Back to Squawk list
  • 30

Video: Red Air MD-82 catches fire in Miami after landing gear collapse

MIAMI, FLORIDA — A Red Air MD-82 with 126 passengers on board caught fire after landing at Miami International Airport on June 21 when the front landing gear collapsed. Three people had minor injuries during the incident. ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Appears Fire & Rescue were on the wreck extremely fast. Great work on their part.
Erik Bruner 8
Landing gear collapse... yeah, that will happen when you approach the runway sideways.
Mark Kortum 4
At 500 fpm descent rate.
Larry Morgan 5
Just imagine 1/3 of Red Air's entire fleet was wiped out.
Peter Ertman 3
Actually it was 1/4, they had four aircraft.
Larry Morgan 4
Ok, I thought I read they had a total of 3 aircraft, thank you for the correction.
LakeGator 9
They do, NOW! ;-)
Dan Boss 3
What has happened to so called "journalism" these days? The article states it was the nosegear, when in fact it was the left main gear that collapsed on the runway, and all gear were sheared off when the plane hit the grass and slammed into the glideslope antenna and shack for runway 30.

See Blancolirio for the real scoop:

He actually flew the Mad Dog (MD-8x) and points out that because the main gear is so far aft, that if you flare incorrectly, and pull back hard to correct an improper flare, this slams the mains into the ground as the plane rotates about it's cg. He indicates that in a flare too soon, you actually need to ease the nose down to correct and avoid slamming the mains.

The other factor here, from first hand knowledge (I live between MIA and PBI) is that Tuesday afternoon the wind was extremely wicked. 20 knot gusts with lots of shear. Another cell video showed the approach and flare, and he floated almost halfway down runway 9 - and it is likely that a shearing gust caught this bad final/flare and suddenly dropped the airspeed by a good 10-20 knots, making the plane in the floating condition, drop like a rock onto the mains. It's still bad technique, but the result is the same.
James Simms 3
Journalism standards have dropped precipitously with the advent of the Internet along with the lack/drop of local newspapers to train with. Use to be get the facts straight before publication, now it’s to rush to be first, then issue a correcting addendum.
Peter Fuller 3
“…..then issue a correcting addendum.”…..or not. Many “news” articles, and the organizations/people behind them, seek only to get as many hits/eyeballs-on as possible. Accuracy takes a back seat, or is left at the curb.
Craig Good 2
And of course there's an idiot shooting video of the evacuation on his phone. I would have slapped it out of his hands.
Monty Baugh 2
Looks to me from the video that someone put the gear up (instead of flaps or spoilers) on roll-out.
Jack Metcalf 2
OK, I have to point out again what nobody is talking about. I do not see a gear collapse, the plane is level as it goes by the camera and there are NO SPARKS! It is going down the runway straight and true until the end. What I do see is the reverse thrust buckets are only partially deployed in the after shot. Accident damage? Maybe, but both reversers appear to be deployed the same. Is it possible the smoke we see is the pilots applying full brakes and or tires fighting engines in full thrust when the pilots believed they were in full reverse?
Dan Boss 2
Clearly your perception does not match reality! Here is a video from a security camera:
From time 00:02 until 00:05 you see the plane on the runway, with the left main gear collapsed, smoke and sparks issuing from beneath the left wing where the left main is located.

And this statement by the NTSB:
"The airplane experienced a collapse of the left main landing gear during landing on Runway 9, departed the runway and came to rest in a grassy area between runway 9 and 30​. A post-crash fire on the right side of the airplane followed the runway excursion."

And Blancolirio points out the fire on the right side was a result of hitting the glideslope antenna for runway 30, which you can see is wrapped around the right wing:

The reverse buckets appear partially deployed because they shut down the engines before retracting the reverse levers - and since they are hydraulically actuated, once engine power is lost, there is not enough hydraulic pressure to finish there retraction. IN fact in one video you can hear the engines spool down before the plane comes to rest - I imagine the pilot pulled both fuel cutoff levers the instant the plane hit the grass.
Peter Fuller 1
Interesting speculation, but we must wait for NTSB accident investigation announcements and final report to lay out time line of events and probable causes of this crash. This one should be relatively easy - all the wreckage including recorders is on dry land on the airport, there’s video, everyone survived and can be interviewed - but the process takes time.
Hmmmmmmm - heck of a scenario....that is absolutely worth some
sparkie624 3
Another Low Cost Airline, Hate to see this.. Only 3 Minor Injuries, That is good news. I think the crew could have done a better Job evacuating the plane... Took forever for the Front door to open and no Chute deployed that I could see.
David Isaacs 8
It also appeared that many passangers stopped to get the carry-on luggage.
Andre Duijnmayer 4
Personally I think everyone taking that caeey on luggage down chute should be charged with attempted manslaughter.
Roy Hunte 3
And water bottles...
David Isaacs 8
These were to use to put out the fire.
RECOR10 -9
This can from the Dominican...had the plane been in a massive fireball covered in muriatic acid...still better than where they left....
The pilots did a great job . The MD 82 landing gears should either be redesigned or retire the MD 82’s .
I think it’s time to look for more modernized aircraft’s.
Jack Metcalf 1
I noticed the "buckets" are not fully open. Accident damage? Yet they are both in the same position. Is it possible the reverse thrust buckets never fully deployed and the smoke we see is the brakes and or tires fighting the engines?
I’m not sure why this Airline still flying the MD80’s.
It is best to replace them by 737-800/900’s as soon as they can.
Serious incidents and accidents involving the MD80’s:
All MD 82’s, Tarbes , France 2018.
Copenhagen, Denmark 2013.
Barajas , Spain 2008.
Phuket , Thailand 2007.
Same year , Helsinki, Finland.
2002 anchorage Alaska .
Too many incidents not to consider changing to new Aircraft’s.
Under the same premise, never drive a Corvette if you are a middle-aged white dude....


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.