Worker ingested into engine
 

UK news reporting a fatality on the ramp

Very sad, condolences to the family of the deceased.

https://news.sky.com/story/airport-w...abama-12778307

Airport worker dies after being 'ingested' into plane engine in Alabama
 

An airport worker has died after being "ingested" into a plane engine in the US state of Alabama.

The accident happened about 3pm on Saturday at Montgomery Regional Airport after American Airlines Flight 3408 had arrived from Dallas.

The US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said the ground crew worker was "ingested into the engine" of an aircraft while it was parked at the gate, CBS News reported.

The worker - who was an employee of Piedmont Airlines, a regional subsidiary of American Airlines - has not yet been named.

The Federal Aviation Administration and NTSB are investigating the incident.

(Source: Sky News)

Taxiied in?
 

I read somehwre else that the airplane had just taxiied in and the worker cut in front of it for some reason. Not a reliable source though. Terrible!

Reportedly an Envoy Air (American Eagle) Embraer 175 (CF34).

Anything to do with reduced turnround times/efficiency drives ? The chap obviously felt he could get across to the other side to get the holds open earlier or to be in position to refuel, ..... then cut it too fine.
The 737 has the same lowslung configuration and had a mandatory 10 metre arc (IIRC) exclusion zone until the engines were stopped. This aircraft was apparently taxying in and could well have increased engine speed again until on the gate. Interesting to hear what the enquiry has to say about company apron safety procedures.

Allegedly an Embraer 175 with an APU deferred so they kept #2 running till ground power connected as a ramp worker approached to open cargo door.
Probably heard #1 wind down.

We keep #1 running in that case. Don't like it, but better than #2. You would think that in that situation everyone on the ramp would be briefed, outside of the ingestion zone, and extra careful. My experience with the rampers is they are undertrained, underpaid, and overworked. Get asked if they can disconnect power&air every day without the APU running, so obviously they have no clue. Not their fault, no training, lots of new guys.

Hans
great post,
Two years ago, our crew were meeting an A330, our SOP is not to chock mains until beacon is turned off.Newbie wandered out with the chocks, we literally screamed at him, he turned around to face us and continued walking backwards to within feet of the engine as if mesmerised. So not to spook him I just gave him gentle hand gestures to return. which he did but it knocked me sick to the pit of my stomach for weeks,,, That said I’m forever getting the lads to ask for power disconnect to prompt you to start the APU,,, as another poster mentioned time is of the essence and nose lifters can be a pain to attach with FEP cables draped everywhere.

Definitely would be traumatic to see. I see the cargo doors being opened before I turn the beacon off..... But you are my new enemy! we aren't supposed to start the APU till ETD-10 so guys asking me to disconnect 30 minutes prior bug me 🤣

Similar thing happened at the regional I worked for in MEM. Female ramper decided to cut between the fuselage and the running in feather #2 engine (to disconnect the APU IIRC). It was very dark on that ramp at night. She was killed instantly according to coworkers who were there. She was super tired because she was working full time/going to college by day. Sad deal.............

A few months ago we were dispatched with APU inop. Called ahead to ops, briefed them APU inop, no one to approach the aircraft except for putting the bridge and then ground power on. Shut down #1, leave the beacon on, lead ramp agent is giving the big X to keep everyone in position, yelling, pointing at the beacon ... people running all over the place including towards the engine. We shut down #2 immediately and left the pax in the dark. Both legs. It seems ground staff are not being trained or reinforced that this is a dangerous job.

Very sad.

A horrible, unnecessary and preventable death. At my current location it is mandatory SOP that no one approaches the aircraft until the beacon is off. If we get a heads up that the APU is inop then ground power and nose gear chocks go in, preferably with a headset man plugged in too. But, yes, there's a lot of new, young and inexperienced people out there who have had very little training. Mind how you go.

Tragic. How easy it is to lose concentration when doing the same thing day after day.

I'm reminded of a Christmas Day evening trip to Xiamen, China, over 30 years ago in a 737-200. Unserviceable APU and no GPU or Air start units serviceable on the field. Only a glorified tin shed as a terminal in those days and very poorly lit apron. Shut down #1 and disembarked pax via aircraft's own stairs, let cleaners on, shut L1 door, restarted #1 , X bleed start, then shut down #2, bags off loaded, outbound bags loaded, cargo doors closed, X bleed to start # 2, shut down #1, let cleaners off, very careful walk around while new pax boarding. Funnily enough the ground crew had no problem with it all , they did it frequently apparently but were adamant we had to wait until pushback was completed before starting #1 again as they considered it was too dangerous with both running.

Makes you wonder whether a beacon light could be more prominently displayed adjacent to the engine intake(s)
.

Great suggestion.

For the 737NG for example, Boeing quotes a danger zone defined as a 10 foot arc centred on the CFM56 nose cone at ground idle and 14 feet at higher power settings.

There are few, if any points within those arcs where the existing beacons aren't visible.

A beacon/light on the engine intake might make the association of "This Engine is Engine Running" more obvious. The ground staff rushing to open cargo doors adjacent to a still running Engine #2 in a common scenario. Rush Rush is the culture of LoCost Travel and contracted airport providers.

It's also more polite than my first idea which was a neon light next to the aircraft cargo door flashing "F##k Off Suicidal Tw#t"!

I'm all in favour of safety and innovation (Thinks - did I really need to say that), but what we have at the moment is a situation where every certified commercial aircraft has one or more anti-collision beacons at prominent location(s) on the fuselage/empennage. Everyone, globally, who works airside in any capacity knows that if they are flashing then the aircraft is live, the engines could be running, and the aircraft can be expected to self-manoeuvre and to operate external control surfaces without further warning. If they don't know that then they are not properly trained or supervised, and additional lights are unlikely to change that. This situation has existed for decades. The only airframe I ever had trouble with was the Dash-8 which (in my experience) only had a fin-top beacon.

Just off the top of my head, aircraft currently operating with engine intakes at pedestrian level include all generations of 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, 787, A300 series, A319/20/21, C series (by whatever name), Avro (by whatever name) E-170 (etc), CRJ-Series ........

Manufacturers of such aircraft include Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier, Embraer, Sukhoi, Mitsubishi, Antonov ........

National Airworthiness Agencies with primary responsibility for certifying these types include USA, UK, EASA, Brazil, Japan, Canada, Ukraine, Russia (yes Russia) ..........
And their military Airworthiness Agencies.

This proposal is only going to be worth spit if it is adopted universally, otherwise a complacency may arise that no nacelle-beacon means "safe". So all we have to do is to get all those manufacturers to agree a system of lighting, have it approved by their Airworthiness Agencies, and have all the customer airlines agree an implementation process (to including legacy airframes). And this thread is only looking at an engine incident; what about the hazard from an errant flap or aileron?

DD, couldn't have put it better. Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) principle. However,, with the race to the bottom ongoing,I don't see things changing soon. Standardizing procedures worldwide is a no brainer, but with the presssure on turn around times, sadly people will die.
God bless. Matt..

I’ve never flown E175 but I’ve been told the air hookup under the fuselage requires moving in close proximity of engine #1, hence #1 being shut down and #2 running while waiting for GPU to be connected.

Too late now, but perhaps the air hook ups, external power etc should be designed to be away from the danger zone front of the engines, though in this day an age you would think an LED illuminated engine running sign could be incorporated in the fuselage or cowling sides adjacent to the intake.

Correct.

Ground Air Con and Engine Air Start are 8 and 9 respectively:

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....cfbb4e305f.jpg

So, pilots expect air-conditioning to be connected before engine shutdown now?

With the best will in the world, this would involve a radical and impractical redesign of the air supply systems, and Ground Pwr panels are already a long way forward of the engines.

As others have said, no need for LED's showing an engine is running....because there's a much cheaper solution.

You know, as well as I do, the RAF went to great lengths to stress the dangers of jets, props and rotors, but even then incidents sadly occurred, however, the key point is, the dangers were constantly emphasised and displayed.....it's called training and education which, along with supervision, is a remarkably effective way of ensuring safety for all and everybody involved in ramp operations.

Live aircraft are a paradox....they are inherently safe....and also inherently lethal....if you become complacent or don't receive the appropriate level of training along with continuous awareness of the dangers.

I do accept however that, no matter how much emphasis is placed on safety, humans are remarkably adept at finding ways to kill or maim themselves.

I also accept, having seen it many times over the years, the same emphasis isn't going to feature with ramp service providers.

Macabre I know - but what exactly happens to a person in this case? Are we talking pink mist or McNugget mix?

If you search the Internet there are images available of previous incidents. My advice. Don't do it.

For passenger comfort yes, also for engine start during quick turnaround.
It’s simple really, shut down #1 get air hookup, get ground power and shut down #2.

That is why I said too late now, the design is done and dusted and in production, one was thinking ahead for future aircraft.

Yes we did go to extremes in the RAF to prevent it, however it still did not prevent them all .

So where should the LED illuminated engine running sign be located for the exhaust jet blast? There have been numerous injuries and deaths caused by jet blast.

You could have then installed in the outer and inner cowl? Just an idea.. rather like this electro illuminated panel

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/2285...umber-el-panel


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....09bc46c065.jpg

In fact you can now get Electro luminescent paint, so you could literally spray the cowlings and get the running engines cowls to light up!
Though it might not be as effective in daylight. I saw the stuff on Car SOS where they added a VW logo to a bonnet.

https://www.ellumiglow.com/electroluminescence/el-paint


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....fffbbde61.jpeg

Have you ever seen an airport at night? The ramp? It’s already a cacophony of flashing lights and rotating beacons and alarms and jet bridge beeps and sirens.
Lights on the engines won’t make a difference but be a feel good.
As stated before…in the rest of the world nobody approaches with a beacon flashing.
After a min or two you may get a polite reminder from the mechanic plugged into the nose gear.

Watch this and tell me you wouldn’t see it on a live engine, even if it saves one life it is worth it. And yes I have worked the ramp on airports for many years.

Problem solved:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e13b43ecd6.jpg

Yep, those boards over the compressor should stop all suction problems ;)

In the early days of pure jets and low bypass turbofans, ingestions were not particularly uncommon (although - thanks to inlet guide vanes - not automatically fatal). There is a pretty dramatic video on a US Navy carrier of a crewman getting ingested into (IIFC) an A-6 and surviving.
In the early days of the high bypass turbofans (where getting ingested is pretty much a guaranteed fatality), ingestions were almost non-existent. I suspect in part because the early widebodies put the inlets higher up, but mainly because people were justifiably scared of getting ingested and so were cautious.
As high bypass turbofans have come to dominate - and with much higher numbers of aircraft, many with the inlets at walking height - a combination of complacency and far more opportunities has combined to make ingestions more common.
Not much we can do about the increase in opportunities (SOP to protect from ingestions are already commonplace - if not always followed), but complacency can and should be addressed.

Seriously? You need conditioned air on arrival before engine shutdown?
Nonsense.

I was just reading that Stockholm experimented with projecting red traffic lights down onto sidewalks. Cell-phone zombies remained oblivious, as it turned out. But maybe it would work under a running engine?

Please explain to us how you survived all those years without it?
We’re all eager to learn.

Well…your opinion is hardly relevant as this is what was apparently the procedure with an APU inop that’s why #1 was shut down.
How many times does it have to be repeated?
Whomever hooked up the air didn’t walk into a running engine so which part of that process is nonsense to you?
The deceased made a fatal mistake.
I feel for the other rampers that had to witness this and I feel for the children that lost a parent.

One word….. Training