The discrepancy is raising a few eyebrows over at FlightStory. One passenger writes:
It was not during takeoff. There was alot of damage. There was no vibration. It doesnt say anything about an uncontained explosion at 25,000ft. I was sitting on that engine watching it happen with my own two eyes. The fan blades shot out towards the plane leaving holes on the engine cowlings and a huge hole on th other side.There was no vibration, but a huge explosion. That report is false and they should really clean it up! The blades could have easily penatrated the fusalage causing a crash, or went through and killed a passenger.
Another explains in harrowing detail:
We all thought we were going to die! We said our goodbyes. There was an explosion and holes in the right engine with something sharp still sticking out of the engine. The plane started shaking so bad. The flight attendant was crying and one was getting oxygen because she was hyperventilating. They were able to turn the flight around and land with no incident but not before the longest 20 minutes back to the ground and the plane being surrounded by firetrucks. A big chunk of the engine flew off and luckily it went away from the aircraft because if it came toward us, we wouldn’t be here. The chunk was on the outer side of the engine not seen from our view but could be seen while walking off the aircraft. There were smaller holes though in our view of the top of the engine. I saw the pilots taking photos when we made it to the ground so hopefully the FAA will do the right thing and investigate how this could happen.
Regardless of which account is accurate, it is still impressive that Southwest’s pilots managed to safely land their wounded plane. The NTSB has launched an investigation.
Follow-up – Southwest Engine Failure [FlightStory]
More From Consumerist
-
FAA Opens Probe Into The Beleaguered Dreamliner & Its Recent Spate Of Problems
-
Two Japanese Airlines Ground Fleets Of Boeing 787 Dreamliners After Emergency Landing
-
No, Trojan Isn't Giving Away Hot Dogs On The Streets Of NYC: Those Are Vibrators
-
Silly Trojan! Boston Mayor Doesn’t Want Any Of Your Free Vibrators In His Public Plazas
-
FAA Fines Delta Almost $1M For Flying Two Planes Without Making Necessary Repairs
Two words.
Shit happens.
Air travel is still a whole lot safer than car travel.
@louv: If they could recover the fan blade from a cornfield and examine it closely enough to conclude a manufacturing defect, then why on Earth couldn’t they do that during the production process?
What am I missing here?
Chicken George and the neo-convicts in the Whore House have been crippling government agencies for the benefit of businesses and profits – the FDA, EPA, OSHA and many others.
Why should it surprise that they’re doing the same to the FAA when it was the Putz administration that cut the budget for levees in New Orleans despite warnings from the Army Corps of Engineers?
I forgot to say: They’re placing political toadies into administrative positions, compromising the integrity of the agencies.
Sorry for the double post.
I agree.
If you look at the pictures on the linked blog.. you’ll see that a blade was probably not even ‘ejected’.. the blades that broke off probably just went straight through the turbine and out the exhaust. The intake cowling around the engine is ripped away, because the engine suffered extreme vibration, not because blades hit it.. it looks like a structural panel just broke off and was ‘banged’ through the exterior cowling because the engine was shimmying around quite a bit.
If a blade goes through the exterior cowling, it will probably be a pretty small hole.. and if you notice, the actual engine casing itself is not compromised anywhere.. also, a blade will NOT fly forward at the aircraft’s operating velocity.
The blade(s) were not thrown, they went out the back.. the engine contained the damage, as it was designed to do.
is that in fact a picture of the incident, or did COnsumerist just publish a photo of a plane with a hole in it?
On UA232, it wasn’t the fan blade that failed, it was the fan disk which broke apart. A fatigue crack, caused by a flaw in the titanium ingot, went undetected (even though it should have been caught) and resulted in the failure. (The fan disk is such a critical part that it’s made from a solid piece of titanium.)
While you can’t see it very well in those pictures, 737s don’t have a window where they normally would at the point where the engine fan’s rotational plane meets the fuselage. In a 1973 accident on National Airlines, a DC-10 fan assembly failed. A piece of debris struck the window, causing it to separate from the aircraft, and a passenger was ejected through the window.
@trai_dep: There probably was another aircraft on the runway. Happens more than it should, and a pilot will do an abort if that happens. Could have been other things too – maybe the pilot didn’t feel good about his approach. Starting over is a good idea if there’s doubt.
@cde:
Sorry, but that is still not an explosion, but I see how that mistake could be easy to make. A container under pressure that suddenly releases it’s internal pressure is referred to as Rapid Decompression. An explosion does indeed require fuel, ignition and oxygen. Many people and dictionary’s mistakenly label other events explosions.
@Jen_DZ: I don’t think anybody here is discounting the fact that any sort of engine trouble or big bang on an airplane during flight is absolutely terrifying, but they are saying that hysteria breeds hyperbole. This wasn’t an explosion, and the engine performed as it should have and contained the failure. The pilots were trained well enough to handle the situation, (though the flight attendants weren’t) and the plane was landed safely. The inference that Southwest’s report is misleading seems false: it’s a problem that could very well have been caused by intense vibratory stress. It’s also definitely not a “fatal engine failure”, as to be fatal, it would have had to resulted in death.
@KJones: Gee, such a thoughtful post. Glad to see we have people on here thinking so clear. (ugh)
As someone who works for a jet engine manufacturer, I am glad to see there are people on here who are not just being alarmist about this kind of incident. There is an incredibly high amount of scrutiny involved with the FAA/EASA and other international flight safety and administration organizations. That someone would even suggest that public safety is being ignore or compromised is incredibly foolish.
Think about it – Despite the incredibly high safety record of air travel, there is absolutely nothing that can be more of a public relations disaster than something going wrong in-flight, especially with an engine. This is why there is such a high degree of inspection, testing and maintenance performed on them… but events will happen and it’s great to see that the flight crew handled it so well.
For those people who would still rather drive, let me ask you this: Would you rather have a highly trained pilot guided by air traffic control systems (which while not perfect, are still pretty darn good) ferrying you about in the event something went wrong? Or would you rather have something go wrong on a highway where half the people are on their cell phones, applying lipstick, text messaging, etc. etc.?
Guys, I’m a safety/reliability engineer for a major aerospace firm. This was not even “Catastrophic”. There are different levels associated with different events on an aircraft. Catastrophic, Hazardous, Major, and Minor are the levels. Catastrophic would mean the loss of the aircraft and loss of life. So, this is not a catastrophic event. At best, it’s a “Hazardous” event, but it may not even qualify as that and may go down as a “Major” event. What you have here is a loss of one or more fan blades. Nothing more, nothing less. The engines are required to undergo testing in the event that something like this has happened. Now normally, this engine cowling is supposed to contain the debris, and in this case it was an uncontained failure. It was far from an explosion. Also, as another poster pointed out, there are no windows that lie in the same plane as the fan blades, in the event that an uncontained failure occurs. One or more of the blades came off, go sucked through the engine thereby damaging it beyond the point at which it could operate. Nothing “blew up”. Was this a fairly terrifying event for those on board? Absolutely, but you have to understand that the FAA (and others) cannot be reactionary and make statements like “OMG!!!! THE PLANE BLEW UP AND EVERYONE ALMOST DIED!”. First, it would be a false statement, and second, it would cause undue concern amongst airline passengers. Stuff like this happens, but the aircraft are designed to withstand these failures, and more. The fact that you see the aircraft on the tarmac after a safe landing with no injuries to any passengers or personnel on board, it is a testament to how safe flying really is. These aircraft are designed extremely well, and must undergo some of the most rigorous testing that you can imagine.
I don’t see the Kevlar? There is usually Kevlar wrapped between the fan and shroud. Nonetheless, 30,000 RPM + metal + force = % of failure
@KJones: Well said
@Kuz: If I could drive to my destination and get there as fast as I could in a plane I would prefer driving. Sure statistically there are less chances of things going wrong while flying but if something did go wrong I think chances of survival are higher while on the ground than in the air… Combine that with the crap attitude of people involved in the process, it would be a no brainer….
@kidgenius: Catagorize as you wish… it only reinforces the point that its not something that “just happens, so what”
All your experience says that “Normally engine cowling is supposed to contain the debris.” But it did not… so it wasn’t just run of the mill event… you are contraditing yourself when you say otherwise
The engine’s design did what it was supposed to do to protect the rest of the vehicle and it’s occupants.
There is a hardened armor band around the compressor assembly, just behind the first stage impeller that you can see to prevent any lethal events. The cowling shattering like that is a byproduct and from the picture, not fatal or disastrous. If you have seen test footage of an engine detonation like this without the cover, you will see the banding preventing the blades from flying about, just smaller pieces like tubing, fasteners and wiring. This event, though an exciting experience for the poor pax, was controlled from time 0 to shutdown and the securing of the engine.
Considering the safety record of the airline and it’s aircraft, this was pure chance and can be put down as as unexpected major event. Southwest will most likely have the engines of similar model, age and hours operating checked thoroughly to make sure that this was just that, chance.
They should be just glad that htey made it down safely and no one was hurt.
things do happen to planes but those pilots deserve a big credit and everyone should be thanking them for handling such a situation so well.
As for the flight attendant yeah its their job to be calm, but they are human beings too. They have family and stuff and are worried about things too.
@pshah: You certainly will get no arguments out of me re: the people involved in the process. lol
But I think the point you are making in your “What if something happened…” scenario is a little off with the comparison you draw. I am not sure I would agree that you have better chances on the ground if something happened, especially in light of how much more often things on the ground occur. If you take that piece of the equation out, it is not really a fitting comparison. Things that happen thousands of times causing deaths (just in the U.S. alone) in comparison to the very few incidents that cause any fatalities worldwide makes flying a no brainer to me.
Also, I feel a lot safer taking transportation that is safety checked and inspected before every flight. Lord knows no one does that before driving their cars.
@sethom: The kevlar is mostly up around the fan blades towards the front of the engine. This looks like something more towards the middle with an airfoil (blade or vane) letting go or (to use the industry term), “liberating”.
@pshah: What I was trying to point out was that many of the passengers, and some here, are blowing out or proportion what they perceive to be the FAA’s lack of concern. What I was trying to provide is the side of why the FAA may not show great concern in this case. Will they investigate, sure. If they find something will action be taken, of course. But the FAA is not going to cause a panic over an event which, in the end, did not result in the injury to any passengers or crew. Also, this was not even a “close call” where a cover-up is trying to be performed. There are provisions in place to handle an event such as this, and the pilots acted accordingly. The pilots did what they were supposed to and the aircraft did as it was designed. I apologize if I appear to be callous to this, but it’s not that big of a deal. The engine did not “explode” and passengers did not almost die. Some of the passengers, and some here, are needlessly freaking out about it.
Now, IF when this containment event occurred some debris flew towards the fuselage, and IF a piece of this debris came through the fuselage despite the fact that the fuselage in this region is designed to deal with this scenario, and IF a passenger’s safety was put at risk, THEN there would be something to really discuss if the FAA was taking the same approach. But, THAT scenario did not happen, and as such we can look at the pictures, say that it is an interesting event, and move on.
@DallasDMD: and @P41: I thought that picture was from a stock photo source and not this flight. Am I wrong?
Wait . . . just checked the linked article. Yep those are the real photos! They actually let non-officials take those photos — which then got posted on the ‘net?
@boberto: The fact that once something goes wrong you have the benefit of hindsight to tell you that you missed something. So you look harder for what you now know to be there.
@LilKoko: You do realize that nearly every cell phone has a camera in it, right? And that people will take pictures of things that interest them, right? Good luck finding every single one of those cameras or censoring someone who has one. Once it’s out, it’s out.
We need to realize that citizen journalism (and this can be argued to fall into that category) is going to make public things that were always swept under the rug before.
@kidgenius: Even if there had been loss of life, the FAA and all other concerned parties that have to invetigate will, and I repeat WILL, issue their report as if they were machines. Cold and redacted as if they did not give a damn.
Trust me, when you want a truly objective report, the investigators will try to be desensitized while carring out their assingment, they rage about all other factors once they finish.
As a aerospace eng let me say this.
1. That engine did not explode nor did it come apart in any that would damage the aircraft.
2. If you look the fan disk while it looks horrific, for this kind of failure it is actually in good shape.
3. the fan disk that holds the blades shows no signs of damage(now it is probably no longer air worthy) the stators behind that blade show some dings but not that many.
4. If you look, the containment shield around the fan disk is intact as it should be since the fan disk did not fail.
So first the engine is just not that badly damaged it will probably be repaired and put back in to service. And southwest will probably fly the plane to the repair depot in that condition.
Most probably something came apart further back like a oil pump or some machinery like that, since that is the area were they are on that engine, and debris went into the fan blade.
@trai_dep: It sounds like the plane hit a hard crosswind, or perhaps a downdraft, and missed the approach. The high pitch, sharp engines-up and high-g are pretty typical for a big plane’s missed approach. Missed-approach maneuvers are one of the earliest things you get trained in, so yeah, the crew was pretty well prepared.
damn, thats some scary shiet…
I don’t blame the passengers for thinking it was an explosion, even if it wasn’t. There’s a video on youtube called ”A380 Blade Off Test” where the engineers deliberately fail a blade while the jet engine is at full power, to test if the engine casing will contain the shrapnel. Shortly after 3:10 in the video, you can hear the LOUD boom that follows.
[www.youtube.com]
No doubt the pax and flight attendants would be scared, even though to someone that understands aircraft this isn’t that big of a deal. The fact that a flight attendant hyperventilated is testament to the fact that this kind of stuff just doesn’t happen often! There are pilots that fly their entire careers without experiencing an engine failure off the ground.
@TODDBRADLEY: “keep the meat separate from the fan blades”
Okay, that’s a funny way to put it, but that’s probably some Engineer humor there…
To further explain what you mean, I believe there is some armor-like plating on the inboard side of the engines. If blades start flying around, the main concern is to protect the main fuselage from damage – you’d probably WANT the rest of the blades to rupture the cowling. You certainly don’t want them rattling around throughout the rest of the engine causing potentially more damage.
So, the fact that this incident was “uncontained” is probably a design feature. Kind of like some cars will drop their engine on the ground in a head-on crash. It’s better to have the engine on the pavement than in the lap of the driver/passenger.
@Buran: Statistically speaking, flying is safer by numbers. But if you break the statistics down by miles traversed, they actually come out pretty close to the same. [www.meretrix.com]
Sorry if any of you did not like flying but clung to the promise of it being safter than driving.
This was not an uncontained failure look at the photos that thick metal band around the fan is the containment shield. If you look it is not even scratched. The fan disk did not come apart and all the fans are still attached to it. Granted not all of them but thats just it. Other than blade damage which as I said earlier was probably just the result of some other failure, that engine is not in that bad of shape. Hell Ill bet that thing probably will still start and run.
1) I wish I could fly with some of you frequent fliers/engineers/pilots. You make me feel (no, seriously) way better.
2) If that had happened on my flight I am pretty sure I would have given birth to a shit baby.
@Javert: There’s just one problem with those statistics: None of them are for major commercial air travel. Those numbers apply to general aviation (i.e. non-commercial and non-military flights) and so are not terribly applicable in this situation. There are far fewer incidents with major commercial air traffic than there would be with “smaller planes” (especially given the quality of pilots by comparison).
@Angus: Kind of like some cars will drop their engine on the ground in a head-on crash. It’s better to have the engine on the pavement than in the lap of the driver/passenger.
Most aircraft actually have this feature too. In the case of an engine fire or any engine trouble, if serious enough, the engine and pylon are meant to fall off. Having the engine fall off cleanly is better than destroying the leading edge control surfaces of the wing. You’d end up in a similar situation as American flight 191 if the engine damaged the wing (or any) control surfaces.
Also I have to sort of giggle at the overreaction passenger account saying “if the blade entered the cabin it could have caused a crash.” While it could have been fatal for someone sitting near the engine (National Airlines Flight 27) it probably wouldn’t cause the aircraft to crash. I’d be more worried about engine debris damaging control surfaces on the wings and stabilizers.
On SWA 420 departing LAX 12/5 for Oakland we experienced a significant “bump” at 1-3 minutes after takeoff, felt like we hit something (bigger than a bird, smaller than a brinks truck), after about 2 minutes pilot announced we “blew an engine” and the plane returned to LAX. Passengers on right side reported a burst of flames over the engine. Everyone stayed calm. Curious if this is the more “routine” lost engine or something more serious a la this November incident. Southwest crew handled the incident perfectly, smooth landing, good communication, got us on a new flight within about an hour despite bad weather delays in the bay area.