Jump to content
PRR 60

Southwest Airlines Uncontained Engine Failure, One Fatality (4/17/18)

Recommended Posts

 

Changing engine types on an already-built jet is a costly and extensive process, and thus is rarely ever done.

It's easy on the 787, which was specially designed to operate interchangeably between the two engine types. To swap engines, all they have to do is slightly modify the pylons, stick on the new engines, and they're done.

None of the stories to which you linked claims NH is replacing RR with GE. Although the engines themselves are periodically swapped for maintenance and repair the engine type that was supplied at delivery is almost always the same type installed when the aircraft is decommissioned or written off decades later. Replacing 100 engines is a huge and expensive undertaking and RR has little if any incentive to assist NH with moving to another engine manufacturer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Changing engine types on an already-built jet is a costly and extensive process, and thus is rarely ever done.

It's easy on the 787, which was specially designed to operate interchangeably between the two engine types. To swap engines, all they have to do is slightly modify the pylons, stick on the new engines, and they're done.

None of the stories to which you linked claims NH is replacing RR with GE. Although the engines themselves are periodically swapped for maintenance and repair the engine type that was supplied at delivery is almost always the same type installed when the aircraft is decommissioned or written off decades later. Replacing 100 engines is a huge and expensive undertaking and RR has little if any incentive to assist NH with moving to another engine manufacturer.

 

I noticed that I had misread after I posted, and subsequently removed the links.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Changing engine types on an already-built jet is a costly and extensive process, and thus is rarely ever done.

It's easy on the 787, which was specially designed to operate interchangeably between the two engine types. To swap engines, all they have to do is slightly modify the pylons, stick on the new engines, and they're done.

 

You cut off the Burninator's very next sentence...

 

While originally Boeing wanted to design the 787 so that swapping between GE and RR engines was as simple as a regular engine change, that capability did not make it into the final aircraft design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone see this report this evening?

Very troubling to hear alleged improper conduct by supervisor's over SWA mechanics pressuring them to ignore safety flaws, and general climate of poor safety 'culture'...

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/on-air/as-seen-on/Southwest-Pressures-Mechanics-to-Ignore-Problems-Complaint_New-York-481712101.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went back to the articles on the ANA swap, and when you read the whole article, (not just headline and summary -I' plead guilty) it is clear that they are swapping RR for RR, not going to GE so I was certainly wrong on that......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the aircraft would have had "Concorde sized" windows, would that have prevented the fatal accident of that passenger? Not that I am advocating tiny windows, as with that logic, the next progression would be to have no windows. Maybe some other way to harden the windows further?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the past, there have been examples of uncontained engine failure that caused body panels to puncture where there was no window, leading to explosive depressurization. Absence of windows is no guarantee for safety in the face of such failures.

Edited by jis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the aircraft would have had "Concorde sized" windows, would that have prevented the fatal accident of that passenger? Not that I am advocating tiny windows, as with that logic, the next progression would be to have no windows. Maybe some other way to harden the windows further?

The 737 family is the world's most popular mainline commercial aircraft and has no known issues with window design or any predisposition toward uncontained engine failures leading to explosive decompression. Nor does the 737 need to survive the Concorde's unique mission and flight profile. This isn't the de Havilland Comet (previous example of known window and skin issues) and if the 737 had major design problems we should be seeing similar events all over the world. That being said, WN has been caught excessively delaying and improperly reporting mandatory maintenance and safety work in the past and it's not inconceivable that they didn't learn their lesson last time. I find it genuinely perplexing how a culture that reacts so strongly to airline related incidents and accidents is so quick to return to the false hope of self-regulation the moment things quite down again.

Edited by Devil's Advocate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one of the selling points of the new generation 787 over its competition is that it has larger windows....if people only realized that windshield panels on planes crack way more often than passenger windows...

Edited by PVD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 737 family is the world's most popular mainline commercial aircraft

I thought it's now the A320...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The 737 family is the world's most popular mainline commercial aircraft

I thought it's now the A320...

 

What I mean is that the total number of B737 deliveries exceeds the total number of A320 deliveries. Either way the core point still stands. Unlike the extremely rare Concorde, if there were a critical flaw in the 737's design we should be seeing similar incidents and accidents all over the world by similarly aged/operated aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The 737 family is the world's most popular mainline commercial aircraft

I thought it's now the A320...

 

By March of this year, a total of 8,074 A320 family planes have been built, while the 10,000th 737 family plane was delivered in March this year. So no, it will take the 320 family many years to catch up.

Edited by jis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

define popular..... best selling family ever, easily the 737, best selling in its current iteration, the A320 neo has an edge over 737 max....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike the extremely rare Concorde, if there were a critical flaw in the 737's design we should be seeing similar incidents and accidents all over the world by similarly aged/operated aircraft.

 

Yeah. The Concorde flew 700 mph faster and 20,000 feet higher than the 737. Concorde's windows took orders of magnitude more punishment than that of any normal airliner. So it would be total overkill to put those windows on a normal plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×