This article summarizes reporting by WFSB and includes data from official FAA and LATAM Airlines statements.

LATAM Boeing 767 Suffers Major Tire Blowout Upon Landing in Atlanta

A LATAM Airlines flight arriving from Lima, Peru, experienced a significant landing gear failure at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL) on the evening of Tuesday, January 6, 2026. According to reporting by WFSB and confirmed by federal regulators, the aircraft blew multiple tires immediately after touching down, stranding the jet on the runway for hours.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has launched an investigation into the incident involving Flight LA2482. While the mechanical failure caused substantial disruption at the world’s busiest airport, officials confirmed that the plane came to a safe stop and no injuries were reported among the passengers or crew.

This event marks another high-profile maintenance incident involving the Boeing 767 airframe, occurring just days after regulators issued new directives regarding landing gear inspections for the aging fleet type.

Incident Details and Passenger Accounts

Flight LA2482, operated by a Boeing 767-300ER (Registration CC-CXF), touched down on Runway 26R at approximately 7:38 PM EST. According to details emerging from the investigation, the aircraft suffered a blowout of all eight tires on the rear main landing gear assembly upon landing.

Inside the Cabin

Passengers onboard described a frightening conclusion to the international flight. Witnesses cited in reports by WFSB and other outlets characterized the landing as “rough” and “hard,” noting violent vibrations as the aircraft decelerated.

The physical force of the landing was reportedly severe enough to cause interior damage to the cabin. Passenger accounts indicate that a bathroom door was dislodged from its hinges during the rollout. Despite the intensity of the event, the cabin atmosphere reportedly remained relatively calm once the aircraft came to a halt.

“The plane landed safely and came to a controlled stop on the runway. No injuries were reported.”

, Summary of FAA Statement

Advertisement

Following the incident, passengers remained onboard for approximately two to three hours while emergency crews assessed the stability of the landing gear. Eventually, travelers were deplaned via stairs onto the tarmac and bussed to the international terminal.

Official Responses and Operational Impact

The incident triggered immediate responses from the airline, the airport, and federal regulators. Runway 26R was temporarily closed to facilitate the evacuation and the complex removal of the disabled wide-body aircraft.

Airline and Regulator Statements

In a statement regarding the event, the FAA confirmed that the jet “blew tires after safely landing” and noted that an investigation is underway to determine the root cause. LATAM Airlines acknowledged the “technical incident,” emphasizing that safety remains their priority and regretting the inconvenience caused to customers.

Delta Air Lines, which has a codeshare agreement with LATAM, clarified to reporters that the flight was operated entirely by LATAM crews and hardware, distinguishing their operations from the incident.

AirPro News Analysis

Context on the Boeing 767 Fleet

While the investigation into Flight LA2482 is in its early stages, AirPro News notes that this incident occurs within a broader context of scrutiny regarding the Boeing 767 platform. The aircraft involved is approximately 17 years old, a common age for this workhorse of the transatlantic and South American markets.

Significantly, this blowout follows a January 2025 FAA Airworthiness Directive requiring inspections of landing gear on specific Boeing 767 aircraft. That directive was prompted by previous reports of landing gear collapses and heat damage issues. While it is too early to link Tuesday’s event to these specific mechanical concerns, the failure of an entire main gear tire assembly (eight tires) is a rare severity that will likely draw intense focus from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and FAA investigators.

We also observe that this incident compounds operational stress at Atlanta’s airport, which had already been recovering from runway equipment issues earlier in the week. The ability of the pilots to maintain directional control despite losing traction on the main gear suggests a high degree of airmanship, preventing a potential runway excursion.

Frequently Asked Questions

Was anyone injured on LATAM Flight LA2482?

No. Despite the severity of the tire blowouts and reported interior damage, no injuries were reported among passengers or crew.

What caused the tires to blow out?

The official cause has not yet been determined. The FAA has opened an investigation to analyze whether the failure was due to mechanical malfunction, pilot input, or runway conditions.

What type of aircraft was involved?

The flight was operated by a Boeing 767-300ER, a wide-body twin-engine jet.

Did this flight belong to Delta Air Lines?

No. While it may have carried a Delta codeshare flight number, the aircraft and crew were from LATAM Airlines Peru.

Sources

• WFSB

This article is based on official safety recommendations and accident reports from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).

NTSB Issues Urgent Safety Recommendations for Hawker 800XP and 900XP Post-Maintenance Flights

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has issued urgent safety recommendations calling for immediate changes to pilot qualifications and testing procedures for Hawker 800XP and 900XP Commercial-Aircraft. The recommendations are directed at Textron Aviation, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) following two fatal accidents involving post-maintenance stall test flights.

According to the NTSB, the current regulatory framework allows standard line pilots to conduct high-risk functional check flights that require test-pilot-level skills. The agency has identified a critical gap in training and experience that has contributed to the loss of life in recent years.

The urgent action was triggered by investigations into two separate crashes, one in Michigan in October 2025 and another in Utah in February 2024, where crews lost control of their aircraft while attempting to verify stall warning systems after wing maintenance.

Urgent Recommendations for Industry Stakeholders

The NTSB’s report outlines specific actions required from the Manufacturers, the regulator, and industry advocacy groups to prevent further tragedies.

Directives to Textron Aviation

As the manufacturer, Textron Aviation is being urged to establish specific pilot qualification standards. These standards must define the experience, training, and proficiency required to safely conduct post-maintenance stall tests. Furthermore, the NTSB recommends that Textron revise aircraft maintenance and flight manuals to include standardized “stall test plans.” These plans should explicitly outline safe execution procedures, abort criteria, and risk management Strategy.

Directives to the FAA

The NTSB has called upon the FAA to mandate compliance with the new criteria established by Textron. The recommendations suggest that the FAA must increase oversight to ensure that only qualified pilots, potentially those meeting test-pilot-like standards, are authorized to perform these high-risk functional check flights. Currently, operators of Hawker 800XP/900XP aircraft are not strictly required to use specialized test pilots for these specific maintenance checks.

Directives to the NBAA

The NBAA has been tasked with disseminating this urgent safety information to its membership immediately. The NTSB emphasizes the need for collaboration between the NBAA, FAA, and Textron to develop and promote best practices for conducting post-maintenance functional check flights.

The Catalyst: Two Fatal Accidents

The NTSB’s urgent recommendations stem from two accidents where flight crews were unable to recover from stalls induced during mandatory post-maintenance checks.

The Michigan Accident (October 2025)

On October 16, 2025, a Hawker 800XP (Registration XA-JMR) crashed near Bath Township, Michigan, killing all three occupants. The aircraft had just completed seven months of routine maintenance at Duncan Aviation, which included the removal and reinstallation of wing leading edges and TKS ice-protection panels. This maintenance required a mandatory post-maintenance stall test flight.

According to the NTSB investigation, the operator elected to use their regular flight crew rather than professional test pilots, despite the maintenance facility providing a list of qualified test pilots for hire. The crew climbed to 15,000 feet to perform the test, but ADS-B data showed a rapid descent shortly after.

“We are in a stall… recovering… sorry.”

— Final transmission from the crew of XA-JMR, per NTSB records.

Investigators believe the crew likely encountered “aileron snatch,” an uncommanded roll phenomenon, or deep stall characteristics they were not trained to handle.

The Utah Accident (February 2024)

On February 7, 2024, a Hawker 900XP (Registration N900VA) crashed near the Utah-Colorado border, resulting in the deaths of both pilots. The aircraft was on a repositioning flight following maintenance at West Star Aviation. The NTSB Final Report determined that the crew attempted to perform the stall test in icing conditions, which is explicitly prohibited by the flight manual.

The investigation concluded that ice contamination on the wings likely degraded performance, causing the stall to occur earlier than expected and simultaneously with the stick shaker activation. This gave the crew no time to react before the aircraft entered a spin.

Technical Context: The Dangers of the Hawker Stall

The NTSB report highlights specific aerodynamic characteristics of the Hawker 800/900XP series that make these tests particularly hazardous for untrained pilots.

Lack of Natural Warning

Unlike many aircraft that provide a natural aerodynamic buffet (shaking) before stalling, the Hawker 800/900XP relies entirely on mechanical systems, specifically the stick shaker and stick pusher. During these maintenance tests, pilots are required to fly the aircraft to the very edge of its envelope to verify that the stick pusher activates to force the nose down.

Aileron Snatch and Roll

At the point of stall, airflow separation on the Hawker wings can cause the ailerons to “snatch,” leading to a violent, uncommanded roll of up to 80 degrees. Standard pilot training emphasizes using ailerons to correct a bank, but in a stall scenario, this input can worsen the situation and induce a spin.

The Qualification Gap

The NTSB identified a critical “gap” in pilot qualifications. Standard corporate pilot training focuses on avoiding stalls and recovering at the first indication of a stick shaker. However, maintenance tests require pilots to intentionally fly past that safety margin. Most corporate pilots have never performed a full aerodynamic stall in the actual aircraft, as simulators often do not perfectly replicate the violent roll characteristics of the actual jet.

AirPro News Analysis

These recommendations mark a significant shift in how the industry views “routine” maintenance flights. For decades, there has been a gray area regarding who is qualified to return an aircraft to service after major wing maintenance. By pushing for test-pilot-level qualifications, the NTSB is signaling that the era of using line pilots for functional check flights (FCFs) on complex airframes may be ending.

For operators, this will likely result in increased costs and scheduling complexities, as they may need to contract specialized crews for post-maintenance flights. However, the Safety data presented by the NTSB suggests that the cost of convenience, using regular crews for test-pilot work, is unacceptably high.

Sources

• NTSB Safety Recommendation Report DCA26SR003

This article summarizes reporting by Reuters. The original report may be paywalled; this article summarizes publicly available elements and regulatory filings.

Transport Canada Demands Probe After Air India Pilot Fails Alcohol Test

Transport Canada has formally requested a detailed investigation into an incident involving an Airlines Air India captain who allegedly reported for duty under the influence of alcohol at Vancouver International Airport (YVR). The regulatory intervention follows the removal of the pilot from a scheduled flight on December 23, 2025, a breach that Canadian authorities have classified as a “serious matter.”

According to reporting by Reuters, the incident occurred prior to the departure of Air India Flight AI186, a Boeing 777-300ER service scheduled for Delhi. The pilot, identified in reports as Captain Saurabh Kumar, was prevented from operating the aircraft after failing two breathalyzer tests administered by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).

Regulatory Intervention and Violations

In a letter dated December 24, 2025, Transport Canada official Ajit Oommen addressed the airline regarding the Safety lapse. The correspondence, cited by Reuters and regulatory sources, outlines specific violations of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) and Air India’s Foreign Air Operator Certificate (FAOC).

The regulator has given Air India until January 26, 2026, to submit a comprehensive report. This submission must detail the findings of an internal review conducted under the airline’s Safety Management System (SMS) and propose corrective actions to prevent recurrence.

Specific Safety Breaches

The incident reportedly triggered violations of multiple safety protocols. According to the regulatory notice, the pilot’s conduct breached:

• CAR 602.02: Which prohibits crew members from working while their ability is impaired.
• CAR 602.03: Which mandates a strict prohibition on acting as a crew member within 12 hours of alcohol consumption.
• FAOC Condition (g): A condition of Air India’s operating license requiring the safe conduct of all flight operations.

Transport Canada has warned that enforcement actions, potentially including fines or license suspensions, may be pursued by both the RCMP and Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA).

Air India’s Response and Operational Impact

Following the incident, Air India confirmed that Flight AI186 experienced a delay of approximately seven hours while a replacement crew member was rostered. The airline stated that the pilot involved has been suspended from flying duties pending the outcome of the inquiry.

In a statement regarding the event, an Air India spokesperson emphasized the carrier’s stance on safety protocols:

“Air India maintains a zero-tolerance policy towards any violation of applicable rules and regulations.”

, Air India Official Statement

The airline further noted that any confirmed violation would result in “strict disciplinary action” in accordance with company policy.

AirPro News Analysis

Context: A Pattern of Scrutiny
This incident at Vancouver International Airport does not occur in a vacuum. It adds to a growing list of regulatory challenges facing India’s flag carrier. The airline is currently navigating the aftermath of a severe safety incident in mid-2025. According to industry data and previous reports, the crash of Flight AI171 in June 2025, which resulted in significant fatalities, has already placed the carrier under aggressive oversight from global aviation bodies.

Furthermore, the alcohol-related breach in Canada coincides with domestic pressure from India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). In late December 2025, the DGCA issued show-cause notices regarding safety lapses on Tokyo routes, alleging that pilots accepted aircraft with known technical snags. The convergence of these events, international regulatory intervention by Transport Canada and domestic warnings from the DGCA, suggests a critical need for Air India to reinforce its internal safety culture and operational discipline.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the “Bottle to Throttle” rule?
In Canada and many international jurisdictions, aviation regulations strictly prohibit pilots from acting as crew members within 12 hours of consuming alcohol. This is often referred to as the “bottle to throttle” rule.

What are the potential consequences for the pilot?
Beyond immediate suspension by the airline, the pilot faces potential criminal charges from the RCMP and enforcement actions from Transport Canada, which could include the revocation of piloting credentials.

Sources

• Reuters
• Transport Canada (Official Correspondence, Dec 24, 2025)
• Air India (Official Statement)