AllTop Viral!

The most viral news stories that you need to know about.

737 almost strikes tail on takeoff, stalls

Posted by / July 10, 2017

Hopefully you never end up flying on this airline. The pilot made a series of bad choices, lead to the plane’s tail nearly striking the ground just before the plane stalled out.

Full story at YouTube.

More great flying vids.

Comments are off for this post.

  • His flaps aren’t out.

  • Alain

    Made the same observation. Pilot should be grounded for good!

  • Sabino

    These pilots HAVE TO BE fired! NO FLAPS to take-off!!!!!

  • Jim

    But it worked eventually !

  • Too big for 737, right? 757 or 767 ??

  • PIC Jack

    a series of bad choices… stall?!? – where did you see stall? He did his utmost to get airborne w/o making a damage to the plane, let alone saving all souls on board…

  • Gary

    Delta 1141, Northwest 255, BEA 548 all crashed because the flaps weren’t set properly.

  • None

    The trailing edge flaps are retracted, however the leading edge flaps and slats are extended (this is the flaps 1 position, a perfectly normal flap position for takeoff). This is most likely a case of improper loading, incorrect takeoff trim setting, early rotation or more likely some combination of all three.

  • Marshall

    I don’t know if the plane completely stalled but it’s apparent the pilot knew that condition was imminent since he was bleeding airspeed rapidly following rotation and still had insufficient lift. He dropped the nose to regain airspeed before again attempting to fully rotate. The need for adequate flaps front and rear is to generate lift.

  • Dan Feeney

    It looks like he has flaps set to one, leading edges are extended. And that is a 737 bird.

  • Troykirk

    He did recover the airplane?

  • Tom

    They could have had a flap indicator failure. This guy could have thought he was in FLAPS 5 when really maybe the plane had an issue and only the Slats were working. You never know just from looking at it externally.

  • This is 737-700 and those that noticed flaps set to 1 are correct. a standard config for TO. Possibles are the CG is way off from improper loading or pilot rotated to soon. Possibly given wrong Wt and Balance data. Very likely just a really bad pilot. you get what you pay for……….

  • Girac

    Do they record each and every landing and takeoff?

  • stts

    Naw, The flaps are fine. The pilot just rotated too early. He wasnt watching the speed indicator and wasnt up to speed for the load he had. He may have been fully loaded with cargo and wasnt up to the speed for his load. That happens when you dont pay close attention to your check list on a flight. Flying these days is a tedious job because everything is about checklists to take the human errors out of the flying equation. Be checklist complacent, and human errors can creep right back in. Just like what we are seeing here.

  • stts

    And that whole “tail strike” things is just sensational bonk. All planes like this rotate that much. Its just that this time it didnt rise off the ground. They see on their indicator how much they rotate so they know how far to go. This pilot was just going too slow for a takeoff. And he would NOT be bleeding off speed at this pitch. His engines were at full power and he actually gains speed at this pitch and continues to gain speed as he goes up. He just rotated back down to speed up faster. After all, the runway doesnt go on forever.

  • With all you people who apparently have been PICS’s at one time or another, how is the average Jo(sephine, in my case) supposed to know what went wrong, if y’all have such wide variations in opinion?

  • Randy

    there could be multiple reasons for the odd takeoff… stated above…..the airplane could have been using incorrect takeoff speeds which are calculated for the weight, temperature, and ambient pressure. A fully loaded 737/700 would need a speed of 148 kts for flaps one on a 35C day. If they set the takeoff numbers for flaps 5 on a lightly loaded aircraft…the speed to fly is only 122 kts. The CG could have been out of range nose forward….causing the tail to be unable to rotate the nose. Another possibility is the autothrottles may not have been in HOLD at 80 kts….and this caused an abnormally low take off power setting…..the pilot could have made a mistake and tried to lift off abnormally early despite the correct power and loading. You cannot say without having more information.

  • stts

    Or there could have been a snake on the plane and it suddenly fell in the pilots lap. But the reality of the situation is what is most likely to have occured. And inattention is a common failing that leads to pilot error. Hopefully hes not a Fentanyl druggie pilot like the Spirit Airlines pilot that was recently found dead with his wife. The industry has had inattention failings in that reguard, so its being revieled.

  • jeffery fry

    All valuable points and logical responses , Also the air density value could of changed from time of push back and when they started the roll? I say rotated too soon and a few knots slower than should of and again possibly due to inaccurate calcs, weight & load balance information. As for the tail strike, Id been more comfortable with the flaps at 5. A hot day, a full load and go for the longer run up and longer roll out and Rotated (V2 + 10) to be safe.

  • Yasir Ali bondagjy

    People don’t prejudge something you don’t know what kind of circumstances the take off is going through.

  • Jacob

    Jeffery Fry has the only logical conclusion and I agree with my 11,206 heavy aircraft flight hours..Never discount weight & air density and go the safe way and longer roll…

  • Goobs

    It sounds windy. Could have been a wind shift near rotation. Let’s not crucify the pilot when we don’t know all the facts. If it was a V speed miscalculation or a loading error, whoever responsible should be investigated and held responsible.

  • Prof. kgm

    Flaps are set to minimum for takeoff – notice LEDs. Looks like a rotation at too low an airspeed. Maybe Vr was miscalculated.

  • Kawika

    I’ve flown this jet. So that along with my 31K hrs would say flaps were set at 1 incorrectly and he was using flaps 5 speeds. His initial rotation was below flying speed for flaps 1. The difference in any density altitude calculation is unlikely as aircrews are always vigilant for temp and pressure changes. Also the speed correction would have been smaller to get up to flying speed than this guy who had quite a bit more than the 3-5 knots more speed needed in a density altitude correction!. It’s not that it couldn’t happen, but I’ve seen way more improper V speed and flap setting combinations than density altitude errors!

  • }p-;/0.lo