A LATAM Airlines Brasil Boeing 777-300ER operating from São Paulo to Lisbon rejected takeoff at high speed at São Paulo/Guarulhos International Airport on February 15, 2026, in an incident that is already drawing close scrutiny from aviation watchers. The widebody jet, registered PT-MUH and scheduled as flight LA8146, came to a stop near the end of the runway before passengers were evacuated onto the taxiway. While there were no immediate reports of injuries, the episode raises fresh questions about high-speed aborts on heavily loaded long-haul flights and the safety margins at one of South America’s busiest hubs.
What Happened During LATAM Flight LA8146’s Takeoff Roll
According to preliminary information published by specialist aviation incident outlets, LA8146 was departing from runway 09L at Guarulhos for an overnight service to Lisbon when the crew initiated the takeoff. As the Boeing 777-300ER accelerated, the pilots reportedly attempted rotation, the phase when the nose is lifted to leave the runway. Witness accounts and early technical summaries indicate the nose gear briefly lifted before the crew rejected the takeoff at an indicated ground speed of around 174 knots, a speed typically associated with or beyond decision speed for large long-haul jets.
After the high-speed abort, the aircraft decelerated along almost the full length of the runway, vacated at the far end and came to a stop on a parallel taxiway. Emergency services at Guarulhos responded, surrounding the jet with fire and rescue vehicles as a precaution. Passengers were subsequently disembarked via mobile stairs onto the taxiway, an unusual but controlled procedure that allowed airport authorities to keep the aircraft isolated while initial inspections were carried out.
There have been no official statements so far detailing any visible structural damage to PT-MUH, such as tire failures, overheated brakes or runway debris. Nonetheless, the combination of very high speed, near-liftoff rotation and emergency stop meets the classic criteria of a serious rejected takeoff event, one that aviation safety agencies typically analyze carefully for clues about aircraft performance, crew decision-making and infrastructure readiness.
Passenger Experience On The Taxiway And At The Terminal
For passengers, the incident unfolded in a matter of seconds. Travelers have reported a rapid acceleration followed by a sudden and forceful deceleration, accompanied by the distinctive roar of engines throttling back and the sensation of heavy braking. Some described smelling hot brakes once the aircraft came to a stop, a common byproduct when large jets are brought from near-liftoff speed to a halt in a short distance.
Once stationary on the taxiway, the crew and ground responders coordinated a disembarkation by stairs rather than emergency slides, an indication that, despite the intensity of the maneuver, the situation on board was stable and did not require a full-scale evacuation. Passengers were led onto waiting buses and transported back to the terminal, where they faced the next wave of uncertainty: how and when they would complete their journeys to Europe.
LATAM staff at Guarulhos worked to rebook passengers on later flights, both on the airline’s own network and through partner carriers, according to accounts shared locally. For some, this meant overnight accommodation and extended delays, as transatlantic long-haul services from São Paulo and neighboring hubs are often fully booked in February. While airline disruption policies in Brazil and the European Union can offer compensation in some circumstances, the exact entitlements often depend on whether the event is ultimately classified as an operational failure or a safety-related necessity beyond the airline’s control.
The Aircraft Involved: LATAM’s Boeing 777-300ER PT-MUH
The jet involved in the incident, PT-MUH, is a Boeing 777-32W(ER) delivered new in late 2012 to the then-TAM Linhas Aéreas before the brand transitioned into LATAM Airlines Brasil. Now nearly 13 years old, it is one of the workhorses of LATAM’s long-haul fleet, commonly seen on routes linking São Paulo with major European gateways including Lisbon, Madrid, Barcelona and London, as well as long-range services to North America.
Configured with 38 business-class seats, 50 premium economy seats and 322 in standard economy, the aircraft can carry more than 400 passengers in a typical high-density layout. Heavy long-haul loads and full fuel tanks, particularly on westbound or winter-season legs, mean takeoff performance margins for aircraft like PT-MUH are carefully calculated for every departure, taking into account temperature, runway length, wind and aircraft weight.
Public fleet databases list PT-MUH as active and in regular service prior to the February 15 event, with no publicly documented major structural incidents. That history, combined with Boeing’s long track record for the 777-300ER, suggests investigators will focus as much on operational parameters, performance calculations and environmental conditions as on any latent mechanical issues when reconstructing why this particular takeoff roll ended in a high-speed abort.
Why High-Speed Rejected Takeoffs Are So Serious
Rejected takeoffs are a planned part of airline safety procedures, but they become particularly critical at high speed. Crews calculate a decision speed, commonly known as V1, before every departure. Below that speed, a significant anomaly such as an engine failure, runway obstruction or unstable engine readings typically dictates rejecting the takeoff and stopping on the remaining runway. Above V1, the standard doctrine calls for continuing the takeoff, because the aircraft may not be able to stop safely within the remaining distance.
Early reports placing the abort near 174 knots suggest the event occurred around or potentially beyond the calculated V1, which for a fully loaded 777-300ER is generally lower than that figure. If confirmed, this would indicate that the crew perceived a problem serious enough to override the normal preference to continue. A late or extremely high-speed abort can push braking systems and tires to their design limits, sometimes resulting in blown tires, melted wheel components or fires, as well as long runway closures while debris is cleared.
Globally, high-speed rejected takeoffs have featured prominently in several runway overrun and fire incidents over the last decades. Aviation regulators and manufacturers regularly emphasize training around go/no-go decision points precisely because the margin for error shrinks dramatically once a widebody aircraft accelerates beyond about 150 knots. The circumstances on board LA8146 that prompted the crew to remain on the ground, rather than commit to flight, will be central to the Brazilian investigation.
The Investigation: What Brazilian Authorities Are Likely To Examine
The incident at Guarulhos falls under the remit of Brazil’s Center for Investigation and Prevention of Aeronautical Accidents, known as CENIPA. While a formal investigation announcement had yet to circulate widely by February 16, precedent suggests that the agency will open at least a serious incident inquiry. Investigators typically secure flight data and cockpit voice recorders, gather maintenance and operational documentation, and interview the flight and cabin crew.
Key technical questions are likely to include whether any engine or systems malfunction occurred during the takeoff roll, whether the aircraft’s warning systems indicated an unsafe configuration for takeoff, and how closely calculated takeoff performance figures matched the actual weight and conditions on the day. Investigators will also look at air traffic control recordings, runway friction measurements and weather data at Guarulhos at the time of the event.
It is common for CENIPA and international counterparts to issue preliminary factual updates within weeks or months, while full final reports can take a year or more. In that period, LATAM and Boeing typically cooperate fully, sharing expertise on aircraft systems and operational procedures. Should investigators uncover systemic issues such as widespread calculation errors, software anomalies or training gaps, they may recommend safety bulletins or procedural changes long before the final report is published.
Context: LATAM’s Recent Safety Scrutiny And Brazilian Runway Events
The São Paulo incident arrives against a backdrop of heightened attention on LATAM’s operations and wider Brazilian aviation safety. In 2024, a LATAM Boeing 777-300ER departing Milan Malpensa for São Paulo suffered a severe tail strike on takeoff, later attributed by Italian investigators to a large error in takeoff weight calculations. That aircraft, registered PT-MUG, continued the climb and later returned safely, but the event was ultimately classified as an accident due to the extent of the damage.
In 2025, LATAM was also involved in a runway excursion in Chapecó, southern Brazil, when an Airbus A319 overran the runway amid poor weather and reduced visibility. Although no serious injuries were reported, that episode refocused attention on wet runway operations and the challenges of regional infrastructure. Separately, Brazil’s major airports have seen other recent high-profile runway events involving different carriers, including collisions and aborted takeoffs that underscored the importance of surface surveillance and procedural discipline.
Within this larger pattern, the rejected takeoff of PT-MUH will be examined not only as an isolated event but as part of a series of operational stress points in Brazil’s busy aviation ecosystem. LATAM, for its part, has repeatedly emphasized its adherence to international safety standards and its participation in industry audit programs. The airline is expected to conduct its own internal review, parallel to the state-led investigation, to determine whether additional training, checks or fleet-specific guidance is warranted.
Impact On Operations At São Paulo/Guarulhos And For Travelers
Guarulhos is the primary international gateway for São Paulo and one of the busiest airports in the Southern Hemisphere. An event involving a large aircraft coming to a stop near the end of a major runway can quickly cascade into wider disruption, especially during peak travel periods. In the hours following the LA8146 abort, arrivals and departures using runway 09L were subjected to restrictions while authorities assessed the pavement, checked for rubber deposits or debris, and coordinated the safe removal or repositioning of PT-MUH.
For connecting passengers, particularly those on tight Europe or North America itineraries, even a temporary closure or flow restriction can lead to missed connections and subsequent rebookings. While LATAM and partner airlines can rearrange passengers onto alternative flights, long-haul seat availability in February is constrained by both tourist and business demand. Travelers affected by the disruption are encouraged to retain boarding passes, receipts and written communications with the airline, as these documents can prove essential later if they seek compensation or reimbursement for additional expenses.
Airports and airlines increasingly view such incidents as stress tests for their contingency planning. How quickly buses, stairs and ground staff reached the aircraft on the taxiway, how efficiently terminal operations absorbed several hundred unexpected returning passengers, and how well information flowed between operations centers and passengers will all be critical performance metrics reviewed in the days after the event.
What Comes Next For PT-MUH, LATAM And Future Passengers
In the immediate term, PT-MUH will likely remain grounded until detailed engineering inspections confirm the status of its brakes, landing gear, tires and structural components. High-speed rejected takeoffs can impose tremendous thermal and mechanical loads on wheels and brake assemblies, sometimes necessitating component replacements even if no obvious damage is visible from the outside. Depending on the findings, the aircraft could return to service within days or face a longer maintenance stay.
For LATAM, the incident presents both an operational challenge and an opportunity to reaffirm its safety culture. The airline will be expected to communicate transparently with regulators and, where appropriate, with the traveling public about the nature of the event and any changes implemented as a result. Industry analysts will be watching closely for any interim recommendations from CENIPA and for any fleet-wide advisories from Boeing related to takeoff performance, brake energy limits or procedural refinements for the 777-300ER.
For future passengers traveling through São Paulo, the episode is a reminder of the layers of safety built into commercial aviation. While a high-speed rejected takeoff can be a frightening experience, the fact that LA8146 came to a controlled stop, that emergency services responded promptly, and that passengers disembarked without reported serious injuries underscores how aircraft systems, pilot training and airport preparedness combine to manage rare but challenging scenarios. As investigators work through the data from this event, their findings will feed into the continual cycle of safety improvements that underpins long-haul travel worldwide.