Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
seriously, is it possible to simply be too close to the inlet without the engine being anywhere near full, even if it were at say idle? Like if I were right up against the lip of the inlet, compared to the inlet's size, I would be a big profile, yes?
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Sfomb67 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 417 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5846 times:
This goes to show how dangerous it can be working around "live" aircraft at an airport. I'm only glad I wasn't there to witness this as I'm sure this is something you have nightmares about for a long time.
Pilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3136 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5817 times:
On another fourm I'm a member of, one of the members said he was a good friend of this mechanic. He was the guy's personal mechanic and just performed an annual on his 172. It was sad to read. Yet another reminder that those of us out on the ramp have perhaps the most dangerous jobs in aviation. Be careful out there everybody.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13742 posts, RR: 63
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 5671 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 9): Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 6):
Those lines only apply to an engine running at idle. If it is running at full power the danger area is much larger
Agreed.Isn't that area denoted by a Red Vertical line on the Fuselage near the Fwd cargo door on the B737 classics.
Yup. But these lines only apply under ideal conditions, idle power, dry, not slippery ground, no wind. Any change of these factors will increase the danger area.
At full power the danger area actually extends to several yards in front of the aircraft nose, e.g. at idle the danger area is a 180 degree arc of about 6 meters radius from the fan (NOT THE EDGE OF THE INLET, THE DANGER AREA REACHES AROUND THE INLET TO ABOUT WHERE THE FAN COWLS MEET THE INLET COWL), but at take off power the radius will be about 20 meters.
The whole suction is treacherous as well, because the airflow will start almost unnoticably, but increase rapidly getting closer to the engine. And if anybody has ever watched the video showing the guy being pulled into the inlet of an A-6 Intruder on the aircraft carrier, he will see how strong the forces are. The man was lifted into an inlet well avove his head (Luckily he survived, because he got stuck on an inlet guide vane and his helmet got torn off first and jammed the engine a split second before the man would have reached the fan).
TimT From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 168 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5547 times:
I've done many engine trim runs with the cowling open for idle adjustments, then closed for power, both in the test cell environment and on wing. On a high bypass engine at idle, the most difficult thing is getting past the wind generated by the fan. TOTAL concentration on the task, coupled with a very high level of situational awareness is an absolute need. Above idle, I'm not getting close.
The number 1 rule of avaition; ( I don't remember the exact wording, but it's something like this)
Aviation is, in and of itself, not inherently dangerous. But, to an even greater degree than the sea, it is less forgiving. -author unknown
I always hate to hear about anyone getting hurt, much less losing their life. My sympathies to the family and friends.
Fr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 4978 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5273 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 16): Attached to the Engine Flange in the safe zone.Like the JT8D has for Trimming purposes
I've worked at 3 operators who operated the JT8 in its various incarnations and never once used or seen used the harness. Why? One reason I can think of: safety.
If we are running an engine, the last thing I want to do is to be tied to that engine. Normally, we as a maintenance group, are around a running engine, under the cowl, performing a leak check or in the instance of older engines, doing trim runs. These engine, because they are under maintenance, may not perform properly. When a fuel line sprays fuel, I want to be able to clear the engine immediately. When an oil line ruptures, same thing. Hydraulics, run away. Ever seen a JT8 stall during a trim run?
It's not a bad idea, I think the risk of something going wrong during at engine run for maintenance out-weighs the potential benefit of a harness. Granted, the benefit being the mechanic doesn't get chewed up, but I can now count on 2 fingers when this has happened. I can't even count high enough the amount of times I alone have moved away from a running engine because I didn't like what it was doing. Did I aviod injury? In some cases yes, in most, no, because no injury was going to happen, but I value the ability to retreat.
Again, nothing beats situational awareness when we are operating engines.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away. Never leave your cave without your club.
Wrighbrothers From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 1875 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5249 times:
This reminds me of a guy at BOAC,
The man was wearing a hooded coat, and was standing by the engine of a 747 on an engine test run (100 %) and the hood got sucked into the engine, bringing the man along with it, and he got sucked onto the blades of the engine, He survived amazingly, but lost an arm and leg (although I'm not sure if he lost his leg too) in the process.
Not a nice thing to have happen to you.
Always stand up for what is right, even if it means standing alone..
Gunships From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 574 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4989 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 5): Quoting Pilotpip (Reply 4):
There's a reason that there are red lines painted on the nacelle that you're not supposed to go past while the engine is running.
Unless I'm mistaken (and that's a real possibility), aren't the red lines shown in the picture posted by HAWK21M meant to illustrate the turbine plane of rotation? As far as I know, these do not exist to warn of the danger of ingestion, but rather to illustrate the plane at which the T-wheel is turning.
In the event of an uncontained failure of the turbine wheel, this is the "most likely" path the fragments would take as they exit the cowling. Basically, it's there to remind you stay in front of or behind the plane of rotation.
777WT From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 874 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4976 times:
Quoting Gunships (Reply 20): In the event of an uncontained failure of the turbine wheel, this is the "most likely" path the fragments would take as they exit the cowling. Basically, it's there to remind you stay in front of or behind the plane of rotation.
The turbine wheel is at the BACK of the engine, not in the front. That's the fan.
The line is where the fan disk is at and it has a small warning image which is a half radius red filled in circle which means danger area to be at when the engine is running.
About the fragments path, it's designed to contain the fragments and shoot it out the back as the regulations and certification requires.
During testing and certification, the engine has an explosive bolt or other means to release a fan blade at 100% power and see if the contamination shield contained the fragment parts and eject it out towards the back. This was done on the GE90 engine in the building of the 777 video, the kevlar liner did contain the fragments and it was shot out back as excepted.
The uncontained engine failures are rare but still happens such as the delta MD-80 fan disk broke through the shield and penetrated the hull which was a long time ago.