SW 1380 one passenger dead: Uncontained engine failure and emergency landing at PHL
Apr 20, 2018, 12:31 pm
#271
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,355
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.
This isn't like fighting a nuisance regulation that, say, light bulbs in the lavatories be changed pre-emptively so someone doesn't stub a toe in the dark. As you point out, engine blade containment is very difficult to guarantee 100%, and the consequences can be very, very bad.
Apr 20, 2018, 12:54 pm
#272
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,364
Apr 20, 2018, 1:34 pm
#273
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
Yeah, it's hard to defend management on this one. It's easy to say "safety is our #1 priority," but infinitely harder to actually make that true. Clearly, any discussion of risk management takes into account that there is an acceptable amount of risk, and that risk is balanced against cost. I'm not suggesting that any other carrier wouldn't do the same. But safety is not the #1 priority.
Apr 20, 2018, 2:23 pm
#274
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: STL, MO-US and A , SWA A-List, Marriott LTTE, Hilton Gold, Hertz PC
Posts: 1,883
Apr 20, 2018, 2:52 pm
#275
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,842
This isn't like fighting a nuisance regulation that, say, light bulbs in the lavatories be changed pre-emptively so someone doesn't stub a toe in the dark. As you point out, engine blade containment is very difficult to guarantee 100%, and the consequences can be very, very bad.
In both cases, a regulatory authority after evaluating a problem instructs an action be taken to reduce the risk of injury and/or death. Company A decides the instruction is unreasonable / unnecessary / disproportionate / a nuisance, in view of the cost of taking the action versus risk of not taking it.
Company A may be right. Or it may come to regret that decision when an elderly customer unfortunately trips up in a lavatory because he can't see anything due to a broken lighbulb, cracks his head on the cistern and tragically dies.
It appears in the present case - at least while we await the actual facts - that Southwest's decision was a bad one.
Apr 20, 2018, 3:36 pm
#276
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SNA
Programs: Bonvoy LTTE/AMB, AmEx Plat, National EE, WN A-List, CLEAR+, Covid-19
Posts: 4,982
Apr 20, 2018, 4:03 pm
#277
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreux CH
Programs: FB Platinum, M&M FTL, BA Blue
Posts: 11,662
Apr 20, 2018, 5:04 pm
#278
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: 14,447
Apr 20, 2018, 5:32 pm
#279
Join Date: May 2006
Location: TUS/PDX
Programs: WN CP/A-List, AS MVPG75K
Posts: 5,798
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?
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?
And a computer simulation (dont know how accurate it is, but it looks like a reasonable depiction of a blade shedding event):
Second: youre correct. Motors are moved around routinely and the motors that were delivered with the original airframe are likely on a different airframe within the WN fleet. Just like airframes, the motors have an overhaul schedule, where theyre taken off the plane and either overhauled in house or shipped to a third party MRO facility.
Apr 20, 2018, 6:59 pm
#281
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicagoland, IL, USA
Programs: WN CP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 14,201
Apr 20, 2018, 9:49 pm
#283
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
Apr 20, 2018, 11:41 pm
#284
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Houston (HOU/IAH)
Programs: WN, UA, DL, AA, Chase UR, Amex MR
Posts: 2,269
Couple of thoughts a few days after the accident:
Thank goodness there was not a lap child in that row. Killing an adult passenger is bad enough but just think of how horrific it would have been if an infant had been sucked out of the hole and then having to search the Pennsylvania countryside to find the poor child.
I know that's morbid but it very easily could have been the case.
If the FAs return to the light hearted style of delivering the safety demos they better discontinue the "gone with the wind" bit they do sometimes. *Extremely* poor taste considering how the passenger passed away.
Thank goodness there was not a lap child in that row. Killing an adult passenger is bad enough but just think of how horrific it would have been if an infant had been sucked out of the hole and then having to search the Pennsylvania countryside to find the poor child.
I know that's morbid but it very easily could have been the case.If the FAs return to the light hearted style of delivering the safety demos they better discontinue the "gone with the wind" bit they do sometimes. *Extremely* poor taste considering how the passenger passed away.
Apr 21, 2018, 8:20 am
#285
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Programs: DL DM & 5MM, WN
Posts: 1,451
Great videos, tusphotog! So are there two issues with the engines? First, the rare instance of a main blade failing and the possibility this is related to the regime of inspections. Second, the containment on this engine type doesn't work like the videos when these blades separate -- two containment failures in a row for WN?