Ahh, it's a nacelle failure, NOT an engine failure
Originally Posted by
jaytee54
That's ahead of the fan! Would blades come off and forward? In all that inward airflow?
Don't flatter yourself and your engineering knowledge.
Can't you see that a significant part of the first stage low pressure compressor fan appears intact along with the spinner?
If you remember anything about convergent flow in ducts, you will remember that the static pressure in an accelerating stream of fluid/air flow drops compared to that of the freestream (external/adjacent to the cowl opening). There is a net suction inside the lip of the nacelle/cowl opening.
It's highly likely that the material that separated from the forward cowl/shroud initially was sucked inward in relatively large pieces, making it less likely that pieces of any significant size were ingested into the engine core. Some smaller pieces of debris may in fact have passed through the bypass (cold air) section of the engine.
Originally Posted by
Uplinker
Isn't there supposed to be a kevlar blanket around the circumference of the fan to contain loose blades ??
Ah, not where there are not turning/burning engine components. This is an area of cowl/shroud AHEAD of any spinning parts (low pressure compressor). And there's no evidence that any blades of any sort were liberated.
Originally Posted by
PAXboy
As the failure is on the inboard side - what happened to the portside fuselage?
You are assuming that high speed rotating objects were liberated from the engine/cowl.
That may not be the case, especially if the relatively light structure which 'disappeared' was sucked in towards the centre of the cowl/shroud.
Originally Posted by
jaytee54
That's ahead of the fan! Would blades come off and forward? In all that inward airflow?
Do you even understand what you are looking at ?
Originally Posted by
underfire
well, they did get a video chat from the engine! What is wrong with the press?!?!? I listened and I heard visual check, not video chat.......
I bet that the inspection and repair requirements of the cowl on that engine has been moved up!
http://services.casa.gov.au/airworth...011-0173R1.pdf
From the EASA AD identified by the link above, it seems that modifications were required to be incorporated to a number of A330 aircraft. Later build aircraft appear to have been delivered with modified cowls. Seems to me like a design/analysis screw up. Possibly the need to beef up the acoustic treatment/damping of the inner surfaces was identified at some point without properly assessing whether additional beefups were required at panel perimeters where attached to more substantial structure.
This AD goes back to 2011 with a revision in 2014.
An Airbus SB afford inspection and subsequent modification action.
One wonders if the airline has evidence of compliance with the ADs/SBs?