WATCH: Delta Airlines' Boeing 767 flight engine catches fire, makes emergency landing in Los Angeles
Video footage showed Delta Airlines flight 446, operated by Boeing 767-400 aircraft, during its ascent over the Los Angeles airport (LAX) with fire emerging from its left engine. The video captured the plane circling over Los Angeles before returning to LAX safely.
❗️Boeing 787 Makes Emergency Landing in LA 🇺🇸 – Engine ON FIRE 🔥
Video claims to show a Delta Airlines flight bound for Atlanta on Friday making an emergency landing at LAX. The engine reportedly caught fire shortly after take-off.
📹 @LAFlightsLIVE https://t.co/t1HBVLDi0P pic.twitter.com/vYNgkpZJcq
— RT_India (@RT_India_news) July 19, 2025
According to reports, no injuries were reported in the incident. As the plane made an emergency landing, the fire crew was present at the runway and confirmed that the fire was extinguished. The flight was headed to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.
A Delta airline spokesperson confirmed the incident and said, 'Delta flight 446 returned to Los Angeles shortly after departure following an indication of an issue with the aircraft's left engine,' BBC reported. The airline has said that it is fully cooperating with the investigation and also reviewing its safety protocols.
The US aviation watchdog Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has launched an investigation to determine the cause of the fire. Officials said that the exact reason behind the fire in the left engine of the aircraft remains under probe.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Delta pilot's daring move: how a split-second decision saved flight from mid-air B-52 disaster
As reported by a Delta pilot flying on route to Minot, North Dakota, was forced to make an 'aggressive manoeuvre' to prevent a collision with a B-52 bomber, present, mid-air. The SkyWest-operated flight took off from Minneapolis, Minnesota on July 18, the date of the incident happening. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Select a Course Category Operations Management Project Management Artificial Intelligence CXO Data Analytics others MBA MCA Product Management Data Science Design Thinking Cybersecurity Degree Public Policy Others PGDM Management Finance Healthcare Technology healthcare Data Science Digital Marketing Leadership Skills you'll gain: Quality Management & Lean Six Sigma Analytical Tools Supply Chain Management & Strategies Service Operations Management Duration: 10 Months IIM Lucknow IIML Executive Programme in Strategic Operations Management & Supply Chain Analytics Starts on Jan 27, 2024 Get Details The pilot after landing, apologised, to the passengers and explained the reason he had to evade and cause such a manoeuvre. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Ban Cham: Unsold Furniture Liquidation 2024 (Prices May Surprise You) Unsold Furniture | Search Ads Learn More "Given his speed... I don't know how fast they were going, but they were a lot faster than us, I felt it was the safest thing to do to turn behind it," the pilot reportedly added, as the discussion was recorded. The pilot coolly measured the situation by saying, I apologise for such an event and that he was surprised the Air Force base radar missed it, when it should have always been functional. He thanked the crew for being so understanding and said,'It was not a pleasant day at work.' Live Events It remains unclear if the cockpit alarm was triggered as general response for possible collisions to the pilots, and if not, could be looked at as a surprising miss as an Air Force base with B-52 bombers is located near Minot, expectedly heightening security from Air Force or Air Traffic Controllers. "Recent reports of Air Force and commercial aircraft operating in the vicinity of Minot International Airport are something we are aware of. We're investigating the situation right now,' stated an Air Force spokeswoman to ABC News on Sunday night, July 20. "We can confirm that a B-52 aircraft assigned to Minot AFB conducted a flypast of the North Dakota State Fair Friday evening." According to SkyWest, the event is being looked into.
Indian Express
5 hours ago
- Indian Express
The third black box: Despite obvious benefits for air crash probes, debate on cockpit cameras has dragged on for decades
What happened inside the cockpit of the doomed Air India flight AI 171 has become a matter of significant speculation globally, with various theories doing the rounds. Even at this early stage in the investigation, which could take months to conclude, many have insinuated pilot action—inadvertent or even deliberate—as the probable cause. Then there are those who appear convinced that it couldn't have been the pilots, and believe that something was wrong with the aircraft. Amid all the speculation and theories, an old debate has relighted: should aircraft have a third black box—a cockpit video recorder—in addition to the cockpit voice and flight data recorders? Recently, global airline industry body International Air Transport Association's (IATA) Director General Willie Walsh said in Singapore that there is a 'strong argument to be made' for having cockpit video recorders, and based on what little is known about the Air India crash, 'it is quite possible' that a video recording in addition to the cockpit voice recording would 'significantly assist the investigators'. While investigators have been pushing for their installation for over 20 years, cockpit video recorders have been staunchly opposed by pilot unions over privacy and trust issues. The preliminary investigation report into the crash, released a month after the accident, said that the Air India Boeing 787-8 aircraft crashed after both its engines were starved of fuel as the two fuel control switches transitioned from 'RUN' to 'CUTOFF' position within a second of each other moments after lift-off. From the cockpit voice recorder data, the preliminary probe report notes that one of the pilots asked the other why he cut off the fuel, to which the other pilot responded saying he did not. To be sure, the report doesn't mention that fuel control switches—which allow and cut fuel flow to the plane's engines—moved physically, and uses the term 'transitioned' to describe the change of mode from RUN to CUTOFF. It also does not state these were moved by either of the pilots, and does not provide any other input from the cockpit voice recording. The selective information presented in the report has many believing that it implicitly pointed a finger at one of the pilots. The current debate essentially boils down to one question: was it pilot action or a technical issue that brought the aircraft down? While the cockpit voice recording and flight data might lead to more clarity, it is a no-brainer that the presence of a cockpit video recording would have definitively confirmed or ruled out human action. Convinced of the positive impact cockpit video could have on air crash investigations in cases of suspected crew error or action, the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) first cited the need for video recording of the cockpit in 1989, and officially recommended the installation of video recorder to the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)—the American aviation regulator—in 2000. In a safety recommendation to the FAA in April 2000, NTSB's then chairman Jim Hall made a strong case for cockpit video recorders citing multiple aircraft accidents where videos would have answered important questions that remained unanswered. The then most recent accident mentioned in that letter was that of EgyptAir Flight 990, a Boeing 767 that plunged into the Atlantic Ocean, killing 217 passengers and crew. '…the Safety Board is concerned that the full circumstances that led to the descent into the ocean may never be fully understood because of the lack of electronic cockpit imagery,' the letter noted. Indeed, the crash remains controversial to this day with the Egyptian authorities not agreeing with the NTSB's conclusion that deliberate action by one of the pilots caused the crash. A video recording could have helped resolve the disagreement by providing additional clarity. Although flight data recorders show what the aircraft did, they don't always uncover why it did it. Cockpit voice recorders certainly capture what was said in the cockpit and also record other sounds, but they don't tell investigators how pilots physically reacted to a situation, or record their actions, which could be crucial information in air crash investigations. Back in 2004, Ken Smart, the then head of the UK's Air Accident Investigation Branch, had said that cockpit video would offer essential additional information in almost all aircraft accident probes. Investigators have been arguing that cockpit video could expedite investigations, bring more clarity, and provide important context to existing data from the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder. Over two decades ago, technology and cost-related challenges could have been an argument against installation of cockpit video recorders. In 2025, that's no more the case. There are no technology-related challenges now in installation and operation of these devices. In fact, cockpit video recorders are being used on various aircraft—like helicopters involved in offshore operations, police choppers, search and rescue aircraft, and test and training aircraft—in different parts of the world. But airliners don't have them. Thanks to the presence of a cockpit video recorder, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau recently concluded that pilot negligence and error were major factors in a 2023 helicopter crash. According to the investigation report, the pilot was 'occupied with non-flying related tasks…specifically, mobile phone use and the consumption of food and beverages' when the helicopter hit turbulence. The cockpit video also highlighted other errors made by the pilot as he tried to deal with the crisis. Despite air accident investigation agencies pushing for cockpit video recorders in commercial aircraft, the needle hasn't really moved in the last 25 years. That's because influential pilot unions in the US and even other parts of the world have been strongly pushing back against the idea. The biggest reason for opposition being privacy concerns. They have been arguing that the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder have proved to be sufficient in successfully conducting a vast majority of air accident investigations, and the need for cameras has been felt in very few cases. But given that CCTV cameras are now commonplace in offices, why should the cockpit be treated differently as it is, after all, the pilots' work space? Pilots argue that the cockpit is not a regular office space, but a specialised one where high-pressure decisions and safety-critical operations take place, which may include occasional expression of frustrations and even fear. Having a camera capture all that is something that they are not comfortable with. But those in favour of the cameras argue that the device need not be focussed on the faces of the pilots, but rather on the instruments in the cockpit to capture them accurately, while also capturing the pilots' operation of the instruments. 'Given the high demand for sensational pictures, IFALPA (International Federation of Air Line Pilots' Associations) has absolutely no doubt that the protection of AIR (airborne image recorders, or cameras) data, which can include identifiable images of flight crewmembers, would not be ensured either. If released, this will affect safety and could have a devastating effect on the families of the victims, following a fatal accident,' the global federation of airline unions IFALPA had said in a December 2021 position paper on the issue. The bigger concern is the fear of how the footage may be used after an accident. There are concerns that videos may be leaked during the investigation, which could tarnish the pilots' reputation. Such concerns stem from the fact that there have been several instances of cockpit voice recordings being leaked to the media during air crash investigations, leading to distress for the families of victims and crew. Pilots and their unions fear that the distress would be far more if cockpit videos of an ill-fated aircraft find their way to the media and the general public. There are also fears about the videos being used by airlines and even investigators to appropriate blame, footage being used in legal proceedings against pilots, and their actions being misinterpreted or misrepresented. 'Until the misuse of recordings and transcripts has been effectively prevented, IFALPA will remain strongly opposed to the installation of AIRs in aircraft. The Federation supports expanding the existing technology of the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) to provide a better understanding of the state of the aircraft and believes that Safety Management is the most effective way forward for proactive safety improvement,' IFALPA said in its position paper. In its letter to the FAA in the year 2000, the NTSB had stated that while it recognised 'the privacy issues with recording images of pilots', it believed that 'given the history of complex accident investigations and lack of crucial information regarding the cockpit environment, the safety of the flying public must take precedence'. The NTSB has been arguing that if regulators ensure that cockpit footage gets the same level of legal protections that cockpit voice recordings get, there shouldn't be any reason why they should not be mandatory on airliners. The FAA has so far said that it encourages voluntary use of cockpit video recorders, but doesn't mandate it as it also recognises the associated privacy and security concerns. Sukalp Sharma is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express and writes on a host of subjects and sectors, notably energy and aviation. He has over 13 years of experience in journalism with a body of work spanning areas like politics, development, equity markets, corporates, trade, and economic policy. He considers himself an above-average photographer, which goes well with his love for travel. ... Read More
News18
6 hours ago
- News18
Delta Airlines Jet Makes 'Aggressive' Detour To Avoid Mid-Air Collision With B-52 Bomber In US
Last Updated: The pilot of the Delta Airlines jet blamed unclear air traffic control instructions for the close call and apologised to passengers for the sudden movement of the plane. A Delta Air Lines regional jet narrowly avoided a tragic mishap recently as it was forced to make an 'aggressive manoeuvre" to avoid a mid-air collision with a B-52 bomber in North Dakota last week, according to various media reports. The incident took place on July 18 and is being investigated by SkyWest, which operated the flight. In a viral TikTok video that was uploaded on Saturday, the Delta pilot told passengers that he was forced to make a sudden detour to avoid colliding with a military plane flying nearby. The plane had departed from Minneapolis and was on approach to Minot, North Dakota, home to an Air Force base with B-52 bombers, according to a report by ABC News. The pilot said unclear air traffic control instructions led to the close call. 'For those of you on the right-hand side, you probably saw the airplane kind of coming at us. Nobody told us about it, and so we continued. There's no radar here, so the tower does everything visually," the pilot told passengers in the video. He said he was directed to 'report about six miles from the airport" and was instructed to make a specific turn, according to the PEOPLE magazine. However, when he saw the approaching military aircraft, he told air traffic control, 'There's an airplane over there" and was told to turn in the opposite direction. 'By the time we went back to clearance with nowhere, I saw the airplane that was kind of coming on a converging course with us." The pilot apologised for the sudden movement of the aircraft, saying, 'So sorry about the aggressive manoeuvre." 'It caught me by surprise. This is not normal at all," he continued. 'I don't know why they didn't give us a heads-up, because the airport base does have radar." Meanwhile, passengers on the plane also witnessed the approaching B-52 bomber on one side of the aircraft. Despite the close call, passengers were reportedly calm. 'I felt like I was gaslighting myself, like maybe I was being crazy, because no one else was reacting," said Monica Green, one of the passengers. 'The way he (pilot) said it, it almost sounded like he was insinuating that landing safely might not be an option for a moment. We all just kind of looked at each other and stayed quiet." view comments First Published: July 21, 2025, 09:24 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
