An Emirates Takeoff almost Turns into Australia's Worst Disaster | TWO Deadly Mistakes

Find out how two routine takeoffs performed by two different Emirates Airbus A340s (operating as Emirates Flight 764 and Flight 407) nearly turned into two catastrophes.

Get early access to future videos and support the channel here:

Check out the Official Shop with merchandise here:

Follow TheFlightChannel

Business Enquiries

Chapters
0:00 Intro
0:18 Takeoff from Dubai
1:20 The next day in Johannesburg
1:40 Briefing
2:18 Push-back and taxi
2:48 Takeoff
3:20 New Rotation Technique
4:53 Falure to Lift Off
5:52 Impact
6:43 Investigation
7:45 Pre-flight Preparation in Melbourne
8:15 Deadly Mistake
10:03 Takeoff
10:22 Falure to Raise the Nose
11:02 Impact with the Runway
11:55 Lift Off
12:52 Investigation

[ronaryel]

First incident: When a pilot gets a "tip, ", it's best to try it out on a simulator a few times before you do it on a real airplane with real people aboard because you might not know exactly what that tip is going to do when you try it. Maybe conditions weren't the same when its originator came up with it. The A340-300 is a particularly bad airplane to try something like this, because it is underpowered and sluggish compared with the -500. The -300 was supposed to receive a geared turbofan being developed by Rolls-Royce (years before Pratt and Whitney started selling its GTF). The engine's development was prolonged (and, ultimately, it was a failure; Rolls is now developing the Ultrafan GTF, which should be a lot better). But that engine was not available, so Airbus put GE-SAFRAN CFM-56 engines on it (the same that power the 737NG). The Airbus A300 is not an airplane that you want to put into a situation where you have to quickly get out of trouble through high thrust, especially if the A340-300 is fully loaded, at or near MTW.

[High-Alpha]

If you do re-uploads maybe consider putting that in the title so those that have seen it already can keep moving

[keziasarah]

Used to be the best flight channel, now its the best re-upload channel. 😥

[hothotchickenroll]

there are actually two melbourne airports, one is melbourne tullamarine and one is melbourne avalon. the one in the video is melbourne tullamarine so that should have been noted.

[ethelmertz]

About reuploads-I have seen a lot of comments about that and insulting this channel. Though I have been subscribed to this channel for years I still have not seen all of the content. So like this one here I have never seen before.
I still think this is the best channel.
Until I catch up maybe I will complain too I don’t

[MrCrystalcranium]

Why did Airbus make this underpowered turkey of a plane? You would think a plane with 4 modern engines would be a fighter jet and not a 1983 Camaro with the base 4 cylinder in it. My guess is they pushed the performance/economy line too far in the direction of low fuel use to make it more attractive to potential customers. There was a threshold out there somewhere and they went over the edge with it. I'd be terrified getting on one of these for a long duration flight, full of gas and passengers...unless we were taking off from a dry lakebed.

[CassassinCatto]

If I had a nickel for each time Emirates messed up a tale-off in an Airbus, I'd have two nickels. Not much but should I be concerned it's happened twice?

[michaelsimpson]

I enjoy your work but it seems to me that I have seen this before.

[atarool]

Bro, why show me this. I have a flight today with Emirates 😅

[RyanYarlagadda]

The old days when emirates operated the a340😢

[Aviation_of_Houston]

Greetings from Houston TX, United States 🇺🇲 ❤

[DarkSygil]

I was away for a while... at what point in time did the reuploads happen? I want to go back and watch all that i missed, but I wasn't sure when they started the duplication thing. Did this happen within the last year?

Do you guys remember when he tried narrating, and there was a little bit of opinion he should not, and kept it quiet?

Man it sucks to hear the channel changed.

[smcdonald]

02:33 Wow having to turn off air con for better engine performance...

[TheGospelQuartetParadise]

The
A-340 is the one aircraft that should ALWAYS take off under full under-power. Now you know why they call it the 4 engine hair dryer. I have seen many of them take off and they all look like they are huffing and puffing to get off the runway. Luckily, no lives were lost in the making of this report.

[smcdonald]

262.9 or 362.9 tons - that's a huge difference!
If the A340 burns 6 tons per hr, is 262.9 even possible, unless it's a very short flight with no passenger/cargo? Inputting that value should trigger a pop-up warning like "Value is low. Are you sure?" on the computer.

[ouroboris]

Can't blame the plane or the design.

[jessicasnaplesfl]

Several articles mention runway overruns resulting in collisions with lights, antennae, etc Perhaps these auxiliary pieces could be positioned on both sides of the ends of the runways instead of directly ahead, so airplanes having issues with extended take-offs or extended landings don't wipe them out with their need for extended runway length? Just a thought.
Here's another: Why would any production airplane be susceptible to tail-strikes? It wouldn't seem that small increases in "economy" would warrant the extra precision or precautions needed to avoid such a problem.

[peterkoln]

Even if you repeat the videos: I love to even watch the repetitions!

[CMDRFandragon]

A340, the plane with all the engine power of a Spad XIII

[thenewadventuresofhenry]

The A-340-300 in particular is notorious for being very under-powered.