SKYDRIFTER

Excellent point. The AAIB report sait that the fo said that he "could not recall what it was that led him to shut down the right engine", in which case, why was he in such a rush to shut it down? That's not to say that it's OK that the engine threw a fan blade in the first place, but the aircraft is designed to fly on one good engine, so the real issue seems to be CRM. If I remember correctly, this was the 6th such incident involving the CFM56-3C, but it was the only one involving the loss of an a/c. Tragic, and also unnecessary.

Skydrifter

You said: "Engine shutdowns should not be automatic without a confirmed or highly suspect engine fire or indications of imminent severe damage. There's an old adage from the piston days, "Unless you have a fire, never shut down an engine packing its own weight."

I would just like to add that it is now widely accepted that (catastrophic failure excepted) an engine on fire is likely to be producing greater thrust than in normal operation and for that very reason should not be shut down hastily. Especially on takeoff, an engine on fire may just produce enough thrust to carry you safely beyond obstructions and permit you the time to deal with it in a competent manner.

Tilii -

Good point. I forgot to mention that. Standard teaching for critical flight regimes such as takeoff, go-around- and short-final.

Sad part of today's world is that inexpensive miniature video cameras are available to look at such places as engine compartments and cargo holds, yet, I've yet to hear a proposal to add them. At best, you'd have an inexpensive 10 pounds with a terrific safety edge.

Bleed leaks are common fire warning culprits, so the conclusion is obvious.

As to the engine, the series had a brief history of fan failures, such that they were on reduced thrust for a while. I never heard the whole story on that matter.