Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA1634 Engine "Blows Up" Today...  
User currently offlinesleekjet From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2049 posts, RR: 22
Posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 25522 times:

Departed San Antonio en route to O'Hare. The words of a passenger on board tell the story:

"I wanted to post to the group as soon as I landed. I was on AA1634. The engine basically exploded (internally) on climb out above the hill country, almost to Austin. I took another flight through DFW do get to ORD - so now I am in DFW.

There was a loud explosion and the captain addressed the PAX that we had lost an engine (right). We circled back and landed hard. We came in 12 from the west over 281. Stopped before the old terminal (quickly). Fire trucks checked us over for any fire - and there was none. Proceeded to gate B2 or 4 can't recall. The FD was still checking the engine with a thermal gun at the gate. It looked like the back of the engine was blown out. The crew did a great job. I thanked the pilots on the way out - but they were way busy with checklists etc.

Some interesting facts:

The plane was completely full (front & back).
We did not drop fuel. Which seemed weird right after take off.
Most of all, this bothered me:

The captain came on board prior to the flight to announce a mechanical. He said the thrust reverser in the right engine was not working, but it was not mandatory for flight. I fly a lot and that was the first I had heard that one. Anyway, as fate would have it, that was the one that blew.

I got on the ground and heard about the other flight had a bird strike. Fun day flying!"


That "other flight" he mentioned was an a/c which was on the runway and seemingly unable to exit the runway. Must have been a wild afternoon at SAT.


II Cor. 4:17-18
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBMIFlyer From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, RR: 58
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 25443 times:

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
We did not drop fuel. Which seemed weird right after take off.

MD80's don't have fuel dump capability  



Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15844 posts, RR: 27
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 25292 times:

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
The engine basically exploded (internally) on climb out above the hill country

Sounds like a compressor stall.

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
He said the thrust reverser in the right engine was not working, but it was not mandatory for flight.

Aircraft are not certified with the thrust reversers for takeoff or landing distances, so there is absolutely nothing wrong with having one, or even both, inop in most situations. In some instances, a plane with a reverser inop cannot be dispatched to certain places under certain conditions, if I remember correctly.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinesw733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6372 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 25269 times:

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
He said the thrust reverser in the right engine was not working, but it was not mandatory for flight. I fly a lot and that was the first I had heard that one.

ORD has some pretty long runways, and for an MD-80, a thrust reverser is far from necessary

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
We did not drop fuel. Which seemed weird right after take off.

BMI is right as he usually is - no fuel dump on the MD-80


User currently offlineB727LVR From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 630 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 25215 times:

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
He said the thrust reverser in the right engine was not working, but it was not mandatory for flight. I fly a lot and that was the first I had heard that one. Anyway, as fate would have it, that was the one that blew.

This is true, you can have an inop thrustreverser. This will make your landing roll a bit longer and and the brakes a little warmer, but it perfectly safe. I highly doubt that the problem with the thrust reverser, and engine are related. The only thing it does is re-direct the thrust to help slow the aircraft down. It doesnt change the operation of the engine.



I'm like a kid in a candy store when it comes to planes!
User currently offlinesoon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 25161 times:

I had a similar event on an MD-80 out of FLL. We departed out over the ocean on a still Sunday AM with a plane load, no vacant seats...I though to myself as the Hertz rental agency sped past us rapidly...'if an engine crapped out now...we are screwed"...well...it did happen but fortunately after we leveled off at 31K, #2 blew with 3 restarts...nothing...No word from the crew...flight attendants thought we "hit" something...I told them we had just lost the #2 engine...  Wow!,...the look on their faces scared me!...We diverted to Orlando with a foamed runway which we didn't need...turned out a Banderanti behind us belied in...no injuries...so much for a quiet morning. The next week the same #2 on a Delta Md-80 blew and it was uncontained...killed a mother and son seated adjacent to the engine. Blew a 1'x 4' hole in fuselage.

User currently offlineJpax From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 23819 times:

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 5):
if an engine crapped out now...we are screwed".

Why would you be screwed?

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 5):
The next week the same #2 on a Delta Md-80 blew and it was uncontained...killed a mother and son seated adjacent to the engine. Blew a 1'x 4' hole in fuselage.

Are talking about the mid-90's incident?


User currently offlineweb500sjc From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 756 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 23556 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 5):
I had a similar event on an MD-80 out of FLL. We departed out over the ocean on a still Sunday AM with a plane load, no vacant seats...I though to myself as the Hertz rental agency sped past us rapidly...'if an engine crapped out now...we are screwed"...well...it did happen but fortunately after we leveled off at 31K, #2 blew with 3 restarts...nothing...No word from the crew...flight attendants thought we "hit" something...I told them we had just lost the #2 engine...  ,...the look on their faces scared me!...We diverted to Orlando with a foamed runway which we didn't need...turned out a Banderanti behind us belied in...no injuries...so much for a quiet morning. The next week the same #2 on a Delta Md-80 blew and it was uncontained...killed a mother and son seated adjacent to the engine. Blew a 1'x 4' hole in fuselage.


Whta flight was the mother and son on, cause I ahve never heard of that flight...
Oh and I have never been on a diverted flight, science we seam to be talking about those



Boiler Up!
User currently offlinekearnet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 230 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 23405 times:

Quoting web500sjc (Reply 7):
Whta flight was the mother and son on, cause I ahve never heard of that flight...

DL flight 1288 on July 6, 1996.

Link to NTSB report: http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1998/aar9801.pdf


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9243 posts, RR: 76
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 23404 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2):
Aircraft are not certified with the thrust reversers for takeoff or landing distances, so there is absolutely nothing wrong with having one, or even both, inop in most situations.

No reverse is a dry runway takeoff/landing requirement, many FAR operators do account for reverse on wet and contaminated runways as additional distance is required.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineLARadar From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 23294 times:

I was supposed to be on that Delta flight out of PNS in 1996, and seated in the back. Two days prior to flying back to ORD via ATL from a family reunion, my mom and I decided to move my flight up a day early so I'd have an extra night to prep for my college summer school class. Needless to say the accident freaked me out, but even more so my mom.

User currently offlineAviatorcraig From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2010, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 16 hours ago) and read 20216 times:

Shock headline...

Non Rolls-Royce plane engine in failure horror!  Wow!



707 727 Caravelle Comet Concorde Dash-7 DC-9 DC-10 One-Eleven Trident Tristar Tu-134 VC-10 Viscount plus boring stuff!
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2038 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 15 hours ago) and read 19589 times:

Did QANTAS have a codeshare on the flight 


it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineAABB777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 613 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 15 hours ago) and read 19246 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2):
Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
The engine basically exploded (internally) on climb out above the hill country

Sounds like a compressor stall.

I've this happen - compressor stall - just after takeoff from DFW on an AA MD80. Loud boom, etc. The planed circled back around and landed safely.


User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3498 posts, RR: 46
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 13 hours ago) and read 17733 times:

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
There was a loud explosion and the captain addressed the PAX that we had lost an engine (right).

Standard compressor stall symptoms and... that is exactly what it was. You "lost an engine" because the crew shut it down.

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
We circled back and landed hard.

If you circled back to SAT then you were probably not "almost to Austin." The crew reported the compressor stall happened "early in the climb" which is why they chose to return to SAT rather than divert to AUS --which was farther away.

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
Stopped before the old terminal (quickly). Fire trucks checked us over for any fire - and there was none.

"Quickly" is a relative term. The crew reported a "normal" landing and the post-flight overweight landing maintenance inspection revealed nothing. Once called out the fire crews will continue to monitor the plane all the way to the gate -- unless called to another "emergency."

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
The FD was still checking the engine with a thermal gun at the gate.

Standard procedure for fire crews -- especially when they've got nothing else to do.

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
It looked like the back of the engine was blown out.

Was there bent metal anywhere? The right engine of an MD80 ALWAYS has black soot on the nacelle... from the APU exhaust.

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
We did not drop fuel. Which seemed weird right after take off.

As previously noted, MD80 has no fuel dump capability.

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
The captain came on board prior to the flight to announce a mechanical. He said the thrust reverser in the right engine was not working, but it was not mandatory for flight. I fly a lot and that was the first I had heard that one. Anyway, as fate would have it, that was the one that blew.

The LEFT thrust reverser was FIXED prior to your flight. The RIGHT engine experienced a compressor stall. Not only are the thrust reverser and compressor stalls not related, but they were on DIFFERENT engines.



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlineintheair10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 29 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 13 hours ago) and read 17254 times:

Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
The plane was completely full (front & back).
We did not drop fuel. Which seemed weird right after take off.
Most of all, this bothered me:

The captain came on board prior to the flight to announce a mechanical. He said the thrust reverser in the right engine was not working, but it was not mandatory for flight. I fly a lot and that was the first I had heard that one. Anyway, as fate would have it, that was the one that blew.

Dropping fuel isn't really necessary, there are procedures for performing an overweight landing. It has to be written up and inspected.

Thrust reversers are not required as the performance received in the flight release is predicated on using brakes only; for both a RTO (rejected takeoff) and landing.


User currently offlineRG787 From Brazil, joined Nov 2010, 135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 12 hours ago) and read 16439 times:

I know the thrust reversers are not necessary but I think it is time to change this. JJ 3054 crashed in Sao Paulo in 2007 not only because of a faulty thrust reverser obviously, but it helped to bring out the final result. Yes, Congonhas does not have a long runway but it is said that the crew could stop the plane if the conditions of the airport was ok. The thing is, during the flight it started to rain in Congonhas and bingo: you have the crash.

User currently offlinesoon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 12 hours ago) and read 16178 times:

Quoting Jpax (Reply 6):
Why would you be screwed?


At the point of time during the rotation and immediate climb out when I had that thought...positive rate of climb on one engine would have been doubtful...It was very warm/humid/ we were loaded and our ground roll was long as a no wind condition existed...

My event was two weeks before the Delta incident.

Around that point in time some bogus shaft bearrings had made their way into many JT8 powerplants (727, 737, MD-80's)and a rash of engine failures were making the news. The feds caught up with the guy and he is probably still doing time. So many engines had the parts that they could not do much about the issue until...(A)...the engine failed or (B)...the powerplant came time for overhaul. Either way, some bearring failures were the culprit while others were just other issues.


User currently offlinesuseJ772 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 826 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 11 hours ago) and read 14559 times:

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 17):
At the point of time during the rotation and immediate climb out when I had that thought...positive rate of climb on one engine would have been doubtful...It was very warm/humid/ we were loaded and our ground roll was long as a no wind condition existed...

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure in order for the plane to be certified, you have to be able to prove positive rate of climb on one engine at Maximum Takeoff Weight.



Currently at PIE, requesting FWA >> >>
User currently offlineMax777geek From Italy, joined Mar 2007, 538 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 11 hours ago) and read 13820 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2):

Aircraft are not certified with the thrust reversers for takeoff or landing distances, so there is absolutely nothing wrong with having one, or even both, inop in most situations

Am I wrong in thinking one engine out or one reverser inop deny the use of all reversers ? Wouldn't the use ot the spares give an asymmetrical braking, unless it is the #2 on a 3 engine like md11 or dc10 ?


User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3498 posts, RR: 46
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 10 hours ago) and read 12194 times:

Quoting Max777geek (Reply 19):
Am I wrong in thinking one engine out or one reverser inop deny the use of all reversers ?

Depends upon the aircraft and the airline's approved procedures. There is no such prohibition in the AA MD80 manuals.



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlinecschleic From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1306 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 9 hours ago) and read 11858 times:

I could be wrong, but if remember correctly, 757's don't have fuel dump capability, either. Not all planes do.

User currently offlineTravelAVNut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1670 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 9 hours ago) and read 11720 times:

Quoting suseJ772 (Reply 18):
Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure in order for the plane to be certified, you have to be able to prove positive rate of climb on one engine at Maximum Takeoff Weight.
Quoting suseJ772 (Reply 18):
Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 17):
At the point of time during the rotation and immediate climb out when I had that thought...positive rate of climb on one engine would have been doubtful...It was very warm/humid/ we were loaded and our ground roll was long as a no wind condition existed...

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure in order for the plane to be certified, you have to be able to prove positive rate of climb on one engine at Maximum Takeoff Weight.

..and maintain a certain climb gradient in order to avoid obstacles. Soon7x7, I was under the impression you knew that?

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 20):
Quoting Max777geek (Reply 19):
Am I wrong in thinking one engine out or one reverser inop deny the use of all reversers ?

Depends upon the aircraft and the airline's approved procedures. There is no such prohibition in the AA MD80 manuals.

The engines are very close to the fuselage with tail mounted engines, so the a-symatrical thrust would be negligible I guess.



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineboeing767mech From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1031 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 9 hours ago) and read 11570 times:

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 14):
Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
The captain came on board prior to the flight to announce a mechanical. He said the thrust reverser in the right engine was not working, but it was not mandatory for flight. I fly a lot and that was the first I had heard that one. Anyway, as fate would have it, that was the one that blew.

The LEFT thrust reverser was FIXED prior to your flight. The RIGHT engine experienced a compressor stall. Not only are the thrust reverser and compressor stalls not related, but they were on DIFFERENT engines.
Quoting AAR90 (Reply 14):
Quoting sleekjet (Thread starter):
There was a loud explosion and the captain addressed the PAX that we had lost an engine (right).

Standard compressor stall symptoms and... that is exactly what it was. You "lost an engine" because the crew shut it down.

This airplane DID NOT have a compressor stall, but a CONTAINED TURBINE FAILURE. and my sources tell me that the engine is being changed as I write this and will be back in-service sometime tomorrow.

And I'm surprised everyone hasn't asked so I will just throw it out there N424AA

David



Never under-estimate the predictably of stupidty
User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5312 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 9 hours ago) and read 11570 times:

After AA announced that it was going to retire the F100 fleet, I was on a fair number of F100 flights. I noticed that pilots were using much less reverse thrust, and sometimes no reverse thrust, when landing on long runways. My guess is that AA wanted to save as much wear and tear on the Tay engines, since they were going to be put up for sale.

So, if there hadn't been an engine failure, my guess is that the pilots would have begged off on an approach to a short runway at ORD, such as 22R, which is only 7500 feet.


25 B727LVR : On a 747 per the MMEL one reverser may be inoperative as long as the reverser on the opposite side of the aircraft is secured as well. Two may be ino
26 EMBQA : I can think of a few commercial aircraft that don't even have TR's installed. The BAe 146 and Avro RJ come to mind, and you can ordered the Embraer E
27 musang : Full reverse thrust is available on one engine on 737s also. No asymmetry issues. Regards - musang
28 n9801f : Another consideration could have been fuel price at the time. I've observed (unscientifically) that when fuel prices are extremely high, landings wit
29 BMI727 : Not necessarily, but it would require the pilots to hold against the yaw with the rudder (and on the MD-80 this effect would not be as pronounced as
30 B727LVR : Believe it or not, there is still a pretty noticable yaw. On one of my aircraft, one engine spooled up faster than the other, and you could feel the
31 BMI727 : There still is, but it is certainly not too difficult to handle that a pilot would not use the remaining thrust reverser if he thought it was necessa
32 soon7x7 : Your impressions are correct however I also remember that certification as called out, is also performed by test pilots with new airframe/power plant
33 Post contains images worldliner : Why haven't AA grounded their 767 fleet?
34 flylku : My dad claims that in the early days of the 747 (I believe the 200) Northwest actually had the reversers removed. The weight savings provided the ext
35 Post contains images AAR90 : Yeah, you mechanical folks get to see all the "good" details. The pilots know the SYMPTOMS, not what actually may have occured. I flew the F100 until
36 Post contains images TravelAVNut : My apologies for this terribly off-topic question; but how did she fly? I had my first jet flight with the F100 when I was 12 (Air Litoral). Way befo
37 Post contains images AAR90 : You're right, it is "off-topic." She flew like any other airplane: wings generate lift & up you go. Sorry about that. Send me private email with
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
MH 777 Engine Blows Up In Perth posted Thu Sep 21 2000 09:59:11 by Tim
Lion Air MD80 Blows Up Engine posted Sat Oct 14 2006 10:44:42 by Mandala499
Dash-7 3-engine Landing @ SIN Today posted Sat Nov 27 2010 21:42:29 by spiplane
Engine Start-up Noises/video posted Mon Oct 3 2005 18:43:18 by BR715-A1-30
YYZ - What's Up Today? posted Tue Aug 2 2005 22:07:57 by Vingt20cent
Airbus Engine Start-up's posted Sun Jul 24 2005 19:24:31 by CYEGsTankers
Saw A Twin That Landed Gear Up Today posted Fri Dec 17 2004 02:19:39 by HaveBlue
Why A Dead Silence Beefore Engine Spoils Up? posted Sat Jan 5 2002 08:11:01 by AirNewZealand
What's Up? Today's CA1002 HKG-PEK posted Sun Mar 25 2001 12:38:03 by Ryaneverest
What If WN Was Starting Up Today? posted Sat Mar 24 2001 21:51:35 by Kav92373