SW 1380 one passenger dead: Uncontained engine failure and emergency landing at PHL
Apr 20, 2018, 1:48 am
#256
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: AA (PPro/3MM/Admirals Club), AS, UA, Marriott (Gold), HHonors (Gold), Accor (Plat)
Posts: 2,602
What has actually changed is that all the world can see your farewell photos and videos within seconds, instead of having them found months later in the rubble. And apparently a lot of people want to see this kind of stuff.
Apr 20, 2018, 1:51 am
#257
Join Date: May 2006
Location: TUS/PDX
Programs: WN CP/A-List, AS MVPG75K
Posts: 5,798
FWIW, one of the memory items on a rapid depressurization is to squawk 7700 which is the emergency code for ATC to see. This was probably done immediately after donning the masks. So don’t get hung up on the pilot not phrasing something “mayday” or “pan pan” or whatever. I also wouldn’t be surprised if she tried to get an emergency or mayday out but got stepped on (you can hear it in one of the recordings).
Nope. Not even close. The pax have chemical generated oxygen (might be why many people had them off their nose, it STINKS). The cockpit is supplied with quick fit, continuous, positive pressure oxygen. There are some bottles located under the cockpit. The pilots also have much, much more oxygen than the folks in the back.
Apr 20, 2018, 2:03 am
#258
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Economy, mostly :(
Programs: Skywards Gold
Posts: 7,801
FWIW, one of the memory items on a rapid depressurization is to squawk 7700 which is the emergency code for ATC to see. This was probably done immediately after donning the masks. So don’t get hung up on the pilot not phrasing something “mayday” or “pan pan” or whatever. I also wouldn’t be surprised if she tried to get an emergency or mayday out but got stepped on (you can hear it in one of the recordings).
Nope. Not even close. The pax have chemical generated oxygen (might be why many people had them off their nose, it STINKS). The cockpit is supplied with quick fit, continuous, positive pressure oxygen. There are some bottles located under the cockpit. The pilots also have much, much more oxygen than the folks in the back.
Nope. Not even close. The pax have chemical generated oxygen (might be why many people had them off their nose, it STINKS). The cockpit is supplied with quick fit, continuous, positive pressure oxygen. There are some bottles located under the cockpit. The pilots also have much, much more oxygen than the folks in the back.
Pax oxygen is primarily designed for depressurisation events, and only designed to last for the duration of a rapid descent, which is generally way under 10 minutes. Flight crew however have oxygen not only for depressurisation but also for cases of fumes or fire or smoke.
Apr 20, 2018, 5:37 am
#259
Join Date: Oct 2015
Programs: SWA CP, UA MP, Hilton G, SPG G
Posts: 69
What is interesting to me, is that media focused and the public attention is on the pilot actions. In my opinion the focus should be on why Southwest airlines had two of the same type of engine failure in such a short period of time. Is it because of outsourcing maintenance? Cost savings?
I find it concerning that the airline would choose profit over safety… They fought over doing the inspection- because of cost, they delayed accomplishing the inspection… And now all of a sudden they can do it in 30 days?
Meanwhile the mechanics are in Their fifth year of contract negotiations , and even expressed their safety concerns in a February letter.
i think this is going to get ugly.
I find it concerning that the airline would choose profit over safety… They fought over doing the inspection- because of cost, they delayed accomplishing the inspection… And now all of a sudden they can do it in 30 days?
Meanwhile the mechanics are in Their fifth year of contract negotiations , and even expressed their safety concerns in a February letter.
i think this is going to get ugly.
Apr 20, 2018, 6:08 am
#260
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2001
Programs: DL 1 million, AA 1 mil, HH lapsed Diamond, Marriott Plat
Posts: 28,190
What is interesting to me, is that media focused and the public attention is on the pilot actions. In my opinion the focus should be on why Southwest airlines had two of the same type of engine failure in such a short period of time. Is it because of outsourcing maintenance? Cost savings?
I find it concerning that the airline would choose profit over safety…
I find it concerning that the airline would choose profit over safety…
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/18/b...e-failure.html
Apr 20, 2018, 6:25 am
#261
Join Date: Oct 2015
Programs: SWA CP, UA MP, Hilton G, SPG G
Posts: 69
The article states it is too early to say, and one suspected cause is a design, not defect.
that being said, SWA fought CFM and the FAA on the type of inspection required. They also claimed they could not accomplish it in a year and wanted more time., but now they can do it in a month?
and the mechanics did write a letter over concerns of safety and the safety culture.
$$$$$$$
Apr 20, 2018, 6:46 am
#262
Join Date: Oct 2001
Programs: LTP, PP
Posts: 8,700
I'll buy most of that. It still doesn't take into account runway length and the situations where a plane will go to full throttle while standing on the brakes before commencing the takeoff roll, vs. the more normal moving to full throttle and having the plane lumber from 0-60 in several seconds.
Apr 20, 2018, 6:58 am
#263
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 5,513
Airlines reacted differently to maintenance bulletins on fan blades. Southwest fought the June 2017 inspection alert notifying the FAA it had mixed and matched blades and dispersed the specific ones identified as problematic across the fleet.
That may be an issue going forward.
Former FAA Inspector General Mary Schiavo says blades are numbered and aren't interchangeable on the hub.
That may be an issue going forward.
Former FAA Inspector General Mary Schiavo says blades are numbered and aren't interchangeable on the hub.
"[The CFM alert] identified numbers of particular fan turbine blades that they suspected might have the problem. It specified exactly how these blades should be taken out of the engine and tested ultrasonically. It set forth in many dozens of pages exactly how this should be done, how you should identify cracks, what should happen if you found one. How long it should take you to do this, and that you can return the blades back to the engine, back to service, if you don’t see on the ultrasonic testing any of these cracks."
"Southwest said in reply, in this letter they filed with the government on October 17th, that they could not track these turbine blades by numbers that the manufacturer had given them way back in June to go inspect. That they intermixed them. That if they inspected something they put it back into service and they could no longer track the individual turbine blades. And that they had been widely dispersed through their fleet."
Apr 20, 2018, 7:40 am
#264
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Programs: DL DM & 5MM, WN
Posts: 1,451
One thing that has been mentioned in the press is that the methods for containment of debris after an engine failure didn't work here/haven't worked, etc. But did I had once read that the main turbine blades, if they fail, cannot be contained -- too big and powerful when they break away? And that, since their failure could not be contained or controlled, there was an extra-cautious philosophy for their manufacture and maintenance. How much of that do I have right?
Also there has been reporting of the age of the plane. But don't the engines get moved from plane to plane? Isn't the age of that engine/its amount of use the more important point?
Seems to me SWA will do better over-inspecting rather than debating the fine points of what the rules said or will say. And, if they don't know where they have put the questionable fan blades, they have a lot of work to do, quickly.
Also there has been reporting of the age of the plane. But don't the engines get moved from plane to plane? Isn't the age of that engine/its amount of use the more important point?
Seems to me SWA will do better over-inspecting rather than debating the fine points of what the rules said or will say. And, if they don't know where they have put the questionable fan blades, they have a lot of work to do, quickly.
Apr 20, 2018, 10:35 am
#265
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: RNO
Programs: AA/DL/UA
Posts: 10,778
How is filming a video any different from when passengers would write goodbye letters when they thought their plane might go down? Perhaps it’s narcissistic to put this kind of thing on Facebook Live for all to see, but I hope that we all have at least a few people in our lives who will care when we die.
What has actually changed is that all the world can see your farewell photos and videos within seconds, instead of having them found months later in the rubble. And apparently a lot of people want to see this kind of stuff.
Apr 20, 2018, 11:13 am
#266
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,028
I agree, and kudos to the Dallas-area fire-fighter who was onboard, and declined to describe the injuries to the passenger out of respect for her family when he was interviewed...
Apr 20, 2018, 11:27 am
#267
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,028
Not as easy as it sounds. Not saying the inspection interval should be every 2 gazillion hours/cycles, but neither should it be (in this case) before every individual flight (which would obviously be the most conservative approach possible). The details that need to be worked out differ on the actual issue involved (the immediate DC-10 groundings years ago for maintenance-related engine mount issues was the other end of the scale), and it’s not unreasonable for an airline to negotiate from the standpoint of balancing risk management with practicality.
Apr 20, 2018, 12:01 pm
#268
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreux CH
Programs: FB Platinum, M&M FTL, BA Blue
Posts: 11,624
My GUESS is trauma. I saw an episode of Air Emergency about this flight. Was only 17k feet, but the pilot was halfway outside the plane for 20 mins. he survived.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...ys_Flight_5390
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...ys_Flight_5390
Apr 20, 2018, 12:13 pm
#269
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR and back on Van Isle ....... for now
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 14,429
Since the plane landed safely we'll never know if poster would have cut the feed at the end or not.
Apr 20, 2018, 12:23 pm
#270
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8
After the Amtrak derailment in 2015, the NTSB also made some comments on how Philadelphia first-responders handled the incident (mostly commending them, but there were a few recommendations on EMS prioritization and use of resources, I recall). It will be interesting to see how well Philadelphia applied the NTSB recommendations to this incident.