Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
LeCoqFrancais
Topic Author
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:03 pm

NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:38 pm

An ANA All Nippon Airways Boeing 787-800, registration JA840A performing flight NH-959 from Tokyo Narita (Japan) to Shanghai (China) with 240 people on board, was accelerating the engines for takeoff from Narita’s runway 34L when the left hand engine (Trent 1000) failed with a loud bang prompting the crew to reject takeoff at low speed (about 20 knots). The aircraft returned to the apron, metal debris reportedly blades from the engine needed to be removed from the runway.

http://avherald.com/h?article=49c93f39
--
Not very good...
Sébastien C. Tourillon
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:55 pm

Statistically it will happen. Does anyone know the probability?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27457
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Sun Aug 14, 2016 3:08 pm

I expect it is pretty rare. Last one I can think of is the BA 777-200ER with the GE90 letting go during the take-off at Las Vegas last September (so almost a year ago).
 
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2237
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Sun Aug 14, 2016 3:50 pm

This might be the first for this variation of Trent engines. It does and will happen but glad it was at the beginning of the take-off sequence which makes this a low stress event....unless you are on FoD duty for that runway :)
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 21227
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Sun Aug 14, 2016 4:13 pm

This has several posibilities. There are steep thermal gradients in the engine. It is also a time the fluid seals in the engine are under the greatest stress. Centrifugal force grows the blades (Compressor and turbine) quickly during the spin up. The rotors bow. This could be FOD related, this could be a blade tip clearance issue, it could be several factors. I'll be very curious to know what happened.

Lightsaber
3 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
User avatar
NYPECO
Posts: 604
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:55 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Sun Aug 14, 2016 4:33 pm

boefan wrote:


Pretty soon we'll be seeing "Jet Aircraft EXPLODES on Takeoff" in news headlines.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12232
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:41 pm

NYPECO wrote:
boefan wrote:


Pretty soon we'll be seeing "Jet Aircraft EXPLODES on Takeoff" in news headlines.


lol.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
traindoc
Posts: 356
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:35 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 2:18 am

Impressive picture of engine flame out! Taken at just the right time.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8368
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 2:57 am

It might be the same thing that has been a known issue that Boeing has issued instructions to airlines that I I heard from a 787 certifying engineer.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27457
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 4:21 am

aerorobnz wrote:
It might be the same thing that has been a known issue that Boeing has issued instructions to airlines that I I heard from a 787 certifying engineer.


EASA issued an AD on the Trent 1000 back in 2013 for transfer gearbox failures, but I didn't see anything more recent regarding that engine family.

Are you maybe thinking of the AD issued by the FAA against the GEnx1B family for fan ice shedding?
 
downdata
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 5:37 am

Last time i flew on a JAL DC10, they had to reject the take off - guess this happens all the time
 
User avatar
CARST
Posts: 1565
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 5:56 am

Couldn't it have been a bird-strike?

Reminds me a little bit of this video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1jZvlFmqQU
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9726
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:01 am

SonomaFlyer wrote:
It does and will happen but glad it was at the beginning of the take-off sequence which makes this a low stress event...)


Well, at very low speeds, the thrust from the remaining engine could steer the aircraft right off the runway as it is at full power whereas the other one might not be producing any thrust at all creating a big imbalance in the thrust provided.
 
dashdrvr
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 4:54 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:54 am

AirPacific747 wrote:
SonomaFlyer wrote:
It does and will happen but glad it was at the beginning of the take-off sequence which makes this a low stress event...)


Well, at very low speeds, the thrust from the remaining engine could steer the aircraft right off the runway as it is at full power whereas the other one might not be producing any thrust at all creating a big imbalance in the thrust provided.

Actually the opposite is true. There is not enough forward movement to create much turning moment from the operating engine.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9726
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:57 am

dashdrvr wrote:
AirPacific747 wrote:
Actually the opposite is true. There is not enough forward movement to create much turning moment from the operating engine.


It depends on what speed band we're talking about. But you're for the most part wrong. I don't know if you ever tried both low and high speed RTOs in an actual simulator, but if you did, you'd know why I'm correct ;-)
 
itisi
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2016 12:37 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 8:55 am

Another one!!... Has the Jetstar 787 made it back from Guam yet?
737-300/400/500 ... are NOT classics :)
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11606
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:42 am

itisi wrote:
Another one!!... Has the Jetstar 787 made it back from Guam yet?


No its still there, been stuck there for just over a week now
Forum Moderator
 
chornedsnorkack
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:39 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 11:18 am

Does an engine failure at takeoff count into in-flight shutdown rate applicable to ETOPS, or are only engine failures in cruise relevant to ETOPS?
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8368
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 12:19 pm

Stitch wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
It might be the same thing that has been a known issue that Boeing has issued instructions to airlines that I I heard from a 787 certifying engineer.


EASA issued an AD on the Trent 1000 back in 2013 for transfer gearbox failures, but I didn't see anything more recent regarding that engine family.

Are you maybe thinking of the AD issued by the FAA against the GEnx1B family for fan ice shedding?


Possibly I am, yes. The thing is that the engines at my airline are RR though...
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 5:36 pm

Didn't see this posted here yet, here is a video of the engine failure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urpr59HpEuY
 
mats01776
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 5:57 pm

I thank god this did not happen at St Maarten.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:26 pm

Remarkable that it was caught on video. Here's another instance of spotters potentially contributing to aviation safety with documentation of an incident.

sunrisevalley wrote:
Statistically it will happen. Does anyone know the probability?


Not off-hand, but ETOPS sets a maximum rate, among other requirements. I can't seem to find the allowable in flight shut down rate for ETOPS 330 in a quick search, but for ETOPS 180 it's 1 per 50,000 engine hours. I think ETOPS 330 is 1 per 100,000.

According to All Things 787, there's been 446 delivered so far. They're probably accruing well over 1 million flight-hours (2 million engine hours) per year at this point. In flight shut-downs once or twice a month across the entire in-service fleet don't sound out of the question.

But not all shut-downs are equal. An uncontained failure is significantly more hazardous, as it can potentially damage other systems. There doesn't seem to be any word yet about visible damage to the cowling in this case, so I'm assuming whatever failed was contained, and the metal parts in question were ejected out the rear of the engine. If it wasn't contained, it's not unprecedented, and would likely result in added inspection requirements until a root cause is identified and addressed.
 
dashdrvr
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 4:54 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:41 pm

AirPacific747 wrote:
dashdrvr wrote:
AirPacific747 wrote:
Actually the opposite is true. There is not enough forward movement to create much turning moment from the operating engine.


It depends on what speed band we're talking about. But you're for the most part wrong. I don't know if you ever tried both low and high speed RTOs in an actual simulator, but if you did, you'd know why I'm correct ;-)

Yea actually I have. In various twin engine jets and props. I would take a low speed RTO over a high speed any day of the week including Sundays.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9726
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:49 pm

dashdrvr wrote:
Yea actually I have. In various twin engine jets and props. I would take a low speed RTO over a high speed any day of the week including Sundays.


I don't know what type you're flying, but the twin engine types that I've flown all show similar characteristics. At high speed, the aircraft is more stable and affected less due to a single engine failure with less yaw compared to a similar incident at lower speeds.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22034
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:07 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
Didn't see this posted here yet, here is a video of the engine failure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urpr59HpEuY


Interesting. Initially the flames come from the hot section but then there is some from the bypass duct. Perhaps the failure within the hot section reverberated to the N1 spool causing fan blades to strike the casing?

mats01776 wrote:
I thank god this did not happen at St Maarten.


Why? The procedures at SXM are written with the idea of an engine-out at V1 in mind. All airports are like that.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2380
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:13 pm

Technically (unless something surprising comes to light) this wasn't uncontained ... it worked exactly as designed : the debris went out the back end ... not through the casing (and the wing, and everything else).
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:44 pm

mats01776 wrote:
I thank god this did not happen at St Maarten.


It shouldn't strictly matter. Takeoff performance graphs and decision speeds are based on losing an engine. If they're legally flying out of St. Maarten, they should be able to safely abort or takeoff and go around depending on the speed at the time it happens.

Looking at the takeoff charts in the 787 airport planning document, at sea level on a hot (40 deg C) day, the 787 is good for up to 420,000 lbs out of St. Maarten. For 219 passengers at 250 lbs each (United 787-8 seat layout, seats full, plus a small amount of cargo), that gives a roughly 4000 nm range.

Of course, one of the things you can never have too much of in aviation is spare runway ahead of you, so SXM isn't high on the list of places you'd want to need an abort at. The concerning part about SXM isn't so much the rated runway length, but the short 150m long overrun areas. The crew doesn't have much time to delay an abort decision as they get close to V1, nor margin for miscalculating their takeoff weight (which has been a factor in a few accidents in the past).
 
mats01776
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:46 pm

DocLightning wrote:
Why? The procedures at SXM are written with the idea of an engine-out at V1 in mind. All airports are like that.


I was concerned about all those thrill-seekers clinging to the fence at the runway threshold.
 
TheF15Ace
Posts: 318
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:27 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:51 pm

mats01776 wrote:
I thank god this did not happen at St Maarten.


It was a low speed reject so it wouldn't have been an issue.
 
luv2cattlecall
Posts: 835
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:25 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:54 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:
mats01776 wrote:
I thank god this did not happen at St Maarten.


It shouldn't strictly matter. Takeoff performance graphs and decision speeds are based on losing an engine. If they're legally flying out of St. Maarten, they should be able to safely abort or takeoff and go around depending on the speed at the time it happens.

Looking at the takeoff charts in the 787 airport planning document, at sea level on a hot (40 deg C) day, the 787 is good for up to 420,000 lbs out of St. Maarten. For 219 passengers at 250 lbs each (United 787-8 seat layout, seats full, plus a small amount of cargo), that gives a roughly 4000 nm range.

Of course, one of the things you can never have too much of in aviation is spare runway ahead of you, so SXM isn't high on the list of places you'd want to need an abort at. The concerning part about SXM isn't so much the rated runway length, but the short 150m long overrun areas. The crew doesn't have much time to delay an abort decision as they get close to V1, nor margin for miscalculating their takeoff weight (which has been a factor in a few accidents in the past).



You're overthinking it! The comment probably was because of how close spectators on the fence would have been to the debris shooting out of the engine.
 
hivue
Posts: 2115
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 8:08 pm

AirPacific747 wrote:
dashdrvr wrote:
Yea actually I have. In various twin engine jets and props. I would take a low speed RTO over a high speed any day of the week including Sundays.


I don't know what type you're flying, but the twin engine types that I've flown all show similar characteristics. At high speed, the aircraft is more stable and affected less due to a single engine failure with less yaw compared to a similar incident at lower speeds.


I think the issue here is Vmcg, right? This event was going to be a non-event as long as the crew were prompt in rejecting the takeoff.

Although it's A and not B, this has a short discussion of Vmcg.:
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_g ... _SEQ07.pdf
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9726
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 8:19 pm

hivue wrote:
I think the issue here is Vmcg, right? This event was going to be a non-event as long as the crew were prompt in rejecting the takeoff.



Yes :-)
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 8:20 pm

AirPacific747 wrote:
dashdrvr wrote:
Yea actually I have. In various twin engine jets and props. I would take a low speed RTO over a high speed any day of the week including Sundays.


I don't know what type you're flying, but the twin engine types that I've flown all show similar characteristics. At high speed, the aircraft is more stable and affected less due to a single engine failure with less yaw compared to a similar incident at lower speeds.


Just about every recurrent sim I had threw in a low speed abort to demonstrate the control issues you have compared to a high speed abort -- especially if you have 115K on one side and 0 on the other.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:00 pm

luv2cattlecall wrote:
You're overthinking it! The comment probably was because of how close spectators on the fence would have been to the debris shooting out of the engine.


Good point. Thanks for bringing that up.

litz wrote:
Technically (unless something surprising comes to light) this wasn't uncontained ... it worked exactly as designed : the debris went out the back end ... not through the casing (and the wing, and everything else).


Contained vs. uncontained isn't about whether parts leave the engine, but how they get out.

Parts tumbling out the back usually counts as a contained failure. There's not much behind the engine to hit, and parts exiting the back tend not to be moving super fast (I wouldn't want to get hit by one as a bystander, but I'm a lot softer than a wingskin).

Uncontained refers to parts penetrating the engine casing or fairing, generally an event that means they have a lot of kinetic energy, derived from their high rotational speed before failure, and are a major hazard to surrounding hydraulic, electric, and fuel lines or tanks, or potentially even the structure and passengers. Qantas 32 is a really good case study on the matter, and fortunately one that ended well.
 
rcair1
Posts: 1147
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:39 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:54 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
Didn't see this posted here yet, here is a video of the engine failure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urpr59HpEuY

Reference all the discussions about controlability at low and high speed, watch the rudder. Pretty cool. Initially pretty hard right, as you would expect from a loss of #1, then pretty quickly pretty hard left as the right probably overcompensated when the power was brought back.
rcair1
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Mon Aug 15, 2016 11:41 pm

rcair1 wrote:
Reference all the discussions about controlability at low and high speed, watch the rudder. Pretty cool. Initially pretty hard right, as you would expect from a loss of #1, then pretty quickly pretty hard left as the right probably overcompensated when the power was brought back.


Rudder pedal steering. Hard right to prevent running off the runway to the left, then left to straighten out with the runway.
 
sixtyseven
Posts: 830
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:42 am

Re: NH Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner rejects take-off because of engine faillure

Tue Aug 16, 2016 4:48 am

Low speed rejected takeoffs can be a handful, and can become a real mess.

First you have little to no rudder authority. Nose wheel steering is available via rudder pedals but not a great deal of authority versus tiller.

Where things get dicey is the auto thrust and auto brake logic during a sequence like this. I'm not sure of the 787 but the RTO functions on the brakes won't arm until usually around 70+kts. More confounding is the auto thrust. In hold mode, the RTO logic won't apply until a speed somewhere in the 70+KT range as well. So when you retard the throttles to begin the RTO, they try and come back to TOGA and the brakes don't apply either.

In other words you have to disconnect the auto throttles and apply brakes yourself while the aircraft is trying to head for the weeds during a massive asymmetric thrust situation. Believe me as an instructor giving low speed rejects on the Airbus and 767 always opened eyes. These guys did well.

The Airbus wasn't as bad as the thrust levers wouldn't advance like on the 767.
Stand-by for new ATIS message......

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos