The leading edges of all aerofoils were literally beaten flat, the engine intakes and bullet fairings looked as though someone had worked them over with a ball peen hammer.
The surprising thing was that the first stage compressor blades were all intact with no visible distortion
when I saw the pictures of hail damage on this 747, my first thought was, "I've seen much worse hail damage". The composite radome will and does break, but I didn't see much damage to leading edges and engine inlet cowls, no cracked windshields (may be the pictures though). Here's a random example of worse looking damage: bmi G-MIDJ, where the
accident report stated "the manufacturer later confirmed that the aircraft was in a safe condition to continue to its destination". There's been some airliner accidents where storm cells with hail and rain caused flameouts due to water ingestion, but engines have been modified as a result (continuous ignition, fan shape). My point being, modern airframes are remarkably resilient, and while this is no excuse for risk-taking, I'm sceptical to the drama in media reports without seeing a full accident investigation. Just like I'm sceptical to pilots blaming fellow pilots based on hearsay. Medical doctors don't usually blame their brethren without clear and very convincing evidence, but a few pilots always seem to rush to vilify their colleagues. No blame culture my a**. Yet airline incidents seem to invoke some kind of primeval response in many people, and pilots get to be either villains or heros (both labels can be equally undeserved). I remember some psychologist who had a good explanation for this behaviour, I'll search for it
We may
never get to know much more about this particular incident though:
Delta notified the the National Transportation Safety Board about the incident, but reported no injuries, "no substantial damage" to the aircraft and no airframe penetration, NTSB spokesman Eric Weiss said. The incident is not under investigation, he added. He declined to provide more information.