Mayday, Mayday, Mayday: United Airlines flight with over 200 passengers to Munich makes emergency return to Dulles after engine cuts out
Flight 108, operated by a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, had departed around 6 pm with 219 passengers and 11 crew on board. But within minutes of takeoff, the left engine failed as the aircraft was climbing to cruising altitude.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Please select course:
Select a Course Category
Operations Management
MCA
Data Science
Artificial Intelligence
Public Policy
Design Thinking
Project Management
Others
Leadership
PGDM
Technology
healthcare
Finance
Product Management
Degree
Management
Digital Marketing
others
Data Analytics
Data Science
Cybersecurity
CXO
MBA
Healthcare
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
"Engine failure, left engine, United 108 declaring an emergency. Mayday, mayday, mayday," the pilot told air traffic control, according to audio published by You Can See ATC and cited by both PEOPLE and USA TODAY.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Helping Organizations Close The Gap Between Technical Invention And Commercial Innovation; Interview with Colin Scott, Senior Vice President of DownSelect® at Innventure. - TechBullion
TechBullion
Undo
Plane too heavy to land immediately
At the time of the engine failure, the aircraft had reached approximately 10,000 feet. Air traffic controllers responded quickly.
"There's nobody between you and the field," an air traffic controller told the pilot in the same audio clip, asking whether the plane could return via a right-hand turn.
Live Events
But the aircraft was still too heavy to land. It had taken off with full tanks for the transatlantic journey to Munich and needed to reduce weight before attempting to land. The pilots stayed airborne and circled the airport, dumping fuel and preparing the aircraft for a safe return.
The plane remained in the air for more than 30 minutes before descending back to Dulles.
Safe landing, no injuries
The aircraft touched down at around 8.33 pm, according to flight tracking data from FlightAware. No injuries were reported.
"The plane landed safely, was checked by Airports Authority Fire and Rescue personnel then towed to a gate," Crystal Nosal, spokesperson for Washington Dulles Airport, told USA TODAY. "There was no disruption to other flights."
Once at the gate, all passengers and crew members disembarked safely. The emergency response included a full check of the aircraft by airport fire and rescue personnel before it was cleared for towing.
United Airlines confirms mechanical issue
In a statement quoted by PEOPLE, United Airlines confirmed the diversion was due to a mechanical issue but did not provide further technical details.
"The flight was subsequently cancelled and we arranged alternate travel arrangements to take customers to their destination as soon as possible," the airline added.
The incident has drawn attention not just for the emergency itself but also for the calm, clear way it was handled by both the flight crew and air traffic control.
In the audio shared by You Can See ATC, the pilot can be heard calmly repeating, 'Failure, engine failure, left engine, United 108. Declaring an emergency. Mayday, mayday, mayday.'
This was followed by instructions from air traffic control to turn and return to the airport, setting up the process for a careful and controlled landing.
There were no further delays at Dulles following the event, and passengers were later rebooked to complete their journey to Germany.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
10 hours ago
- Scroll.in
Ten emergency landings due to technical snags reported since January 2024: Centre
Ten incidents of aircraft making emergency landings due to technical snags have been reported since January 2024, the Ministry of Civil Aviation told Parliament on Monday. Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol also said that two incidents of turbulence were reported in the same period. In addition to these, an Air India aircraft 'declared mayday and eventually met with an accident' on June 12, said the minister. Air India's Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner aircraft, which was en route to London's Gatwick airport from Ahmedabad, had crashed just 33 seconds after taking off on June 12. There were 242 persons aboard the aircraft. One passenger survived with ' impact injuries '. Thirty-four persons were also killed on the ground after the plane crashed into the hostel building of the BJ Medical College and Hospital in Ahmedabad, according to Air India. This was said to be the world's worst aviation disaster in a decade. In his reply, Mohol also said that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation had conducted 171 regulatory audits between 2020 and June 2025. Structural audits of Delhi airport Replying to a question on the roof collapse incidents in June 2024 and May 2025, Mohol said structural audits at the Indira Gandhi International Airport in New Delhi found the terminals to be safe. One person was killed and several others injured when part of the roof at the airport's Terminal 1 collapsed amid heavy rain on June 28, 2024. The fallen canopy struck vehicles outside the terminal building. On May 25, a portion of the roof at the same terminal collapsed during heavy rainfall. A video shared on social media showed part of the terminal's tensile overhang giving way as water poured down and flooded the pavement below. At the time, the Delhi International Airport Limited had said that the incident took place because of extreme weather, adding that there was 'no structural compromise'. In his reply, Mohol said that the May incident did not involve a roof collapse but damage to a 'non-structural element'. 'A small portion of the tensile fabric (a non-structural element) in the forecourt area tore off due to an unusually high-intensity thunderstorm, accompanied by strong winds and unprecedented rainfall over a short duration,' he said. Mohol added that the Terminal 1 canopy was inspected by Cortex Construction Solutions and the results were validated by the Indian Institute of Technology-Banaras Hindu University. The structure has been found to be safe, he said. Structural audits of Terminals 2 and 3 were conducted by the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras. They were also found to be safe, the minister said. He added that all airport operators have been directed to evaluate all structures before the onset of the monsoon season. At the Delhi airport, Terminal 1 handles domestic flights by IndiGo and SpiceJet, Terminal 2 also serves domestic passengers and Terminal 3 handles all international flights along with some domestic operations.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Time of India
US law firm to represent 65 families in AI crash probe
Vadodara: Prominent US-based law firm Beasley Allen will represent at least 65 families from India and the US whose relatives died in the AI-171 plane crash in Ahmedabad. The law firm's aviation attorney and the lead lawyer for the AI-171 crash, Mike Andrews, is on a visit to India to meet families. He visited the plane crash site in Ahmedabad. Talking to media persons, Andrews said that the families he met in the UK and India expressed a burning desire for answers, transparency, and information. Andrews said that the legal options available to the family will primarily be based on what data shows and what the investigation reveals. "We visited the crash site and spoke with some of the individuals who were there. We were able to take some photographs and get a feeling of the size of the scene," said Andrews. The Boeing 787-8 plane en route to London from Ahmedabad crashed into a medical hostel shortly after take-off, killing 241 out of 242 people onboard and 19 on the ground. Andrews said that the data will give them an idea of which entity may or may not be responsible for the crash. He added that if Boeing is found to be responsible for this crash, the cases will be filed in the Federal court in the US. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Can Mental Illness be the Key to Their Creativity? Undo When asked about reports of a pilot error being responsible for the incident, Andrews said that more often than not, pilots who are deceased are the ones who are blamed. He added that in other incidents where the planes landed safely, the pilots were not blamed because those pilots can still speak for themselves. Andrews said that previous crashes taught us that the rush to reach a judgement on any crash is premature and speculative. "We need to wait to get all of the data," he said. After Ahmedabad and Vadodara, Andrews was scheduled to visit Surat and Diu. From Diu, he was expected to return to Ahmedabad and then to London. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Raksha Bandhan wishes , messages and quotes !
Mint
5 days ago
- Mint
Ghosted by blue ticks: How to avert tragedy in the age of social media
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who have blue ticks on WhatsApp and those who've chosen the dark side. This piece is about the latter— a growing tribe. Let me begin by clarifying: I'm not talking about unread messages. I'm talking about read messages. Ones that have been consumed by someone's cornea, cognitively processed and perhaps chuckled at, but for which there is no outward evidence. Nada. No blue ticks. For the uninitiated (if any exist), blue ticks on WhatsApp are not just a social signal, but part of modern online messaging etiquette. Sent a message? Two grey ticks mean it was delivered. Two blue ticks mean it was read. No blue ticks can spell existential angst. Also read: Borrowing for the 'Gram: How social media is driving young Indians into debt Now imagine sending a carefully crafted message—perhaps a witty one-liner, a risky proposal, or worse, a confirmation of dinner plans—and being met with… radio silence. No response. And worse, no blue ticks. Has it been read? Has it even got a glance? Are you being ghosted? Or is the recipient just unbothered? Or did the person fall off a Himalayan cliff? The answer, of course, is that the app's 'read receipts' feature has been turned off. It's the equivalent of saying, 'I'm not ignoring you, I just don't like the pressure of replying." Oh, please. You left me hanging like an unread 'Terms & Conditions' pop-up. My first impulse was to dismiss such behaviour as a passive-aggressive rejection of accountability. But being a person of some academic inclination, I decided to investigate further. Surely, there must be some research on this epidemic of blue-tick dodging? Turns out, there is. In the age of instant messaging, there's an unspoken contract: If I message you and you've read it, I expect a timely response. This expectation, known in behavioural circles as 'reciprocal immediacy,' is reinforced by digital cues like blue ticks, 'typing' and 'online' indicators and 'last seen' time-stamps. These markers transform casual interactions into psychological minefields. Disabling blue ticks, then, becomes a way to opt out of the tyranny of constant availability. A 2021 study in Information Technology & People ( found that individuals who turned off read receipts reported lower social pressure and digital fatigue. They felt more in control of communication patterns, less trapped in what clinical psychologist and the founder of MIT's Initiative on Technology and Self, Sherry Turkle, calls the feeling of 'you want to know who wants you." Also read: Social media addiction is about pleasures of the hunt Translation? Blue-tick disablers don't have a problem with you. They just don't like the idea of having to respond immediately. Of course, there's a darker side to this too. Research in communication theory suggests that ambiguity in digital interactions can be a subtle power move. 'Strategic ambiguity,' like leaving messages unread or turning off read receipts, can be used to assert control in relationships online, especially when hierarchies are unclear or shifting. When your colleague says, 'Didn't see your message until this morning," but the time-stamp says otherwise, it's not forgetfulness. It's office Darwinism. And in personal relationships, this dynamic can border on emotional hostage-taking. You're left second-guessing yourself—was I too needy? Too blunt? Too emoji-heavy? It's not just about the message anymore. It's about the meaning behind the non-message. Let's also not underestimate how badly our brains handle ambiguity. Built for binary clarity (friend or foe, food or poison), the human brain does not like Schrödinger's read-or-unread mystery. Studies in cognitive neuroscience show that uncertainty activates the amygdala—the brain's fear centre—more than clearly negative outcomes. In other words, knowing you've been rejected hurts. But not knowing if you've been rejected? That can drive you mad. Which brings me back to my chronic frustration: people who have turned off blue ticks aren't just preserving their mental peace. They are spreading digital neurosis. You may feel calmer. I, on the other hand, am spiralling. Some argue that turning off blue ticks is about reclaiming digital boundaries. In a world of 24/7 messages, it's tempting to ghost the world under the noble banner of self-care. And yes, WhatsApp does this annoying thing: if you turn off blue ticks, you can't see others' blue ticks. A fair symmetry, perhaps, but it feels unfair. Also read: Mint Explainer: How Twitter's blue tick went from status symbol to laughing stock So what's the solution? Mandatory read receipts? A blue-tick audit trail? Not quite. But maybe we can create a culture of compassionate digital honesty. If you need time to respond, say so. If you've read something but can't reply, send a thumbs-up. Digital clarity may not solve climate change or world hunger, but can help keep our minds less scrambled. Meanwhile, I continue to send messages into the void. Staring at grey ticks like a character in a modern Greek tragedy. Waiting for the unread to become read. For silence to turn into speech. Or at least, a double blue tick. Writer's note: This piece has been read. Whether it's been replied to is another matter. And these are the author's personal views. The author is professor of economics and policy and executive director, Centre for Family Business & Entrepreneurship at Bhavan's SPJIMR.
