Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Brooke on April 17, 2018, 03:22:11 PM
-
It happened again today.
Today's:
https://nypost.com/2018/04/17/engine-explodes-during-southwest-flight/
Feb 2018
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/13/us/united-airlines-engine-cover.html
Oct 2017
https://www.aviationcv.com/aviation-blog/2017/engine-explodes-air-france-plane
Aug 2016
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/08/27/Southwest-flight-makes-emergency-landing-after-engine-explodes/9521472332967/
-
Catastrophic engine failure. One passenger in critical condition with head trauma. Hope she makes it.
Hope this isn't a repeat of Sioux City Iowa, where a crack was missed six times during non-destructive testing on the fans.
-
Catastrophic engine failure. One passenger in critical condition with head trauma. Hope she makes it.
She didn't.
- oldman
-
Catastrophic engine failure. One passenger in critical condition with head trauma. Hope she makes it.
Hope this isn't a repeat of Sioux City Iowa, where a crack was missed six times during non-destructive testing on the fans.
I don't see anything missing on the fan, but I can't see the inboard fan blades...
Looks like the cowling came off. Must have hit the passenger window aft of the wing.
-
It can only be as good as the guy who secured the cowling.
-
I don't see anything missing on the fan, but I can't see the inboard fan blades...
Looks like the cowling came off. Must have hit the passenger window aft of the wing.
I think you should look again. The fan disk is no longer there
-
I think you should look again. The fan disk is no longer there
Uh....... N1 fan...
(http://media.phillyvoice.com/media/images/04172018_Southwest_engine_USAT.2e16d0ba.fill-735x490.jpg)
(http://wrcb.images.worldnow.com/images/16559410_G.jpg?auto=webp&disable=upscale&width=800&lastEditedDate=20180417144108)
Looks intact to me (what's visible). Or am I seeing photos of another incident?
-
Is the quick fix safe enough to be applied ?
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/11/29/16/46CEF4A300000578-5129515-image-m-27_1511974730023.jpg)
Shocked passenger films an engineer using TAPE for a quick fix on an easyJet engine (http://"http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-5129515/Engineer-uses-TAPE-quick-fix-easyJet-engine.html")
-
Is the quick fix safe enough to be applied ?
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/11/29/16/46CEF4A300000578-5129515-image-m-27_1511974730023.jpg)
Shocked passenger films an engineer using TAPE for a quick fix on an easyJet engine (http://"http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-5129515/Engineer-uses-TAPE-quick-fix-easyJet-engine.html")
I bet he is putting 100-mile-an-hour tape over gap seal until it dries.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrSK7afoMjY
NTSB's first look, one blade gone.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrSK7afoMjY
NTSB's first look, one blade gone.
That's what I was wondering.
-
Uh....... N1 fan...
(http://media.phillyvoice.com/media/images/04172018_Southwest_engine_USAT.2e16d0ba.fill-735x490.jpg)
(http://wrcb.images.worldnow.com/images/16559410_G.jpg?auto=webp&disable=upscale&width=800&lastEditedDate=20180417144108)
Sorry, you right. I had not seen that photo
Looks intact to me (what's visible). Or am I seeing photos of another incident?
-
Here is an article I found interesting from last year.
As you know, Boeing doesn't make engines. Customers select which brand they want.
Or in the case of Southwest, some bean counter said "Hey! Let's take those old engines off the old airframes, refurbish them, and hang then on our newer fleet!"
Cutting Costs Costs Lives!
http://www.mro-network.com/maintenance-repair-overhaul/southwest-uses-737-retirements-drop-costs
Southwest Airlines is phasing out its Boeing 737 Classic aircraft by about 2017 and is finding ways to use engine inventory from that fleet to decrease its maintenance costs.
Related: AJW And Engineering Of Russia Set Up Stock Base
Mandy Gower, Southwest Airlines’ powerplant supply chain manager, told Aviation Week that the airline employs MTU Canada and BP Aerospace in Irvine, Calif., to tear down its CFMI CFM56-3s that power the Classics. The airline just took the next step and selected Avioserv San Diego to consign the material. Avioserv, a company that specializes in the supply and sale of serviceable engines, will be Southwest’s sole consignment partner to feed used serviceable material back to the airline to decrease CFM56-3 engine overhaul costs. Several parts on the -3, which power Southwest’s 737-300/-400/-500 aircraft, are interchangeable with the CFMI CFM56-7, the engine on the 737-700. Avioserv also will market the excess engine inventory.
My buddy who flies 737 sleds for a competing airlines just sent this as a reply to my email about this incident:
Yep, they've been having an inordinately high number of engine issues. Word on the street is when they have an issue that less catastrophic, rather than report it as per regulations, they simply change out the engine without reporting.
GE and Boeing recommend a 3 minute warmup and cool down period. Meaning 3 minutes from start to takeoff thrust and 3 minutes from high power setting of reverse (landing) to shutdown on taxi to gate. At least in the past, SWA never seemed to follow that guideline. It's pretty important for the life of the engine.
Also, ever wonder why SWA doesn't go to Hawaii? It's because Thank God the FAA mandates very strict and lengthy engine monitoring and proof of reliability programs before permitting it. SWA has had some serious 'documentation' issues in the not so distant past.
It's just their business model. Anyway, it doesn't really surprise me all that much, just a horrific tragedy for the poor fatality and their family as well as the trauma to all the other pax. Of course, I can't say too much, my company killed everyone on board trying to save money on tail jackscrew grease and inspections.
For the record, SW has submitting FAA paperwork to begin flying to Hawaii. Something tells me they're going to be under scrutiny.
-
Sorry, you right. I had not seen that photo
:salute :cheers:
-
Ask your friend if that three minute limit is on a cold engine. My jet is four minute warm-up on a cold engine (off for 90 minutes or more), two minutes warm-up for a hot engine, and one minute to cool down after landing.
-
Here is an article I found interesting from last year.
As you know, Boeing doesn't make engines. Customers select which brand they want.
Or in the case of Southwest, some bean counter said "Hey! Let's take those old engines off the old airframes, refurbish them, and hang then on our newer fleet!"
Cutting Costs Costs Lives!
http://www.mro-network.com/maintenance-repair-overhaul/southwest-uses-737-retirements-drop-costs
Southwest Airlines is phasing out its Boeing 737 Classic aircraft by about 2017 and is finding ways to use engine inventory from that fleet to decrease its maintenance costs.
Related: AJW And Engineering Of Russia Set Up Stock Base
Mandy Gower, Southwest Airlines’ powerplant supply chain manager, told Aviation Week that the airline employs MTU Canada and BP Aerospace in Irvine, Calif., to tear down its CFMI CFM56-3s that power the Classics. The airline just took the next step and selected Avioserv San Diego to consign the material. Avioserv, a company that specializes in the supply and sale of serviceable engines, will be Southwest’s sole consignment partner to feed used serviceable material back to the airline to decrease CFM56-3 engine overhaul costs. Several parts on the -3, which power Southwest’s 737-300/-400/-500 aircraft, are interchangeable with the CFMI CFM56-7, the engine on the 737-700. Avioserv also will market the excess engine inventory.
My buddy who flies 737 sleds for a competing airlines just sent this as a reply to my email about this incident:
Yep, they've been having an inordinately high number of engine issues. Word on the street is when they have an issue that less catastrophic, rather than report it as per regulations, they simply change out the engine without reporting.
GE and Boeing recommend a 3 minute warmup and cool down period. Meaning 3 minutes from start to takeoff thrust and 3 minutes from high power setting of reverse (landing) to shutdown on taxi to gate. At least in the past, SWA never seemed to follow that guideline. It's pretty important for the life of the engine.
Also, ever wonder why SWA doesn't go to Hawaii? It's because Thank God the FAA mandates very strict and lengthy engine monitoring and proof of reliability programs before permitting it. SWA has had some serious 'documentation' issues in the not so distant past.
It's just their business model. Anyway, it doesn't really surprise me all that much, just a horrific tragedy for the poor fatality and their family as well as the trauma to all the other pax. Of course, I can't say too much, my company killed everyone on board trying to save money on tail jackscrew grease and inspections.
For the record, SW has submitting FAA paperwork to begin flying to Hawaii. Something tells me they're going to be under scrutiny.
Your “buddy” is trying to blow smoke up a dark place. His lame accusations are just that. SWA does have warm up and cool down time limit procedures in place and they are followed. He has NO CLUE about why SWA hasn’t gone to Hawaii. It happens to be the most overserved airline destination on the planet. In the past, Herb resisted it because there was a great deal more low hanging economical fruit elsewhere. That strategy has continued with the current SWA CEO until recentlLy.
Perhaps the reason SWA has more engine incident occurrences is that each jet in the fleet on line averages 11-12 legs every day while your “buddy” is sitting on his tail skid in the airport Starbucks for a couple hours a day and thus his competing airline is not making money while his jet is parked at the terminal. Tell you “buddy” to get the facts, and THEN make comparisons. Until then, he needs to shut up and you’d be best served to quit spreading his false accusations.
-
Your gross generalization and judgement of a senior Alaska Airline pilot is immature and insulting.
-
Your gross generalization and judgement of a senior Alaska Airline pilot is immature and insulting.
Not as insulting as the original slander by that pilot, IMO. Lots of hate-on for Southwest because they kicked butt for so many years.
SWA has a way better safety record than anyone in the US. It’s not even close. Since they started flying in 1971 this is the first (for-cause) fatality aboard one of their airplanes. That’s an amazing achievement.
:salute Puma.
-
Your gross generalization and judgement of a senior Alaska Airline pilot is immature and insulting.
Well, he’s obviously a senior Captain who knows everything, just ask him. Your spreading of his lame accusations is the true immaturity and insult here. I know exactly what I’m talking about. He doesn’t. And you certainly don’t.
-
Ok ok enough chest beating, just tell me LUV, do I short or go long???
-
Nonstop
-
Well, he’s obviously a senior Captain who knows everything, just ask him. Your spreading of his lame accusations is the true immaturity and insult here. I know exactly what I’m talking about. He doesn’t. And you certainly don’t.
I spent many hours on LUV jumpseats when I was a regional schlub. Best training in CRM I ever got. Those guys were all pros. No exceptions.
-
Nonstop
He's probably referring to the stock! LOL
-
He's probably referring to the stock! LOL
LOL!!! :rofl. Just took a stab at what he might be asking. LUV served me well after buying it for nearly 20 years.
-
Your gross generalization and judgement of a senior Alaska Airline pilot is immature and insulting.
As an Alaskan, I would choose SWA over Alaska Air if they offered service up there.
All airlines have some shady business. I see SWA having the least.
-
I'm pretty sure the missing blade is the result of ingesting some of the cowling.
-
I'm pretty sure the missing blade is the result of ingesting some of the cowling.
Or material failure of the blade. Catastrophic regardless.
-
I'm pretty sure the missing blade is the result of ingesting some of the cowling.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/04/southwest-airlines-protested-airworthiness-directive-designed-to-prevent-engine-failures/
"The fan blade separated in two places," said NTSB Chairman Robert Sumwalt. "At the hub... there's a fatigue fracture where this #13 fan blade would come into that hub. It also fractured roughly halfway through it. But it appears the fatigue fracture was the initial event. We have the root part, but we don't have the outboard part. The crack was interior, so certainly not detectable from looking at it from the outside."
Looks like metal fatigue.
CFM advised that inspections should be done in 12 months rather than 18 months after the 2016 incident, but Southwest objected to the faster pace of inspections. Not good news for Southwest in any wrongful death suit.
-
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/04/southwest-airlines-protested-airworthiness-directive-designed-to-prevent-engine-failures/
Looks like metal fatigue.
CFM advised that inspections should be done in 12 months rather than 18 months after the 2016 incident, but Southwest objected to the faster pace of inspections. Not good news for Southwest in any wrongful death suit.
Assuming that the fan blade failed in the same manner as the 2016 incident, how exactly does one inspect the fan blades for internal cracks, which cannot be seen from the outside?
-
Assuming that the fan blade failed in the same manner as the 2016 incident, how exactly does one inspect the fan blades for internal cracks, which cannot be seen from the outside?
I'd expect that fluoroscoping would show such things.
Time consuming, hence expensive for a big fleet.
- oldman
-
I'd expect that fluoroscoping would show such things.
Time consuming, hence expensive for a big fleet.
- oldmand
Yep, a daunting task for a fleet of 700 jets with most of them moving all over the place every day.
-
Assuming that the fan blade failed in the same manner as the 2016 incident, how exactly does one inspect the fan blades for internal cracks, which cannot be seen from the outside?
X-ray, eddy current, ultrasonic...
-
Or material failure of the blade. Catastrophic regardless.
This.
IMO the cowling failed because of the turbine blade going ballistic.
-
Yep, a daunting task for a fleet of 700 jets with most of them moving all over the place every day.
Still needs to be done.
-
Still needs to be done.
Wasn’t implying that it didn’t need to be done.
-
From this article today. http://www.kvoa.com/story/38004040/southwest-gives-5000-checks-to-passengers-on-flight-1380
“The NTSB will look into how an interior crack on a fan blade led to the engine failure. Sumwalt said the crack was not detectable from the outside. One of the cracks was consistent with metal fatigue, he said.”
-
From this article today. http://www.kvoa.com/story/38004040/southwest-gives-5000-checks-to-passengers-on-flight-1380
“The NTSB will look into how an interior crack on a fan blade led to the engine failure. Sumwalt said the crack was not detectable from the outside. One of the cracks was consistent with metal fatigue, he said.”
Get ready for time-based blade replacement. Probably a good idea but not cheap. Single-piece fans...that’s another can of worms.
-
Wasn’t implying that it didn’t need to be done.
Wasn’t assuming you were. Just stating the obvious. Far to often do compaines put profits over safety.
-
Wasn’t assuming you were. Just stating the obvious. Far to often do compaines put profits over safety.
Southwest doesn’t ever compromise safety. It’s the number one priority every day, every flight.
-
Wasn’t assuming you were. Just stating the obvious. Far to often do compaines put profits over safety.
Painting with a broad brush there. Southwest didn't compile their excellent safety record by chance or by cutting corners.
-
south west has never had an airplane crash. couple of dead here and there.
semp
-
From this article today. http://www.kvoa.com/story/38004040/southwest-gives-5000-checks-to-passengers-on-flight-1380
“The NTSB will look into how an interior crack on a fan blade led to the engine failure. Sumwalt said the crack was not detectable from the outside. One of the cracks was consistent with metal fatigue, he said.”
Ultrasonic or phased array inspection would have detected that easily. However, the logistics of testing each fan blade are pretty time consuming. The fact that the crack started inside the blade leads me to suspect it had an internal manufacturing defect from which the crack propagated.
However, if I were a cynic, I would think that they were just saying it wasn't detectable from the exterior because they missed it during normal inspection (most likely due to poorly trained technicians).
-
south west has never had an airplane crash. couple of dead here and there.
semp
One death in an overrun in Chicago. The plane hit a car on the perimeter road.
One death after an attempted takeover of the cockpit. Passengers subdued the man leading to his death.
Then this one.
After 47 years of flying and the massive number of cycles they've generated that's borderline miraculous.
-
However, if I were a cynic, I would think that they were just saying it wasn't detectable from the exterior because they missed it during normal inspection (most likely due to poorly trained technicians).
It a good thing you aren’t a cynic, otherwise I would raise a very large BS Flag. Southwest has THE FINEST maintenance technicians in the industry. Each and everyone of them has skin in this game. They all travel on company jets. Their family members travel on company jets. They all, myself included, will go out of their way to fly Southwest vs a brand X airlines because of Southwest’s sterling safety record. A very large part of that is because of our maintainers. In my 20 years of experience, there’s never been an instance of a mechanic short cutting anything. On the contrary, they won’t hesitate to take a jet out of service if it isn’t up to par. Southwest doesn’t do any “poorly trained” anything, at any level. So, choose your words carefully.
-
It a good thing you aren’t a cynic, otherwise I would raise a very large BS Flag. Southwest has THE FINEST maintenance technicians in the industry. Each and everyone of them has skin in this game. They all travel on company jets. Their family members travel on company jets. They all, myself included, will go out of their way to fly Southwest vs a brand X airlines because of Southwest’s sterling safety record. A very large part of that is because of our maintainers. In my 20 years of experience, there’s never been an instance of a mechanic short cutting anything. On the contrary, they won’t hesitate to take a jet out of service if it isn’t up to par. Southwest doesn’t do any “poorly trained” anything, at any level. So, choose your words carefully.
Heh.
Clever readers might surmise that Puma44 knows a thing or two about Southwest and its aeroplanes.
Just a guess, you understand....
- oldman
-
I'm pretty sure the missing blade is the result of ingesting some of the cowling.
I'm now pretty sure I was wrong.
-
Heh.
Clever readers might surmise that Puma44 knows a thing or two about Southwest and its aeroplanes.
Just a guess, you understand....
- oldman
He does, though I don't pretend to speak for him. And he's right. My dad was a Captain there as well. It's not the family it used to be, but they still do a good job.
-
It a good thing you aren’t a cynic, otherwise I would raise a very large BS Flag. Southwest has THE FINEST maintenance technicians in the industry. Each and everyone of them has skin in this game. They all travel on company jets. Their family members travel on company jets. They all, myself included, will go out of their way to fly Southwest vs a brand X airlines because of Southwest’s sterling safety record. A very large part of that is because of our maintainers. In my 20 years of experience, there’s never been an instance of a mechanic short cutting anything. On the contrary, they won’t hesitate to take a jet out of service if it isn’t up to par. Southwest doesn’t do any “poorly trained” anything, at any level. So, choose your words carefully.
Who performs the nondestructive inspection of Southwest airlines airframes and engines? I can't find the article now, but I read that it was contracted out to two separate companies.
Looks like the FAA ordered Southwest to inspect all its engines with ultrasound. 4 hours per engines. Still couldn't find whether Southwest performs this itself or contracts it to smaller companies.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/business/southwest-airlines-accident.html
-
One death in an overrun in Chicago. The plane hit a car on the perimeter road.
One death after an attempted takeover of the cockpit. Passengers subdued the man leading to his death.
Then this one.
After 47 years of flying and the massive number of cycles they've generated that's borderline miraculous.
i stand corrected but i was more like referring to a full plane going down for whatever reasons.
semp
-
i stand corrected but i was more like referring to a full plane going down for whatever reasons.
semp
Wasn't correcting you. Just expanding on the theme a bit. :salute
-
Southwest doesn’t ever compromise safety. It’s the number one priority every day, every flight.
Painting with a broad brush there. Southwest didn't compile their excellent safety record by chance or by cutting corners.
Maybe I should have been more clear. I’m not pointing fingers. It’s just the sad truth of our world. Profits over safety is a direction we do not need to head. Someone sadly has to be a example.
-
Maybe I should have been more clear. I’m not pointing fingers. It’s just the sad truth of our world. Profits over safety is a direction we do not need to head. Someone sadly has to be a example.
Southwest is not that example. Again, SAFETY FIRST, every flight, every day. That’s the Southwest culture.
-
Southwest is not that example. Again, SAFETY FIRST, every flight, every day. That’s the Southwest culture.
Just heard that SWA cancelled several flights to do intrusive testing. Bravo. Should have done it sooner.
-
Just heard that SWA cancelled several flights to do intrusive testing. Bravo. Should have done it sooner.
What do you want them to do, ground the entire -700 fleet on a whim?
They’re acting prudently.
The blade failure does not concern me in and of itself. That happens. Can’t be avoided. What concerns me is how something can hit a passenger window seven rows back. That’s a certification issue.
-
Just heard that SWA cancelled several flights to do intrusive testing. Bravo. Should have done it sooner.
How would you predict sooner?
-
How would you predict sooner?
People get killed on airplanes. Time to just ban them all. That will solve the problem.
:cheers:
-
Agreed, people are the problem, get rid of them!
-
Or, make it illegal for mechanical things to fail.🤪
-
How would you predict sooner?
Proper preventative maintenance. In my field and our family business we sign contracts with companies to do PM. We take several hours per unit and groom it with a fine tooth comb. Why wouldn’t they do that in airplanes? This. Shouldn’t. Ever. Happen. As mr V said how does it go 7 rows back. That’s crazy.
-
That’s a certification issue.
Seems like more of an airflow issue. :) Does certification cover things like cowling parts/aircraft separation?
Stuff happens. I had a glove come out of a meat bombs jumpsuit and fly back to jam between the elevator mass balance and the end of the stab which locked that elevator up right the heck now. :)
-
Proper preventative maintenance. In my field and our family business we sign contracts with companies to do PM. We take several hours per unit and groom it with a fine tooth comb. Why wouldn’t they do that in airplanes? This. Shouldn’t. Ever. Happen. As mr V said how does it go 7 rows back. That’s crazy.
Do you REALLY think Southwest doesn't do routine preventative maintenance and phase inspections? If you do, you are sadly mistaken. You are obviously not in the airline business. Metal fatigue is metal fatigue and it happens. This instance was the perfect storm of a slow news day, typical media hysteria pumping, and a female Captain, Male First Officer, and three Flight Attendants that did a fantastic job with compound emergencies and a very unfortunate fatality.
How does it go 7 rows back? Most likely came loose, created the engine cowling mess, and got on a vector to that window assisted by the the 500ish mph airflow.
You are right. It should have never happened. But, you, having no clue about the industry, Southwest Airlines, and aviation in general (apparently) have no credibility casting judgement on the situation. There are a lot of moving parts, they're made of metal, and they sometimes fail.
There are car fatalities every day in the United States, 40,100 last year according to this link https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/14/traffic-deaths-edge-lower-but-2017-stats-paint-worrisome-picture.html. Thats 110 car fatalities every day in this country. Where's the hysteria and outrage about that? That. Should. Never. Happen.
A search of airline flights across the U.S. reveals 87,000 flights per day or 31,755,000 per year.
I can't even try to imagine what that Captain and her Crew are feeling about having a fatality. It is the last thing anyone wants to have happen on their watch.
-
AD already issued. Ultrasonic inspection of all CFM56 fan blade dovetails within 20 days.
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf/0/6de148fe35ddeddb8625827500759aa4/$FILE/2018-09-51_Emergency.pdf
As someone who maintains aircraft for a living, can I just say the general tenor I've seen from the media and certain politicians who wouldn't know a Boeing from a Bücker (one certain Senator said FAA safety has "nose dived" because they've issued less fines, and vowed to "crack down on them" :rolleyes:) on this is just dumb. Major air carriers in the US and elsewhere are as safe as they've ever been. This is the first fatality on a major US carrier in nearly a decade, out of how many hundreds of millions of fliers? How many Amtrak passengers have been killed in the same time frame? and how many people do they move? Flying commercially is safer then just about any other activity in life, and is far and away the safest form of public transportation.
-
Proper preventative maintenance.
Is what A&P mechanics like myself spend 90% of our time on the job doing.
In my field and our family business we sign contracts with companies to do PM. We take several hours per unit and groom it with a fine tooth comb. Why wouldn’t they do that in airplanes?
Ummm.... we do. 'Several hours per unit' huh? That's cute. Yeaaaaaaaa.... we have around a dozen mechanics spend several days on an 'A' or 'B' check, and several weeks or even months on a heavy check. Not to mention the daily pre-flights or service checks with take a couple of guys at least an hour or more.
This. Shouldn’t. Ever. Happen.
OK... That's a lovely platitude, but that's not real world is it? There can not be a mechanical device that is 100% immune to failure (though aircraft components get closer then anything else I can think of) So there are designed in redundancies and safeguards. It's rarely just one thing that fails and leads to an accident in aviation, be it mechanical failures or human factors. Accident investigators talk about the accident chain, because there are usually more then one single contributing factor, and the odds of every link in that safety chain breaking down and leading to a catastrophic are incredibly slim. In this instance, it's that 1 in a Billion chance that finally comes through, the laws of probability cannot be defeated, but they are hugely in your favor.
-
So...
SWA sent out some info to help clarify some of the incomplete reporting going on about both this tragic incident and the last time a motor failed in a similar fashion.
Grossly simplified summary:
After the last engine failure, SWA participated with both the investigation and in the process recommending preventative measures. When the AD and required inspections came out last time, SWA felt that the required inspections were not comprehensive enough and so went quite a bit beyond the required inspections.
After this incident, SWA has already gone beyond the new inspection requirement, and is in the process of inspecting every single motor on the wing in addition to the already increased routine inspection cycle.
None of that can take back what happened, but I think it shows that SWA takes this extremely seriously and is not going to be satisfied with a minimal compliance effort regarding inspections intended to catch any failing blades before they fail in service.
-
Seems like more of an airflow issue. :) Does certification cover things like cowling parts/aircraft separation?
Stuff happens. I had a glove come out of a meat bombs jumpsuit and fly back to jam between the elevator mass balance and the end of the stab which locked that elevator up right the heck now. :)
I would imagine a contained failure has to meet certain criteria regarding collateral damage. These cowl failures are alarming.
-
So...
SWA sent out some info to help clarify some of the incomplete reporting going on about both this tragic incident and the last time a motor failed in a similar fashion.
Grossly simplified summary:
After the last engine failure, SWA participated with both the investigation and in the process recommending preventative measures. When the AD and required inspections came out last time, SWA felt that the required inspections were not comprehensive enough and so went quite a bit beyond the required inspections.
After this incident, SWA has already gone beyond the new inspection requirement, and is in the process of inspecting every single motor on the wing in addition to the already increased routine inspection cycle.
None of that can take back what happened, but I think it shows that SWA takes this extremely seriously and is not going to be satisfied with a minimal compliance effort regarding inspections intended to catch any failing blades before they fail in service.
Good, to the point, addition Eagl. Thanks! It’s the Southwest culture to do it right the first time and not just meet the standard but, exceed it. Safety first.
-
I would imagine a contained failure has to meet certain criteria regarding collateral damage. These cowl failures are alarming.
I wonder, in the grand scheme of things, given the tens of thousands of airline flights every day, how frequent are these failures. Or, is it just the ability of people to take photos, post to social media, and make it look like a panic situation, and then the news media grabs it and off they go.
-
I wonder, in the grand scheme of things, given the tens of thousands of airline flights every day, how frequent are these failures. Or, is it just the ability of people to take photos, post to social media, and make it look like a panic situation, and then the news media grabs it and off they go.
...more the latter. More people die in car accidents LAST YEAR than have died in civilian and military aircraft, including all wars since WWI. Yet the media looses their mind when there is a single fatality involving an passenger aircraft.
-
...more the latter. More people die in car accidents LAST YEAR than have died in civilian and military aircraft, including all wars since WWI. Yet the media looses their mind when there is a single fatality involving an passenger aircraft.
Zactly! Then people start deciding they’ll never fly again and go hop in a car. Go figure.
-
I wonder, in the grand scheme of things, given the tens of thousands of airline flights every day, how frequent are these failures. Or, is it just the ability of people to take photos, post to social media, and make it look like a panic situation, and then the news media grabs it and off they go.
Well, there is that. But I don’t take comfort in seeing the front cowling coming off of so many of these wing-mounted engines (737, A320). Maybe they’re designed to shear off on purpose to protect the wing structure, in which case I am at a loss for how you mitigate more damage.
-
People get killed on airplanes. Time to just ban them all. That will solve the problem.
:cheers:
people use their own things to kill themselves. time to ban them all.
semp
-
I would imagine a contained failure has to meet certain criteria regarding collateral damage. These cowl failures are alarming.
I found this video of destructive testing of fan blades. There are many more on line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcALjMJbAvU
I believe the engine manufacturers are required to certify containment. I think its inappropriate to question Southwest Airlines Safety protocol when no one is discussing GE engines manufacturing standards.
-
Good point Busher.
-
Good point Busher.
Yep. Which is what I’m referring to a few posts back regarding certification.
Good post Buster.
-
This wasn't the first engine to disentegrate. In fact, in 2016 an engine disentegrated on a flight over Florida. Now windows are blowing out for no reason. Southwest has been fined numerous times.
The biggest FAA fine against Southwest was $7.5 million in 2009. The FAA said Southwest kept 46 planes flying even though they had skipped critical inspections of the fuselage for metal fatigue.
Five years later, the FAA proposed a $12 million fine over 44 planes that had undergone improper fuselage repairs while at a contractor hired by Southwest. The airline settled a lawsuit by agreeing to pay $2.8 million.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-southwest-airlines-safety-investigation-20180424-story.html
-
This wasn't the first engine to disentegrate. In fact, in 2016 an engine disentegrated on a flight over Florida. Now windows are blowing out for no reason. Southwest has been fined numerous times.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-southwest-airlines-safety-investigation-20180424-story.html
Nobody is perfect. Subcontractors are not directly controlled by the airline.
We have had issues with some of ours in the past. We aren't set up for heavy maintenance so we have no choice but to use manufacturer-approved vendors. Some are good and some are not. Sometimes you find out the hard way.
-
Nobody is perfect. Subcontractors are not directly controlled by the airline.
We have had issues with some of ours in the past. We aren't set up for heavy maintenance so we have no choice but to use manufacturer-approved vendors. Some are good and some are not. Sometimes you find out the hard way.
Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect.
-
Another incident with a Southwest window today
https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2018/05/02/southwest-airlines-flights-diverts-because-cracked-window/573435002/
-
Another incident with a Southwest window today
https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2018/05/02/southwest-airlines-flights-diverts-because-cracked-window/573435002/
Seems to me this is a Boeing/Certification thing again. Just like when the Comet was ripping itself apart or the old 737's were blowing their tops off. We learn by doing but that usually comes with a price, unfortunately.
-
Now windows are blowing out for no reason.
What windowS are you referring to? At least know the facts before making a lame accusation. You know good and well there was a reason for the Flt 1380 window.
Southwest has been fined numerous times.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-southwest-airlines-safety-investigation-20180424-story.html
As have most other airlines for one reason or another.
-
Nobody is perfect. Subcontractors are not directly controlled by the airline.
Although subcontractors are not directly controlled by the airline, the airline is directly responsible for the subcontractor. The FAA will hang both if proper procedures are not followed.
-
Although subcontractors are not directly controlled by the airline, the airline is directly responsible for the subcontractor. The FAA will hang both if proper procedures are not followed.
That’s precisely my point. Sorta. Nobody can “control” a subcontractor, really. The FAA does (tries) via PMIs, enforcement, and so forth. If they do a bad job you usually find out well after the fact—and you fine or fire them.
You can delegate authority but never responsibility. It’s the nature of the beast.
-
Although subcontractors are not directly controlled by the airline, the airline is directly responsible for the subcontractor. The FAA will hang both if proper procedures are not followed.
True. Southwest doesn’t tolerate substandard work from contractors.
-
What windowS are you referring to? At least know the facts before making a lame accusation. You know good and well there was a reason for the Flt 1380 window.
As have most other airlines for one reason or another.
Another Southwest jet made an emergency landing for a window blowing out.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/02/us/southwest-flight-957-unplanned-landing/index.html
My job in real life is to study trends and predict when equipment is going to fail. Southwest may have been a stellar airline when you worked for them, but the evidence is mounting against that. A bunch of small events usually lead to a big event. For whatever reason you are being very subjective about this event. I'm being objective. Southwest was fined millions of dollars for failing to inspect aircraft and to continue to fly with critical repairs. An engine disentegrated in mid-air in 2016. An engine catastrophically failed in April. A window blew out at altitude in May. Something isn't right.
-
What is the incidence per mile flown, as compared to other airlines?
-
What is the incidence per mile flown, as compared to other airlines?
Probably identical. But SWA is a cycle generator more than distance. They fly shorter average legs than everyone else. Cycles are the most important factor for this sort of thing.
-
Another Southwest jet made an emergency landing for a window blowing out.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/02/us/southwest-flight-957-unplanned-landing/index.html
My job in real life is to study trends and predict when equipment is going to fail. Southwest may have been a stellar airline when you worked for them, but the evidence is mounting against that. A bunch of small events usually lead to a big event. For whatever reason you are being very subjective about this event. I'm being objective. Southwest was fined millions of dollars for failing to inspect aircraft and to continue to fly with critical repairs. An engine disentegrated in mid-air in 2016. An engine catastrophically failed in April. A window blew out at altitude in May. Something isn't right.
Evidence is mounting for what? That cycles cause wear? These airplanes aren’t old even by that measure. If there is a problem here then it is the manufacturer’s.
SWA generates way more cycles than anyone. They fly a LOT LOT LOT. More flying means more exposure to risk and thus more incidents. Southwest’s safety record beats everyone in the business.
If you study this for a living then you KNOW that it is the RATE that matters, not the total number of incidents.
Windows fail. It happens. I’ve had three delaminations in my airplane type over my career. It had nothing to do with our maintenance. It was the manufacturing. Those windshields are no longer made and are being replaced on-condition by a better version fleetwide.
-
Evidence is mounting for what? That cycles cause wear? These airplanes aren’t old even by that measure. If there is a problem here then it is the manufacturer’s.
SWA generates way more cycles than anyone. They fly a LOT LOT LOT. More flying means more exposure to risk and thus more incidents. Southwest’s safety record beats everyone in the business.
If you study this for a living then you KNOW that it is the RATE that matters, not the total number of incidents.
Windows fail. It happens. I’ve had three delaminations in my airplane type over my career. It had nothing to do with our maintenance. It was the manufacturing. Those windshields are no longer made and are being replaced on-condition by a better version fleetwide.
Agreed. SWA is known for happy staff - and that includes their maintenance workers. Happy/confident workers tend to not cut corners and actually look for ways to improve quality of work done, with better efficiencies in repairs and procedures that make sense.
Some points:- Want to see an airline with lots of issues - then look at how they treat their maintenance teams.
- If they outsource the entire maintenance program, they don't really care about quality - it's another companies job (until there is an issue)
- Several large airlines are using foreign OVERSEAS maintenance providers with 'questionable' reporting requirements to the F.A.A..
- Eventually, you'll run into issues if you're constantly racing to the cost-control bottom at the expense of quality work at the risk of safety of your passengers.
- The job of almost all service providers is to do work for your customer, closest to the minimum specified in the service agreement to be as profitable as possible.
And I can guarantee you, those that outsource do a risk calculation on the cost savings of outsourcing their maintenance work verus in-house over a period of time against the payout they would face to families if they have a major incident. After all, it's about profit, not people.
-
Another Southwest jet made an emergency landing for a window blowing out.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/02/us/southwest-flight-957-unplanned-landing/index.html
My job in real life is to study trends and predict when equipment is going to fail. Southwest may have been a stellar airline when you worked for them, but the evidence is mounting against that. A bunch of small events usually lead to a big event. For whatever reason you are being very subjective about this event. I'm being objective. Southwest was fined millions of dollars for failing to inspect aircraft and to continue to fly with critical repairs. An engine disentegrated in mid-air in 2016. An engine catastrophically failed in April. A window blew out at altitude in May. Something isn't right.
You are not being objective if you intentionally misrepresent the information in your own link. The precautionary landing in Cleveland was for a cracked window. It was not blown out. Read your link again and look at the picture. Either you have something against Southwest or you don’t have a grasp on facts, or both. What ever your agenda is about Southwest, it is not based on factual information.
-
What is the incidence per mile flown, as compared to other airlines?
That’s a question DaveBB needs to research and present the facts versus his agenda driven comments.
-
You are not being objective if you intentionally misrepresent the information in your own link. The precautionary landing in Cleveland was for a cracked window. It was not blown out. Read your link again and look at the picture. Either you have something against Southwest or you don’t have a grasp on facts, or both. What ever your agenda is about Southwest, it is not based on factual information.
This is a good point.
The original window failure that brought all this on wasn't even related to this one. That incident was due to an engine failure and the window was broken as a result of collateral damage. Windows rarely just break to the point of total failure. They crack and delaminate sometimes, heck they even blow off because someone used the wrong size screws to fasten them (British Airways 5390, BAC-111, June 1990), but they don't tend to "blow out" without some sort of trauma.
-
What is the maintenance schedule for windows? Is there one?
-
What is the maintenance schedule for windows? Is there one?
The jets go through a comprehensive maintenance schedule with specific depth of inspection at progressive time points. Not sure how the windows fall in that schedule. Every 7 days, a Southwest mechanic does an airworthiness inspection on each jet and signs it off. Again, not sure what the specific requirements are of that inspection. The mechanics would typically show up after the last leg of the night and start looking at the overall condition, lights, systems, etc as we gathered up our gear departed for the night.
As stated previously, Southwest Mechanics have plenty of skin in the game. They do not take shortcuts and will not hesitate to take a jet out of service if it doesn’t meet Southwest’s high standards.
This current dust up in the “news” media is a result of a slow news day. There are mechanical issues with airliners every day. Those issues are dealt with properly by the flight crews and mechanics. The jets continue on or are taken out of service.
Airliners are kept in far better mechanical condition than the average person takes care of their car.
-
The jets go through a comprehensive maintenance schedule with specific depth of inspection at progressive time points.
Correcto Puma... airplanes have a maintenance schedule similar to that of a vehicle. (from 737 Heavy Maintenance)
The 737 like all airliners undergoes periodic heavy maintenance this page describes soem of the maintenance programs and checks involved.
The first photograph below was taken whilst the aircraft was on a D check as part of the end-of-lease process. Most airlines lease rather than own their aircraft. Large airlines will often place a large order for aircraft with the manufacturer, then as soon as they are delivered, they will immediately sell them to a leasing company and lease them back on a fixed term, say for 7 or 9 years. This frees up capital for the airline.
One of the conditions for the handback of the aircraft to the leasing company is that the aircraft is returned to the lessor in as good a condition as it was given. Whilst it is impractical to have a 7 year old aircraft in new condition, the accepted compromise is that a heavy maintenance program be completed before handback. With the typical high utilisation of a low cost carrier this equates to a P48 check which has a maintenance interval of 24,000 flight hours (FH). Such a check used to be known as a “D” check.
The maintenance check periods and nomenclature is approximately as follows:
A check – every 500 FH. Now known as a P1 check
B check – every 6 months. Often incorporated into A or C checks
C check – every 4-6,000 FH / 2-3 years. Now P8, P10 or P12 checks
D check – every 24-40,000 FH / 9-12 years. Typically a P48 check
For example, a D check they basically strip the interior of the aircraft and then to x-rays of various key components, looking for micro fractures and other stress related issues to major components not visible with the human eye. Nowadays, they also use AI software to assist mechanics in the analysis of the x-rays and other safety systems.
737 gutted for a D inspection
(http://www.b737.org.uk/images/heavymaint.jpg)
-
What is the maintenance schedule for windows? Is there one?
Every single part on the airplane has a schedule. A Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP) is how most do it. Everything is in the computer and at specified intervals the airplane is given a workover. As the plane ages the inspections become more intense until we get to the 144-month at which time the airplane is almost completely rebuilt. Then it starts over.
Windows are in this program but they’re also on-condition (like any part) meaning you replace them if something is wrong. We have manufacturer criteria for tolerance on things like delamination or scratches. Anything too big or too deep means we replace it.
EMBRAER actually tracks every single part in the fleet and can give you a predicted failure time/date. If the plane is in for inspection and a part is closing in on it’s expected failure it can be proactively replaced.
At the end of the day this is why the industry went almost a decade without killing anyone. It’s an amazing thing.
-
Pre flight, through flight, post flight, phase minor and major (typically dependent on flying hours), depot level maintenance and all sub systems have their own work carded items that have inspection intervals aligned with phase, depot and and system specific requirements.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Great info Fork! Interesting how much factual information can be found with a little effort vs making up info to support a slanted agenda. Thanks for the effort and posting. :aok
-
Pre flight, through flight, post flight, phase minor and major (typically dependent on flying hours), depot level maintenance and all sub systems have their own work carded items that have inspection intervals aligned with phase, depot and and system specific requirements.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Depends on utilization. There is a high utilization and a low utilization schedule. Hours *AND* cycles are determining factors in each. If you reach an hourly limit first you do the inspection on that basis. If you reach a cycles limit first you do it for that reason instead.
-
Yeah minors and majors, it’s what I do for a living 20 yrs +
It’s all based on calendar and hours
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Yeah minors and majors, it’s what I do for a living 20 yrs +
It’s all based on calendar and hours
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Depends on the utilization. We have inspections due on CYCLES, hours, and the calendar. I do this for a living, too, and every time I sign for the airplane I'm responsible for ensuring I do not overfly any of the three.
:salute
-
Oh I agree with you brotha, without cats like you and I ain’t a darn thing taking off.
<salute>
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Oh I agree with you brotha, without cats like you and I ain’t a darn thing taking off.
<salute>
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Amen. You guys are the best. :salute
-
Ditto! :aok
-
You are not being objective if you intentionally misrepresent the information in your own link.
Speaking of being objective, do you work for Southwest?
-
Speaking of being objective, do you work for Southwest?
No, he does not, and neither do I. But we both have an understanding of how things work on the inside--him more so than I in this SPECIFIC case.
Next.
-
Speaking of being objective, do you work for Southwest?
Yes, until mandatory retirement activated. Why do you ask?
-
Speaking of being objective, do you work for Southwest?
If you're worried about objectivity perhaps I can help, as I am a full-time A&P mechanic working on part 121, 125, 135 and 91 certificated cargo and passenger aircraft, who has no affiliation with Southwest.
Would I hesitate to fly on Southwest? No. Nor would I hesitate to fly on any major carrier world wide. One only needs to look into the numbers to understand why. Because statistically flying on any major airline is probably the safest activity I could be doing at any given time.
From the FAA,
"Every day, the FAA's Air Traffic Organization ( ATO ) provides service to more than 42,000 flights and 2.5 million airline passengers across more than 29 million square miles of airspace"
So an average of 2.5 million passengers every single day. Multiply that by the nearly 10 years without a fatality and you odds of being a fatality over 10 years are something like 1 in 9 billion (obviously decreasing odds the more often you fly, but you get the point) Just for context you odds of being killed by a lightning strike are 1 in 700,000, and the odds of being killed by a shark attack are 1 in 3.7 million.
Now just because the industry has achieved such an amazing safety record does not mean that the FAA and the companies they oversee aren't continually striving to do even better. That's what ticks me off so much when Chuck Schumer spouts off that FAA safety has "taken a nose-dive." with his only basis being that maintenance fines have dropped off.
As anyone in the industry can tell you fines have dropped because the FAA has learned that gathering good data for analysis is a far better proactive way to improve safety then simply fining the crap out of people and companies. Turns out people are less likely to admit an honest mistake or voice a safety concern when they're afraid of losing their career or costing the company millions of $$ over it. Voluntary disclosure programs like ASAP and NASA reports for individuals and VDRP and SMS programs for companies have made a way for individuals and companies to come forward with honest mistakes, close calls and safety concerns without worrying about losing their career, or crippling the company by doing so. The data and trends are collected, analyzed and shared among companies who use it to proactively improve safety.
-
Well said Saggs! It ignorant twits like Schumer that hamstring the industry by shooting from the hip.