Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

SWA1380 - diversion to KPHL after engine event

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

SWA1380 - diversion to KPHL after engine event

Old 27th Apr 2018, 04:20
  #401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Red face

Originally Posted by Carbon Bootprint
I find several videos there, but none that seem to deal with SW1380. Am I missing something?
Hmmm try again

https://www.wsj.com/video/southwest-flight-1380-what-happened-onboard/366C7463-2DD5-4AF8-ABCD-ADF6510D3401.html?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1

cant figure out how to edit this new fubarproved system

Sorry

And I now am able to delete that previous mess - message ( I think )

Last edited by CONSO; 27th Apr 2018 at 15:40.
CONSO is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2018, 12:38
  #402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Texas, like a whole other country
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
That works, Conso. Thanks.
Carbon Bootprint is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2018, 14:35
  #403 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bourton-on-the-Water
Posts: 1,016
Received 15 Likes on 6 Posts
Thanks for that excellent Wall Street Journal piece, Conso. It brings home to me, again, what a wonderfully calming presence Capt Shults has. Under great pressure, she manages to speak in a conversational way in plain English.
No, it's not on fire, but part of it's missing. They said there's a hole, and ....... someone went out.
And she, and the FO of course, got it back without further injury. Excellent.

airsound
airsound is online now  
Old 27th Apr 2018, 15:52
  #404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here is another good article from WSJ

https://www.wsj.com/articles/southwe...ent-1524834000

Southwest 1380 Pilots Steered a Well-Timed Descent

Abrupt dive was needed to get to a breathable altitude; ‘you can’t do it slower’
By
Jo Craven McGinty
April 27, 2018 9:00 a.m. E
When the left engine of Southwest Flight 1380 broke apart last week, shattering a window of the aircraft and causing the Boeing 737 to lose cabin pressure, the pilots pushed the nose of the plane down and zoomed from 32,500 feet to 10,000 feet in about eight minutes.The abrupt dive led some passengers to describe the change in altitude as a free fall. But the pilots appear to have executed a perfect emergency descent.
CONSO is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2018, 10:50
  #405 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Age: 71
Posts: 884
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Did anyone see any confirmed reports of ear problems in any of the passengers?
I'd have expected a few ruptured eardrums with the rate of decompression when the window went.
Possible that some may even have ended up bent.

There was a report of a passenger standing with his back against the empty window port.

It would be interesting to see what happened with cabin altitude at various stages of the descent.
Obviously a sudden drop to drop the masks. But did the fellows butt in the window make any difference? To cabin altitude, that is. Not denigrating his efforts in any way.)
WingNut60 is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2018, 16:13
  #406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 223
Received 12 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by WingNut60
I'd have expected a few ruptured eardrums with the rate of decompression when the window went.
I wouldn't. With respect to cabin altitude/decompression, the loss of one window is not dramatic. It usually results in the cabin altitude climbing at about 2000-3000 fpm (about the same as the initial climb after take-off). In this event, it wasn't even a full window opening - it was (tragically) partially blocked. So the cabin climb rate would have been even less.

Possible that some may even have ended up bent.
Probably not. Decompression sickness (the bends) becomes an issue above 25,000 feet. The aircraft was about 33,000 feet when they commenced descent. An emergency descent typically achieves about 6,000 fpm rate of descent. Assume a conservative case of the cabin at 14,000 feet and climbing at 2,000 fpm when the descent was initiated. Solving that basic math problem has the aircraft and the cabin altitudes equalizing after 2.375 minutes at 18,750 feet. It's unlikely anyone would get 'bent' at that altitude.

Obviously a sudden drop to drop the masks.
The masks automatically drop when the cabin altitude reaches a predetermined level (usually between 10,000-14,000 feet). The rate at which the cabin altitude is increasing (or the 'suddeness' of the decompression) is irrelevant.

But did the fellows butt in the window make any difference? To cabin altitude, that is.
I'm curious about that as well. I suspect that they were only able to pull the lady in after the cabin and outside air pressures were approximately equal. After that the cabin would have been fully depressurised and any air loss from the cabin would have been due to a venturi effect. A butt in the window might slow/stop that. But was it enough to create an effective seal? Did the cabin start to repressurise? Was the gentleman stuck there until the cabin was depressurised after landing? Did he suffer any injuries - eg a Petechial Rash or worse?

Last edited by Bleve; 28th Apr 2018 at 16:25.
Bleve is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2018, 18:04
  #407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wonder what altitude the cabin finally reached. It is the descent, asa much as the climb, where ear problems can occur. A few decades ago there was an Air Europe B757, out of Bangor I believe. They decompressed at crz level. During the emergency descent there were numerous complaints amongst pax & CA's of ear damage/problems. I don't know what the cabin climbed to. If the cabin climbs to crz level, or above 25.000', and then descends at 6000fpm there is a strong chance of ear drum problems.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2018, 23:42
  #408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Age: 64
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bleve



I'm curious about that as well. I suspect that they were only able to pull the lady in after the cabin and outside air pressures were approximately equal. After that the cabin would have been fully depressurised and any air loss from the cabin would have been due to a venturi effect. A butt in the window might slow/stop that. But was it enough to create an effective seal? Did the cabin start to repressurise? Was the gentleman stuck there until the cabin was depressurised after landing? Did he suffer any injuries - eg a Petechial Rash or worse?
Assuming the story about the passenger blocking the window is accurate, it might have been done to keep anyone else from falling out, rather than actually trying to block the air flow. For that matter, it could simple have been done to reassure the other passengers, who were probably freaking about "Gaping hole in the plane! Ack!"
jugofpropwash is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 01:54
  #409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

Originally Posted by RAT 5
I wonder what altitude the cabin finally reached. It is the descent, asa much as the climb, where ear problems can occur. A few decades ago there was an Air Europe B757, out of Bangor I believe. They decompressed at crz level. During the emergency descent there were numerous complaints amongst pax & CA's of ear damage/problems. I don't know what the cabin climbed to. If the cabin climbs to crz level, or above 25.000', and then descends at 6000fpm there is a strong chance of ear drum problems.
I suspect when the NTSB-FAA report comes out, there will be a data tabulation/curve showing the change in cabin altitude versus time- My GUESS is that it may have reached 16,000 to 18,000 feet,sinc it was likely that the pressurization system reduced the rate of depressurization. Somewhere there should be design or test data- regulations which would accommodate the loss of one window at cruise altitude.
CONSO is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 02:23
  #410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Somewhere there should be design or test data- regulations which would accommodate the loss of one window at cruise altitude.
One of the impediments against the early SST proposals was the cruise altitude vs decompression rate vs the size of the holes made by a bursting turbine disk.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 02:38
  #411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

Originally Posted by lomapaseo
One of the impediments against the early SST proposals was the cruise altitude vs decompression rate vs the size of the holes made by a bursting turbine disk.
perhaps this may help ?

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...r/AC_25-20.pdf
CONSO is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 07:32
  #412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 46
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by CONSO
it was likely that the pressurization system reduced the rate of depressurization.
With one engine shut doen and the other at idle, I think the pressurization system would not be very effective.
procede is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 08:49
  #413 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,739
Received 170 Likes on 83 Posts
Originally Posted by CONSO
My GUESS is that it may have reached 16,000 to 18,000 feet, since it was likely that the pressurization system reduced the rate of depressurization.
That sounds possible. It's not necessarily the case that a cabin with a broken window can't hold any pressure - it's akin to having a second one of these, albeit one that's stuck in the open position:

DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 08:51
  #414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ventura, California
Age: 65
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Depressurization and Ears:

Because of the design of the eustachean tubes, decreasing outside pressure rarely causes problems in a healthy ear. Increasing outside pressure, as in a rapid descent in air, and even more so in water, can cause what divers call “ear squeeze”, which can be very painful and rupture an eardrum if not managed properly.

That’s why you hear far more babies crying during descent than during ascent.

Last edited by thcrozier; 1st May 2018 at 02:09.
thcrozier is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2018, 20:24
  #415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
President Trump will meet with the crew of Southwest 1380 :

Donald Trump to meet with crew of Southwest Airlines Flight 1380

FILED UNDER SOUTHWEST AIRLINES AT19 HRS AGO
Written by

Claire Z. Cardona, Breaking News ProducerConnect with Claire Z. Cardona

President Donald Trump will meet Tuesday with the crew of the Southwest Airlines flight that made an emergency landing this month after a deadly mid-flight engine failure.

They will meet at the White House, but no further details were released about the planned interaction between the president and the Flight 1380 crew.

In a photo provided by the U.S. Navy, Lt. Tammie Jo Shults with her F/A-18A jet in 1992. Shults, one of the Navy's first female fighter pilots, was in command of Southwest Airlines Flight 1380 when its engine exploded on April 17, 2018; for the next 40 minutes, she maneuvered the plane safely to an emergency landing in Philadelphia.(THOMAS P. MILNE/NYT)
Passenger Jennifer Riordan, 43, was partially sucked out of a window and killed on the April 17 flight when a fan blade broke and caused the engine to fail.

The Dallas-bound plane was safely piloted to an emergency stop in Philadelphia by Captain Tammie Jo Shults, who has been commended for her composure during the crisis and compassion after the landing.

Once on the ground, Shults, a Texan and former Navy fighter pilot, walked up and down the aisle hugging passengers.

Also on board were first officer Darren Ellisor and three other crew members whose names have not been released. The flight was carrying 144 passengers from New York's La Guardia Airport.

While the cockpit crew worked to land the plane, witnesses said the flight attendants tried to help save the injured woman, assisted passengers with oxygen masks and explained where the plane was headed.

In a written statement, the crew said they "were simply doing our jobs."
Airbubba is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2018, 22:05
  #416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 81
Posts: 1,608
Received 52 Likes on 15 Posts
Gota tellya, Bubba, but 26 years ago I would have been "interested" in Miss Tammie, with a buncha other folks, pilots or not. Heh heh.

I never had a single problem with the female pilots back in the day, especially in the Viper. That rascal was made for small people and you did not have to be a 200 pound gorilla to handle it just fine. But we in USAF didn't get females in fighters until 1995 or 96 or so. And the Navy restricted Miss Tammie to "training" outfits.

All that being said, the lady done good to get into fighters and then now for over twenty years as a custodian of more than a hundred SLF folks that depended on her to get them here and there.

No doubt the lady is getting the attention because she is a lady!!! So let her be a good example for anyone that wants to be a pilot and stop all the "diversity" emphasis. A good pilot is a good pilot.

Gums opines...
gums is offline  
Old 1st May 2018, 14:40
  #417 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gums
Gota tellya, Bubba, but 26 years ago I would have been "interested" in Miss Tammie, with a buncha other folks, pilots or not. Heh heh.
Apparently, so was her husband, also a SWA captain.
aterpster is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 14:48
  #418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Luxembourg
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Cloudtopper
Considering the gravity of this situation , 2 serious failures and memory actions accordingly plus a flap non normal checklist - landing with flap 5.

...........

Significant investigative effort should also be placed on examining the
procedures and why the airline has had a similar occurrence 2 years back .

Out .
Is it right that the investigation of (first incident) 2016 is yet incomplete, and no conclusions are published. There has been no AD issued in 2016 incident? Yes, CFM then issued an inspection SB, but there is no related AD.
bandagunda is offline  
Old 3rd May 2018, 21:22
  #419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hawaii
Age: 76
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Preliminary report :

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/...CA18MA142.aspx
hunbet is offline  
Old 3rd May 2018, 22:40
  #420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 448
Received 21 Likes on 6 Posts

Originally Posted by Lost in Saigon
I assume the un-named male First Officer was the Pilot Flying during the descent and initial approach, while Captain Tammie Jo Shults ran the checklist and the radio. (except when the FO responded to ATC clearing SWA1380 direct to Philadelphia)

On final, when they switched to the tower frequency, Captain Shults took over flying while the First Officer worked the radio.
(after landing the Captain went on the radio again)

Originally Posted by JPJP
Other way around - The PF would be working the radios, and the FO would be running the checklist. If the FO answered a radio call it may indicate that the CA was communicating with the FAs or making a PA. On approach the roles may return to normal, with the majority of checklists complete.

Obviously, it’s the CA perogative if she wants to run the checklist/manage.
To circle back to the answer to this question; from the investigation -

“The captain took over flying duties and the first officer began running emergency checklists. The captain requested a diversion from the air traffic controller;”
JPJP is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.