Vietnam Airlines close call at Munich 15 Aug 2026

[RooFlyer]

Juan Browne discusses the report as revealed in Vietnamese newspapers, noting that both sets of main landing gears/trucks had burst tyres, indicating a braking problem with both sets. Lots of discussion of the brakes and maybe even 'human factors' at play.

 

[jb747]

Flex or "derated" thrusts became very common with "digital" FADEC - full authority digital engine control or similar depending on engine manufacturer.

They were common before FADEC.

Prior to that the I think the flight engineers would have had to manually calculate it using engine performance charts.

In QF it was worked out by the SO, and then checked by the Captain. If no SO, then Capt/FO. FEOs weren't involved (that I can recall, anyway)

It was to prolong engine life and reduce maintenance because full thrust takeoffs was associated with extreme internal temperatures. So it was used when departing with less payload, longer runways and favourable takeoff conditions like headwind, cool weather

I think the 747-400 had them but not the classics.

Nope...all of them.

But, the level of derate has increased over the years, especially with the advent of laptops/ipads to do the calculations. One rule that limited the derate was that there was never to be a thrust increase at clean up, i.e. the derate was never to be to a power setting less than the climb thrust you intended to use. That 'rule' is gone, and a power increase off a long runway is common. All of this has served to disconnect the pilots from the thrust settings, and even acceleration.

The opposite of derate thrust would be thrust augmentation using water injection which reduced internal temperatures and increased mass airflow allowing more fuel . Not used these days but the 747 classics had them

Ah, the joy of a wet take off. Working out the take off data for that was an exercise, as you had to consider loss of any number of water feeds to the engines. Could you continue after the loss of one or two? And then all four overtemp lights on during to roll.

Unrelated but another incident at MUC..

Lufthansa A380 Lands Short Of Runway, Damages Lights In Munich Just Days After A 787 Overran

No passengers were injured and an investigation is underway.

simpleflying.com

About as unrelated as you can get, unless the gravity at the end of that runway is somehow higher than anywhere else....

 

[RooFlyer]

Preliminary report released. Repeated braking by pilot flying during take-off roll.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I see from another source the brakes were allegedly applied twice, by the captain, during the takeoff

The captain has 27,000 hours. Wonder what could have happened? Inadvertent? Medical incident?

 

[DC3]

OMAAT:

Vietnam Airlines 787 Near-Disaster In Munich: Investigators Reveal A Bizarre Cause

A preliminary report reveals repeated brake inputs by Vietnam Airlines' captain during the Munich 787 takeoff scare, but the actual cause remains a mystery.

onemileatatime.com

 

[RooFlyer]

I see from another source the brakes were allegedly applied twice, by the captain, during the takeoff

The video above has the pilot flying's brake data from the interim report. The left was off and on the whole way! The break in the line at the bottom shows the point of ground departure.

 

[Berlin]

The captain has 27,000 hours. Wonder what could have happened? Inadvertent? Medical incident?

My guess would be on one of the following:

• Weird sudden confusion and/or medical drama- wouldn't we know about the latter by now though?
• Medical issue due to a condition that the pilot was very well aware but was trying to hide in order to stay in his job (not that unlikely tbh)
• Malicious intent (which would be god awful but nothing surprises anymore in this respect...)
• Some weird technical glitch that somehow leads to showing inputs and brakes activating while this was actually not caused by the pilot (not sure if this is even possible- I'm not a technical expert AT ALL).

Anything else I missed? Form everything we've heard so far, it does not sound as if the crew was aware of what caused it (or at least pretended not to be aware...).

 

[Quickstatus]

Does leading edge slat deploy reduce Angle of attack?

 

[piec]

My guess would be on one of the following:

• Weird sudden confusion and/or medical drama- wouldn't we know about the latter by now though?
• Medical issue due to a condition that the pilot was very well aware but was trying to hide in order to stay in his job (not that unlikely tbh)
• Malicious intent (which would be god awful but nothing surprises anymore in this respect...)
• Some weird technical glitch that somehow leads to showing inputs and brakes activating while this was actually not caused by the pilot (not sure if this is even possible- I'm not a technical expert AT ALL).

Anything else I missed? Form everything we've heard so far, it does not sound as if the crew was aware of what caused it (or at least pretended not to be aware...).

Or it was a habit of his, but this time the circumstances where such that it led to an overrun?

 

[Berlin]

Or it was a habit of his, but this time the circumstances where such that it led to an overrun?

Odd to happen at MUC for all places because those runways are rather long but yes, this could (shockingly ) be the case too, agreed!

 

[RooFlyer]

Anything else I missed?

Poor CRM. It was reported early on that “one of the pilots“ repeatedly questioned the speed with no response from the other pilot,

The pilots then were not identified, but as we now known it was the left-hand seat that was pilot flying, it seems to be him that was disregarding the warnings about speed which might have come from any of the other three pilots in the coughpit.

But there is no affirmative action from the other three pilots.

 

[Disco]

Does leading edge slat deploy reduce Angle of attack?

Yes