Disastrous Landing at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport: America West Airlines Flight 794

[@TBblake]

You do an amazing job love watching your videos. I understand how hard this process is. Great job.

[@MPCFlights]

Wow thanks a lot @TBblake! Appreciate your support and may I say this is the biggest donation I've received in my YT career so far. Merry christmas and a happy new year!

[@megadavis5377]

If you as a passenger refuse to fly on any airliner with active MEL items in the Maintenance log then you will miss many flights in the future. Maybe up to 50% or more. This captain, I believe, never returned to the line. He was close to retirement age anyway... I flew with him a few times; always felt comfortable doing so. And '636' was one of the best Buses we had back then.

[@manifestgtr]

: (

[@cchris874]

Can you or someone else explain, if a plane may be dispatched with various items inoperative, why were those items designed to be part of the aircraft's design in the first place?

[@manifestgtr]

@ Redundancy and safety is everything in aviation. Does an a320 on a 10,000’ runway *need* thrust reverse, spoilers AND brakes? Not always but it’s time tested and safe. Does an airplane *need* its landing light on a bright day with no clouds in the sky? No but it’s time tested and safe.

[@cchris874]

@@manifestgtr Yes, I get that. BUT they did away with one of these redundancies for this flight. So we have two possible conclusions: 1) This flight was AS SAFE without this redundancy item as any other flight, in which case there's no need for it to be on other A-320s. 2) If this redundancy IS needed, then it follows this flight operated with LESS REDUNDANCY that other flights. Maybe you could help me figure that out. The fact the accident happened at all certainly SUGGESTS some level of safety compromise due to the locked thrust reverser. cheers

[@manifestgtr]

@@cchris874 I think this is where we have to address the elephant in the room. Flying is expensive to the point where companies absolutely need their airplanes in the sky. So they developed minimum equipment lists in order to address the fact that when any given commercial aircraft spends most of its time in the air, things are simply going to break. That’s just a reality of life. At this moment, there are hundreds, probably thousands of airplanes flying around with various “squawks” (inoperative equipment). We’ve all flown on them. Hell, I’ve piloted airplanes with inop autopilots, landing lights, various engine gauges…that’s just how it is. But everything was there for the conducting of a safe, legal flight and at the end of the day, the pilot in command has the final authority over *everyone else* when it comes to flying or not. This incident was simply one where a few factors lined up and a squawk that would’ve otherwise been long forgotten ended up leading to an unfortunate incident.

[@libertyone5853]

The computer graphics are FANTASTIC!

[@DragerPilot]

Except they did not depict anything accurate about how sky harbor looks.

[@davewilliams5102]

Great Video! Thank you.

[@roadking99jokerst60]

I needed sparks. Silly AI.

[@Great-Documentaries]

"The computer graphics are FANTASTIC!" Yes! If this were 2007. It's 2024. Microsoft Flight Simulator exists. Has for four years. This video looks like shit by today's standards. Lot of other KZbinrs, like Green Dot Aviation, make much better looking air crash videos using modern technology. Not sure why MPC is 15 years behind the times.

[@kcindc5539]

09:28 correction. It was America West that acquired US Airways (US was in bankruptcy at the time) and the America West exec team would lead the merged company, but that the US Airways name would remain. Later, America West (operating under the US Airways name) would acquire American Airlines. Once again the America West exec team would lead the merged company, and that the American Airlines name would remain.

[@MPCFlights]

Thanks for the info. So we could say America West is still going strong.

[@kcindc5539]

@ you’re exactly right!

[@nathangreen2713]

I was just gonna say the same thing America West acquired US Airways

[@ronhayward13]

I also noted this factual error. Thanks for the clarification

[@pigpenpatrol]

America West did not buy American airlines.

[@davidpomeroy8124]

America West was not acquired by US Airways. They merged with AWA being the managing partner, but keeping the US Airways name because marketability. The same goes for when US Airways merged with American. US Airways was the managing partner, not American, but kept the American name because of marketability. Technically. American Airlines is America West.

[@dennischiapello7243]

I got cross-eyed just trying to read that, but I'm sure you're correct!

[@kjjones8627]

He is definitely correct

[@davidpomeroy8124]

@@dennischiapello7243 It is kind of convoluted, isn't it.

[@LiveTUNA]

Man I miss America West airlines. As a Phoenix native it was always great seeing these birds flying over. I still remember the day that the anounced the naming rights for the Phoenix Suns arena. "America West arena" just brings back such great memories of the greatest time in basketball history!!

[@josephveksenfeld5344]

I remember seeing the 757 in the Suns livery at many airports.

[@michaelbedinger4121]

Thankfully, no one was seriously injured. Great video, thank you very much for sharing.

[@Primus54]

America West’s livery was quite beautiful, as were their special liveries on their fleet of 757s honoring the states they serviced.

[@KeithMagnuson-w4m]

I miss America West was a flight attendant and got to work on our 747's was so funny to see our logo on the 747's it was also such an honor to work on those flights as it meant you were one of the best flight attendants. I miss Tempe and all my friends it's a really happy time in my life.

[@infidel6728]

I guarantee that on August 28th it was nowhere near dark at 1645 in Phoenix.

[@patobrien7009]

It wouldn't be that dark in January at 1645!

[@jdelaney9325]

Must have been during an eclipse 😂

[@danmoore346]

It's exactly 1600 hrs now, October 31, 2024 and I'm watching a beautiful sunset. At temps of 120 on August 28, I only wish the dam sun would set. Maybe a bit of misinformation?

[@Fcreceptor]

😂

[@guyseeten2755]

@@patobrien7009 Maybe it was in January 1645. 🤔

[@Kemulnitestryker]

The only question I have is why the aircraft was allowed to fly with a disabled thrust reverser?

[@SuperBooboo02]

it said in the description the A320 could operate with 1 reverser

[@beachem1]

They should send the plane to engine shop if a rev thruster is down. Geez…

[@youngtimer964]

Are you seriously asking this question after watching the video?

[@nickberis1249]

Exactly why did they let the aircraft fly like that was that stupid or what

[@shibukurian79]

@@nickberis1249 its because flying with 1 reverse thruster has certain permits and limits to its name.but with the correct procedures this is still controllable and normally operatable. the procedure is as follows. NORM PROCEDURE: 1. yaw ext PKR set checked & locked. 2. 30 ft thrust idle 3. THRST Asymmetry mid/max rudder (depending on direction) 4. THRST Asymmetry gearbrake MAX 5. spoilers cycled and breifed (stage dependant on weather) 6. flex temp THRST 10-20⁰ EMERGENCY PROTOCOL: 1. INCASE excursion Shut down affected eng first 2. FLP RESET 3. BATTERIES OFF 4. RPM INST FAN SPOIL DAMAGE 5. Shutdown remaining eng 6.STRK damage INSPCT MODE 7. EVAC in 90 SEC protocol initiate

[@fighterbomberMiG27]

Fantastic computer graphics presentation on display. Looks so realistically. My sub for this video. Just keep going

[@MPCFlights]

Appreciate it, welcome aboard!

[@fighterbomberMiG27]

@@MPCFlights Certainly. Thanks for invitations.

[@scottbrettschneider9782]

Tail number for the incident aircraft was actually N635AW. Actually just noticed it’s correct in the written comments.

[@brianarbenz1329]

Good grief, I never thought I'd see a real life landing that looked like Ted Striker's in Airplane! but here it was. Not to make light of the situation, but I expected to see Lorna Patterson cheerfully saying, "Thanks for flying with us" as the passengers slide down the chute.

[@quick65filly]

If the reverse was disabled and locked, why would it matter if he attempted to deploy it. Not sure how you accidentally move it to TOGA instead of idle.

[@malcolmwhite6588]

I would imagine because the throttle was not disabled so while the reverse circuit would not activate it’s entirely possible to place the portside throttle to toga-not withstanding some system locks that might prevent that but obviously not

[@Kevin_Rhodes]

With the reversing vanes locked out, the engine will still increase thrust if you put the throttles in reverse - so now you have one in reverse and one making more forward thrust creating a huge asymmetry in thrust. You would think that the engine controls would prevent this, but evidently they do not. Reverse actually causes vanes to redirect the bypass air that is the main thrust producer in a high-bypass turbofan engine out to the sides and somewhat forward, so if the vanes don't deploy, it's the same as increasing thrust normally, it all goes out the back.

[@malcolmwhite6588]

@ good on you Kevin very well explained , so as you say I would’ve thought engine management would prevent thrust assymmetry with one in reverse and the aircraft on the ground but obviously not . so clearly explain it just ends up with one engine takeoff and one at full reverse making the situation worse

[@rsambrook]

It doesn’t matter, our FCTM says to select both reversers when 1 inop. At idle reverse there is no yaw tendency. I have done it once or twice on the line during my 12 years on A320. The error was trying to select single engine to forward idle. Should have just cancelled reverse. Easy in hindsight, thus brief (threat based) the none normal configuration especially the ‘hows’. Captain A350

[@jamesthompson3099]

Please folks, if you have no airline experience and don’t understand how MELs and thrust reversers work, quit commenting or just ask the pilots and other flight ops folks here to explain why this flight was operating properly and safely. I can guarantee you that if you have flown commercially more than a few times, one or most of those aircraft have had MEL items inop.

[@SNATRAVELS]

most common are APUs being Inop, where they need to be air started

[@gbedmonds1594]

Ya scold people for inquiring about something they dont understand. Then tell em to QUIT talking thats even better. How about you simply leave an explanation without the Obama scold in your tone. It could read something like this. For anyone who doesn't understand why a plane might fly with an inoperative thrust reverse, the reason is........... And then blah blah blah. Much more helpful dont you think. Peace ✌️🕊️

[@jeffro221]

But but but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[@arthurbrumagem3844]

@@jeffro221if you stayed at a motel 6 they would have left the lights on for you. ( bed bugs don’t like lights )

[@dennischiapello7243]

@@gbedmonds1594 You must have missed this: "... or just ask the pilots and other flight ops folks here to explain."

[@marksellinger3736]

According to Planespotters, the plane continued to fly until being stored in 2009

[@phxpaul]

WRONG ENGINES. You have depicted the aircraft with CFM's. The America West Airbus fleet had IAE

[@angelorobel12]

That KZbin channel might have not been able to find an IAE powered A320 on the flight simulator that was being used in this recreation. Who knows?

[@SNATRAVELS]

actually it wasnt Disastrous since no Lifes were lost, the plane can be replaced or scraped a Human Life cant.. It was actually just a Pilot error and not Disastrous

[@JSmith-zr2ve]

Do you feel better now?

[@oneworldawakening]

Disastrous in that passengers were injured and the plane destroyed. That's not how the flight was supposed to end.

[@sarahbrown9293]

I'd be very curious as to how much flying that crew had experienced that day... and how much rest they'd had previously. The wind direction, speed, gustiness should have made a difference in his approach and landing speeds. Inoperable components in slow, sluggish aircraft regimes should have prompted a heightened, disciplined, response... again I wonder if fatigue got them behind the events?

[@billrivenbark8983]

Plus the Captain is supposed to review the AML (Aircraft Maintenance Log) to make sure all discrepancies are properly signed off and all MELs are Complied with as far as Pulled and collard and any reinspections are complied with. Crew was aware of the MEL.

[@Aircraft1606.]

America West Airlines Flight 794 CVR Transcript 3:54 ATC: Cactus 794‚ visual meteorological conditions prevailing for runway 08. 4:03 FIRST OFFICER: Visual approach runway 08. Cactus 794. 4:20 CAPTAIN: Gear down. 4:54 ATC: Cactus 794‚ cleared to land runway 08. 5:00 FIRST OFFICER: Cleared to land runway 08. Cactus 794.

[@phxpaul]

The WRONG N number was used in half of the video. In the engine start, taxi out, and take off sequences, it shows as N636AW. On approach and the fly away at the end its correctly shown as N635AW

[@bradjohnson482]

There's too much yaw, Captain!! Oh, YEAH??? Hold my TOGA!!

[@shibukurian79]

>:( disrespectful

[@palmdc8]

you are stupid

[@jeffro221]

@@shibukurian79

[@larrybaker5316]

Pilot question....What normally happens to a pilot whose actions totals an aircraft?

[@williammcneill2753]

The captain just retired last month

[@Prodagist]

Depending on the nature of the incident, it could stretch between the pilot having to go to mandatory extra training, losing their pilot's license, or jail time. In certain situations, pilot error isn't always entirely the pilot's fault. Perhaps the airline they work for overworked them and they were sleep-deprived, and as a result, they made an accident causing mistake. In this scenario, the pilot wouldn't be entirely to blame, and may simply get sent back for extra training to prevent the mistake from being made again. If a mistake is made and the pilot is entirely to blame, then what happens is situational to the accident. Most times it will just result in the pilot losing their license, or being fired from their current airline. However, if during the investigation, its discovered that the accident was the fault of negligent actions on the pilots part (such as, ignoring multiple warnings that an accident was about to occur) it is possible that they'd face jail time.

[@larrybaker5316]

@@Prodagist thanks for the update!

[@gcorriveau6864]

One of the most glaring errors is how you depicted the captain as being 6'1" tall when, in fact, he was 6'2" ... (FGS nitpickers)... A good video to make the point of how habits can work against us and maybe MEL items should be more carefully crafted to prevent that actual condition! Thanks for posting.

[@JamesFolkers]

OMG!! A whole inch!

[@paulw4310]

Inadequate coordination and CRM? I have no idea where they pulled that from! The only lack of coordination was the captain's when he somehow managed to go to TOGA power while trying to merely push the thrust lever out of reverse to idle. He would've been better off just leaving it alone. It's been a while, but I'm pretty sure that once maintenance deactivates reverse, moving the associated thrust lever into reverse has no effect al all.

[@SinergiaAlUnisono]

Monday's newspaper agrees with this.

[@kewkabe]

It's because neither pilot mentioned the reverse thruster in the briefing or briefed how things would be handled differently.

[@davidpowell3347]

I believe that if one thrust reverser isn't operational you cannot use the opposite one to any great extent. If the runway length permitted should have avoided using thrust reverse on both sides of the twin engine airliner. Better yet take the thing out of service until properly repaired. Not sure if landing without thrust reverse would overheat and damage the brakes.

[@paulw4310]

@@davidpowell3347 In 25+ years of airline flying and who knows how many SE landings in the sim, plus an actual single engine landing in KPHL, full reverse thrust was always used on the good engine, even with the massive CF6-80C2s. The asymmetrical thrust wasn't that bad and was easily compensated for with opposite rudder. This runway excursion occurred because the captain somehow applied TOGA thrust to the engine with the inop reverser; otherwise this would have been a non-event.

[@lbowsk]

@@davidpowell3347 Incorrect.

[@voyaristika5673]

Lots of adrenaline running for those few minutes. Very glad everyone was ok.

[@pacnwguy9056]

I took America West a few times from Seattle to Phoenix to visit my grandparents...never had any problems. As I recall, they flew 747s to Honolulu from both Phoenix and Vegas.

[@johnshifler5439]

Yup. I live in PHX and took America West. Only problem I ever had was an over booked flight so they gave me a $500. voucher for the next time I flew

[@MFARAJR1018]

I flew from JFK to Vegas no issues when they flew from: NY

[@desertmodern7638]

I am surprised the Airbus computers, which I think of as being fairly smart with pilot error, would allow go-around thrust (TOGA) on the left while the right side thrust reverser is deployed.

[@180mph9]

Pilot error, not computer

[@ke7cat]

Most airliners in the world are flying with something “INOP” that is why they have a Minimum Equipment list(MEL). The philosophy behind the MEL is to authorize release of flight with inoperative equipment only when the inoperative equipment does not render the aircraft unsafe for the particular flight. As most airlines schedule the majority of their flights during the day, being able to defer non-critical inoperative equipment with the MEL can help prevent the plane from being hard grounded during the day allowing it to be fixed during overnight stays, preventing loss of revenue. This is permissible as aircraft have a significant number of redundant systems (or systems that are not expressly required to be functional for safe flight) and thus some systems can be inoperative without impacting overall safety. Wiki

[@dennyup]

An error at the end. America West acquired US Airways and not the other way around.

[@joanmurphy2166]

Thank you.

[@BruiserFL]

Ironically, current A320 "Thrust Reverser System" inoperative procedures call for both thrust levers to be placed into idle detent, then reverse upon landing.

[@vinfiz55]

True but what is ironic?

[@arquivoyager2010]

Locked reverse caused the crash of an A 320 in Sao Paulo Brazil, killing 199 people in 2007. Planes with locked/defective reverse system should never be allowed to fly ! 10 years earlier a Fokker 100 crashed after departing same city airport due to the opening of both reversors while climbing . It fell over a densely populated area adjacent to the airport killing 99 people, including 12 on the ground.

[@SeanMcmahon-e8z]

Cactus is such a badass name. 🌵

[@edwardcasper5231]

The animation shows the wrong kind of A320. America West's A320s (-231s) had IAE engines, and the ones shown are CFMs. Look at the pictures of the actual aircraft. It has IAE engines,

[@angelorobel12]

Not every aviation channels uses precise variants of the airplane types when they recreate stories of aviation accidents and incidents. I've seen Disaster Breakdown, Mentour Pilot and Airspace using different variants of airplanes with different engine options.

[@edwardcasper5231]

@@angelorobel12 I understand that. I simply mentioned the IAE engines because some people might want to know that detail.

[@beefeekeefee]

I recently flew round trip from Athens to/from Santorini on A320 variants. Both landings were accomplished with no use of thrust reversers at all.

[@vinfiz55]

The video has so many mistakes, where to begin? America West acquired UsAirways. AWA had IAE engines with different thrust reversers. The real misunderstanding in the video is the thrust levers. The captain left the deferred engine in the CL detent. He used reverse on the #2 engine. Auto-thrust was active on #1 so it added full power on #1 while #2 went into reverse. The system worked as designed. With an MELed TR the pilot can select full reverse with both thrust levers, there is very little yaw. The mistake was leaving #1 in the climb detent. Both power levers must be moved to idle for landing or auto-thrust will add power to save the airplane from low airspeed.

[@180mph9]

At this point in time it was perfectly ok to operate the thrust levers on the L engine like the T/R’s were both normal, different now. But to leave it in climb is what happened in Brazil, it could have been much worse.

[@mick-q2p]

Did they get fired?

[@MaryYoungblood-xy8vg]

Airbus now recommends that they put both levers to reverse even if only one is operable. See the TAM wreck in Sao Paolo Brazil for why.

[@riconui5227]

If a good landing is one you can walk away from, a really great landing is one where you get to use the airplane again. So being high time is no guarantee of not screwing the pooch. That's our lesson. Glad for no fatalities.

[@dwightbernheimer331]

Complacency... 'Nuff said!!!...😊😊😊

[@r.o.1330]

....."we're here!"

[@aeromoe]

Except...HPs Airbusses had IAE V2500 motors vs the pictured CFM-56 morors.

[@charliematt4808]

Those engines and nose one must be made of copper. I didn’t see one tiny spark.

[@glocke380]

Cactus in Aussie slang means Done or Dead.

[@bobharrison7693]

The "Cactus" call sign was acquired from DOD with the help of Senator McCain. Cactus was the collective call sign for the air forces on Guadalcanal during WW2 and was commanded during part of that time by McCain's grandfather, RADM John S. McCain. Cactus is a name that shines in history, far from being dead.

[@timgraaff7551]

Of course there were 5 passengers hurt, and there all saying my ship has come in. And there are a lot of lawyers cheering them on!

[@johannesbols57]

It's a safe bet they were injured going down the slides. The slides look like Waterworld; they're closer to sandpaper.

[@dennisnorris6439]

Why not just repair the thrust reverser?

[@susie1111]

Instead of just informing the Captain of the mechanical issue how about they tell each passenger as they board. I wonder how many would have said “ah, no thanks”.

[@SPUDWRENCH]

It’s not recorded, but were the flaps deployed? Doesn’t appear so based on the CG imaging.

[@argekay1960]

The captain was promoted to upper management.

[@annfitzpatrick3780]

Wouldn't exactly call that a disaster. If you walk away you sure shit wouldn't.

[@823Steve]

Exactly why any inoperable equipment should ground the plane.

[@lbowsk]

You'll never, ever, convince Boeing, Airbus, the airlines and the FAA to agree to that.

[@jamesstuart3346]

How would deploying an inoperative thrust reverser cause any issues?

[@davidpowell3347]

One engine in full reverse thrust and the other at idle causes the plane to want to yaw to the side probably beyond the ability of the rudder and nosewheel steering to control. If one engine at takeoff power and the other one at even light reverse thrust probably even worse/ Asymmetric thrust = plane tends to yaw

[@jamesthompson3099]

@@davidpowell3347the left engine was at reverse thrust but without reversers. The right engine was in reverse. There was no way that aircraft was staying on the tarmac.

[@paulgooding803]

Because it was tagged Inop but still operated. And the thrust control worked but the reverse gate did not. In other words it was partially operative but flagged. Add a human error, and voila. This incident.

[@jamesthompson3099]

@@paulgooding803 So the problem should have led to the aircraft being put out of service but AW maintenance just slapped tag on it and declared it good to go under the MEL?

[@Prodagist]

Reverse thrust works by opening air veins on the side of the engine that redirects the thrust forward. When reverse thrust is selected, these veins open and the engines automatically power up to somewhere between 70% to 80% (depending on the aircraft) to provide maximum stopping power. When the reverser door is locked out by matinence, the air veins that redirect the thrust forward cannot be opened on that specific engine. When reverse thrust is selected with an inop reverser, the engine will still power up to 70-80% thrust thinking that its helping slow the plane, but the air veins won't open to force the thrust out the front, meaning that the thrust comes out the back, accelerating the aircraft.

[@JoeyFlyBoy]

This incident was mentioned in the TAM 3054 episode

[@danielestrada1850]

Human propensity to screw up badly in a way that doesn't make any sense to both those witnessing and the perpetrators themselves is a real thing.... unexplainable stuff. You can be the best, most experienced of drivers/pilots and still mess up in a way you don't even understand. I've driven millions of miles on stick shift semis and cars and just last week I absentmindedly let off the clutch in my car on first gear after I'd parked it, under the notion that I'd already turned off the engine, getting startled by the violent jerk caused by the engine stalling. I still can't come to terms with how that even happened. I certainly feel for that captain.

[@cameraman655]

Houston is in, Texas…? Who knew…?

[@garythompson2517]

Runway is long enough...Don't use reversers. You have spoilers and brakes.

[@tommystx]

Airforce one would not be able to fly in that condition.

[@ggeorge4144]

How can these pilots be so stupid? I think doing the same boring flights over and over again. I flew charter and did flight instruction and in a case like that you land at a slower speed and land on the numbers so you have much more runway to work with. If that is done right you don't need reverse thrust, just the brakes. Those are very long runways.

[@CSkyhawk722]

I'm a 777 Captain with 20+ years of 121 experience. You land at your calculated ref speed, and cross the threshold at 50'. You usually don't need reverse thrust, and it is normally excluded from performance calculations on a dry runway in most 121 operations. I've never flown an Airbus product, all my 16,000 hours of turbine time have been in Canadairs, Embraers, and Boeings... But each of those aircraft had a specific operational note in the reverser MEL that the operative reverser could be deployed, but must remain in idle thrust. This accident had nothing to do with stopping distance, and everything to do with directional control. No aircraft is going to be controllable with one engine in reverse and the other in TOGA. This can happen to any pilot, and we use Threat & Error Management to mitigate the threat. Come up with a plan to trap the threat- maybe forego use of reversers all together... With a big reminder somewhere on your clipboard, or have your PM remind you on short final.

[@majorp7967]

​@@CSkyhawk722exactly!!

[@majorp7967]

Sure , you are supernatural😅

[@lindabarrett5631]

This was an accident waiting to happen. How can the airline allow this plane to function without both reversers? This would have been tragic if the weather had been bad with a wet runway and rain.

[@youngtimer964]

M.E.L.

[@andresmith9212]

There are restrictions in the MEL prohibiting landing on a wet runway with 1 reverser in-op.

[@dominichamel4685]

I'm just a regular person, but it seems to me that an airliner should be fully functional for flight. I don't agree with "mel". If we are comfortable with lowering our standards, where the hell will it end. Pilots have enough to deal with already. To remember that a crucial piece of equipment is inoperable is simply madness to me.

[@billmeeker774]

Diversity inclusion and equity is the death of safety in the airlines when skill; merit and ability mean nothing.

[@itjustlookslikethis]

Airbus said it was O.K. to fly with inoperable thrust reverser. Why not blame them?

[@jamesthompson3099]

Not so. Many, if not most flights operate with MEL items inop and always have. If you ground every flight with defects that don’t prohibit safe flight you effectively ground the airline. Captains are all fully trained and briefed before each flight on any MELs and how to handle them. This one just messed up.

[@dominichamel4685]

@jamesthompson3099 you simply miss the point I was trying to make. These are flying machines. They have a regular maintenance cycle as do the school buses I work on as well as every vehicle out there. But when you are willing to start cutting corners on safety, then you are just opening the door for failure. Especially with flight, failure is not an option. I stand by my previous statements

[@jamesthompson3099]

@@dominichamel4685 The only thing I can say is, don't fly. MEL items will always be part of aviation, the safest form of transit known. Thrust reversers are only one of hundreds if not thousands of devices that can be inoperable on aircraft.

[@MorganBrown]

Sully he was not

[@hankgs]

What a way to END your career- TOTALING an Airbus A320 and injuring passengers that YOU were RESPONSIBLE for...

[@phxpaul]

No he didn't, he got some mandatory training time

[@horseathalt7308]

@@phxpaul How do you know in this specific situation, did you work for AW back then and fly with that captain?

[@phxpaul]

@@horseathalt7308 Yes I did. And with the 2 mergers, I am a 39 year AA employee. I also know the #1 and #2 Flight Attendants on that flight.

[@horseathalt7308]

@@phxpaul Thanks for the info. I love these flight incident channels on YT, the comment sections are the best because many posting are actual crew and experienced pilots. I know a lot of the time pax don't get to express their appreciation to the cockpit crew, so I would like to do that here. We appreciate your dedication to your profession and making sure we get to our destinations safely!

[@sisportsengine5425]

Just an FYI, even if the reverser is locked out the pilot still has to select both reversers to idle. This has o effect on the locked reverser. So your assertion that it was a mistake is incorrect

[@arturo468]

Lots of mistakes in this video as mentioned below. Do better next time. Also, it's metres, not meters.

[@bradleywhite9118]

Only disastrous for the pilot's career

[@jeffro221]

And one plane costing gazillions of dollars.

[@Oops-IMeantToDoThat]

If the reverser was locked out, the captain pulling the reverser handle should not have had any effect. Locking or disabling the reverser should mean it cannot activate, regardless of pilot actions. in fact, I've heard (Air Disasters TV show) that with a locked/ disabled reverser, the pilot SHOULD pull that handle along with the other engine to keep as close to standard procedures as possible. However, it could be the 320 doesn't. Kinda stupid, as other Airbus' function that way, i believe. Furthermore, triggering TOGA (go around) should have put both engines on takeoff power this video implied only engine 1 spooled. Id think TOGA would also deactivate teversers as well. Something is a bit cooky on this debrief. Key info is missing from either the lead up, the accident summary, or the final report.

[@judgedayan9934]

Thrust reversers are invoked by pulling the throttle all the way back. This gives full power to the engine but also engages a reverse gate that directs the thrust in the opposite direction. In this case the engine power worked but the reverse gate didn't work. I can understand that it is not a big deal to land with the thrust reverser working on one side, in any case the vast majority of stopping power comes from the brakes, but there should be a simple mechanism on the throttle control that blocks it from going into reverse.

[@bobwilson758]

Thing was rode hard and put up wet . No thanx - pass

[@danielkokal8819]

minor injuries, but I bet alot of poop cleanup on the passenger seats.

[@mph1ish]

"Disastrous?"

[@fredmitchel1236]

Captain should of been axed...

[@chasallallbright4877]

Don’t fly with a defective plane… any defects!!!!

[@westsparks6844]

I totally forgot about this airline. I flew them once from Minneapolis to Phoenix back in the late 90's, if I remember it was like $190 rt

[@robav8or]

The comment (from the video) “He tried to move the left throttle to idle” makes no sense. Even with one reverse inoperative (or one engine for that matter) the pilot still uses BOTH reverse levers until slowed to taxi speed. The only difference is the left thrust reverse system (in this case) won’t deploy. There is no compelling reason to advance one thrust lever until taking BOTH levers out of reverse. One inoperative reverse has minimal impact on stopping distance compared to speed brakes and wheel brakes. Of course; advancing one engine to takeoff power will cause the aircraft to depart the runway.

[@youngtimer964]

Nice job Cap. Maybe think about retirement.

[@itjustlookslikethis]

The blame is 100% on Airbus. They said it was O.K. to fly the A320 with an inoperative thrust reverser. maybe operating instructions need to be changed? No?

[@jmp.t28b99]

@@itjustlookslikethis Pilot Error on this one. Like most airliners, flying with one thrust reverser inop is perfectly legal. There are take-off and landing charts for runway requirements when this happens. Captain should have reviewed the approach and abnormal landing with the FO , so that they both would be in a heightened mode of awareness for the upcoming landing. FO should have brought it up if the Captain did not.

[@itjustlookslikethis]

@@jmp.t28b99 Doesn't change the fact the minimum equipment list said: A320 could be flown with one thrust reverser. Maybe it can't.

[@Prodagist]

@@itjustlookslikethis Except it can. Aircraft take off and land with inop reversers daily. If aircraft weren't allowed to fly with systems like that inop, 50% of the world's flights would be canceled. I've personally flown on multiple A320s, and A330s that have had one inop reverser, and each and every one of them landed perfectly fine. The pilot's here just fucked up, that's all there is to it.

[@YolandaPullman]

I think the captain did an amazing job of safely stopping that airplane with minimal injuries and no major buildings were struck. Sure he made 2 mistakes, but damn hes good.

[@rexhinlo3398]

Almost similar conditions on the PAL PR 137 incident. March 22, 1998.

[@georgecoons6872]

flown then in 1989 non stop to jfk to phoenix arizona. they did,nt last long.

[@paulgooding803]

Lasted 26 years and then merged with US Air which later merged with American. "Didn't last long" .... what does that even mean? SMH

[@storeparts]

How is this possible when you have 19500 flight hours 🤔🤔

[@wasserdagger]

Hey, it happens. I just got done reading about the crash of Aeroflot flight 5143 which crashed near Uchkuduk, Uzbek SSR, Soviet Union, on 10 July 1985. The crash killed all 200 occupants on board (it was the deadliest air disaster in Soviet aviation history). Investigators determined that crew fatigue was a factor in the accident. The pilot and co-pilot each had nearly 12,500 flight hours.

[@SinergiaAlUnisono]

I have a theory somewhere in the comments xD

[@storeparts]

@@wasserdagger Yes. I noticed that. But the question remain. How could it happen we you have som many hours.

[@storeparts]

@@SinergiaAlUnisono Thanks!

[@horseathalt7308]

@@storeparts Complacency. It happens. We are human.

[@guinnog2]

The hitherto unknown landing technique of nose braking

[@SinergiaAlUnisono]

Cuando el cirujano, a pesar de poner el cartelito o anotarlo con fibra te serruchan la pierna equivocada durante la amputación xD

[@renardfranse]

sounds like bi den was flying the plane!

[@pacnwguy9056]

Inane comment.

[@renardfranse]

@@pacnwguy9056 you MUST be a flaming liberal LOL

[@pacnwguy9056]

@@renardfranse Incorrect.

[@lbowsk]

Your two-digit IQ is showing.

[@Jim-bq5do]

Here is an idea...why not give him the pilot a fully functional plane to fly instead of one with a screwed up reverse thruster? Or is that too much to ask?

[@jamesthompson3099]

Actually, yes. Pilots are expected to fly with MEL items inop. They are not necessary for safe completion of a flight. The Captain messed up.

[@blackmusik109]

Believe it or not but these aircraft can land just fine without the need for reverse thrust under most circumstances. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe that they factor reverse thrust in the landing distance calculations

[@thomasbutler5039]

Please don’t reply with guesses about about a field in which you are obviously totally ignorant. A 29400 hour pilot.

[@Jim-bq5do]

@@thomasbutler5039 Just because something CAN be done does mean it should be done. 50 year common sense multi million mile frequent flyer here. If the plane is not 100% ready to go, I would prefer not to be on it. Don't tell me when to comment and when not to. If you are going to do that I will assume you are a Harris voter.

[@dennischiapello7243]

@@Jim-bq5do LOL All your frequent flier miles! What impressive piloting skills you must have absorbed just through osmosis!

[@SinergiaAlUnisono]

Qué manera de dársela en la pera !!! y eso que no estaban de fiesta xD

[@benhogan4739]

Not many yougins remember American West. Even though they were bought out a short time ago.

[@dennyup]

They were never bought out.

[@benhogan4739]

@ Yes they were.

[@dennyup]

@@benhogan4739 By whom? They were the ones doing all the buy-outs I.E. US Airways and later American.

[@benhogan4739]

@ If AW bought US Airways why did they change all their planes and corporate logo to US Airways. Which was then later bought by American. So yes, they were bought out.

[@dennyup]

@@benhogan4739 They were not bought out. They changed their livery only to maintain name-recognition value. Same with American. American had better name recognition value than US Airways which had better name-recognition than America West. America West bought out the others yet kept their names for name recognition only.

[@SinergiaAlUnisono]

When experience means nothing at all xD You can screw things up big time no matter what ! xD

[@RaulSavala-em1vb]

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!! They should of REPAIRED the reverser (BEFORE) THIS AIRCRAFT WAS PUT BACK INTO SERVICE.

[@JamesFolkers]

Why?

[@CAROLUSPRIMA]

Did anyone else see the “Cactus” designation and think, Hey, that’s Sully’s callsign!

[@palmdc8]

No

[@bobharrison7693]

No, that was Guadalcanal's call sign during WW2.

[@davidweeks6984]

@@palmdc8 YES

[@DragerPilot]

I’m very disappointed that America West had any Airbuses. I always believed they were strictly an American built company. I thought the graphics were completely wrong as they showed this really ugly aircraft sitting at the gate.

[@Prodagist]

Dude, it's actually embarrassing to be offended over a product that a company you aren't related to orders. American aircraft manufacturers can only deliver so many aircraft per year. The aviation market in the US is the strongest in the world, and for airlines to meet that demand, they need a lot of aircraft, more than US manufacturers alone can provide. Every major US airline, America, United, Delta, and more, orders from both Airbus and Boeing to meet the demand, that's just how you play the game. Whether you like the look of the plane or not, its stupid as fuck to be offended over what an airline orders.

[@snake91977]

Phony baloney video for the first 7 minutes. What a waste of time.

[@Nobilangelo]

Ended in the cactus...

[@BrianAdams-dt1ks]

I hope the Cap took an early retirement.

[@ForbiddenHistoryLIVE]

THANK YOU FRIENDS NOW SUBBED ! Peace & Enlyghtenment Alwayz Dezert-Owl from OHIO USA Author / Translator / Journalist Polymath / Professional Speaker / Available for Interviews

[@arthurbrumagem3844]

What ? Not a Boeing ?

[@jmead6121]

landed but he forgot to tie an string around his finger but he was flying an wounded air plane witch i don't agree with @ all should have bee repaired before flight or Grounded ..could have been way worst but since he took off anyways & stared the flight as captain he needed longer runway & massive breaks & Rutter steer to set down

[@vinniegravano8136]

How can these experienced pilots be so stupid?

[@gop4usa12]

Could this be the incident that led America West to selling out to US airways?

[@bobharrison7693]

America West did NOT "sell out" to US Air, it saved US air from going out of business!

[@paulgooding803]

Short answer, no. Had nothing to do with it. The merger happened because both airlines wanted to expand and their different service areas made the merger feasible. The merger still exists ... it is part of American Airlines.