Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Completely closed means full thrust? (not familiar with terminology).
Closed is idle. They needed to descend right now.
Quote:
Does setting a modern jet engine to full thrust - a jetliner engine, not a higher-performance engine like in a fighter - increase the chances of failing the engine? Most engines I am familiar with, running at max power does increase the chance of failure, although generally the increase is small.
Not really. You use what you need in an emergency situation.
Quote:
I would think the engine gauges in the cockpit make it clear which engine failed, plus the un-commanded yaw towards the side with the failed engine. I would guess you could hear a noise, too, but maybe the cockpit is too far away from the engine to hear much.
You would know these things, enlighten us.
Yeah, between the gauges and yaw, there is little doubt as to which engine failed. If your ears and lungs aren't enough, the cabin altitude warning horn blaring like a NY taxicab will ensure that you know there's been a decompression.
At the height of 32K feet where the incident occurred, they would have been able to glide to a couple airports - they were over very developed territory. They also wouldn't need much engine power since they automatically get momentum from losing altitude.
I think the glide ratio of that plane means it could have gone 90+ miles without any engines. Lancaster, PA has a 150 ft by 6800 ft runway that seems "in spec" and probably many others (military, etc.)...
But once the situation was somewhat under control, they probably elected to go to Philly for better rescue setup and also ease of re-routing the passengers and servicing the jet.
As far as takeoff, remember it's not the engine - it's the effective airspeed of the aircraft. If they are headed into a 20 MPH headwind and have a long runway, they could gain speed much faster, even on one engine (fuel load and plane load important also)...
It says a lot that they are now allowing 737's to cross the big pond. That means it has pretty much proven that it can get on one engine to an airport anywhere along the way. Not to make it sound simplistic, but they have a way of rating and approving these things based on criteria such as that.
Even many of the US Flight Paths are within glide ratio of an adequate airport (for 737) for much of their flights.
The big danger here would have been either fire or the pieces cutting some of the control mechanisms, etc - but, then again, I suppose a fighter pilot could even counter most of those. The ride might be rougher tho.
I think the reason she requested to go to Philadelphia was because she wanted to use the 12,000 foot runway. She was pretty clear that she wanted the longest possible runway. She probably wasn't sure she could stop the damaged plane on a 6800 foot runway. At that point she knew that she had one fatality, other injured passengers, and she was missing part of her plane. I'm pretty sure that re-accommodating passengers and servicing the aircraft was the least of her concerns. IMHO. Though the better emergency services at Philadelphia probably did play into her decision too.
I think the reason she requested to go to Philadelphia was because she wanted to use the 12,000 foot runway. She was pretty clear that she wanted the longest possible runway. She probably wasn't sure she could stop the damaged plane on a 6800 foot runway. At that point she knew that she had one fatality, other injured passengers, and she was missing part of her plane. I'm pretty sure that re-accommodating passengers and servicing the aircraft was the least of her concerns. IMHO. Though the better emergency services at Philadelphia probably did play into her decision too.
Correct. They did not use full flaps on the aircraft for landing. This was most likely due to not know the extent of any damage that the aircraft had, and the possible effect on performance. Also deals with the leading edge slats, which were obviously damaged. Because of this, they were landing at a higher speed, and needed a longer runway. The better emergency service availability is a big plus, and the time in the air between available airports was most likely negligible at best.
SW 737 take a beating year after year. I can't think of any other airlines. that have as many puddle jumper flight segments. Flights like that must really take a toll on an aircraft. Plus many of their aircraft seem rather old.
This is essentially the fault of the maker of the engine. Since engines are constantly being refined and changed, no airline or maintenance worker can be expected to know what to check and how to check it...unless it is specified in the manual.
Each time they improve these engines to get 2 or 3% more MPGs out of them, they have to make things lighter (or at least different). When you change anything...everything changes.
Not sure where you get this opinion. Any changes to an engine, or procedure dealing with an engine, the maintenance personnel are trained/updated PRIOR to working on them, and being introduced into the fleet. New/updated parts just do not get put into an engine.
As far as lighter parts, sure, newer materials are being developed that are not only lighter, but stronger. A big win/win. And lighter? Guess that may be why Ford went to aluminum on their trucks.
SW 737 take a beating year after year. I can't think of any other airlines. that have as many puddle jumper flight segments. Flights like that must really take a toll on an aircraft. Plus many of their aircraft seem rather old.
I used to fly southwest a couple times a week & was a true fan for many years. I really think they’re growing a little too fast to preserve the culture that made me a fan. I don’t like any us airline better than southwest, but their customer service has definitely declined & I avoid air travel in general anymore.
I’ll be very disappointed if this failure turns out to be caused by penny-pinching, but I haven’t seen any evidence of that. That said, my opinion doesn’t matter much specifically because I’d much rather have a colonoscopy and a root canal at the same time without anesthesia than jump on another plane. The airlines and the TSA have changed the calculus to the point that 4hrs in the air vs 3 days on the road isn’t a slam dunk anymore.
Correct. They did not use full flaps on the aircraft for landing. This was most likely due to not know the extent of any damage that the aircraft had, and the possible effect on performance. Also deals with the leading edge slats, which were obviously damaged. Because of this, they were landing at a higher speed, and needed a longer runway. The better emergency service availability is a big plus, and the time in the air between available airports was most likely negligible at best.
Mark
I don't fly turbines, so don't know, but I would think using the thrust reverser on the good engine could cause adverse yaw so they may have not had that available either.
Southwest did have another uncontained engine failure on 27 August 2016 12 minutes after takeoff. It was a very similar incident, although no shrapnel entered the plane.
The aircraft then diverted to Pensacola International Airport for a safe landing on runway about 20 minutes later without further incident. While the aircraft sustained substantial damage, there were no injuries. The aircraft involved was a 16-year-old Boeing 737-7H4 (WL) (registration number N766SW), delivered to Southwest in May 2000. The jet was subsequently returned to service and as of April 2018 is still flying for Southwest.
This incident involved about 17 minutes to divert to Philadelphia airport.
This type of engine is very common and over 30,000 have been sold.
Silly to think that all of their 737s should be grounded. If any should be, it would be those that are older, or of similar age. Thst's a fraction of the fleet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
