Jump to content
MARU5137

Frightening Southwest incident

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I've seen a few engine failures in my time and as has been said the debris should be contained within the cowling with it's kevlar mats and all but that has certainly failed big time.

Another thing I used to hear was that during an emergency, one pilot used to do the flying whilst the other used to be responsible for the radio etc.

So in this case could it actually have been the first officer flying ?

Or am I behind the times...............again.

:hmmm:

 

Bingo - unless the Captn. did a Sully the First Officer would have been on the controls - unless absolutely necessary controls are not switched during an emergency and Pilot Flying (PF) is doing just that - flying and the Pilot Monitoring (PM) is working the radios, checklist and keeping an eye on the PF... the Cptn. is ALWAYS unless delegated for some reason in contact with the Cabin Team and Passengers... but, Southwest might have different Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)... Edited by alaninaustria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's deeply saddening that someone died, but it's a concern that the exact same occurrence happened to the same aircraft type with the same airline, and that the broken blade flew off in the same direction.

 

The relevant authorities and manufacturers need to get their fingers out, not to mention the airline.

 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/04/southwest-airlines-protested-airworthiness-directive-designed-to-prevent-engine-failures/?amp=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

What the news hasn't picked up on is that this isn't the first incident of this happening with the port engine of a SouthWest 737.  It happened in 2016 as well but no injuries. Not sure if this was a blade failure or just a shroud failure?

 

 

 

According to Miles O'Brian on tonight's PBS News Hour, the 2016 incident was essentially the same cause.

 

He also said that the FAA and the NTSB wanted the airline to have all their engines' turbine fans get UT inspected but they balked at the time and got an extension.

 

Now the FAA and the NTSB is demanding Southwest do the inspections.

Edited by Gigant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at that video Ron just posted, the asymmetric lift must have been something else when they extended the slats.

That's an extremely lucky bunch of people on that 737. That leading edge device is beat up BAD. An uncommanded roll, on one engine, at slow speed.  Sounds like FUUUUN!!!

 

Weird things going on there. It looks like only one blade broke, yet there is damage to the cabin and the leading edge outboard of the engine. The blade couldn't go both ways

 

The NTSB report will be interesting

 

Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The damage to the fuselage and the wing’s LE seems to come from parts of the engine shroud, from the first reports ...

 

Hubert

 

Just interesting that the parts managed to fly outwards to such an extent on a forward moving 'plane. 

 

Perhaps a big lump of fan shroud got caught over the leading edge, then worked it's way outwards. I'm assuming the blade broke the window

 

Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's deeply saddening that someone died, but it's a concern that the exact same occurrence happened to the same aircraft type with the same airline, and that the broken blade flew off in the same direction.

 

The relevant authorities and manufacturers need to get their fingers out, not to mention the airline.

 

 

Sad as it may seem, it often comes down to insurance factors, if you think this as a second incident is of concern, I would google 737 rudder failures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The more interesting story is here: 

 

_100936285_046255284.jpg

 

That's the damage from a single blade failure which is supposed to be contained by the fan shroud. Not good

 

Richard

 

And in a perfect world it is

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=uncontained+turbine+failure&client=firefox-b&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=BCi-YQYpH46i7M%253A%252ClDq3pvbiOQztcM%252C_&usg=__d3JArtyg_HSAekhyh5xYTtI2RiY%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiZ2tK7_cjaAhXqJsAKHR5xBm0Q9QEIXjAH#imgrc=_

 

Strange as it may be, I have been involved (in the cockpit) running an aircraft when the IGV's let go and took the turbine out through the jetpipe, when you are sitting in a cockpit 2 foot away from the engine gauges and you cannot read a single one because the aircraft is shaking itself to bits,  the fire alarms are blaring and flashing in your periferal  and when you tell the outside man to run, only to see he is ahead of the game, it opens ones eyes, throttle had no input and only chopping the fuel and dumping the fire bottles into it killed both the engine and the noise..... man outside thought it stopped rotating from about 90% to zero in 2 to 3 revolutions. we then had the other three to shut down normally before vacating.. Strange when looking down a detuner at the "colander" and seeing blades sticking out of 1/2 inch steel plate, then looking forward and seeing daylight through the engine.

 

The other one I had was a fighter that had been unbeknown to us throttle assisted to light and overtemped, we started it up ( actually on Bonfire night lol) I was outside man and there was an almighty surge, a flame exited the intake about 10 foot  followed by a huge bang as it ran down, indeed it was still running down as my mate passed me and he had been running it!

Edited by TonyT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Clunkmeister

This is exactly why, (in my opinion), twin jets of any kind should not be involved on extended overwater passenger service.  That third engine on the L-1011 and DC-10 was a great insurance policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a tyro I was an apprentice with blokes who developed gas turbines in the '50s and '60s. Based on their stories it was very clear why the bullet proof glass window in the engine test cell was well in front of the first stage of the compressor

 

I shall never forget the first time I heard a Spey running down. Sounded like someone had dropped a bag of spanners

 

Happy days

 

Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they test these shrouds for blade containment it's not at 900km/hour, it's in a dyno sitting still and not in a wind tunnel from what I've been able to find on line.  In looking at a lot of the pics of both SW cases it looks to me like it blew open from air load trying to make it burst. I wonder if the blade damage makes it weak in hoop stress and airflow is really the fatal blow?  the force of airflow at 900kn/hr would be enormous.  In both cases the metal bits left on the engine are all pealed backward.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Clunkmeister

I'm no engineer, Ron, and several here are, so I'll leave that there.

 

But to me, if you're going to go through all that trouble to design a shroud to contain blades, debris, and other flying parts from failing gas turbines, you'd expect the shrouds and containment vessels would be designed to function in a real world situation.

 

I'd think, even today, the most common time for engine failure is still on takeoff, yet, it seems we're having more than a few bigtime bursts in cruise or climb.

I remember one incident that took down a DC-10 in Iowa when the tail engine's power turbine failed in cruise and wiped out the aircraft's entire hydraulic system.

Now this one. I talked to a SW pilot who was in the shop today, and they were still climbing, passing through FL300 to FL350.

What would it take to keep the debris inside the engine? As in have it pass through the engine and out the rear instead of out the side? Yeah, weight is an enemy, but dangit  killing folks is worse.

 

This type of failure is statistically very rare, but given the staggering number of jet engines in continuous operation worldwide, it is a far from uncommon occurrence.  We just heard about it because it happened in a media center to a nice pretty lady in a first world country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would appear now that the female passenger was killed instantly.  Somehow, that's much better than the alternative of her living through the ordeal, and dying the next day. If it was caused by the explosion and subsequent partial egress of the plane, it was probably quick enough to not even register pain.  Hopefully any suffering was brief, couldn't imagine what it would have felt like

 

 

 

 

 

Matt 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way the news media handles aviation accidents is really appalling (no, this not the initiation of a fake news flame war), but they really need to have people who understand aviation and its complexity comment. Part of the problem is that the viewers need answers right away and accidents take a long time to investigate. This doesn't satisfy the viewers need for instant gratification and television ratings.

 

Mark Proulx

The news media does not want ho-hum stories, even if they are true.

The media needs to make everything they report to be scary, deadly, stupendous, magnificent, colossal. Mainly exciting so they can sell newspapers or ad space on TV news programs.

They are not interested in simple factual reporting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×