Germanwings aircraft loses part of engine

[Dimitri Cherchenko]

Tuesday 20 October, Euro Wings / Germanwings flight 4U592, an Airbus 330, from Cologne to Palma de Mayorca lost a piece of coverage of the left engine while taking off. Airport closed until debris were cleaned off. Flight continued to Palma.

http://www.20min.ch/dyim/ad13a6/M600,1000/images/content/1/9/6/19656082/2/topelement.jpg

20 minutes - Son avion s'effrite, le pilote trace sa route - Monde (http://www.20min.ch/ro/news/monde/story/Son-avion-s-effrite--le-pilote-trace-sa-route-19656082)

Köln-Palma 4U592: Germanwings-Flugzeug verliert Triebwerksabdeckung - DIE WELT (http://www.welt.de/vermischtes/article147853310/Flieger-verliert-Teil-in-Koeln-Pilot-fliegt-weiter.html)

[A4]

Continued to Palma........wow. This is the third or fourth cowl incident in a week isn't it?

A4

[ATIS]

CONTINUED TO PALMA!!!! Please tell me that's not true

Did EU261 sway the commander's decision by any chance. I'm pretty sure engines aren't designed to operate normally with all their pretty bits and pieces showing. Got lucky this time............but the next

[AlphaZuluRomeo]

Chill out: we don't know yet when the crew became aware of the issue.
First indications (swiss article linked above) suggest Marseille Center was the one that informed the crew, meaning the aircraft was at least above southern France, and perhaps already above mediterranean waters.

[Nialler]

Wouldn't the airport at least have advised flights which had departed of the issue with debris on the runway and suggested whatever visual checks were possible?

[Hotel Tango]

Who says there was debris on the runway? The photo would indicate that the part fell beyond the runway. Once reported lots goes into motion but it will take time before all crews are advised. This is why said a/c was probably well past the half way mark of a relatively short flight when they were informed.

[Simplythebeast]

How quick some people are to criticise a professional pilot without knowing the full facts.

[matkat]

Wonder why the other one never came of??

[DaveReidUK]

Wonder why the other one never came of??

It's not unknown for an A330 to lose a single cowl door (Canada 3000 in March 2000, for example), whereas the doors on the A320 almost invariably depart in pairs. Don't ask me why.

[Nialler]

@Hotel Tango:

The article written in French says that pilots reported debris on the runway and it was closed down for some time.

@Simplythe beast: I'm not blaming the pilots or anyone.

I'm just ointing out that there's something odd about the sequence of events.

[Less Hair]

Pilots have been informed about the incident by ATC while enroute in southern french airspace. They hadn't noticed anything before and decided to continue to Palma.

[Annex14]

May be it helps if some facts become recognized.
At the time of departure it was dark.
RWY 14L is situated to the east of the TWR.
Cowl separation happened on the left side.
With this basics in mind one must consider that ATC had no chance to observe the separation >> darkness >> engine concealed by the fuselage.
Apparently smaller debries were found by succeeding landing or take off.
Then RWY inspection followed by collection of parts and identification.
Only then it was possible and made sense to contact the correct flight.
There are reports that all this took about 45 min., this will take a flight from CGN to PMI into France airspace.
So seen the circumstances: no delay !! Yes may be some amount of luck and yes, someone on the ground might feel not so comfortable anymore.
In genaral it is a shame that every so often one or both of these cowlings start flying by themself!! Looks like the engineering performance on the locking and the lock control mechanism - if available - is not really brilliant !!

[Hotel Tango]

Nialler, I find nothing wrong with the sequence of events. We don't know how long after the departure of the affected aircraft the debris was reported. Believe me, as soon as ATC were notified they will have immediately set about gathering the details of all preceding departures and contacting adjacent ATC units. There will have been multiple departures all going in different directions and working different ATC units. It all takes time.

[oliver2002]

EW/LH internal news:

20 October 2015

D-AXGA safely landed in Palma

On today's D-AXGA Airbus flight 4U592 from Cologne to Palma de Mallorca, a part of the left engine cover loosened and fell off during startup (06:56 am). The cover was retrieved by the fire brigade next to the runway of the Cologne/Bonn airport after the A330 took off. The said part is a shroud from the middle ring of the engine.

In the cockpit there were no indications that the part of the engine casing had gone missing. The pilots were informed of the facts in French airspace. Since a safe flight was still ensured, the pilots decided to continue to fly to Palma de Mallorca as planned. The aircraft landed safely at 08.58 am in Palma. There was no danger for the 169 passengers and 13 crew members. The Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU) has been informed and together with Lufthansa Technik is examining why the part fell off.


A bit is lost in translation, but still it seems there was no reason to worry so the flight continued.

[Nialler]

@Tango Hotel, thanks.

Annex14 introduced the word "darkness" which would really explain at a stroke the timescales involved in communication.

There appear to separate accounts of when the pilots were told, but this explanation covers things largely.

[Fortissimo]

In the continue, return or divert debate, my considerations following a cowling loss would include lack of knowledge about the extent of other damage and the fact that you have no effective fire protection for the engine concerned.

i wasn't there and will not criticise, but I would be interested to know what the thought processes were and what other factors were in play.

[Hotel Tango]

For sure there will have been a discussion between the captain and the company's qualified engineer(s). They will have known a great deal more than we do here and made their decision based on the facts they had at hand.

[BARKINGMAD]

"Wonder why the other one never came of??"

Maybe it's because the Germanwings engineers are smarter than BA.

Maybe they've noted the risks of working on 2/2 engines on any 1 occasion without extra precautions being taken.

Maybe they've read the accident report to G-OBMM and paid heed to the recommendation regarding simultaneous critical work on both engines not be accomplished on routine basis.

Is this :mad:ing rocket science, or am I the only grumpy old f**t to have read this accident report and marvelled at how quickly the pumped-up young pipsqueaks who run todays airlines forget yesterdays mistakes?!!

:ugh: :ugh: :confused:

[DaveReidUK]

"Wonder why the other one never came of??"

Maybe it's because the Germanwings engineers are smarter than BA.

Maybe they've noted the risks of working on 2/2 engines on any 1 occasion without extra precautions being taken.

Maybe they've read the accident report to G-OBMM and paid heed to the recommendation regarding simultaneous critical work on both engines not be accomplished on routine basis.

I think the OP was asking why only the outboard cowl departed and not the inboard one on the same engine (given that they are latched to each other), rather than why the other engine wasn't affected.

Any suggestions?

[Nialler]

A question:

Is it also possible that the loss wasn't visible; that the cowling hadn't been positively identified as belonging to that particular aircraft and it was not possible to verify visually that it was lost?

I ask (as mere-SLF) because surely if it were visible a passenger might have called the loss to the attention of the crew, and because if it were the sort of event to trigger an alert on the deck it would have been spotted early in the flight.

Could it be that the warning to the pilot was that such an event had happened and that there was no indication was present to identify the particular aircraft.

Please forgive any abject ignorance behind the question.

[Denti]

Brand name Eurowings, on a Germanwings flight number, operated by Sunexpress Germany. Wonder which MRO they use.

[His dudeness]

MX apparently by LH - Technik

[NSEU]

It looks like the left hand fan cowl on the left hand engine (so invisible to the pax/crew).

I don't think all undercowl fire extinguishing capabilities would be lost. Looking at the books on the CF6, there doesn't appear to be any fire detectors in that left hand fan cowl area, but there may be extinguishing nozzles (?).

Apart from nacelle anti ice ducting, I recall the engine EEC lives there.
The electrics would be reasonably waterproof. The EEC has ambient pressure (Po) ports, but, if the crew reported no problems, I guess the EEC wasn't bothered by a bit of fresh air :}

[Less Hair]

German tabloid Bild posted passenger pictures taken during and after the flight. PAX noticed missing part and informed FA during the flight.

Airbus flog Triebwerks-Abdeckung weg: BILD-Leser-Reporterin berichten aus der Maschine - Leserreporter - Bild.de (http://www.bild.de/news/leserreporter/leserreporter/waehrend-des-fluges-fliegt-die-triebwerk-abdeckung-davon-43095840.bild.html#)

[Hotel Tango]

No, you can't see any missing part! What you can see is evidence that the top is unlatched.

[dbbass]

hi


The fire protection will be lost as it works only in a confined area, when the cowlings are closed and is anyway only working for fire outside of the engine.
There is a fire detection (loop) on both sides...
The EEC is in a protected blanket, no water ingression possible
EEC is normally cooled by a air scoop in the air intake, so in that case it was very well cooled.
If the pilot does not see (how could he) there is no way to know a cowling is lost except of the nacelle temperature indication if the aircraft is equipped..


And again there is a procedure in the AMM for all work requesting engine cowling opening.
Engine cowling opened for xxxx reason
Engine cowling closed Sign by X
duplicate inspection performed Sign by Y


Now in our engineering world we have the same as crew, we call it procedures.... of course if you do not follow....


Funny I did open a 330 cowling 2 hours ago... and closed it after all that handwriting.

[dbbass]

as far as visible it is the hinges and the most solid part of the big cowling, the rest being gone already...

[Annex14]

You should know to what kind of journalism BILD belongs.
Guess the pictures and the story made for a cheap / zero cost vacation !!
Seen the time of year and obvious time of day the in flight picture was taken this might have happened at about halfway the distance to PMI.
Though assumption, I believe by that time cockpit and cabin had the full information and picture.
Once again, much too much comotion afterwards.

[Less Hair]

Thanks I know what Bild is, this is why I wrote tabloid. The pictures are still interesting.

No, you can't see any missing part!
But the eyewitness did observe something go missing during takeoff and informed the FA.

[lederhosen]

This happened during the ramp up phase of a new long haul operation for Lufthansa under the Eurowings brand. The aircraft was previously flown by Eva air in Taiwan and the pilots come from Sun Express Germany a joint venture between LH and Turkish airlines.

The aircraft has been shuttling twice a day to Palma getting crews trained and testing the operation. It is probable that maintenance and trainers were being provided by Lufthansa. Exactly how enthusiastic everyone is about this new low cost experiment is unclear. What is obvious is that this is a not very encouraging start to the operation and will raise uncomfortable questions about interactions between various parts of the LH group.

In particular questions are bound to be asked how a large piece of the engine cowl could have come off with potentially serious consequences and the aircraft climb to 41,000 feet and fly nearly two hours to Palma where the weather was not particularly good with a blustery north east wind and thunderstorms in the forecast. It may well all be a chain of unfortunate coincidences and indeed the sort of thing it is better to find out during the shakedown rather than in full out operation. But I am sure the authorities will be looking closely at this.

[NSEU]

the fire protection will be lost as it works only in a confined area, when the cowlings are closed and is anyway only working for fire outside of the engine.
There is a fire detection (loop) on both sides...


Thanks, dbbass.
It's been a while since I worked on the CF6 and my CF6 notes appear to be simplified

http://www.iinet.net.au/[email protected]/CF6FireLoops.GIF

The engine is divided into sections. I assumed the ribs would prevent all extinguishant being lost due to one area being open.

The EEC is in a protected blanket, no water ingression possible

Must be an Airbus thing to wrap them up, although I've never heard of thermal blankets stopping water ingress.

Rgds
NSEU

[lomapaseo]

NSEU

Must be an Airbus thing to wrap them up, although I've never heard of thermal blankets stopping water ingress.

The protective blanket around the fan is not for thermal protection, but for protection against liquids impregnating the Kevlar armour.

Get yourself a Kevlar armour jacket and soak some liquid into it and see how well it stops a bullet or not.

[Annex14]

The plane right now is over Burgundy, France on its way home. However, limping at FL 100 and roughly 300 kts. Guess a bit more work needed still.

[Annex14]

Okay, now on the ground at FRA - RWY 25L - at 1936 z. As of now it´s a case for LH Technik FRA.

[NSEU]

The protective blanket around the fan is not for thermal protection, but for protection against liquids impregnating the Kevlar armour.


Lomapaseo, I thought he was talking about an ECU blanket, not a fan blanket? The ECU is mounted on the outside of the kevlar armour and under the cowls for easy access.

Cheers

[lomapaseo]

NSEU

Sorry, didn't mean to add confusion :O

[Less Hair]

I have heard it took quite some time to contact them. Incident was observed and reported right away by AB crew taking off right behind them. EDDK Tower tried to follow the always changing ATC contacts enroute the A330. Finally they went via Sun Express HQ. Might be a good lesson to learn from.

[Annex14]

There are some open questions to what you report to have heard!
First - if that AB crew was next for departure at holding point 14L at CGN they definately would have been alighned at about 50 - 30 deg to the centre line of 14L.
I twas dark at the time of departure, therefore no chance to even have a glance on what was going on 800 - 1000 m down the runway - assume that is about the distance to achieve the necessary speed to rip of a major cowling part.
What they might have seen, if the mentioned sequence is correct, are some parts on the runway that showed up in their landing lights during t/o run.
Next was to first check if there was indeed something wrong, then collect the pieces and identify and than inform the flight.
Of course TWR could have relayed the sighting message directly to Langen center(Frankfurt ACC), running App and Dep Control for CGN, and that by simply pushing a button, activating a secured, standing line.
The same is true for the connection between Langen center(Frankfurt ACC) and Maastricht/Eurocontrol(UAC) or Eurocontrol/France (UAC)
The delay in information of the flight seems to be more related to the time needed to get factual information at hand.
Even in my "Dinosaur" times we were able to catch any "part looser" within our FIR.

[Less Hair]

The AB-crew reported to have seen part(s) next to the runway when they took off. This incident was noticed right away. This is why the runway got checked immediately. However it took some time to relay that message to the a/c concerned.

[Volume]

The problem is, what would you do as a two men crew on a 2 hrs flight if you are notified by ATC that you "probably have lost some parts" (not yet identified at that time) with no indication of a problem in the cockpit.
How likely would it be to be able to identify the damage from the cockpit or cabin (if you leave the cockpit)? How important would it be to have the full flight crew in the cockpit if indeed an issue develops? What would you expect your cabin crew to be able to detect if you ask them to check the aircrafts integrity?

Our actions must start from evidence to be effective. There must be ground staff which asap can identify debris. There must be a way to immediately assess those items (wrt. consequences to the aircraft and looming risk), there must be a way to immediately inform (and not just confuse...) the crew.
Otherwise there (generally) is not much you can do, except for continuing the flight and hoping for the best (or hoping for the designers to have done a good job to make the aircraft damage/falult tolerant).

So what we need, are experienced people on duty, just in case you may need them. At the airport, at the Operators, at the manufacturer, in the cabin. People you can call 24/7 and get an immediate educated answer. Something the beancounters do not like at all.

[Less Hair]

My point is: The long time needed to contact that very aircraft leaves room for improvement. That's all. No accusation or whatever. Just a lesson learned.

BTW: Eyewitness pax reported to have informed the cabin crew immediately without being taken serious. (see tabloid source above)

[lederhosen]

If you are informed that bits have fallen off your aircraft I hope most would land asap. An A330 from a german airline in Dusseldorf had a similar incident a few years ago and after an immediate return it was discovered that debris had breached a fuel tank. In this case the time it took to inform the crew seems to have been an important factor.