Southwest Airlines Flt
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- From a pilot's perspective.
LINKS:
Flight Tracker Radar- www.flightrada...
Proposed AD (Airworthiness Directive)
www.federalreg...
NTSB B Roll Flt #1380
• Video
Audio from ATC (Air Traffic Control)
• #WN1380 Southwest Engi...
PayPal
www.paypal.me/... 
Наука
April 19 NTSB update, more info- ruclips.net/video/EL5eMVGz5gk/видео.html
blancolirio The pilot did not tell the truth in this video, Southwest was given a directive to inspect these engines over a year ago, and they appealed that ruling.
Incorrect date, April 19, happen 10//5/18.
So who was the first death on Southwest you were talking about?
this is becoming the technical news channel the world has needed. knowledge is power, knowledge conquers fear,
Watching this video alone and depressed on my birthday when your assistant's hat dropped and made my day. I laughed myself happy. Thank you. Love your channel.
I just loved it when the cap on Petes head fell down over his eyes. That's a keeper.
I'm surprised that didn't go viral
Laughed out loud when I saw that! And dropping the marker.
Thank you, Juan. Awaiting further reports as you get more facts from the correct sources. Your comment about MSM and the hype generated for viewership is spot on.
Was actually waiting for this. :) You never disappoint.
Been watching your stuff since the scary days of a year ago. As an aviation addict ,when I saw what your personal aircraft was I knew why I liked your damage reporting on a viseral level. Keep the wind beneath your wings and know that when I need true reporting on things in your many areas of expertise I will always check for your reports. It's heartening to see people doing the right thing with their time.
I don't even read any of the crap the media puts out anymore. I just wait for your videos. Thank you again.
The media AND the CT specialists that haunt the web.
Me too
The media has historically done a poor, if not misleading job in reporting anything having to do with aviation. This is either through ignorance or to cultivate sensationalism. Case in point. The 1978 midair collision between a PSA 727 and a Cessna 172. Newsweek's graphic of the accident had the C172 catching up to the 727 and striking the trailing edge before going on to cause damage to the leading edge. That's right. A 90Kt C172 catching up to a 727 traveling in excess of 150 kts.
Ggkgdbs
tsossojtis
Tessufso
e3sh d'sshshsrskrsueeoe. .
Thanks Juan , I guessed that (and hoped ) that you might have a post on this incident.Full marks to the Pilot and her Crew .......Great Job well done in difficult circumstances !!! :-)
Great to get a pilot’s perspective. Thanks Juan
panda44r haha, indeed ; )
The captain is a hero clearly... An amazing recording of her communications got played yesterday. As the engines get older, thorough studies of fatigue are needed.
Jaun thank you so much for sharing your insight and knowledge of this with us. You did such a better job of explaining how the engine works and what actually happened than any other news source i have looked at about this accident has. Would really like to here some more about procedures and protocol on this type of an incident. Pete is a fine co journalist and helper he did a great job. Looking forward to hearing more about and procedures from you in the future. Thanks for taking the time to make these videos and sharing them with us. Have a great week. God Bless !!!
Been watching your channel since you proved yourself with the Oroville Dam stuff. I am now telling everyone I come into contact with that you are the guy to listen to if you want to listen to someone who is interested in learning about a topic and then spreading that knowledge.
More power to you Juan.
Pete just the best teacher I have ever seen. Hat slip totally sales it!
Thank you Juan. I just knew you would do a commentary on this incident. Your pilot expertise and logical explanations are top notch. All of the positive comments below speak to your amazing skills on several scientific topics. So looking forward to your follow videos on this particular subject. Gotta love Lt. Pete. Thank you again for your dedication and hard work producing this videos. Go Navy.
By watching this video, YT made some recommendations on this topic.
I think i gonna ignore them, because *blancolirio* channel covers all important details without being bias, like always.
Thank You Juan
You do a great job of relaying actual information instead of speculation. Keep up the good work.
Thank you for your educational videos. I always look forward to seeing your videos. Thank you.
Learned about this incident late last night and, since it was long over, my first thought was "Juan will be on this one, just need to wait for the video."
While I am eager for the riding videos to return, it's good to know when something bad happens, a calm, well explained, and educational video showing just the facts will be along to help make sense of the event.
Thanks Juan! Keep it up!
Thank you! I had been looking for those vids on destructive testing✅, thanks again for all your great reporting.
Thanks Juan, this is what the national media does not do well. Very informative, thank you.
Great, straight from the horses mouth! Special thanks to the Army Air Corp Lt Pete Brown!
If the 747 is the Queen of the Sky the Triple 7 is the Princess. Such a beautiful bird. Cheers to you and thanks for this.
Thank-you so much for this explanation, so easy to understand. Also your lieutenant was an excellent 'board master'. Love from Scotland.
When he read the list, dropped the marker and the hat fell over his eyes, I lost it. That was very good. So glad to see the kids involved in their Dad's videos. Two thumbs up Juan.
Absolutely priceless when Lieutenant "Tyrannosaurus" Pete dropped the marker after reading the list and then his hat dropped to his nose covering his eyes! Perfect!
Well done as a GA pilot and mechanical engineer I'm alway staggered at the errors the main stream media makes in reporting these type of incidents, keep up the good work.
I listened to the ATC Comms and the pilot almost seemed sedated she was so calm. Comms quality on the other hand was horrible.
She was a Navy pilot.
Cockpit crew radio transmissions are almost always calm and intelligent. That due to extensive training and ability to deal with emergency’s. Would you like it any other way?
Black Toof...please, please tell us that you DO NOT watch those two so-called news outlets....!!
Black Toof I haven't heard myself anyone slamming her (maybe cause I don't watch Cnn or MSNBS) but I know they hate Christians and she is one so maybe that has something to do with it.
NAVY!!!
Your aircraft commentaries are your best videos!
I had the wonderful opportunity to work with GE Engines and University of Dayton a number of years ago with "blade off containment" technology development.
I was asked to participate,because of my background in lightweight ballistics and explosive suppression material development.
The fan shrouds used kevlar and aluminum to contain the blades, which usually come off at roughly the speed of a .45 caliber bullet,[subsonic velocity].
We looked at and tested very much lighter materials like ballistic grade UHMPE and a very unique, advanced carbon fiber matrix developed at Brigham Young University, that looked like a spider web, impregnated with P.U. foam, which proved to be considerably lighter,and stronger than the old school aluminum and kevlar.
The GE guys considered a couple of solutions, first they thought it would be best to allow the blade off plus the partial blade off [which was nearly always partially broken of as well] next to it, be allowed to exit completely from the nacelle and gain distance from the still revolving fan, but quickly realized that was not a good idea,for obvious reasons.
We developed the alternative concept, per GE`s request to design the cold fan ring to allow the blade off plus partial blade off to penetrate into it and and be out of the fan rotation.
The fan blade off,would be completely absorbed, as much as possible, so the fan could safely spin down sans the broken blade pieces thereby lessening the catastrophic damage.
We calculated a considerable weight savings derived from the new lighter,stronger materials than the old method of heavier aluminum and kevlar.
You are a wizard. Thanks for the professionalism and great explanation as always.
Thank you. Expert explanation without the hype and why I subscribed to your channel about the Oroville Dam situation.
4:50 - "...one of the first womens to ever fly F-18s in the Navy."
THE FIRST.
Another excellent explanation of event. Thank you Mr. Brown.
Best explanation on the web. Condolences to the pax's family.
THANK YOU FOR THE ENLIGHTENMENT JUAN !!!
Dezert-Owl
I just watched Mentour pilots video about this incident and instantly wondered when you would post your perspective on the situation.
Kevin....Yep, I also watch Mentour...quality stuff he has.
Yep I like Mentour's vids and saw his on this topic earlier today. Juan get's a bit more technical (which I also like) but I think that's due to the difference in his audience and Mentour's. Mentour flies 737's (800) so he is very familiar with this engine.
Juan, I would listen to your news before the network "Fake" new, any day! You always present the facts with no bias.
Go Pete! summarized how jet engines work very nicely. As an alum of Embry Riddle Aeronautical University I can offer him a scholarship if he chooses a career in AE.
Thank you; again, you have brought clarity and understanding to a difficult to fathom situation.
3 observations:
1) Once again Juan does a great job
2) Considering the energy of a fan blade letting loose at 50+K rpm its amazing how much of that energy is contained.
3) Amazing the idiots who don't pay attention to pre-flight instructions and can't get get a simple oxygen cup on their face correctly. Fortunately, more didn't get hurt (Hypoxia) by their own stupidity.
ramosel, the fan doesn't turn at 50+K rpm. The core of the engine probably does. The fan blades have to be kept subsonic. More like 7-10,000 rpm. Much of the technical details are kept secret with the manufacturer. I'm surprised the CFM video even talked about temperatures in the engine core.
Operating specs aren't secret. Every pilot and mechanic must know them.
The core of this engine does not spin at 50K+ RPM Either. Max RPM for that size of an engine will generally be less than 30K RPM due to the speed at the blade tips. This specific engine tops out at 14,460RPM per this info: www.b737.org.uk/cfm56_soi.htm The inlet fan will definitely be less than the engine RPM as well because of it's longer blades/larger diameter.
The manufacturers don't hide engine data, it is made available through manuals which must be purchased, just as many other industries do. If you do a search, you will find that there is a lot of data about jet engines out there. There are even RUclips channels like @agentjayZ: ruclips.net/user/AgentJayZ which go into great detail about jet engines.
Regarding your 3) point is correct besides being judgmental. Yeh I noticed that. How people react in tense situation is very unpredictable.
No 3. - yes, I noticed that too!
As a student pilot back in 97, on a solo flight to orbit the field then do pattern work, I had a complete engine failure when I pulled power back climbing downwind. My training paid off. I was able to get safely back to the runway. It was about 20 minutes later when it hit me. Then I was shaking. But, training works.
Good job Juan. No opinions. Just facts. We are of similar backgrounds, 20 years in the Air Force as T-37 IP, C-141B FEIP, C-20A FEIP, and 21 plus years with major airline in B-737-300/500 F/O A320 F/O and Captain, approaching 19000 hours. I have never had a major emergency since leaving the Air Force. These airplanes are extremely reliable. Our training covers most of the usual incidents but it always up to the pilots' skills to cover the situations not covered in training.
Another excellent video, Juan. Great use of the animation by cfm and the videos of the testing of these engines to failure. Best of all was the clear explanation of how these engines work by your "copilot" Lt. Pete Brown. Keep up the great work. I'm heading over to Patreon to make another contribution.
Well done, I as well was waiting your perspective. After reading some other articles it does seem strange that the FAA slept on this and didn't mandate their proposed AD. I understand that a CFM service bulletin recommends an ultrasonic inspection of certain fan blades can be done in 2 hours, and doesn't require removing the engine. The proposed FAA AD stated that on engines that have flown more than 15,000 cycles, the fan blades would have to be inspected within six months of the rule being finalized, while on those with fewer cycles the blades would be inspected within 18 months. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the counterpart to the FAA in Europe, last month did finalize an Airworthiness Directive requiring airlines operating in Europe to perform the inspections recommended by CFM. Whats really interesting and I don't know is the the inlet cowl a Boeing part or a CFM part?
AFAIK the cowling is removed with the engine, so it is a CFM part, not a Boeing part.
Right on que LT PETE. You’re a keeper!
Juan, THANKS for a pilots perspective of what happens and the explanation of the different types of failures. I for one want to hear how you pilots react to the emergencies, I would imagine that you need to lose altitude ASAP for the decompression issues.
Enjoyed the video and your perspective. Thanks for posting. Stay safe!
Thanks Jaun! I thought you were a dam engineer!! haha This is probably not a big deal, but I noticed in the passenger pic no one had the mask over their mouth AND NOSES. Presumably they were already below 10,000'? FOLLOW all crew instructions!!! There was a good sized engine failure in the middle east somewhere a year or two ago. They landed, the engine was on fire, like heavily. Instead of evacuating as per crew instruction, people were opening the overheads, collecting belongings from the seat back, etc. and dragging their rollies down the aisle to the emergency exits... 20 minutes later the plane was completely destroyed.
Phil Rabe 😱😱😱
Yaaaaayyy!! Time for the real deal- brought to you by Juan & son! Good job, guys!
Thank you for another grate video! 👏👏👏👏👏
Red Jaden “Great”, not Grate.,
You produce some good stuff Jaun, thank you for keeping us informed with good factual information. Fly high and stay safe. Oh BTW, your first officer in the film was a crack up. Way to go Pete.
When mentioning the 36K people killed a year in vehicle accidents, it would probably bring out the comparison better to say that that is 100 people A DAY, vs the one person killed in the 9 years since 2009.
Checking auto fatality rates per mile for the latest year I could find (2007), it's 1.36 per 100 million miles (FHWA). Aviation is doing quite a bit better, at 1 per 5.2 *billion* miles per year (2017). (Wikipedia). I submit that miles traveled vs. deaths is the best way to evaluate safety. Put it another way, if you're flying 1,000 miles, your chances of dying are 1 out of 5.2 million.
Great as ever info!
It looked like captain Pete was getting ready for a bombing run over the enemy.
Keep him safe Juan.
Thanks for making us a little smarter...again.
Pete in both of these videos, with his hat!!! TOO precious, my kids LOVE it -- just like Marvin Martian. If that wasn't accidental, it was *inspired*.
Great coverage, but you don't need ME to tell you that...
Thanks Juan. Very informative, I still don't fly, to many on ground restrictions.
I am watching your videos Sir FROM KAZAKHSTAN, the content you do. Is really good, thank. You
Juan, you brought back memories of SOS and Command and Golf (OOps, Staff). It was the Air Force way. I have a Power Point presentation for the jet engine and it is exactly like yours. Suck, Squeeze, Bang, Blow. Pete is adorable.
Really really well done, Juan!
The most dangerous part of flying is getting to and from the airport.
Tell that to the one who didn't land with the plane
jstins - exactly.
Good job relating the facts. The only minor observation I have is that the engine is not a turbojet, it is a turbofan
Thank you for the insight on this incident Juan. I had a buddies Mrs watch this she had lots of questions about what happened, as one of her friends was aboard this aircraft. Much appreciated info for sure. She thanks you as well and now comprehends that it wasn't the engine that caused the fatality her friend witnessed, but the structure that surrounds the engine itself.Much respect for the captain of this flight she did everything by the book and then some, kept a cool head and resolved the issues that presented themselves with the utmost skill and professionalism. I hope that MSM picks up on this and give her the proper recognition she is due for getting this aircraft back on the ground safely. I bet all of her peers including yourself are giving her all the Kudos she deserves on this incident. I just pray the nut jobs in MSM don't try to park a bus on her as she deserves a medal at the very least and all the thanks we can give her from us the traveling public. Thanks again Juan Keep the blue on top! Jay
A great report, Juan. I respect that you didn't go into non-technical details such as the injuries sustained by the passengers. The air-to-ground communications (available on YT) demonstrate the sort of emergency calm that professionals don in order to perform the multiple checklists you mentioned, remembering to always "fly the plane" as their first duty.
So, the sequence of engine operation could be stated as:
- compress some air (through the fan and front compressor) to 450 C
- mix that air with jet fuel and ignite it, raising both temperatures and pressures
- use the pressure to drive the rearward turbine stages
- use that developed power to drive both the fan and the front compressor
- use the fan as a propellor to drive the bypass air around the engine and out the rear. The exhaust from the rear turbine is added to that for a little extra kick. Waste not want not.
Yep!
I’m surprised that, after incidents like this, although rare, with the possible subsequent lawsuits for the mental anguish suffering of the passengers, the airlines don’t also include (or do they?) with their emergency oxygen mask instructions (and did you notice some of the photos on Southwest showed every person only covering their mouth with their mask and not their nose and mouth?) the description of the sudden decompression emergency rapid descent maneuver and why it’s necessary. I suspect most passengers understandably assumed that the plane was out of control and "falling" to an eminent crash. A NYT article reported a passenger saying the plane was, "tilting to one side" as it approached to land. Maybe the carrier should also explain sideslip? Here’s my recent Tweet about the New York Times article:
The NYT needs an airline pilot to edit sensationally reported stories. Liam Stack’s & Matt Stevens’ 4/17/18 article about the Southwest engine failure: exploded/midair/lost altitude/violently depressurized/tilting to one side/(landing) nothing short of extraordinary. Wrong words.
Bruce John Shourt it's tilting due to having only one running engine. Remember, with only one engine going, you are fighting asemetrical thrust. So your lift won't be balanced. Not only that, but the dead engine is just dead weight creating drag. As far as the oxygen mask, they tell you exactly how to use them before departure, the issue is people don't listen. As far as letting people know more via pamphlets , well they don't due to cost. That and people likely wouldn't bother to read it.
Curtis Ridge Yes, thanks, but in my multi engine flying training (a light twin for my rating) I was able to fly level on one engine. The largest factor in asymmetrical thrust is yaw, not roll. If you watch RUclips videos recorded in simulators of 737 engine failure on takeoff and return to land they are flown level the entire time except when turning.
Excellent videos and RUclips channel. Thank you.
We need clone this guy and replace a bunch of reporters with his clones
Thanks Juan, another great explanation of things in the news.
We need to look at the Kevlar ring around the fan. It is designed to prevent the fan blades from being ejected and doing damage to other parts of the aircraft. In both of these events, the entire cowling was shredded and could have damaged the wing, flaps or even the tail. Great vid Juan. Pete is really cute. He and I share the same name. Is aviation in his future?
The cowling probably disintegrates due to wind forces at cruising altitude. Actual blade tests are done with stationary engines, which does not reproduce this mode of failure.
Correct. Some of those failures are fun to watch. However, the Kevlar band around the fan is meant to trap any blade or piece from piercing the airframe.
I thought Investigators said the blade never left the engine. It was not what hit the fuselage or window. Must have been the cowling when it blew apart.
been waiting for this... cant wait
Juan, Does Pete, at the ripe old age of 6 yrs. understand, that he is indeed funny? I suppose, you might want to state, he is a chip off the old block. You are probably more knowledgeable than most of the persons offering commentary below, but I've read were the CFM-56 engines have a reliability rating of over 93%. As you mentioned, Airbus used them on earlier builds of their A-320. Also, if my memory serves me correctly, Airbus also used them on the A-340-200, but as I've been reading, they were just a bit underpowered for that application.
93% of what? A 7% failure rate (say 7 failures per 100 flights) would be a terrible reliability rating.
As usual Juan, your reporting is spot on! I like the fake news stations telling the public that the engine "exploded"! One thing I must say is that the cfm56 engine has 42 fan blades. I believe you said 24. The cfm56 engine is a very reliable engine and the USAF uses that engine on the KC-135 tankers. The only differences are the location of the transfer case and the Tanker uses a down rated (thrust) version. Thanks for setting the record straight!
Different models of the CFM56 use anything from 44 to 22 fan blades, this B737 has 24.
Gordon Richardson I stand corrected! Thanks. I was speaking from KC-135 experience. I easily counted 24 from the pictures and I should have done that first. My question to you is why the variance in the number of blades? Thrust rating?
Tom Uhlig The Wikipedia entry for the CFM56 explains some of it, as the engine has gone through multiple upgrades (similar the B737 itself), and large ranges of thrust ratings. See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFM_International_CFM56#Variants
Jet engine background: The father of all modern airline transport engines was Austrain Amselm Franz. In about 1940 he was given the task of producing a jet engine for the Junkers aircraft company, where he worked as a turbocharger designer. The early experimental jet engines all used centrifugal compression, but Frans had a better idea and invented the axial compression jet engine, which became the Junkers Jumo 004. The 004 powered the Messerschmitt 262 which was 100 mph faster than American fighters in WW2. After WW2 Franz moved to the US where he developed a number of turbine engines including the PLFIA-2 the worlds first high bypass jet engine. All the large airliners are now propelled through the vapors by Franz invention of the axial compression high bypass turbine engines, such as the CFM56. Franz changed the world and virtually no one knows his name.
The Jumo 004 had a time between overhauls(TBO) of 25 hours, but with 80 years of metal science the TBO of the CFM56 is about 10,000 hours.
Fraz died in 1994 at the ripe old age of.....94.
(How many Americans would want to fly on an airliner powered by a Junkers engine?)
ziggy 2shus Jet engine invented by Frank Whittle,who was sidelined by the backward thinking military analysts before WW2. Details of his design were obtained by the Nazis by nefarious means! You are obviously a very knowledgeable chap, do you know of any similar turbofan containment catastrophic failures in Rolls Royce units? This is a design engineers nightmare.
I posted this for the convenience of the Blancolirio viewers. Most of my information comes from Wikipedia.Yes, Whittle invented the first jet engine, but it was a centrifugal compression engine, which was the logical way to produce the first of its kind. Hans von Ohain , in Germany also developed a centrifugal compression jet engine and got a US patent for his engine. Ohain's engine was the first to power a airplane in 1939. In 1926 A.A. Griffith reviewed Whittle's turbine paper and derided it, and stated that the large diameter compressor would make Whittle's design impractical for aviation, which shut down Whittle's work for a long period. A.A. Griffith wrote a paper proposing an axial flow compressor. Griffith's and Franz great idea was to take steam axial expansion turbines and flip it around backwards and use it as an air compressor. The steam turbine had been invented by Sir Charles Parsons in 1884. The British had an axial compression test engine flying in the Gloster Meteor in 1943.
The British Gov. sold the Rolls-Royce Nene centrifugal to the Russians in the late 1940s, which they knew was a dead end design. The Neme engine was far superior to anything the Russians had, and they improved it and used it to power the Mig-15. In the Korean war. The modified Mig-15 Neme engine produced more power than the axial engine in the US F-86, but this was the last straw for the big centrifugal engines.
-
A quick Google check: In 2001 a Rolls-Royce engine fan blade broke off on a 777 on take off. In 2017 a RR engine fan blade broke on an Airbus 330, but there was no significant damage to the cowling.
ziggy 2shus Thankyou for the information Ziggy. Sad to say I had never heard of Franz before,though I worked on steam and jet turbines for many years,including failed blade containment at the power stage. I imagine the turbofan cowling is a composite material so it will be interesting to find out how and why it failed.
The Swedish Ljungstrom radial steam turbine was quite successful but limited for the reasons you outlined in the Whittle Jet. One advantage was the speed it could be run up and loaded compared to an axial unit which requires careful thermal expansion.
Parsons turbine powered boat “Turbinia” is in a museum in Newcastle and well worth a look.It was good for nearly 40 mph !
The Swedes and Turbinia. Similar to the Turbinia embarrassing the British Navy in 1897 at Spithead with its speed, the Swedes "sank" a US aircraft carrier during war games with a little put-put submarine. The Swedish sub The Gotland is powered by an apparently very quiet Sterling engine and can stay submerged for weeks. The small"inexpensive" Gotland sub was able to sneak through all the US Navy defenses and photo the aircraft carrier.
-
The problems with broken fan blades should be reduced with the adoption of the new engines now in production. The CFM LEAP engine has light weight carbon fiber composite blades, which should reduce the damage if one breaks. The new P&W 3/1 geared engine would reduce the energy of a broken blade. The P&W geared turbine spins at about 12,000 rpm but the fan only turns at about 4,000 rpm.
Thanks Juan - solid update BB
Excellent explanation, thanks so much, Juan!!
The centripetal force on those blades is enormous! Their molecules are slowly being pulled apart every microsecond of rotation until micro-fissures develop and slowly grow until the fan blade simply pulls apart like taffy. They need an even more stringent blade replacement interval with very accurate data on how long before the micro fissures begin to form to prevent the blades from ever reaching the point of structural failure. This event was just the "law of averages" where everything is normal for a while until a predictable "outlier" event occurs that was this apparent blade failure. Chaos theory also predicts these events, i.e., every ocean wave fits a normal pattern until one forms a huge rouge wave very far out of the ordinary that can flip a ship.
Do (newer) airplanes have any sort of external video cameras installed? I'd think that the pilot would love to see the gremlin on the wing, nacelle damage, smoke, etc. that accompanies all the warning lights and alarms.
geonerd I think the A380 does, but it's only pretty much so you don't hit anything while taxiing since it's so huge. Otherwise if something goes wrong in the back, like an engine thing that the pilot can't see, they usually just call up a flight attendant and have them go peek through a nearby window. Flight attendants are very well trained and in an obvious and likely LOUD issue such as an engine failing, they'd go look and let the pilot know before he/she even had time to ask. If absolutely needed, the pilot in command can always turn over the controls to copilot and go in the back to have a look for himself. Although after the Germanwings thing, I'm not sure how that would work with a 2 man crew on the flight deck, because I think there are rules against having anyone in the cockpit solo.... Maybe a flight attendant would have to remain in the cockpit while the pilot was out.
Understood. But that all takes time. To see the damage immediately might help the pilots assess an emergency and respond more correctly.
Simplistic hero worship is not an answer. :/
There's someone........ some-thing........ out on the wing.!!!!!!!
Juan, pro-tip, start writing your notes up large! and tack them up to something behind the camera so you can avoid looking down to read your notes... You are great to catch up with and are possibly poised to become the go to guy for the news co's....
2:58 "Turbofan" sir.
I get a little 'loose' with my terminology...
thanks Juan, i knew you would be on top of this.
This file is out-of-sync by several frames. Please repost a corrected version.
Jeez don't panic, let it finish processing. Looks good on this end now. You need a better connection Bruce! lol.
blancolirio My connection is fine and I quit and relaunched the app (iOS) and reloaded the video and the sync problem was the same. Another viewer noticed the problem, too.
Worked fine for me on my Android phone.
Works fine for me.
12:15, 14:30(+/-10 seconds). Those were the only two spots that lagged one hour after uploading. Who cares? Great job as always, Juan. Cheers.
Excellent explanation Juan. Looks like the engine inlet structure needs to be as robust as what contains the engine.
3:55 It's actually the first passenger fatality on Southwest in its 47 year history. Their only previous fatality was a car passenger who got in front of a Southwest plane that slid off a runway at Midway.
Correct.
And crashed through a wall. Unfortunately some kid riding in a car in traffic just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Southwest is a great airline though. I've heard the ATC guys like them too, something about southwest buying them a lot of pizza..
Thank you for the explanation!
I was flying out of Moscow-Pullman airport as a passenger and a goose got sucked into the engine. Bird strikes happen, and good piloting got us back on the ground safely.
Thanks Juan, that was great!
Great job and thanks!
The kid doing the explanation was a cute touch.
Just a suggestion for future great videos like this, put Lt Pete Brown from the army air core in your credits (when you invite him), I enjoy his view, enthusiasm and takes on your show👍🏼, thanks!
Very interesting and informative. Thank you for the awesome videos.
BTW - Juan did a good job too. thanks for the frank conversation and info sharing.
Hey, Captain, thank you so much for the run down and taking time to explain this tragedy with fact and logic. Is that your future Raptor Driver assisting you? God Bless You and Yours!
Juan, great video (as always). I would love see you talk about or mention United Flight 232 and discuss how very different the outcome was. Also, whether or not the study from that crash has any bearing on how relatively minor these two incidents were when you compare them to 232. Even through it was minor when compared to other uncontained engine failures, someone's mother, wife, daughter, was lost. Hopefully something good can come of the investigation that will help prevent this from occurring in the future.
Thanks for the great explanation!
Thankfully, I have never had an actual engine failure. Before I got my jet job, and before all of the added security procedures produced by 9-11, I was able to take a tour of the 777 at the BOAC terminal in Philly. The operations manager was very generous with his time for two GA pilots. Standing in front of those giant RR engines was a real treat. And, a moving cockpit seat is much better than the gyrations one takes to get into a Lear 35.
I am forced to wonder if these two blade failures are due to a production problem or simply unanticipated metal fatigue. I am also wondering if the ultrasonic testing will prove to be a sufficient benchmark for future failure predictions. What do you think?
It's 2018 and I'm really surprised aircraft lack either interior or exterior cameras where the data can be stored in its own blackbox. We always seem to rely on video and pictures someone takes on planes with their phone. My home has 24/7 video and it cost me less than $400 bucks. Can you imagine how much the investigation team would benefit if a camera was aimed at the engine during failure?
As always, great reporting. I've heard many passenger comments about how cool, calm and collected the pilot was. No surprise to me. (Spent many years on the flight deck of carriers and in the squadrons that live on them. Navy pilots are a special breed. Often chosen to captain our space vehicles. They are not only cool they are very level headed and physically fit.
I frequently hear comparisons between aircraft and auto safety. For several significant reasons, it seem like comparing apples and oranges. Aircraft travel is in an environment that is significantly different from that of automobiles. There is also a difference between commercial and private travel.
@ 5:10 Pete is the star of the show!
Thank you for your input.
Very informative juan!
Thank you for the information!