Kiwi303 Posted September 11, 2015 Share Posted September 11, 2015 Looking at the GE90 test flight on the 747 while certifying it during design stage, I wonder if they could make a twin engine 747? (I clicked through to one of the other suggested videos at the end of the video above.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted September 11, 2015 Share Posted September 11, 2015 Wow interesting stats in that film....forces equivalent to 7000 times their own weight, or as the woman suggested equivalent to the weight of a locomotive.......... makes you wonder what the resultant unbalanced vibration forces in play would be....for example, I can see that containment is an issue but I wonder how the engine stays attached to the pod with those forces at play. When the blade let go it seemed that the one immediately following also detached, and presumably bits of the ones following it....Not completely shown.....so if that was fully contained why then the A380 picture which showed multiple containment case breaches, and the video posted on the 777 also showed cowling damage consistent with multiple containment casing failures....... I reckon the 777 pilot was damn lucky he was on the ground and able to stay there......will be interesting to see what damage to the wing and wiring resulted from the failure...hope the flames didn't damage so much that its impossible to tell....leading edge looked to have completely sag'd due heat.....Having to rely on the skill of the flight crew to overcome the failure of the casing to contain is likely to not always end well....... Is it as rare as the few occasions we have talked about or does it occur more frequently than just those few? Actually a google search for "uncontained aircraft turbine engine failure" suggests that its not at all that rare, specifically the USA NTSB had this....http://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/Four_Recent_Uncontained_Engine_Failure_Events_Prompt_NTSB_to_Issue_Urgent_Safety_Recommendations_to_FAA.aspx (but not entirely common either....another website to check out is this one http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Uncontained_Engine_Failure ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Well I guess that one isn't flying to a graveyard anytime soon....... I presume it will be written off.......the though of flames around metals with specific heat treatment finishes would suggest to this total unknowledgeable critter that I wouldn't want to be PIC of that beast ever.... The big bypass fan looks Ok...wonder what it looks like from the backend forward!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I've been saying for years ever since the first generation ultra- high bypass turbofan engines came on the scene ( RR RB 211 ) that when they let go, they are really going to let go. There is so much pressure and power there rotationally speaking, that even very well designed Kevlar-reinforced containment cowls don't have a lot of chance stopping the hot stuff when they grenade. QF32 was a good example and this recent B 777 in Las Vegas another prime example, and there have been others. Loosing an engine is one thing and crews are highly trained to respond well , however once very hot high speed bits impact the sourrounding fuselage and wings after penetrating the cowl, the whole picture can change. The crew at Las Vegas did a fine job of aborting the takeoff, however I don't expect that airframe to be flying anytime soon, if ever again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The big bypass fan looks Ok...wonder what it looks like from the backend forward!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The fact it's got underfloor so fast should worry them. All that plastic stuff doesn't stop fire it would seem. If it's a late model with low hours to make it worthwhile, it can be repaired depending on local resources available (Hangar space and engineering facilities.) I would think. The servicing history of the engine would be looked at. Jet engines are many times more reliable than Pistons, but a bogus or timex part can change that. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 The fact it's got underfloor so fast should worry them. All that plastic stuff doesn't stop fire it would seem. If it's a late model with low hours to make it worthwhile, it can be repaired depending on local resources available (Hangar space and engineering facilities.) I would think. The servicing history of the engine would be looked at. Jet engines are many times more reliable than Pistons, but a bogus or timex part can change that. Nev I'd say that wing carry- thru would have been jepodized with heat damage....uneconomical to repair ?....may end up a freighter, at least it's in the right country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 A 777 with AfterburnerAlso noted a fair number of passengers slid down the emergency chute with their carry on luggage Fly Safe RW Up until now, evacuations have always been "passengers only", and no carry on baggage. I suppose somehow, the passengers thought it important enough to get their priorities right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Up until now, evacuations have always been "passengers only", and no carry on baggage. Passengers don't seem to understand that baggage, in the rush to get out, can catch in places, block exits, damage slides, injure other people, etc, etc. This is why you leave it behind. If the plane survives generally intact, you'll get it back eventually. If the plane explodes or burns to the ground, thank your lucky stars you're still alive and go out and buy a celebratory new set of toiletries and change of clothes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Passengers don't seem to understand that baggage, in the rush to get out, can catch in places, block exits, damage slides, injure other people, etc, etc. This is why you leave it behind. If the plane survives generally intact, you'll get it back eventually. If the plane explodes or burns to the ground, thank your lucky stars you're still alive and go out and buy a celebratory new set of toiletries and change of clothes. Actually the airlines should be compensating passengers for any personal items lost in a crash and /or fire . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 They probably would but the limit will be specified overall, and varies from country to country. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 They probably would but the limit will be specified overall, and varies from country to country. Nev Well I would certainly make sure I grabbed my carry on bag then in an emergency, I wouldn't want my spare Rolex watch , gold chains and thousands of dollars worth of jewellery being destroyed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 They do normally compensate you. Which is why I said you can leave your bag behind and go on a splurge to buy new clothes and toiletries. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 They do normally compensate you. Which is why I said you can leave your bag behind and go on a splurge to buy new clothes and toiletries. Thank God ( no I don't actually own a Rolex ) but I think you already guessed that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Perry Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Thank God ( no I don't actually own a Rolex ) but I think you already guessed that. My Blonde Lady neighbour has two Rottweilers, called Rolex, and Timex. I said "What sort of names are those ? " She said,. . ."Helooooooo , duh, they're Watch dogs stupid " I'll get me coat. . . . . 2 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 That's why I said "Funny". You are not supposed to take personal stuff. The prime concern is getting people off, and sometimes they don't ALL get off. Some end up dead. Just imagine overwing exits with people having their luggage with them. They only had half a load of Pax and One door not used, and not a lot of wind to blow the slides around, BUT but I'm surprised BA would be involved with that sort of thing. There was wing full of fuel there and it could have been perforated by shrapnel. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 That's why I said "Funny". You are not supposed to take personal stuff. The prime concern is getting people off, and sometimes they don't ALL get off. Some end up dead. Just imagine overwing exits with people having their luggage with them. They only had half a load of Pax and One door not used, and not a lot of wind to blow the slides around, BUT but I'm surprised BA would be involved with that sort of thing. There was wing full of fuel there and it could have been perforated by shrapnel. Nev I wouldnt take personal stuff off the aircraft in an emergency, I was just joking for peoples entertainment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 I know that you were.. I hope it didn't come across any other way. My comment after the initial bit was general in nature.. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 They do normally compensate you. Which is why I said you can leave your bag behind and go on a splurge to buy new clothes and toiletries. Well don't splurge too much if you jumped off a burning Jetstar flight, you might only end up with a voucher for a free coke. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 I know that you were.. I hope it didn't come across any other way. My comment after the initial bit was general in nature.. Nev Dont forget to raid the min-bar on the way out , just in case you get stuck in the airport or on the tarmac for a few hours... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Save you worrying about a motel. You go straight to gaol do not collect $200. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 The galley minibar....got to get your moneys worth on the way out, if they are going to burn your favourite luggage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ada Elle Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Up until now, evacuations have always been "passengers only", and no carry on baggage.I suppose somehow, the passengers thought it important enough to get their priorities right All you need to do is arrest/fine anybody who brings a bag with them on evacuation (of more than a certain size) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Perry Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 All you need to do is arrest/fine anybody who brings a bag with them on evacuation (of more than a certain size) Hmm. . .that's going to play really well with the mainstream media innit ? . . . "I thought I was going to die. . .I managed to get me kids together and off that burning plane and now the Bar$tard$ want to fine me and put me in prison for grabbing me bag with me iPhone in it cos it was 1Kg over the lawful escape weight and being alive . . .? " Damned if they do. . . . . aaaaand. . . . damned if they don't. Human nature cannot be legislated against,. . .in moments of stress / pure terror,. . . . . people do odd things, irrespective of any future consequences. Formulaic / Logical reasoning simply doesn't apply and WILL NOT WORK in these situations. ( Never has so far anyway ) Remember the awful B737 ground fire incident at Manchester Airport a few years back ? A number of the survivors said that their path was blocked by people messing around in the overhead lockers looking for bags, with a cabin full of acrid smoke, and when they had all ( wrongly in hindsight ) been instructed by the captain to remain seated whilst the aircraft returned to the apron. ( Yes, - they should ALL have been evacuated on the runway,. . .but they were not. ) to be fair,. . . the flight crew had no idea how bad the cabin smoke / fire situation was at that stage, and yet, people were more concerned with their luggage than their lives. ( so it appears to to those who were not unlucky enough to be on board that flight and can sit back in their leather armchairs and clinically denigrate the crew. . . ) Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now