Narrative:

Center advised us during climb out to altitude that roc tower had seen a tire in the vicinity of the runway area from which we departed. Center asked us to confirm or deny whether the tire belonged to our aircraft. A visual check of all hydraulic system on the so's panel was done. No abnormal indications were noted. At my direction, the so attempted to contact roc maintenance to see whether or not the tire belonged to our aircraft and to possibly identify the tire. We received no response from roc maintenance with regard to the tire. Only the person who answered the radio at roc talked to us and said he/she would try to get the maintenance person to contact us. Shortly thereafter, we contacted maintenance (air carrier operations command center). Likewise, we asked the maintenance controller who was working our flight if he/she could contact the roc maintenance to identify the tire. The maintenance controller could not find out whether or not the tire belonged to aircraft xyz. We received a call from the ZOB air traffic controller that we understood the airport authority/authorized of roc and/or the roc control tower controller confirmed that the tire belonged to our aircraft xyz. Air carrier dispatch was informed that 'time was of the essence,' and I requested iad because of the length and width of the runways for safety and contingency reasons, that I received a response. When it was suggested to me that lck was a viable alternative, and I agreed because of the length and width of the runways for safety and contingency reasons, that I declared an emergency and told center where I wanted to land. We received WX for our 'new' destination airport, lck, and our rerte from dispatch. ZOB gave us altitude and heading information regarding our new route to lck and we adhered to those directions. Communications with air carrier could have been more expedient. We chose to do a low 'fly-by' to check the runway conditions and then advised tower and the local controllers of our intention to dump fuel. We received ATC clearance to dump fuel. We were notified that emergency equipment was standing by to assist. A normal approach and landing was made on runway 5R at lck, under the circumstances. All appropriate checklists were called for and adherence to all policies, rules and procedures were done accordingly. During tow-in under maintenance control of the aircraft, the tow bar broke and did damage to the taxi light and housing, just prior to parking the aircraft. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated the aircraft was a B727-200 and the loss of the wheel and tire assembly was caused by the failure of the outboard axle bearing. The reporter said the right main gear axle was badly scored and grooved and would need replacement.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B727-200 ON TKOF HAD THE R INBOARD MAIN LNDG GEAR TIRE AND WHEEL ASSEMBLY DEPART THE ACFT CAUSED BY FAILURE OF THE OUTBOARD AXLE BEARING.

Narrative: CTR ADVISED US DURING CLBOUT TO ALT THAT ROC TWR HAD SEEN A TIRE IN THE VICINITY OF THE RWY AREA FROM WHICH WE DEPARTED. CTR ASKED US TO CONFIRM OR DENY WHETHER THE TIRE BELONGED TO OUR ACFT. A VISUAL CHK OF ALL HYD SYS ON THE SO'S PANEL WAS DONE. NO ABNORMAL INDICATIONS WERE NOTED. AT MY DIRECTION, THE SO ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT ROC MAINT TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THE TIRE BELONGED TO OUR ACFT AND TO POSSIBLY IDENT THE TIRE. WE RECEIVED NO RESPONSE FROM ROC MAINT WITH REGARD TO THE TIRE. ONLY THE PERSON WHO ANSWERED THE RADIO AT ROC TALKED TO US AND SAID HE/SHE WOULD TRY TO GET THE MAINT PERSON TO CONTACT US. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, WE CONTACTED MAINT (ACR OPS COMMAND CTR). LIKEWISE, WE ASKED THE MAINT CTLR WHO WAS WORKING OUR FLT IF HE/SHE COULD CONTACT THE ROC MAINT TO IDENT THE TIRE. THE MAINT CTLR COULD NOT FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT THE TIRE BELONGED TO ACFT XYZ. WE RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE ZOB AIR TFC CTLR THAT WE UNDERSTOOD THE ARPT AUTH OF ROC AND/OR THE ROC CTL TWR CTLR CONFIRMED THAT THE TIRE BELONGED TO OUR ACFT XYZ. ACR DISPATCH WAS INFORMED THAT 'TIME WAS OF THE ESSENCE,' AND I REQUESTED IAD BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH AND WIDTH OF THE RWYS FOR SAFETY AND CONTINGENCY REASONS, THAT I RECEIVED A RESPONSE. WHEN IT WAS SUGGESTED TO ME THAT LCK WAS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE, AND I AGREED BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH AND WIDTH OF THE RWYS FOR SAFETY AND CONTINGENCY REASONS, THAT I DECLARED AN EMER AND TOLD CTR WHERE I WANTED TO LAND. WE RECEIVED WX FOR OUR 'NEW' DEST ARPT, LCK, AND OUR RERTE FROM DISPATCH. ZOB GAVE US ALT AND HDG INFO REGARDING OUR NEW RTE TO LCK AND WE ADHERED TO THOSE DIRECTIONS. COMS WITH ACR COULD HAVE BEEN MORE EXPEDIENT. WE CHOSE TO DO A LOW 'FLY-BY' TO CHK THE RWY CONDITIONS AND THEN ADVISED TWR AND THE LCL CTLRS OF OUR INTENTION TO DUMP FUEL. WE RECEIVED ATC CLRNC TO DUMP FUEL. WE WERE NOTIFIED THAT EMER EQUIP WAS STANDING BY TO ASSIST. A NORMAL APCH AND LNDG WAS MADE ON RWY 5R AT LCK, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. ALL APPROPRIATE CHKLISTS WERE CALLED FOR AND ADHERENCE TO ALL POLICIES, RULES AND PROCS WERE DONE ACCORDINGLY. DURING TOW-IN UNDER MAINT CTL OF THE ACFT, THE TOW BAR BROKE AND DID DAMAGE TO THE TAXI LIGHT AND HOUSING, JUST PRIOR TO PARKING THE ACFT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE ACFT WAS A B727-200 AND THE LOSS OF THE WHEEL AND TIRE ASSEMBLY WAS CAUSED BY THE FAILURE OF THE OUTBOARD AXLE BEARING. THE RPTR SAID THE R MAIN GEAR AXLE WAS BADLY SCORED AND GROOVED AND WOULD NEED REPLACEMENT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.