Southwest 737 strikes person on runway in Austin
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Cambridge, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly suicide, and with all sympathies to the individual, what a selfish way to do it.
I had a buddy who was Transport Police - he told me a few tales of railway suicides. Firstly the poor BTP guys had to hunt for all of the bits, and the drivers would often need counselling and be affected for a long time. The last i heard he was on long t term leave for PTSD.
So my sympathies not to the ingested, but to the drivers.
I had a buddy who was Transport Police - he told me a few tales of railway suicides. Firstly the poor BTP guys had to hunt for all of the bits, and the drivers would often need counselling and be affected for a long time. The last i heard he was on long t term leave for PTSD.
So my sympathies not to the ingested, but to the drivers.
Assuming this was suicide, the person involved was literally mentally ill - there would have been no reasoning, just a route to end what was perceived as suffering. That usually means feeling that the world and their family is better off without them, not that they specifically don't want to live. To that person, at that time, they're anything but selfish - they're doing this for all the right reasons, however skewed they may be.
I have complete and utter sympathy for those left to pick up the pieces, both physically and emotionally, but to blame the person involved is unfair.
I can't bring myself to use the word "protocol" based on my limited experience in these ,matters in the USA. Other countries ????
The problem I have seen is that the overhaul shops don't like accepting the job nor how "some" coroners feel about the mishandling of human remains. YMMV but I typically avoid getting into such details
The problem I have seen is that the overhaul shops don't like accepting the job nor how "some" coroners feel about the mishandling of human remains. YMMV but I typically avoid getting into such details
Human ingestion on large turbofans is surprisingly rare - last number I saw was something like once every ten years, worldwide. So I'd be a bit surprised if there is an established protocol for something that happens so rarely (and it's not like the cause of death is in question).
Interestingly, ingestion events were far more common with the low bypass fans (e.g. JT8D) - there used to be more than one a year (although not always fatal since there were inlet guide vanes that kept them out of the fan). Apparently those big fans make people wary enough that they stay well clear?
Interestingly, ingestion events were far more common with the low bypass fans (e.g. JT8D) - there used to be more than one a year (although not always fatal since there were inlet guide vanes that kept them out of the fan). Apparently those big fans make people wary enough that they stay well clear?
Human ingestion on large turbofans is surprisingly rare - last number I saw was something like once every ten years, worldwide. So I'd be a bit surprised if there is an established protocol for something that happens so rarely (and it's not like the cause of death is in question).
Interestingly, ingestion events were far more common with the low bypass fans (e.g. JT8D) - there used to be more than one a year (although not always fatal since there were inlet guide vanes that kept them out of the fan). Apparently those big fans make people wary enough that they stay well clear?
Interestingly, ingestion events were far more common with the low bypass fans (e.g. JT8D) - there used to be more than one a year (although not always fatal since there were inlet guide vanes that kept them out of the fan). Apparently those big fans make people wary enough that they stay well clear?
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Paisley, Florida USA
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As tdracer pointed out above, jet engine human ingestion is pretty rare, and there would probably be no over-all (macro) protocol to handle such a situation; however, embedded in a 'macro' protocol would be numerous minor protocols to deal with the details of the investigation. Examples of the so-called minor protocols would include such things as chain-of-custody/evidence, incident scene documentation, site preservation, site safety etc. and would all be part of the overall investigation. General guidelines or protocols are established for different circumstances, but those circumstances can vary so much that they would not be considered to be reasonably foreseeable. Often a body is recovered by a law enforcement agency and then transferred to the jurisdiction of the medical examiner; however, at a stable incident site (such as the one that is the subject of this thread), the body usually must be released by the Medical Examiner.
As to lomopaseo's suggestion that the entire engine could be removed and given to the Medical Examiner, that would be entirely possible. For example, in my experience in working with the Miami-Dade County Medical Examiner's Office, I've seen entire automobiles (human remains in situ) taken to the medical examiner's facility. In the case of the subject jet engine (CF-56 ?), my guess is that both police and medical examiner personnel would witness the tear down at a maintenance facility, gathering evidence as the tear down proceeded. As pointed out by lomapaseo, this would not be something the average jet engine mechanic routinely encounters and would be very stressful.
Just my "two-cents".
Cheers,
Grog
As to lomopaseo's suggestion that the entire engine could be removed and given to the Medical Examiner, that would be entirely possible. For example, in my experience in working with the Miami-Dade County Medical Examiner's Office, I've seen entire automobiles (human remains in situ) taken to the medical examiner's facility. In the case of the subject jet engine (CF-56 ?), my guess is that both police and medical examiner personnel would witness the tear down at a maintenance facility, gathering evidence as the tear down proceeded. As pointed out by lomapaseo, this would not be something the average jet engine mechanic routinely encounters and would be very stressful.
Just my "two-cents".
Cheers,
Grog
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Human ingestion on large turbofans is surprisingly rare - last number I saw was something like once every ten years, worldwide. So I'd be a bit surprised if there is an established protocol for something that happens so rarely (and it's not like the cause of death is in question).
If the ingestion rate has really dropped to once a decade I'd be surprised. The numbers for the 737 family alone were higher in the Boeing article linked below.
From a 2008 Boeing article:
Airline and airport employees work around commercial airliners every day throughout the world without incident. However, neglecting to stay out of the engine inlet hazard areas or complacency working near operating engines can result in severe injury or death.
There have been 33 reported ingestions of personnel into an engine on 737*-100/*200 airplanes since 1969. Several of these ingestions caused serious injuries and one resulted in a fatality. There have also been four reports of fatal ingestion incidents on 737*-300/*400/*500 and next* generation 737 airplanes. The most recent fatalities occurred in 2006.
There have been 33 reported ingestions of personnel into an engine on 737*-100/*200 airplanes since 1969. Several of these ingestions caused serious injuries and one resulted in a fatality. There have also been four reports of fatal ingestion incidents on 737*-300/*400/*500 and next* generation 737 airplanes. The most recent fatalities occurred in 2006.
Here's an earlier thread with discussions of human ingestion mishaps at BOM and ELP:
Air India engineer sucked into an aircraft engine at Mumbai
In both the BOM and ELP incidents engine thrust was above idle on the ground.
In one of my posts on the thread linked above I mentioned that I had heard two versions of the disposition of an engine with the only recovered remains of some pax in a United 747 cargo door failure out of HNL:
In the 1989 United 811 B-747 cargo door failure out of HNL several passengers were ejected from the aircraft and human remains were found in engine number 3 after the emergency landing back in HNL.
One story floating around the business at the time was that the engine was quietly barged out to sea and sunk.
But, I read in a travel column years ago that the engine was buried near SFO and a memorial was erected.
Anyone know which, if either, of these accounts is correct?
One story floating around the business at the time was that the engine was quietly barged out to sea and sunk.
But, I read in a travel column years ago that the engine was buried near SFO and a memorial was erected.
Anyone know which, if either, of these accounts is correct?
And the AUS accident aircraft N401WN was fixed and operated to MDW this morning. Don't know if the engine was changed.
Last edited by Airbubba; 11th May 2020 at 00:03.
I'm totally confused. I reread the thread and found no reference to ingestion. The body was reported as a male found on the runway DOA. The photo of the damaged cowling on the first page has weird areas of 'haziness' at the top of the engine that suggests a photoshop job. More likely is that the 'victim' was struck by the aircraft, not sucked into the engine.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm totally confused. I reread the thread and found no reference to ingestion. The body was reported as a male found on the runway DOA. The photo of the damaged cowling on the first page has weird areas of 'haziness' at the top of the engine that suggests a photoshop job. More likely is that the 'victim' was struck by the aircraft, not sucked into the engine.
it's hard to imagine a more messed up week; but here we are...
