SWISS RJ100 diversion to FRA.

[AN2 Driver]

According to a press release by SWISS International Airline:

(original in German, translation is mine)

"An aircraft of SWISS had to divert from it's flight from AMS to ZRH today because of a double engine failure. The 4 engined Avro RJ100 HB-IXU with flight nr LX725 with 51 Pax and Crew on board landed normally at 11.20 at FRA and the passengers were able to leave the aircraft normally. A technical evaluation is under way. The passengers onward travel is organized by our handling company Swissport. "

News report by Swiss National TV was indicating that one engine might have failed uncontained, damaging the other one.

No further information, apart from a job well done by the professionals up front.

Best regards

AN2 Driver.

(And before anyone jumps on me, I know that is what they train and get paid for).

(edited to get rid of an unscheduled and quite misplaced Smilie)

SWISS have just confirmed the sequence of events as follows:

In cruise at FL290, an "explosion" occurred in No 2 engine. The aftermath seems to have damaged No 1 engine sufficiently to fail it as well.

This information, presented by the head of flight safety within Swiss (Jürg Schmied) confirms the uncontained engine failure previously reported.

Best regards

AN2 Driver.

[Sharjah Night Shift]

It made it to a stand at T2 under it's own power with the fire trucks following behind. Didn't see the landing as they were landing on the 07s and I was waiting to board the midday BA flight to LCY.

[AN2 Driver]

Following sequence of events now indicated by SWISS:

- Vibration warning Engine No 2.
- 5 seconds after first warning, Engine No 2 suffers uncontained failure.
- Immediately after the failure of No2, Fire Warning No 1 triggered on Flight Deck.

Both engines secured and aircraft landed in FRA without further incident. Pax on TV state visible damage on Engine No 2.


Best regards

AN2 Driver.

[Teddy Robinson]

Well done to the crew... that was a nasty one .. a day when simulator meets real life. Good job well done :ok:

[False Capture]

Well done crew. I feel sorry for the person sitting in seat 8A, however, it could have been a lot worse.:ugh:

[UNCTUOUS]

Immediately after the failure of No2, Fire Warning No 1 triggered on Flight Deck.

Could just as likely have been due to the #1 engine's fire-warning wiring being hit by shrapnel where it passes by the #2 pylon (in the same wire-bundle as the #1 fire-warning system's wiring) along the wing leading edge (i.e. possibly nothing wrong with #2 at all).

If so, that'd be an undesirable design feature perhaps.

[safetypee]

Fire warning wiring routing – an undesirable design feature UNCTUOUS? More likely the failure of the engine structure to contain the rotating components or other bits; not in acordance with certification requirements.

[lomapaseo]

thereof i.a.w. certification requirements.



:confused:

No idea what is being said here

[EGAC_Ramper]

International Air Worthiness Certificates ..............I'd hazard a guess at it meaning.


Regards

[Radarero]

I was working the sector next to the one in which this happened. (the Frankfurt sector) and heard what the (female) pilot said, sounding very unhappy.
"we lost engines Number one and two"
She declared emergency by saying three times MAYDAY, seldom heard over the radio in live-traffic.
Losing both engines on one side is´nt really funny, is it?
Supervisor went crazy when the controller reported him that they lost two engines on their "Regional Jet", he thought it was a Canadair Regional Jet having only two!

[Robert Vesco]

thereof i.a.w. certification requirements. In accordance with certification requirements maybe?

Still no idea what is being said here though. :confused:

[lomapaseo]

quote:thereof i.a.w. certification requirements.

In accordance with certification requirements maybe?

Still no idea what is being said here though.

No worries, the original poster edited his words so now, nobody else knows WTF we're talking about as well.:}

[gofer]

Guess this could raise the old old discussion as to whether its better to have 2 or 4 sets of noise generators - and yes if you have one on either side it is less likely that one going bang affects the other one, but it makes you think doesn't it.

A clear Mayday was exactly the right call - or has anybody got a better idea - instant attention, all the help you could wish for to put it down and emergency services in case it goes wrong

"Good job well done", even if it is what you're paid for and train for. And take those comments about it being a female captain positively guys, as my daughter keeps on reminding all of us, the "right" man for the job is always a woman.
:ok:

[Dagger Dirk]

Would have to agree with UNCTUOUS. I've seen a turbine wheel disruption on #3 in an Electra that simultaneously brought on a firelight in #4. Both bottles into #4 achieved nought and as we suspected, it was later proven to be a case of the flying bits and pieces of the #3 Allison turbine wheel chopping up a wiring harness loom that ran past #3 (and out to #4).

But when you're in that position with a firelight (but an otherwise normally functioning engine), what do you do? Best advice I ever had was to sit on your hands, chomp on an apple, and if there's no visible or instrument indications by the time you've reached the core of the problem, you can then reasonably conclude that apples ain't necessarily apples - (once they've been chomped).

[lomapaseo]

A study of collateral damage to engines in adjacent nacelles (e.g. B52, B1, Jetstar, etc.) has shown that in the event of an uncontained engine failure the likelihood of affecting the adjacent engines fire warning system was extremely high, while the liklihood of disabling the adjacent engine was very low.

Thus a conclusion that pilot training and response would provide adequate protection against an aircraft loss in most cases.

[ph-heineken]

Thumbs up for the crew! :ok:

cheers.

[banana head]

Well I'm looking at photos of the damage here and clearly an uncontained failure of Eng #2 occured. The entire right side of Eng #1 is covered in shrapnel holes, some as big as a closed fist. I think it's safe to say physical debris found its way out of Eng #2 and into Eng #1.
Not the first uncontained failure of an LF507 / ALF502 either. Seem to recall a PSA 146 suffering a number of fatalities / serious injuries when debris from a failed Eng #2 punctured the cabin around row 7 / 8.
Always a risk when 2 engines located so close together.

[lomapaseo]

How about a link to the photos.

I don't recall previous fatalities

[safetypee]

lomapaseo, clarifying my previous post; it would be incorrect to judge that the aircraft had an undesirable design feature (UNCTUOUS ). The certification requirements insist that all of the large rotating components be fully contained. Where smaller debris are uncontained the exit path must not (should not) infringe a given safety area that contains the critical aircraft components – fire wire, fuel pipes, wing structure, etc.
banana head No fatalities or major injuries have resulted from uncontained engine failures in BAe146 / Avro RJ aircraft.

[lomapaseo]

clarifying my previous post; it would be incorrect to judge that the aircraft had an undesirable design feature. The certification requirements insist that all of the [/b]large rotating components be fully contained. Where smaller debris are uncontained the exit path must not (should not) infringe a given safety area that contains the critical aircraft components – fire wire, fuel pipes, wing structure, etc.


Sorry but my pedantic part offers a correction.

The only engine alone certification requirement is that the debris from the release of a single large blade need to be shown.....

The only aircraft alone cerification is that any potential uncontain debris that is aimed at critical structure have its effect on the aircraft be minimized to the extent that it is likely that the aircraft will survive.

Thus it is not a failure of a specific certification requirement if the engine is uncontained and just happens to take out another engine or system.

If service experience does reveal a likelyhood of an undesireable outcome than corrective action must be empolyed under the requirements of Continued Airworthiness (fix it in a reasonable time frame)

[Vick Van Guard]

No fatalities or major injuries have resulted from uncontained engine failures in BAe146 / Avro RJ aircraft.

I was under the impression that many years ago a -200 aircraft suffered an uncontained failure of the fan on the number three engine. Several people have told me that this resulted in the death of the passenger sitting adjacent to it.

On the ALF 502 the fan has a overspeed protection system designed to cut the fuel off when the fan speed reaches 104%. Unfortunately in this instance there was a fault in the system and it didn’t overspeed shut down, so the fan sped away to destruction.

As a result of this incident all 502's were modified to incorporate two overspeed systems that are independent of each other.

I have seen the aircraft in question and it does have a couple of large skin patches adjacent to the number three engine!

[xodus]

Certainly fatality in states out of newark I believe, engine two came into the cabin. early 90,s...

[safetypee]

Vick Van Guard, xodus nothing in the records about fatalities nor a fan failure. However, I recall a report that part of the centrifugal compressor was uncontained during an engine failure in China. Also, a turbine blade did make it as far as the cabin when an engine failed in Mexico due to a bearing failure after poor maintenance.

[Vick Van Guard]

Vick Van Guard, xodus nothing in the records about fatalities nor a fan failure.

It was E2039. :ok:

[lomapaseo]

It was E2039.

Please translate:confused:

[KADS]

lomapaseo -

He is referring to the "serial#" of that specific a/c...