engineering.
antrubler@reddit
Isn't every plane technically off-road anyway?
028247@reddit
Yes! Planes are two-dimensional objects, and roads are one-dimensional.
BackgroundGrade@reddit
Fun fact: I did the preliminary study for how to route recovery straps around the landing gear on the CSeries.
Ok-Parfait-9856@reddit
So daily routine on the C-5, right?
AlternativeEdge2725@reddit
If that’s an engine failure which it looks to be, then that’s also a noncompliance to Vmcg regulations. Will be interesting to watch this one move through investigation.
Oneitised@reddit
Pardon by ignorance but what does this mean? I’m new here.
MGreymanN@reddit
Vmcg is the minimum velocity the aircraft needs to be to have enough control on the rudder to deal with the loss of thrust in an engine.
His comment doesn't make sense though since we don't know the velocity of the aircraft. It will surely be looked into but no evidence of noncompliance.
boobooaboo@reddit
It certainly seems like it was haulin balls
Chuckolator@reddit
Have you contacted the authorities to give them your findings?
joepamps@reddit
The video looks sped up to me
Garestinian@reddit
131 kts max ground speed if FR24 ASB-B data is to be believed
AlternativeEdge2725@reddit
The cert requirement is the aircraft doesn’t deviate more than 30ft off centerline.
True-Industry-4057@reddit
Above VMCG, yes. But we don't know exactly how fast the plane was going when the failure happened, and we also don't know if human factors affected the result.
AlternativeEdge2725@reddit
Definitely looks like human factors at play. Below Vmcg the nose tiller would be used to keep the airplane on the runway. To me this is either a noncompliance issue with rudder authority or the crew messed up the handling of the situation.
Does anyone know if the A220 has a thrust asymmetry protection control law?
nsfvvvv@reddit
We have an expert here.
We don’t need an investigation anymore!
TheFuckingHippoGuy@reddit
Seems the opinions are Split?
CaptAPJT@reddit
Angry upvote
MGreymanN@reddit
Right but that doesn't take into account any other factors. Environmental, TOLD/Speed Verification, etc.
Oneitised@reddit
Thanks. I had heard of VR1(?) but not that one! The more you know :)
bem13@reddit
*V1 and Vr 🤓☝️. V1 is the speed after which the takeoff must not be aborted no matter what, because you won't have enough runway left to stop. Vr is the rotation speed, where the pilot pulls back on the controls to lift the nose into the air and take off.
Oneitised@reddit
Thanks. Love this community haha
IEatLintFromTheDryer@reddit
No nose wheel steering above a certain speed
Oneitised@reddit
That makes sense. Too much lift so not enough contact with the tarmac.
True-Industry-4057@reddit
Vmcg is velocity for minimum control on the ground. Above that speed, the pilot should be able to regain and maintain control over the aircraft with the rudder only.
Avherald says the crew rejected at about 123kts, but I don't know what the 220's VMCG is.
r0verandout@reddit
To be clear here, what you see does not show that any regulation was not complied with. Vmcg measurement is the lowest speed at which the deviation can be maintained by aerodynamic control alone, no use of Nose Wheel Steering, diff brakes or any other items. It also relies on a timely recognition and response. It's a very "theoretical" situation (unless you are testing for it!) and is simply used to define the Vmcg as one of the inputs to the overall Speed schedule.
There are many reasons why 30ft lateral deviation could be exceeded - an improper or late response to the failure (either rudder or cutback of the operating engine) a systems issue, significant crossword etc. The investigation will show what happened, but there is little to no margin in this case, and a tiny error or issue can result in what we saw or worse. But implying that the aircraft certification is invalid is not true!
Strega007@reddit
Just because the *crew* didn't maintain on the prepared surface doesn't mean the TOLD was incorrectly computed.
AlternativeEdge2725@reddit
Lateral deviation doesn’t have anything to do with field length
chekuknez@reddit
I think they are implying that VMCG was calculated correctly with the TOLD. We don't know what the VMCG was and what speed they were going when they had the failure so we can't say if that's a non VMCG aircraft compliance or the crews ability to maintain directional control.
AlternativeEdge2725@reddit
Fair
orangeinvader75@reddit
When engines ingest so much dirt and debris, do they need to be completely inspected for damage to turbine blades etc?
CitizenBanana@reddit
Yup.
Gluecksritter90@reddit
Thank you for reaching the GTF replacement line. Unfortunately, all our operators are currently busy. Do you want to schedule a callback?
rohepey@reddit
Your callback request has been recorded and an operator will call you back at the earliest availability. Expected callback time is 29 June 2029.
funnydud3@reddit
Sadly, not a lot of those engines on the shelf
DaoNight23@reddit
Croatia Airlines already has trouble getting the engines.
sceptator@reddit
That place is known for strong NNE wind known as Bura, and can have hurricane speeds, probably a strong gust, seems like the plane was lifted and nose weered left..
Simply_Red1@reddit
Thrust reverser is not working on engine 1 in the video
ky7969@reddit
Crazy seeing that reverse thrust on the right side, why did it not turn the plane back towards the runway? Im assuming the left side engine failed considering it pulled so hard to the left.
DaniloBrt09@reddit
They got up to 242km/h before rto
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
FlightRadar and ADSB posts are not allowed on r/aviation. Please post on r/Flightradar24 or r/adsb.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community!
Accidental-Genius@reddit
The ole dropped French fry between the seat strikes again.
HappyGnumff@reddit
Back to the simulator
GeorgiaPilot172@reddit
You’re getting downvoted but you aren’t wrong. This would be show stopper in the sim.
Blue_Etalon@reddit
Just found a new home for one of those Spirit engines that are just sitting around now
IcyTable6584@reddit
A321 and A220s have different engine models, albeit from the same family. Doubt if they are so easily swappable…but there’s plenty of demand on the A321 side
MyDespatcherDyKabel@reddit
I look fwd to inflight video from pax
buldozr@reddit
Also, the actual video this lazy screen shooting was made from.
pixeltackle@reddit
And the person recording was too lazy to trim the full name of the sender that shows on the first few frames - what a complete disaster...
buldozr@reddit
Yeah, if the video's distribution was prohibited, this is another kind of facepalm.
trendingtattler@reddit
Welcome to r/aviation - you’re likely here from r/all or r/popular.
We’re glad you’re here. This community is focused on aviation: aircraft, incidents, operations, and the people who keep it all moving.
Due to the surge in traffic, Seatbelts Fastened is now enabled and Crowd Control settings have been increased. That means:
Some comments may be filtered or require manual approval. Participation may be limited for very new or low-karma accounts.
This helps keep discussions informed, on-topic, and readable for everyone.
A few quick reminders:
Keep it aviation-focused. No politics or religion. No low-effort or inflammatory comments.
If you’re here to learn, contribute, or ask thoughtful questions - you’re in the right place.
Thanks for being here,
- The Mod Team
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Charlie1210USAF@reddit
And that is why all lightings and signage must have a frangibility point no greater than 3”. Yikes!
DaoNight23@reddit
it could also be a particularly strong gust of crosswind, the drift looks the same as in a crosswind event
Sasquatch-d@reddit
It’s looking like a loss of thrust in the number 1 engine. You’d have to be blindsided by a tornado to have a crosswind gust strong enough to blow you off the runway.
mihor@reddit
My guess as well.
r21174@reddit
Im no aviation expert at all. But just assumed that maybe the right engine powered up more out of blue. But maybe wind too.
edelweiss_pirates_no@reddit
Don't text and fly.
cowandspoon@reddit
You can’t park there, mate.
triple7freak1@reddit
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
All media must either be original content or correctly attributed to the proper source. Additionally, they must be actual photographs or videos in line with our mission statement - “anything that sustains you in the air”.
Reasons why your content may not be allowed: - No low quality content where the main subject is not easily discernible (excessively blurry, out of focus, too far away, etc) - No flight simulator posts - No memes, troll posts, or image macros - No pictures of plane models - No drawings or computer-generated imagery - No altered, fake, and/or photoshopped images - No AI content
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.
Whoknowsknows1962@reddit
At least there wasn't a concrete wall in its path.
njsullyalex@reddit
Could’ve been worse. At least they brought the plane to a stop and nobody was hurt.
Visible-Pressure6063@reddit
Split airport has a sharp right at 400 because the standard takeoff direction is going into the mountains. Not a place I would want to have a troubled takeoff.
Wild_cmpt6406@reddit
This should be the top comment.
Like the people commenting other stuff on this are just too far gone or tok deep in the box...
r_heem@reddit
Msfs 2026 looking really good
Teghendion@reddit
It's interesting that nobody in this thread mentioned wind as a possible cause.
jungle_jet@reddit
F that airport sign in particular
ilijakr@reddit
Just imagine how fast decision pilot need to make. Split second... it's truly amazing
MintCathexis@reddit
I see what you did there
028247@reddit
This is how anything on tarmac should be: frangible, in case of overrun incidents.
Reminds me again of Jeju Air 2216...
Twitter_2006@reddit
Hope everyone is safe.
WorstPlayer83@reddit
They are
mkn1ght@reddit
Seems he's getting into the Forza Horizon spirit.
bitgrim@reddit
Single_Reaction9983@reddit
Tbh Forza Horison pilots are always terrible. In 5 that guy forgot a big temple in his takeoff flight path, in 6 there is a heli that takes out a bunch of barriers with the rotor in the first Horizon rush event.
mkn1ght@reddit
But he's smashing those XP Boards. He'll have levelled up in no time.
I-live-in-room-101@reddit
Green Dot / Mentour pilot - I await a channel notification in due course 🫡
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your post/comment has been automatically removed due to Low Effort. I am an automated system.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Samurlough@reddit
I hate these damn useless bots
cincinn_audi@reddit
Oh, lighten up.
TONI2403@reddit
As a croat, I guess we will get soon a new EdoStuff video on youtube, if he caught on camera this moment. And also it will probably be on the news this evening. Did this happen today? Is there any info about the damage on the ground and aircraft?
marimahovina@reddit
pretty sure this is his video
TONI2403@reddit
Yes, later I noticed in the video the name of the contact on whatsapp (the video is recorded from ahother phone), that's ptobably him.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your comment or post has been automatically removed from /r/aviation. Posts/Comments from new accounts are automatically removed by our automated systems. We, and many other large subreddits, do this to combat spam, spambots, and other activities that are not condusive to the sub. In the meantime, participate on Reddit to build your acouunt age and this restriction will go away. Also, please familiarize yourself with this subreddit's rules, which you can find in the sidebar or by clicking this link. Do not contact the moderation team unless you feel you have received this message/action in error. We will not manually approve comments or posts from new accounts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
PhoenixSpeed97@reddit
A220 Tokyo drift
SyrusDrake@reddit
Look at those yellow markers in case you were wondering why airport regulations use the word "frangible" with the same frequency as an Australian using the word "cunt".
-burnr-@reddit
"It's just a little FOD. It's still good, It's still good!!" Captain Homer Simpson probably
MonsieurLartiste@reddit
O. M. G.
Demolition derby with an airliner.
ContributionEasy6513@reddit
I can only imagine that CVR recording and set of seat-cushions!
Silicon_Knight@reddit
Fast & Furious - Airplane Drift.
NoDoze-@reddit
Driving drunk?
leonardob0880@reddit
Now with more thrill
Most_Doctor9799@reddit
Weheeeee
G25777K@reddit
One thing is for sure, that A220 won't be flying anytime soon unless they have a spare engine for use.
Historical-Pin1069@reddit
1st A220 incident?
Jmw566@reddit
There’s been a few runway excursion events but this is the first I’ve heard of at a significant speed on takeoff.
Imaginary-Spray3711@reddit
Great job by that crew. 👍👍👍
mistertheory@reddit
So much kinetic energy.
GISP@reddit
Well, the pilots didnt abort the takeoff without reason...
Emotional-Text2250@reddit
“Hang on Martha, she’s headed for the alfalfa!”
chipsachorte@reddit
Not enough right rudder !?
ForgotenSlayer@reddit
Tis but a scratch!
AutoModerator@reddit
Your post/comment has been automatically removed due to Low Effort. I am an automated system.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
AlexLuna9322@reddit
This is your pylot here, we’re saving you the return trip by not departin, yore welcome and thanks 4 flying Croatia Airlines.
Sorkel3@reddit
Wheeeeee!
Finbarr-Galedeep@reddit
That's not gone well.
post-explainer@reddit
Please provide a source by replying to the message that was sent to you. Failure to respond to that message will result in the automatic removal of this post. Please feel free to reach out to the mod team through modmail if you have any questions or concerns.
r/Aviation is trialing new measures to prevent karma farming. Please feel free to provide feedback through modmail. Thank you for participating in the community!