United B777 engine failure
Originally Posted by Sky9
When you listen to the ATC recording the flight crew reported an Engine Failure, not Fire which would be correct
Is there anything in SOP after an engine failure that includes a task like "Ask somebody in cabin crew to go and look through the window at the dodgy engine and report back to flight deck what they see" ? I know pilots will have their hands full at the time, but wondering if a description from somebody who is likely to give a non-exaggerated and accurate description might be a useful thing for the future.
I was going to suggest cabin crew taking a photo on their phone - but thought this would probably just create panic, along with encouraging pax to get out of their seats and pose for selfies which is probably undesired
I was going to suggest cabin crew taking a photo on their phone - but thought this would probably just create panic, along with encouraging pax to get out of their seats and pose for selfies which is probably undesired
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/638797-united-b777-engine-failure.html
Given the similarity between the latest B777 P&W engine failure over Denver and this incident in 2018 I was curious to find out more about the earlier engine failure. The report on the examination of the failed fan blade makes for some interesting reading. Apparently after 5000 cycles (take-off and landing) all fan blades must be examined at P&W by thermal acoustic imaging (TAI) in which ultrasound vibrates the fan blade and if any cracks are present frictional heating at the crack can be thermally imaged. Some sort of paint has to be painted on the fan blade surface to allow TAI and this paint can affect the resultant thermal image. All paint is removed after TAI inspection. Anyway, the failed fan blades were inspected in 2010 and 2015 and this is straight from the report.
“The installed set of fan blades, including the fractured fan blade, had undergone two overhauls at which time the blades underwent a thermal acoustic imaging (TAI) inspection. At the initial TAI in 2010, there was a small indication at the location of the origin of the crack. The review of the records from the 2015 TAI show that there was a larger indication in the same area as where there was an indication in 2010 and from where the crack originated. At the time of each TAI, the inspectors attributed the indication to a defect in the paint that was used during the TAI process and allowed the blade to continue the overhaul process and be returned to service”.
So two inspections, five years apart, showed an indication of a growing fatigue crack in the same place and yet the thermal image was attributed to a paint defect in two different paint coatings.
“The installed set of fan blades, including the fractured fan blade, had undergone two overhauls at which time the blades underwent a thermal acoustic imaging (TAI) inspection. At the initial TAI in 2010, there was a small indication at the location of the origin of the crack. The review of the records from the 2015 TAI show that there was a larger indication in the same area as where there was an indication in 2010 and from where the crack originated. At the time of each TAI, the inspectors attributed the indication to a defect in the paint that was used during the TAI process and allowed the blade to continue the overhaul process and be returned to service”.
So two inspections, five years apart, showed an indication of a growing fatigue crack in the same place and yet the thermal image was attributed to a paint defect in two different paint coatings.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tuskar
Age: 80
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At last there has been a serious a/c incident and no one has died or been injured. Has any noticed the fact that the crew got the aircraft safely back on the ground which is what they were trained to do and did do. The fractured fan blade did not damage the a/c fuselage, some cowling dropped away, the engine pylon remained intact despite serious vibration due to the unbalanced rotor shaft. Now you are all blathering on about a ‘turn’ or a ‘return,’ and souls on board. Stick to the point – the cockpit crew got on with the job and 6 hrs later the pax were on another a/c and on their way to Hawaii. Congratulations to all the crew - cockpit and cabin - for a job well done in an unenviable situation.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,763
Received 2,750 Likes
on
1,171 Posts
SD-2021/002: Limitation of Operations of Boeing 777 Aeroplanes Following Serious Incident of Engine Failure on 20 February 2021This SD is made in the interests of continued safety of operation and to protect the public following a serious incident on 20 February 2021 involving a United Airlines Boeing 777 aeroplane, Flight 328, where the right-hand engine failed in flight following a suspected fan blade failure. A similar engine failure occurred to a Japanese Airlines Ltd Boeing 777 on 4 December 2020.
Fan blades fail. That’s a known and acceptable risk. Containment rings are failing when they shouldn’t. With the cowling gone and the vibration causing a separation, the damaged engine will not depart the wing in a controlled manner and possibly destroying the airframe. Flinging shrapnel into the fuselage is a big concern as well.
fruitflyer
I wanted to read it too. We will have to wait until someone else posts it (probably about 30 seconds after I post this)
Found out they don't have to post it there, from the FAA web site Emergency Airworthiness Directives
An Emergency AD is issued when an unsafe condition exists that requires immediate action by an owner/operator.
Who is affected by an Emergency AD?
An Emergency AD may be distributed by Fax, letter, or other methods. It is issued and effective to only the people who actually receive it. This is known as “actual notice.”
Who will receive an Emergency AD?
All known owners and operators of affected U.S.-registered aircraft or those aircraft that are known to have an affected product installed will be sent a copy of an Emergency AD.
Is an Emergency AD published in the Federal Register?
To make the AD effective to all persons, follow up publication of the Final Rule AD in the Federal Register is critical. This Final Rule AD must be identical to the Emergency AD, and is normally published in the Federal Register within 30 days of the Emergency AD issue date.
I wanted to read it too. We will have to wait until someone else posts it (probably about 30 seconds after I post this)
Found out they don't have to post it there, from the FAA web site Emergency Airworthiness Directives
An Emergency AD is issued when an unsafe condition exists that requires immediate action by an owner/operator.
Who is affected by an Emergency AD?
An Emergency AD may be distributed by Fax, letter, or other methods. It is issued and effective to only the people who actually receive it. This is known as “actual notice.”
Who will receive an Emergency AD?
All known owners and operators of affected U.S.-registered aircraft or those aircraft that are known to have an affected product installed will be sent a copy of an Emergency AD.
Is an Emergency AD published in the Federal Register?
To make the AD effective to all persons, follow up publication of the Final Rule AD in the Federal Register is critical. This Final Rule AD must be identical to the Emergency AD, and is normally published in the Federal Register within 30 days of the Emergency AD issue date.
Buttonpusher
davidjohnson6
Last thing you need is cabin crew coming up and giving you their two cents worth, work the problem then let them know what's happening, many moons ago I experienced an inflight emergency, F/A was a horrible distraction asking irrelevant questions, while I had 10 other things on my mind. Drama drama drama just when you don't need it......
Last thing you need is cabin crew coming up and giving you their two cents worth, work the problem then let them know what's happening, many moons ago I experienced an inflight emergency, F/A was a horrible distraction asking irrelevant questions, while I had 10 other things on my mind. Drama drama drama just when you don't need it......
I think this is only (some of) United's, who are stopped by the FAA notice anyway, so a bit of a non-event. All the Far East operators of the variant have moved on to the -300ER for European flights.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: other side of nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello all. A quick question here, Does Boeing manufacture or contract an outside vendor that produce the engine cowlings or is the a P&WC or GE part that accompanies the engine?
SLF here but given we are in the era of instant photographs would these be useful in informing the crew during the event? And how might that fit into the crew's workflow?
I'm minded of the incident report from G-VROM https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib...747-443-g-vrom
"It would have been a useful facility to have been able to send and receive photographs from on-board the aircraft. This facility might also have been useful for the crew, as photographs were available in the public domain several hours before the eventual landing, showing the position of the landing gear."
I'm minded of the incident report from G-VROM https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib...747-443-g-vrom
"It would have been a useful facility to have been able to send and receive photographs from on-board the aircraft. This facility might also have been useful for the crew, as photographs were available in the public domain several hours before the eventual landing, showing the position of the landing gear."
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As others have noted, the evidence so far indicates that the fan blade failure was contained - that part of the system worked.
The nacelle coming apart is not supposed to happen - design intent is that the nacelle is designed to withstand the forces of a FBO event without failing. Further, large parts departing the aircraft is a no-no - corrective action should be taken whenever it happens.
I am rather surprised that apparently no action was taken with regard to the nacelle structure after the similar UAL event in 2018.
Well something punctured the fuselage below the wing root.
Got annoyed watching the 6pm news on the national broadcaster here in Ireland earlier. Anchor said on the intro “New crisis for Boeing after seven seven seven aircraft type is grounded after engine explosion”. I mean, less than 10% of 777s built are affected? But don’t let facts get in the way of some hysteria.
They did also cover the failure on the 744F out of Schipol the same day too. “a smaller version of the same engine was involved”.
Got annoyed watching the 6pm news on the national broadcaster here in Ireland earlier. Anchor said on the intro “New crisis for Boeing after seven seven seven aircraft type is grounded after engine explosion”. I mean, less than 10% of 777s built are affected? But don’t let facts get in the way of some hysteria.
They did also cover the failure on the 744F out of Schipol the same day too. “a smaller version of the same engine was involved”.