Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pictures Of An Uncontained PW4056 Engine Failure.  
User currently offline747classic From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 2218 posts, RR: 14
Posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 25236 times:

The first photos are emerging from an uncontained PW 4056 engine failure of a Delta 747-451 aircraft en route from Detroit to Narita.
This accident happened on Oct 23, the aircraft involved was N661US, an ex NWA 744.

See : http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest


Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinegokmengs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1125 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 24437 times:

Thanks for sharing this. Uncontained engine failures are rare events really.
What is te status oftne ac as of today? Can anyone share some info.
Thanks



Gercekleri Tarih Yazar Tarihide Galatasaray
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 2, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 24340 times:

Just to attempt to head off the inevitable...the photos clearly show liberation of multiple rotating components in the turbine section. This is *not* necessarily a condition that the engine containment is designed to handle. The regulations require containment of the most critical blade and related debris, not multiple blades or pieces of rotor. The fact that bits got out of the engine in this scenario is why the airframers design for rotor bursts.

Tom.


User currently offlinegokmengs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1125 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 24289 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 2):

Thanks for the explanation as always. So just looking at the damage in these pictures does not confirm uncontained failure? The design was successful in holding the critical blade contained? Thanks



Gercekleri Tarih Yazar Tarihide Galatasaray
User currently offline747classic From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 2218 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 23911 times:

This event could be within the design containment limits of the engine, fact is that several high energy debris, blade fragments,etc. came out of the engine (partly through the engine casing - NOT fan casing) and have damaged parts of the primary flight controls (ailerons) and secondary flight controls (TE and LE flaps).

This classifies this event as an accident according ICAO.

In depth investigation will reveal if the damage is outside or inside engine containment limits.



Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
User currently offlineThrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2691 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 22284 times:

I'm assuming this is not a write-off? To my knowledge, N661US is the first Boeing 747-400 off the production line.


Fly one thing; Fly it well
User currently offlinelitz From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1788 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 21939 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Per Flightaware (e.g., take with grain of salt), it has not flown since the incident.

That being said ... again with a grain of salt ... as long as the whizzing bits of escaped turbine blade didn't do anything major to the airplane itself, it should be a fixable issue, one would think.

What's the status of engine spares might be a better question to ask ...


User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6194 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 21939 times:

Quoting Thrust (Reply 5):

The engine will be a write-off. But the plane doesn't seem to have any damage, so No.



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 21035 times:

Quoting as739x (Reply 7):
The engine will be a write-off. But the plane doesn't seem to have any damage, so No.

'


Ehh, not according to the article.

"On return to Detroit post-flight inspections revealed severe damage to the engine and wing with large holes noted in the cowling as well as damage to slats, flaps and aileron. "



PHX based
User currently offlineN685FE From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 451 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20922 times:

We have covered this before, but let's refresh....
FAA & NTSB defines an accident and regulations for an uncontained failure as follows,

http://www.airsafe.com/events/define.htm



http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Uncontained_Engine_Failure



http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...570d5006ff49b/$FILE/2005-25-09.pdf


http://faa.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/faa....RzPSZwX3B2PSZwX2N2PSZwX3BhZ2U9MQ!!


http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...047AC852565C500612017?OpenDocument

From the description of the article, the damage to the wing would be the most critical component involved and the type of repair to it, major or minor, would define the classification.



psp. lead by example
User currently offlineflyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2030 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 20682 times:

Quoting litz (Reply 6):
Per Flightaware (e.g., take with grain of salt), it has not flown since the incident.

Correct. The airplane is still up at the hangar in DTW.

Quoting 777STL (Reply 8):

Ehh, not according to the article.

"On return to Detroit post-flight inspections revealed severe damage to the engine and wing with large holes noted in the cowling as well as damage to slats, flaps and aileron. "

Nothing that can't be fixed.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5834 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 19896 times:

Ouch!

Quoting flyinryan99 (Reply 10):
Nothing that can't be fixed.

But is it worth the cost of the necessary repairs to the wing on a 1989 744 that probably is close to 100,000 hours?


User currently offlineN685FE From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 451 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 18644 times:

That all depends on which bean counter you ask. Some view the capital expense for an out right puchase to save on fuel out weighs operating a payed off a/c. Most airlines have a mix of owned and leased a/c, so it just means playing with the numbers to support the direction you want to go. It also depends if you have any -400's that are in storage and could be returned to service for a lower cost then the repairs required for this one.
If you were to ask me, and delta plans to keep the 747 in their fleet, I would repair if possible. If it did need to be scrapped, I would replace it if needed with another used frame rather then purchase a new frame. With such a small fleet of 747's it would make sense to plan a fleet upgrade rather then stick a single -8 (if it were even available) into the fleet of -400's. The commonalities between the two would help but running a single or couple of new -8's would prove expensive within just a couple of years.

[Edited 2011-11-03 11:38:33]


psp. lead by example
User currently offlineflyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2030 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 17938 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):
But is it worth the cost of the necessary repairs to the wing on a 1989 744 that probably is close to 100,000 hours?

Depends on the insured value of the aircraft...my guess is they have a very high deductible like $500k to $1M. Also, if the engine failed itself and was not caused by ingestion, then the engine failure is not covered. So, that being said a new engine would be needed plus their deductible before they hit their insurance. Delta can decide not to fly it anymore and scrap it, but the aircraft itself won't be totaled unless there is spar damage or something like it. I'm sure I would've heard it if it was going to be a big loss  


User currently offlineSEA From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 17491 times:

Quoting Thrust (Reply 5):

First off the production line, but 6th delivered.


User currently offlinesgtusmc96 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 16067 times:

The engine is a total write off like stated before. Other than that all the other damage was minimal. Some composite work and light sheet metal work and whole lot of inspections. A/C should be back in the air by the end of the weekend.

User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5834 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 14957 times:

Quoting sgtusmc96 (Reply 15):
The engine is a total write off like stated before. Other than that all the other damage was minimal. Some composite work and light sheet metal work and whole lot of inspections. A/C should be back in the air by the end of the weekend.

Good to hear. With the description above, I was thinking this was a VH-OQA sort of situation with the wing...


User currently offlinewn700driver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11029 times:

Quoting SEA (Reply 14):

First off the production line, but 6th delivered.

Correct. I believe N663US was actually the first in service; also a NW turned DL machine, of course...


User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3188 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9599 times:

Quoting sgtusmc96 (Reply 15):
The engine is a total write off like stated before. Other than that all the other damage was minimal. Some composite work and light sheet metal work and whole lot of inspections. A/C should be back in the air by the end of the weekend


The linked article stated that only 16 747's were painted to DL colors that in its self would indicate 64 turbines in service.
Whether that is leased power by the hour or DL owned in any case with 64 active turbines of the same model there more than likely more than one spare power plant somewhere in the system that was looking for a home as the 400's start to wind down.
I agree that since nothing was mentioned about structural damage or fuel tank leakage. Just some sheet metal work and a few replaceable/repairable parts the plane will be back in action in short order.
I am thinking there are a few that are either trying to compare the major structural damage to QF's 380 to minor sheet metal work or in a hurry to push DL's 744's to VCV

Okie


User currently offlinetraindoc From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 9132 times:

Very reminiscent of the QF engine failure on climb out from SIN! For whatever reason, this incident got almost no media coverage. What we don't know is what systems were damaged by the shrapnel exiting the engine. Any guess as to why the media seem to have ignored this potentially serious event? (Aviation Week excepted)

User currently offlineKDTWflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 835 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6979 times:

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/D...5/history/20111023/1925Z/KDTW/KDTW Here you guys can see it orbiting around dumping fuel after the failure. Pretty crazy stuff. At least the engine remained on the pylon unlike the Kalitta B741 which LOST an engine over Lake Michigan and made an emergency landing at DTW. As of now N661US is still stuck in DTW.


NW B744 B742 B753 B752 A333 A332 A320 A319 DC10 DC9 ARJ CRJ S340
User currently offlineKDTWflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 835 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6688 times:

I think they will repair it because even if they were going to scrap it wouldn't they have to fly it out to say AZ or something? Or maybe leave DTW on 3 engines haha?

BTW here are a couple vids of it dumping fuel over SE Michigan.

http://youtu.be/WrW_ClLvKFo

http://youtu.be/TToh1LPOBj4



NW B744 B742 B753 B752 A333 A332 A320 A319 DC10 DC9 ARJ CRJ S340
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 22, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6592 times:

Quoting gokmengs (Reply 3):
So just looking at the damage in these pictures does not confirm uncontained failure?

There are holes in the engine case...that confirms uncontained engine failure. But that's not necessarily a violation of any design requirements. There is a popular, but very wrong, belief on a.net that the engine is supposed to contain all failures. It's not...it's just supposed to contain some specific failures. The fact that an engine has an uncontained failure is, by itself, no evidence that there is a design problem with the engine.

Quoting gokmengs (Reply 3):
The design was successful in holding the critical blade contained? Thanks

Can't tell yet...if it was a blade failure that started it all, the engine failed (because it's supposed to contain the critical blade and any resulting debris from the failure). If it was a multi-blade failure, or FOD, or a rotor burst, then it may not be a design problem.

Quoting traindoc (Reply 19):

Very reminiscent of the QF engine failure on climb out from SIN!

Other than both incidents involving engines, not really reminiscent at all.

Quoting traindoc (Reply 19):
For whatever reason, this incident got almost no media coverage.

Because this one didn't do nearly as much damage to the airframe, did not (as far as the public evidence shows) demonstrate any design failure, and didn't endanger the passnegers, crew, or airframe.

Quoting traindoc (Reply 19):
What we don't know is what systems were damaged by the shrapnel exiting the engine.

We know it wasn't as bad as the QF A380 failure...this engine at least responded to commands and, according to all media reports, the shrapnel didn't sever any primary structure.

Quoting traindoc (Reply 19):
Any guess as to why the media seem to have ignored this potentially serious event?

Because it wasn't nearly as serious.

Tom.


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...
I Got Pictures Of An Emergency Landing Today... posted Sat Aug 5 2000 08:19:00 by ATA757
Jettisoning Of An Engine? posted Sat Dec 12 2009 14:46:03 by TymnBalewne
Ntsb Seeks Help On WN Uncontained Engine Failure posted Wed Dec 19 2007 14:41:34 by N471WN
Austrian A319 Had An Engine Failure At IST posted Sat Dec 2 2006 11:58:49 by Wing
Pratt & Whitney Sued Because Of Engine Failure posted Tue Aug 22 2006 21:01:09 by RoseFlyer
Skymark B767 Suffers Uncontained Engine Failure posted Sat Dec 3 2005 19:45:47 by Dogfighter2111
Ever Experience An Engine Failure In Flight? posted Wed Dec 31 2003 16:37:22 by Thrust
Engine Of An AF777 Take Fire At HK posted Thu Jun 13 2002 08:05:34 by AOMlover
Uncontained Engine Failure On F100, MD-80, Etc posted Thu Apr 4 2002 19:39:13 by AM744
Contained & Uncontained Engine Failure posted Thu Jun 21 2001 04:20:46 by Trickijedi
Ntsb Seeks Help On WN Uncontained Engine Failure posted Wed Dec 19 2007 14:41:34 by N471WN
Austrian A319 Had An Engine Failure At IST posted Sat Dec 2 2006 11:58:49 by Wing
Pratt & Whitney Sued Because Of Engine Failure posted Tue Aug 22 2006 21:01:09 by RoseFlyer
Skymark B767 Suffers Uncontained Engine Failure posted Sat Dec 3 2005 19:45:47 by Dogfighter2111
Ever Experience An Engine Failure In Flight? posted Wed Dec 31 2003 16:37:22 by Thrust
Engine Of An AF777 Take Fire At HK posted Thu Jun 13 2002 08:05:34 by AOMlover
Uncontained Engine Failure On F100, MD-80, Etc posted Thu Apr 4 2002 19:39:13 by AM744