China Eastern Boeing 777 ignores 'Go Around' direction and lands anyway

CHINA EASTERN AIRBUS A330-243 B-5931 (MSN 1440)

Singapore's Changi Airport witnessed a tense near-miss when a China Eastern Boeing 777-300ER landed despite air traffic control ordering a go-around. The incident, now detailed in the Transport Safety Investigation Bureau's final report, occurred when another China Eastern Airbus A320neo was still vacating runway 20R.

Controllers issued a go-around when separation narrowed to just seconds. But the 777 crew, descending through 76 feet, failed to acknowledge the call and touched down anyway. Investigators later found that altitude callouts from the aircraft's warning system most likely masked the transmission. Fortunately, the A320's tail cleared the runway edge in time, preventing a runway incursion

Both flights taxied safely to the terminal, yet the case now serves as a cautionary training example across Singapore aviation. It underscores how split-second miscommunication between pilots and ATC can turn routine landings into critical safety events.

AirAsia flight experiences engine issues during take-off from Perth

An AirAsia flight traveling from Perth (PER/YPPH) to Denpasar (DPS/WADD) has been forced to abort its climb and circle around after experiencing “engine issues” during take-off. On Sunday flight QZ545 departed Perth from runway 21 at 6.43pm and climbed to 5,300 before leveling off.

Travellers said it was not long after take-off before they heard loud bangs and saw flames coming from an engine.
“All the alarms all went off, and then it was just totally dead,” one passenger said.
“No lights, nothing.”

Another said, “it was like an explosion”.
“You could see the actual flames, and this happened about six times,” they said.
“At first we thought it was lightning.”

A third said they “really thought we were about to crash and die”.
“It was so scary because the plane started going down, up and down,” they told reporters.

The Airbus A320 made 4 circuits around Rottnest Island (west of the airport) and another two circuits (east of the airport) before returning to the airport landing on runway 21 exactly an hour later where they were met by fire trucks waiting all along the runway.

“Passengers were rescheduled onto flights the next morning at 3.30am and 6.30am,” a Perth Airport spokesperson said.

Aircraft Information:
Airline: Indonesia AirAsia
Code: QZ/AWQ

Aircraft: Airbus A320-216

Registration: PK-AXY
Serial Number: 5359
Engines: 2 x CFMI CFM56-5B6/3
First Flew: 24/10/2012
Age: 12.8 Years

Passengers sue Delta and United for selling windowless 'window seats'

Delta Air Lines and United Airlines faced lawsuits from passengers who alleged they paid extra for "window" seats but ended up sitting next to blank walls instead. Class action lawsuits were filed against United in a federal court in San Francisco and against Delta in a federal court in Brooklyn, New York. The suits seek millions in damages for over 1 million passengers at each airline.

According to the complaints, certain Boeing 737, Boeing 757, and Airbus A321 planes have seats where windows would typically be, but they are missing due to the placement of air conditioning ducts, electrical conduits, or other components. Passengers said Delta and United do not flag these seats during the booking process, unlike rivals such as Alaska Airlines and American Airlines, even when charging tens or occasionally hundreds of dollars for them.

The lawsuits say people buy window seats for several reasons including to address fear of flying or motion sickness, keep a child occupied, get extra light or just watch the world go by.

"Had plaintiffs and the class members known that the seats they were purchasing were windowless, they would not have selected them — much less have paid extra," the United complaint said. The Delta complaint contained similar language.

Ancillary revenue from seat selection, baggage fees, cabin upgrades, airport lounges and other services help carriers generate more cash when they fly while keeping base fares lower. Carter Greenbaum, a lawyer whose firm filed the two lawsuits, said the ability to find information from third party websites doesn't excuse Delta's and United's conduct.

"A company can't misrepresent the nature of the products it sells and then rely on third party reviews to say a customer should have known that it was lying," he said in an email.

I have experienced this issue myself. Qantas Boeing 737's seat 9A and 9F do not have windows and many years ago, sadly, I found out the hard way. I asked if I could change seats, and I was told the plane was completely full. People booking flights can use websites such as SeatGuru to find pluses and minuses of specific seats, including those lacking windows.

I also believe 9A on Virgin Australia Boeing 737-800 aircraft don't have a window.

Looking back on Air Transat Flight TS236

On the 24th of August 2001 an Air Transat flight was traveling from Toronto-Pearson International Airport, ON (YYZ/CYYZ) to Lisboa-Portela de Sacavém Airport (LIS/LPPT) when the crew became aware of a fuel imbalance between the left and right-wing main fuel tanks. Five minutes later, the crew concerned about the lower-than-expected fuel quantity indication, decided to divert to Lajes Airport (TER/LPLA) in the Azores. After running checks, the crew ascertained that a fuel leak could be the reason for the possible fuel loss, an emergency was declared to Santa Maria Oceanic Control. At 06:13, at a calculated distance of 135 miles from Lajes, the right engine flamed out. At 06:26, when the aircraft was about 85 nm from Lajes and at an altitude of about FL345, the left engine flamed out. At 06:39 the aircraft was at 13,000 feet and 8 miles from the threshold of runway 33. An engines-out visual approach was carried out and the aircraft landed on runway 33. Eight of the plane's ten tyres burst during the landing. 

An investigation revealed that the primary causal factors of the accident were crew actions in mishandling a fuel leak in the number two engine.

The fuel leak resulted from fitment of an incorrect part to the hydraulics system by Air Transat maintenance staff as part of routine maintenance. The engine had been replaced with a spare engine, lent by Rolls-Royce, from an older model which did not include a hydraulic pump. Despite the lead mechanic's concerns, Air Transat authorized the use of apart from a similar engine, an adaptation that did not maintain adequate clearance between the hydraulic lines and the fuel line. This lack of clearance, of the order of millimetres from the intended part, allowed chafing between the lines to rupture the fuel line, causing the leak.

Air Transat took responsibility for the accident and was fined C$250,000 by the Canadian government, a penalty that, as of 2009, was the largest in Canadian history. The pilots were celebrated as heroes by the Canadian press for their successful unpowered landing. In 2002, Captain Piché received the Superior Airmanship Award from the Air Line Pilots' Association.

This is the world's longest passenger aircraft glide without engines, gliding for nearly 65 nautical miles (120 km; 75 miles). Following this unusual aviation accident, this aircraft was nicknamed the "Azores Glider".


Aircraft Information:
Airline: Air Transat 
Code: TS/TSC

Aircraft: Airbus A330-243

Registration: C-GITS
Serial Number: 271
Engines: 2 x Rolls-Royce Trent 772B
First Flew: 17/03/1999
Age: 2.5 Years

Delta 737 loses part of wing mid-flight

DELTA BOEING 737-932 N855DN (MSN 31966)

A Delta Air Lines Boeing 737-800 has made a successful landing at Austin-Bergstrom Airport in Texas after part of its trailing edge wing flap detached in-flight. The flight carrying 88 passengers and crew taxied to the gate upon landing without further assistance.

The incident unfolded as Delta flight DL1893 from Orlando (MCO/KMCO) to Austin (AUS/KAUS) was nearing the end of its journey on approach into the Texas airport. The flight had departed from Orlando International Airport at 13:11 local time on the 19th of August 2025, for the two-hour and 15-minute flight to Austin.

As the aircraft approached Austin, the crew lowered the flaps in preparation for landing. However, as videos posted on social media illustrated, the lower section on the left-hand outer trailing edge flap became detached from the flap mechanism at its outboard end. The loose flap section was retained on the wing by the hinge fixing on the inboard end of the flap track mechanism and remained in place as the aircraft made its final approach.

The aircraft eventually touched down on Austin’s runway 18R around 15 minutes later at 14:27 local time and taxied without further assistance to its allocated parking stand. According to a posting by the Federal Aviation Administration, the aircraft “landed and a post-flight inspection revealed that the trailing edge of the left-hand wing flap was bent upward.”

The aircraft has been taken out of service for repairs, as data from Flightradar24 shows that the aircraft still remains on the ground in Austin and has not flown since the incident flight.

Although seemingly serious to the untrained eye, the event is unlikely to have been classified as a major risk to the safety of the passengers and crew onboard DL1893. While flaps provide lift to the aircraft at relatively low speeds on take-off and landing, aircraft of this type and size can land without flaps in the event of an emergency, such as a hydraulic failure. Indeed, the fact that the flap section stayed attached to the airframe and did not detach completely means that it will have still been of some use to the pilots flying the aircraft.

Aircraft Information:
Airline: Delta Airlines 
Code: DL/DAL

Aircraft: Boeing 737-832

Registration: N3740C
Serial Number: 30800
Engines: 2 x CFMI CFM56-7B
First Flew: 04/12/2000
Age: 24.8 Years

Qantas cancells flights double the rate of Virgin Australia

Qantas has been canceling flights at twice the rate of its primary competitor, Virgin Australia, which boasted the lowest monthly cancellation rates among major domestic airlines over the past year. 

Virgin Australia cancelled just 1.6% of its flights on average over the year to June 2025, while the Qantas group cancelled 3.2%, or almost one in every 30 of its scheduled flights.

Cancellation rates typically average 2.2%, according to an Australian Competition and Consumer Commission report released on Tuesday. Jetstar beat both airlines in the month of June, cancelling just 1.1% of flights.

The Canberra-Sydney flight route has seen above-average cancellations, hitting 12% in June, or nearly 15% for the Qantas group and half that for Virgin-leased Link services.

“The airlines have cited poor weather, including strong winds in Sydney and fog in Canberra,” the ACCC report read.

In a statement Qantas said: “We have had the most on time flights of the major domestic airlines for the past year, but our cancellation rate has been much higher than it should be.

“We have a number of initiatives in place to improve our operational performance.”

Cancellations across the industry have declined since 2023, as have late arrivals, which fell to a three-year low of less than 18%.

Just 15.2% of Virgin flights were late in May, the lowest proportion for any major airline since monitoring began in 2022, though that picked up to 20.4% in June, just higher than Qantas’s 19.6%.

While airline performance has improved, prices for customers have risen, the ACCC found. Average air fares were much higher in April 2025 than the same month in 2024, even after adjusting for inflation, as back-to-back public holidays saw demand surge.

Airlines also raked in more revenue per passenger in June 2025 than they did in June 2024, despite downward pressure on operating costs from falling jet fuel prices, the ACCC said. At the same time, airlines were flying 172,000 fewer seats across Australia in June than they had been in 2019, even though customer demand has returned to pre-pandemic levels.

“This has likely resulted in people paying more to fly than they would have otherwise,” the watchdog’s report read.

Airfares on major Australian airlines have also risen significantly compared to the cost of jet fuel in 2025, according to new analysis from the competition watchdog.

Remembering Saudia Flight 163

SAUDI MD 11 HZ-HM7 (CN 48532)

 

Saudia Flight 163 was a scheduled Saudia passenger flight that caught fire after takeoff from Riyadh International Airport (RUH/OERY), Saudi Arabia (now known as the Riyadh Air Base) en route to Jeddah International Airport (JED/OEJD) Saudi Arabia on the 19th of August 1980. All 287 passengers and 14 crew on board the Lockheed L-1011-200 TriStar died from smoke inhalation after the aircraft made a successful emergency landing at Riyadh. Flight SV163 landed at Riyadh at 16:06 GMT for a scheduled intermediate stop after a flight from Karachi. 

At 18:08 the aircraft took off for the final leg to Jeddah. Six minutes and 54 seconds after takeoff, while climbing to FL350, visual and aural warnings indicated smoke in the aft cargo compartment C-3. Climbing through FL220 (at 18:20), a return to Riyadh was initiated. About two minutes later smoke was noted in the aft of the cabin, and passengers were panicking. At 18:25:26 the no. 2 engine throttle was stuck. The fire had by then entered the cabin of the TriStar. Because passengers where fighting in the aisles, aft of doors L2 and R2, the captain asked everybody to remain seated (18:27:40). On final approach engine no. 2 was shut down, and the captain told the cabin crew not to evacuate. Flight SV163 landed back at Riyadh runway 01 at 18:36:24 The crew continued to a taxiway and told the tower that they were going to shut the engines down and evacuate. The engines were shut down at 18:42:18. Because no evacuation had been initiated by then, crash, fire and rescue personnel tried to open the doors. At about 19:05 they succeeded in opening door 2R. About three minutes later, the interior was seen to be engulfed in flames. None of the occupants survived the fire.

Probable Cause:

"The initiation of a fire in the C-3 cargo compartment. The source of the ignition of the fire is undetermined. Factors contributing to the fatal results of this accident were 1) the failure of the captain to prepare the cabin crew for immediate evacuation upon landing and his failure in not making a maximum stop landing on the runway, with immediate evacuation, 2) the failure of the captain to properly utilize his flight crew throughout the emergency 3) the failure of C/F/R headquarters management personnel to ensure that its personnel had adequate equipment and training to function as required during an emergency."

The accident is the deadliest involving a Lockheed L-1011 TriStar, as well as the deadliest aviation disaster to occur in Saudi Arabia to date.

The aircraft involved was a Lockheed L-1011 TriStar (Registered in Saudi Arabia as HZ-AHK). It made its first flight on the 13th of July 1979 and was delivered to Saudia on the 21st of August 1979.

Aircraft Information
Airline: Saudi Arabian Airlines
Code: SV/SVA
Aircraft: Lockheed L-1011 TriStar 200
Registration: HZ-AHK
Serial Number: 1169
Engines: 3 x RB211-524B402
First Flew: 13/07/1979
Age: 11 Months