767 engine fire/damage at LAX

[Garfield1966]

I guess it's blind luck everytime you don't get struck by lightning in a thunderstorm?

Since Lighting (and engine explosions) are random events, I do consider it blind luck that
1. the mechanics conducted the run up when they did.
2. That the mechanics on board and in the surrounding area were not injured.
3. That no other aircraft were taking off/landing at the time the shrap mettal were bing hurled 3000 feet away.
4. That no passengers were on board the aircraft
5. And that the aircraft was pulled from service when it was.

As I said earlier in this thread. I am not questioning the competency of the mechanics who worked on the aircraft. I am not questioning the procedures. I am merely saying that the mechanics who were conducting the test on the 767 did not anticipate the engine tearing it’s self to pieces. They were given a report that indicated that there was a problem with then engine. The conducted a run up of the engine with the hopes that the run up would give them an indication of what was wrong. They did not anticipate the engine blowing up, placing their lives and anyone in the surrounding area at risk. If they had, I suspect they would have not run the test.

The UAL DC10 that lost an engine was also luck. The pilots skill was instrumental in bring the plane down and having as many survivors as there were but had the engine let loose in a slightly different manner, or had they been over the Atlantic ocean, all the skill would not have mattered. That does not make the pilot any less skilled. The Delta flight that crashed in Dallas way back when was ‘bad luck" It had nothing to do with the skill of the crew. My understanding is that they put the flight conditions in a flight Sim and no one has survived yet. They, like the engine failure are random events that have nothing to do with those involved other than the fact they are along for the ride. Their skill becomes apparent as result of the random events that occurred.

Yes, there was a lot of luck involved that day. It was a random event. That does not detract from the skill of those involved, it just means they had no control over the event and they will be fortunate enough to wake each morning and continue on with their lives.

J

 

[MCI transplant]

You can NDT a part with ultra-sound,Magna-flux,X-rays,and Zyglo all you want and still have a part crack. It is very possible that the disk was not cracked when it was put into the engine at overhaul. F.O.D. could have started a crack to form or the disk could have been weakened by a previous overtemp event(Hot start or Overboost on takeoff).
There many reasons why metal fatigues in service.

<_< -------True Princess! But N.D.T. is a starting point! Hence the second question of how much time was on the engine at the time of failure! Believe me, all the paper work will be looked at! Which it should be! One failure is one too many! Like the man says: "aa was vary lucky," this time!

 

[QA4Jet-A]

<_< -------True Princess! But N.D.T. is a starting point! Hence the second question of how much time was on the engine at the time of failure! Believe me, all the paper work will be looked at! Which it should be! One failure is one too many! Like the man says: "aa was vary lucky," this time!

Gotta agree with you MCI on that. Question. Did the Run-up happen at the gate or was the aircraft at a remote or hangar area? Scary thought if a fuel truck had been hit by some of those parts... just MHO.

 

[Hopeful]

Gotta agree with you MCI on that. Question. Did the Run-up happen at the gate or was the aircraft at a remote or hangar area? Scary thought if a fuel truck had been hit by some of those parts... just MHO.

There are no run-ups allowed at any gate except for idle runs.
High powered runs are done at the hangar blast fence. If there are no hangar facilities available, a taxi to an inactive runway is the alternative.

 

[PRINCESS KIDAGAKASH]

Gotta agree with you MCI on that. Question. Did the Run-up happen at the gate or was the aircraft at a remote or hangar area? Scary thought if a fuel truck had been hit by some of those parts... just MHO.

This photo may answer your question.

 

[QA4Jet-A]

This photo may answer your question.

Thank you both, Hopeful and Princess. Excellent pic.

 

[Hackman]

This photo may answer your question.

Holely She-ite!!!! I bet them boys needed a Depends change after that one!!! Yikes!!!!

Nice camera work too. 😛h34r:

 

[MCI transplant]

<_< ------ What are those fuel tanks in the background? How far way are they? I know picture can be a little deceiving at times!

 

[FWAAA]

<_< ------ What are those fuel tanks in the background? How far way are they? I know picture can be a little deceiving at times!

Those aren't fuel; someone earlier posted that they are water for the hangar. They are rather close. B)

 

[E-TRONS]

The AA Techs were indeed fortunate to walk away from, what could have been a catastrophe. I have performed run-ups many a time in my 20+ year career. You never know what to expect after engine maintenance. All you can do is to be safe....tune in to the FAA Tower freq, follow the run-up charts, have a ground crew in place, test your fire detection / supression systems, gradually increase power to the target setting, so on and so forth. But things just happen sometimes even when following the book. To me, the run-up crew was on their game.

Much of the damage to the fuselage looks minor on the outside. But, it is the damage on the inside that matters most.
Flap can be replaced...no big deal. However, the aft spar would be more of my concern. Tweak that and you might have a Diner on your hands.

I noticed the skin panels on the left side of the fuselage which appear to be buckled between the stringers....not too good. But you can reskin those areas and replace the stringers and frames as well.

Engines were blown up pretty good and the Pylon looked to have escaped the majority of the hot section's wrath. But that doesn't count for much if the Keel Beam took a substantial hit. If it did, you now have a mobile parts department to rob and plunder.

Were the wet-areas of the wing compromised? Center tank??Without knowing the scope of the unseen damage, I am fairly confident that this 767 will not fly again. And that is nothing more than simple economics. Hope AA had her insured adequately.

This incident should raise the question of Engine TBO and if it is being extended for too long of an interval? If this was an ETOPS bird and was over the pond during this occurrence?? Heaven help them! These repeat incidents (UAIR, UAL, AA) are all shots across the bow. I just wonder if the federal regulatory agencies and the airline management have the wisdom to intercede before something terrible happens. But they probably won't do much because it will cost too much <_<

Keep em safe fellas. Remember that it's Quality over Quantity. Do it right the first time. If your managers don't like that philosophy? Let them fix it and sign it off!!

Peace B)

 

[upsilon]

The AA Techs were indeed fortunate ......

Keep em safe fellas. Remember that it's Quality over Quantity. Do it right the first time. If your managers don't like that philosophy? Let them fix it and sign it off!!

Great Post!!!

 

[eolesen]

These repeat incidents (UAIR, UAL, AA) are all shots across the bow. I just wonder if the federal regulatory agencies and the airline management have the wisdom to intercede before something terrible happens.

IIRC, the -80A was already under more stringent TBO standards than the -80C variants, mainly because of their age.

 

[tadjr]

Article on the problem with this engine type

 

[E-TRONS]

Maybe John Goglia (former USAIR Mech too) read my post??? That just goes to show that most mechanics (SCABS EXCLUDED)share the same philosophy when it comes to safety B)

 

[Wretched Wrench]

Wretched,

If I am understanding you correctly , had the run up test not been done, the next time that plane took off there would have been a good likely hood that the engine would haveexploded and the plane could have creashed?

I think I am going to be ill. Thank god for a little blind luck every now and then.

Yes, I believe the engine would have failed as soon as the flight crew reached the power settings the mechs did. Everybody did their job here. The flight crew noticed something amiss with the engine performance and wrote it up. The mechs and supe investigated and decided to test the engine to see if it met AA specs or not. Boom.

Now, here is the scary part. What if the engine met AA specs, and nothing blew? That turbine wheel could have let go any time later. Some do.

I don't even know if the pilot complaint was related to the crack in the turbine wheel. I don't know if anyone knows. Any intel here, anybody? I did hear it, it did not sound right on runup, but I can't characterize my dislike for the sound. I ust know it was out of the ordinary. And there was a horrific scraping, squealing, rending of metal sound as it quit. Perhaps there were clearance issues at high power settings. That would explain the acceleration complaint.

However, remember, in the sky, the wheel would not have had concrete to skip along as it departed the area, so it could have done less damage, and a crash might well have been avoided.