Jetblue Flight Has Massive Engine Failure in Flight

[dmcowen674]

Originally Posted by zinfamous
One of the reasons I don't like sitting near the wings...because I don't want to see that shit if it happens. I know it's very unlikely, and I'm being a paranoid idiot...but for whatever reason I don't fly as well as I used to.

I saw a special where it said if the plane ever breaks up upon landing, the wings area is the part that will stay most intact for structural reasons. I can't remember the flight that broke into 3 pieces, but those people were the only ones who survived.

Only if the fuel doesn't ignite though.

Normally it does and those close to the wings fry.

 

[halik]

The wing section is the strongest area of the plane, as it has to be, to keep the wings attached to the plane (the C-130 in John Connor's youtube video either experienced severe metal fatigue, or the wings had been removed and put back on, or replaced, incorrectly).

This gives you a good idea of how much flex they build into the wings of a 787.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA9Kato1CxA :thumbsup:

Better video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojMlgFnbvK4

 

[Ferzerp]

Haha, wuss. I've been in a plane where the door popped open in at 2000ft. Apparently that's a problem with Cessna 150s. There was mild concern but I kept myself composed, which is a rare feat.

Hey wuss, I've been in a plane where we *opened* the door at 14,000 ft and then we all fell out of it. More than once!

 

[KeithP]

Thankfully, FAA regulations require commercial jets to be able to fly during a single engine failure for a long enough time to land.

Maybe a pilot will correct me on this but I believe the applicable FAA regulation specifies the routes a plane can fly based on how far it can fly on a single engine and how close a diversion airport is, the plane has to be able to reach the airport on a single engine.

-KeithP

 

[Platypus]

I call dibs on your Subaru, do you still have it?

I do! <3

It's all yours baller :wub:

 

[tortillasoup]

Obviously the chemtrail producing machine malfunctioned.

 

[BUTCH1]

Here's an example of an engine failure just after rotation due to bird-strike to the right engine, fine job by the pilot, total pro-job bringing her back without issue..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KhZwsYtNDE

 

[who?]

It's interesting to watch the flap slide out of and into the wing to adjust the lift and bring the wing back up or down.

 

[Anubis]

Maybe a pilot will correct me on this but I believe the applicable FAA regulation specifies the routes a plane can fly based on how far it can fly on a single engine and how close a diversion airport is, the plane has to be able to reach the airport on a single engine.

-KeithP

its something like that, which is also why only certian planes are allowed to fly across the Atlantic or pacific

 

[who?]

The FAA approves twin engine planes for ETOPS (extended twin operations) based on reliability also. After a plane has proven that engine trouble is extremely rare it's more likely to get approved for ETOPS.

 

[KillerCharlie]

Actually the flexing is not to "smooth the flight like shock absorbers" it's because the wing is very heavy and carries a lot of fuel as well, if it couldn't flex it would break very quickly.

How you can possibly be so far off, I have no idea...

Wings are made of metal or composite. These materials bend. Therefore wings bend.
The stronger the wing is, the less it bends. They don't design something to bend - it does that on its own just fine.

As an aerodynamicist a big part of my job is dealing with wing stiffness.

 

[tortillasoup]

How you can possibly be so far off, I have no idea...

Wings are made of metal or composite. These materials bend. Therefore wings bend.
The stronger the wing is, the less it bends. They don't design something to bend - it does that on its own just fine.

As an aerodynamicist a big part of my job is dealing with wing stiffness.

If the wing was made of sapphire or diamond, it would not bend because of its hardness, instead it would just snap. So that's his point, that there is flexibility in the wing for good reason.

 

[marvdmartian]

Only if the fuel doesn't ignite though.

Normally it does and those close to the wings fry.

That's what happened when the Korean Airlines 747 crash landed on Guam, back in 97. Three hundred some odd people on board, only about thirty survived....and they were seated in the furthest seats back. Tail snaps off, remainder of the aircraft continues to slide further, catches on fire, people die either from smoke inhalation or heat (or both), while back in the tail, there's essentially nothing to burn.

Really makes you re-think that whole sitting close to the front of the plane, eh? :hmm:

Here's an example of an engine failure just after rotation due to bird-strike to the right engine, fine job by the pilot, total pro-job bringing her back without issue..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KhZwsYtNDE

Agreed! One of my neighbors, when I lived on Guam, was a pilot for Continental Micronesia Airlines, flying the 727. The airline decided they were going to phase out the 727's, and replace them with 757's, so he had to go back to Houston for 4-1/2 months, to get type rated on it. When he came back, he told me that one of the amazing things about that aircraft, was that the engines were so powerful, that you could be at your point of no return, maximum weight for the aircraft, and lose and engine....and still have enough power to get safely off the ground, to circle around, dump fuel, and land.
If memory serves, it take pushing that sole engine up to ~150% power for liftoff. Which makes sense, especially when you hear the pilot in the video you linked talking about how hot the left engine was, and that he wanted to shut it down before being towed into the terminal area, just in case.

 

[BUTCH1]

How you can possibly be so far off, I have no idea...

Wings are made of metal or composite. These materials bend. Therefore wings bend.
The stronger the wing is, the less it bends. They don't design something to bend - it does that on its own just fine.

As an aerodynamicist a big part of my job is dealing with wing stiffness.

I don't think I was off at all, he was thinking that wing flexing was designed into a wing to smooth out the ride, I am well aware that materials "bend" LOL..

 

[BUTCH1]

That's what happened when the Korean Airlines 747 crash landed on Guam, back in 97. Three hundred some odd people on board, only about thirty survived....and they were seated in the furthest seats back. Tail snaps off, remainder of the aircraft continues to slide further, catches on fire, people die either from smoke inhalation or heat (or both), while back in the tail, there's essentially nothing to burn.

Really makes you re-think that whole sitting close to the front of the plane, eh? :hmm:




Agreed! One of my neighbors, when I lived on Guam, was a pilot for Continental Micronesia Airlines, flying the 727. The airline decided they were going to phase out the 727's, and replace them with 757's, so he had to go back to Houston for 4-1/2 months, to get type rated on it. When he came back, he told me that one of the amazing things about that aircraft, was that the engines were so powerful, that you could be at your point of no return, maximum weight for the aircraft, and lose and engine....and still have enough power to get safely off the ground, to circle around, dump fuel, and land.
If memory serves, it take pushing that sole engine up to ~150% power for liftoff. Which makes sense, especially when you hear the pilot in the video you linked talking about how hot the left engine was, and that he wanted to shut it down before being towed into the terminal area, just in case.

I flew on a 757 from Philly to Orlando, even with a packed plane and 98 degree weather the roll-out to V1 was short and the climb-out was very steep, you could tell that plane had balls..

 

[Paratus]

Picture of the cabin?