737 Engine comes of wing in Cape Town
 

Just heard on the radio that a Nationwide 737-200 lost an engine after take-off. Apparently the bucket deployed and shortly after that the engine dislodged from the wing and hit into the runway. The aircraft got away ok and is currently circling to burn off fuel and plan the return landing.....

Mmmhhhh
Having the reverser bucket(s) open on an engine during the take-off and then loosing the whole engine must be a nice piece of rodeo :eek:

Well done guys, all my sincere wishes for a successful outcome :ok::ok::ok:


live 2 fly 2 live

On-line news here - but fairly inconclusive as to what's going on
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_A...216890,00.html

Surely it can't have been too bad if the runway was only closed for 10 minutes?!? Or could this be a bit of 'seat of the pants' press management?

More to come methinks...let's hope everyone gets on the deck safely

link here http://www.news24.com/News24/South_A...216890,00.html

Safe return, no injuries, well done all

Not sure whether they lost the whole engine or just part of it, as eye whitness accounts are sometimes not all that accurate, glad to hear it turned out well though!

I heard that it can be almost unrecoverable for a 200 to have an engines reverse buckets become unlocked just after take off?( I cant imagine it would be a good thing on any twin)
I imagine the guys must've had their hands and feet full!

Well done to the crew!

It is difficult - I recall it was a Sim exercise on the 200 in DanAir and the climb rate was not a lot:)

"They took off and left the engine behind," he said.
:E:E:E

B737-200 ENGINE SEPARATE -- History
 

Judging from earlier cases, readers should be skeptical about any ThReverser interaction before this latest ENGINE SEPARATION. See history of B737-200 cases.

Cone pins were used on B737-100s and -200s, and B727s (fuse pins employed on B747, B767, B757, and B737-300/400/500s).

NTSB sought hardware changes. A safety cable system had previously been used to hold engine after failure of primary structure -- then secondary support structure designed and installed (which also fractured in the DAL case).

[See also B707 and B747 cases where #3 Eng separates and then spears the #4 Eng.]

= = = // = = =

Delta B737-200 7Jan92 DFW. Engine separation on takeoff. After T/O at 200' breakaway safety bolts called "Cone Pins" sheared for right engine. Engine bounced on grass on right side of runway.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...11X13985&key=1
... FTW92IA055 ....
... DELTA AIR LINES ...
... Tuesday, January 07, 1992 in DFW ...
... BOEING 737-232 ... N322DL ...

THE RIGHT ENGINE SEPARATED ... CLIMBING THROUGH 200 FEET AFTER TAKEOFF. ... UNEVENTFUL LANDING ...

ENGINE SEPARATION WAS THE RESULT OF THE FAILURE OF THE AFT CONE BOLT AND THE ENGINE SECONDARY SUPPORT ASSEMBLY. THE AFT CONE BOLT FAILED AS RESULT OF A PREEXISTING FATIGUE CRACK, WHILE THE ENGINE SECONDARY SUPPORT ASSEMBLY FAILED AS RESULT OF THE DYNAMIC LOADS THAT EXCEEDED THE DESIGNED CAPACITY OF THE MOUNTING BOLTS.

THE TWO FORWARD CONE BOLTS FAILED IN OVERLOAD AS THE ENGINE SWUNG FORWARD DURING THE SEPARATION SEQUENCE.

METALLURGICAL TESTING REVEALED THAT THE FATIGUE OF THE AFT CONE BOLT WAS A RESULT OF LUBRICANT INADVERTENTLY INTRODUCED INTO THE CONICAL SURFACE OF THE CONE BOLT.

...Board determines the probable cause ...
THE FAILURE OF THE AFT CONE BOLT AS RESULT OF PREEXISTING FATIGUE CRACKING DUE TO IMPROPER MAINTENANCE, AND THE FAILURE OF THE SECONDARY SUPPORT STRUCTURE AS A RESULT OF LOADS THAT EXCEEDED THE CAPACITY OF THE ATTACHING HARDWARE AND THE CRUSHABLE HONEYCOMB CORE.

= = = // = = =

Piedmont Airlines B737-200, 20Jan89, right engine separated from aircraft after T/O at Chicago. Newly designed secondary support structure had not yet been installed.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...13X27558&key=1
... CHI89MA046 ....
... PIEDMONT AIRLINES
... Friday, January 20, 1989 in CHICAGO, IL ...
... BOEING 737-201 ... N242US ...

AN IN-FLIGHT TEARAWAY OF THE RIGHT ENGINE (FROM THE RIGHT WING) OCCURRED AS THE AIRPLANE LIFTED OFF FROM THE RUNWAY. ... CONTINUED THE TAKEOFF ... RETURNED ...

AN EXAM OF ITS WING & SEPARATED ENGINE REVEALED THE AFT CONE (ENG MOUNTING) BOLT HAD FAILED FROM FATIGUE, THEN THE TWO FORWARD CONE BOLTS FAILED FROM DUCTILE OVERSTRESS.

A RAISED MECHANICAL DEFORMATIVE WAS FOUND ON THE CONICAL SURFACE OF THE AFT BOLT. THE DEFORMITY WAS INDICATIVE OF DAMAGE PRODUCED PRIOR TO OR DURING ASSEMBLY OF THE CONE BOLT IN THE ISOLATION MOUNT. A MATCHING CAVITY WAS NOTED ON THE ISOLATION MOUNT. THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT THE MECHANICAL IRREGULARITY RESULTED IN A NONUNIFORM FIT WHICH ALLOWED THE TORQUED FITTING TO LOOSEN DURING CYCLIC LOADING.

AD 88-01-07 REQUIRED THAT ULTRASONIC INSPECTION OF THE CONE BOLTS BE PERFORMED AT INTERVALS NOT TO EXCEED 600 CYCLES. AN ULTRASONIC INSPECTION OF THE BOLTS HAD BEEN ACCOMPLISHED ABOUT 330 CYCLES BEFORE THE ENGINE SEPARATED.

... Board determines the probable cause ...
PREVIOUS DAMAGE TO THE AFT CONE (ENGINE MOUNTING) BOLT, WHICH RESULTED IN MISMATCHED SURFACES BETWEEN THE BOLT AND ISOLATION MOUNT, LOSS OF TORQUE DURING CYCLIC LOADING OF THE MOUNTING BOLT, AND SUBSEQUENT FATIGUE FAILURE OF THE BOLT.

= = = // = = =

US Air B737-200 PHL 5Dec87 #2 engine separated shortly after takeoff. Cracks caused by metal fatigue in one of three bolts; after rear bolt failed the two forward bolts and support cable failed in overload. http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...13X32769&key=1
... NYC88FA050 ....
... USAIR
... Saturday, December 05, 1987 ... DEPTFORD, NJ ...
... BOEING 737-2B7 ... N319AU ...

DRG TKOF, AS USAIR FLT 224 WAS CLBG THRU 4000', THE ACFT YAWED/ROLLED RGT. SIMULTANEOUSLY, THE CREW NOTICED THE #2 THROTTLE SLAM/LOCK TO THE IDLE PSN & A CONTINUOUS AIRFRAME BUFFET BEGAN.

SOON THEREAFTER, THE #2 ENG SEPD FM THE ACFT & THE BUFFET STOPPED.

THE ENG IMPACTED IN AN OPEN FLD, 6 MI FM THE ARPT.

JUST BFR IT SEPD, A PAX SAW THE AFT END OF THE #2 ENG MOMENTARILY DROOP ABOUT 30 DEG.

AFTER ENG SEPN, THE 'B' HYD SYS LOST PRES & THE TE FLAPS WOULD ONLY EXTD 10 DEG.

THE ACFT WAS LNDD SAFELY AFTER AN EMERG GEAR EXTN & DIFFERENTIAL BRAKING WAS USED FOR STEERING.

AN EXAM REVEALED THE AFT MOUNT CONE BOLT FOR THE #2 ENG HAD FAILED FM FATIGUE THRU THE THREAD RELIEF UNDERCUT RADIUS. FATIGUE CRACKS HAD INITIATED ON DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE RADIUS. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE FWD MOUNT CONE BOLTS & SECONDARY SUPPORT CABLE FAILED FROM OVERLOAD.

... Board determines the probable cause ...
ENGINE INSTALLATION, MOUNTING BOLT ..FATIGUE

= = = // = = =

"Southwest 223" / 3Jan86 B737-2H4, after T/O from Love Field (Dallas), Rt Engine rear mount Cone Bolt sheared, mount failed and restraining cable broke; leaving the engine attached by only the two fwd mount bolts; returned safely. [AWST 124:31 Ja 13'86, photo.]

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...10X00187&key=1
... FTW86MA030
... SOUTHWEST ...
... January 03, 1986 in DALLAS, TX
... BOEING 737-2H4 ... N86SW ...

THIS INCIDENT OCCURRED WHEN THE NO. 2 ENGINE EXPERIENCED AN AFT ENGINE MOUNT CONE BOLT FAILURE AND THE SUBSEQUENT FAILURE OF THE SECONDARY SUPPORT LINK (STAINLESS STEEL CABLE).

THE FAILURE OF BOTH AFT ENGINE SUPPORT ASSEMBLIES DURING THE TAKEOFF ROLL ALLOWED THE AFT SECTION OF THE ENG TO HANG DOWN TO WITHIN 4' [sic, transcription err] OF THE GROUND. AS A RESULT, THE NO.2 THRUST REVERSER ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY DRUG THE RUNWAY ON ROTATION.
... RETURNED ... LANDED...

METALLURGICAL EXAMINATION OF THE CONE BOLT REVEALED THAT IT FAILED AS A RESULT OF FATIGUE, MOST PROBABLY DUE TO IMPROPER INSTALLATION OF THE BOLT, SPECIFICALLY, THAT IT WAS UNDER TORQUED WHEN THE OPERATOR RE-INSTALLED THE ENG.

THE SAFETY CABLE FAILED AS A RESULT OF OVERSTRESS, PROBABLY INDUCED WHEN THE ACFT ENCOUNTERED A ROUGH STRETCH OF RUNWAY DURING THE TAKEOFF ROLL.

... Board determines the probable cause ...
ENGINE INSTALLATION, SUSPENSION MOUNTS .. FAILURE, PARTIAL
... FATIGUE ... SEPARATION ... OVERLOAD ... UNDERTORQUED
MAINTENANCE, INSTALLATION .. IMPROPER ...

Contributing Factors ... RUNWAY / LANDING AREA CONDITION ... ROUGH /UNEVEN

This is 3rd hand heresay, so treat it as such, but my mother is in cape town waiting for a nationwide flight back to Jo'burg. She has just texted me. Apparently some from her tour group were on the affected flight.
My mums words are that aircraft landed back after approx 1 hour. Passengers are all in counseling at the moment, airport is closed. I texted back to ask what the problem was, her reply was "Serious, Engine fell off!".

Sounds like top marks to the crew for bringing it back in one piece. Well done guys (or gals) :D:D

The thread is also running in the Africa forum, no pictures up there yet, would be very interested to see some pictures of the aircraft in question.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_i...4353660C626321

Extract:

"I heard this huge bang, and he said, that's our engine that's just fallen off. I couldn't believe it. He had to repeat it to me," she said.

"The plane started to shake a bit, but what was amazing was the staff and passengers: everybody was so calm. There was no hysteria, no nothing, it was amazing.

"The guy next to me seemed to know something about planes. He said, don't worry: the plane will go with one engine. So I thought, that's okay."

She said that while the plane was making a wide turn and dumping fuel, the cabin crew took the passengers through the emergency procedures, getting them to take off their shoes and practice bending down.

"They didn't know what to expect. It could have been a hard landing. It could have been anything," she said.

"It's quite scary: flying around quite a lot, you don't listen to the emergency procedures. Suddenly you realise, I need to know what to do.

"But when we landed it was a soft landing, like you would think there was nothing wrong with the plane."

She said that when the plane had come to a stop surrounded by fire engines, the pilot walked into the cabin, and all the passengers cheered.

But she admitted she herself had been "very panicky" during the landing.

"I don't think I've ever been so scared in my life, ever," she said.

At 7pm, having declined counselling, she was waiting for a British Airways flight to Johannesburg.

"We'll see how that goes. I hope they've got a drink, because I need one now," she said.

That's my kind of gal. Stiff upper lip, "carry on chaps". Good for her :D

Don't think it was thrust bucket deployment
 

Have listened to three eyewitness reports - all passengers - two of whom actually watched the engine fall off. No-one said anything about the thrust bucket deploying - and I rather think they would have noticed (and commented) if it had.

One broadcast comment was that most of the Nationwide pilots are very experienced ex-SAA pilots - and can't help but think that helped matters.
Also -- they didn't use the emergency slides for evacuation - waited about five minutes then disembarked down steps.

Interesting (referring to IGh above) that it's always the Right engine that falls off - anyone care to comment on that?

Sounds like the crew did what they had to - well done to them!:D:D:D

Avman,

Thats because she is from Jo-Burg, have you ever driven on the airport road?:}

I think it makes more sense that the engine separated rather than the buckets becoming unlocked, although we shall see.
IGh that made for some interesting reading, thanks.
I'm not sure what the state of maintenance is like at Nationwide?

Regardless of the discussion about cone bolts etc, just think of the inertia of a JT8 at T/O power!! The gyroscopic effect would send it miles until it ran down!! :=

Tristar 500

:uhoh:Watching something like this happening is seeing but not believing...even after 30+ years in the job, it still rattles you.

I must applaud the crew:D:D:D:D They kept the plane flying under these trying and difficult conditions with drizzle rain and a cloud base of 900ft running IMC just after the incident while trying to keep the A/C flying. No time to dump fuel as it was spilling on its own. They made it back by the grace of God. It had to land...that is why the runway was cleared of rubble in such a short time(not 10 mins but 20 mins)

Engine, cowling and other parts still lying next to the runway.

Once again....brilliant flying by the pilots:ok::ok::ok::ok:
RE

Well done chaps!!
 

Whatever the cause, well done to the crew

Yep, that fell off by the looks of things :ok:

Well we do have lots of experience good and bad with this sort of thing, some of which IGH has already posted.

Engines which toss their cookies before breaking off have already lost much of their inertia by the time that they fall away so no big gyro there (Kalita B747).

Engines which are perfectly good and fall away (fatigue of pylon mounts) have enough fuel left in their guts to last about 5 secs. The smaller engines (on the B737) simply fall away even at takeoff/early climb power having been found pretty much on the runway heading within walking distance from the point of departure.

The larger fan engines like the JT3D on the B707 act just like the JT9D on the B747 (El AL, CI) and being released due to pylon mount fatigue lift up and snap to the right into the outboard engine due to gyro loading effects within the first 5 sec.