SWA Diversion to DAL, First-Hand Account

Status
Not open for further replies.
All you have to do is look at the picture, kids. Maybe take an accident investigation class or two. The fan blades are damaged, most certainly. But, they're more or less intact, eliminating a "Fan Burst".

And, Chicaga, perhaps YOU'D better look at your own "evidence". The Fan blades all line up the same way in each picture, althought the SWA blades are show extreme damage.

Some of you "experts" need to ask a 737 pilot for a fam walkaround so you can see and touch the fan.
 
FlyChicaga said:
Really? The fan section is intact? That certainly doesn't look like the N1 fan section to me, and I don't fly the B737.

I have linked a picture of the N1 fan section of a CFM-56 engine below. Here is a hint: Compare what you see behind the fan section in the picture below with what is pictured above.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1280417/M/
Click to expand...

I think the disagreement stems from looking at the wrong model of CFM-56. You are absolutely right that the damaged engine does not match the fan pictured in the link above - the number of blades don't even match up. However, the engine in question is probably just an older model CFM-56 used on the 300s. Check out

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1065799/M/

As you can see, the fan blade number, shape, and position match the damaged aircraft much better.
 
Velocipede said:
All you have to do is look at the picture, kids. Maybe take an accident investigation class or two. The fan blades are damaged, most certainly. But, they're more or less intact, eliminating a "Fan Burst".

And, Chicaga, perhaps YOU'D better look at your own "evidence". The Fan blades all line up the same way in each picture, althought the SWA blades are show extreme damage.

Some of you "experts" need to ask a 737 pilot for a fam walkaround so you can see and touch the fan.
Click to expand...

You seem like a smart individual and though your heart matches the intentions of the founder of this website, your attitude does not. Maybe you don't realize what your posts say about attitude, but the replies of your peers don't lie. I rarely completely agree with you, but I still wanted to see what your opinion was. I know what I'm looking at. I've been inspecting CFM 56's for 7 years and I still wanted to know what you had to say.

Listen, when you're gone, people will pass on the knowledge you've passed down to them. But first, you need to provide it. Not everyone is going to take an accident investigation class and some of these folks consider themselves lucky to have even been able to stand outside an airport fence and look at a CFM 56
 
I think the real point at hand with this accident is that it firmly reinforces the concept that pilot thoroughly earn whatever pay they earn, and may in fact be highly entitled to a raise.


Thank you.

>bows<
 
Realms09 said:
As you can see, the fan blade number, shape, and position match the damaged aircraft much better.
Click to expand...

Thank-you, realms. The problem I have is when people (and especially PILOTS, for godsake) get on the Internet and start spewing opinons about what happened in an aircraft accident/incident.

They are often universally wrong, sometimes laughably so, as this thread indicates. All it takes is one uniformed opinion (like "fan burst") to set off a whole B.S. discussion about cowl containment, blade shrapnel, etc., etc.

And off the herd goes on their merry way. Pilots are supposed to know better and not act like a bunch of uninformed yellow journalists.

Again, that, perhaps, is a measure of the general experience level of the board. Its nothing about 20 years and 10,000 hours in aviation can't cure. Hopefully, they'll take the time to read the investigation when it finally comes out and discover how wrong they were. And at that point resolve never to get into a public debate about the causes of aircraft accidents again, especially when the founding post is based on an account by someone so obviously unfamiliar with aircraft engine/pressurization systems.

You want an illustration. Read the Mach 3.18 breakup post and compare it the the first one in this thread. One is written by an expert aviator, the other is written by some hysterical F/A who's just happy to be alive. Ask yourself which one is more credible?
 
Firebird2XC said:
I think the real point at hand with this accident is that it firmly reinforces the concept that pilot thoroughly earn whatever pay they earn, and may in fact be highly entitled to a raise.
Click to expand...

I agree with that!!......and...that Boeing makes a heck of an airplane, especially the 737. Able to withstand that kind of damage and land safely.......some of the best planes made...........
 
Velocipede said:
Thank-you, realms. The problem I have is when people (and especially PILOTS, for godsake) get on the Internet and start spewing opinons about what happened in an aircraft accident/incident.

They are often universally wrong, sometimes laughably so, as this thread indicates. All it takes is one uniformed opinion (like "fan burst") to set off a whole B.S. discussion about cowl containment, blade shrapnel, etc., etc.

And off the herd goes on their merry way. Pilots are supposed to know better and not act like a bunch of uninformed yellow journalists.

Again, that, perhaps, is a measure of the general experience level of the board. Its nothing about 20 years and 10,000 hours in aviation can't cure. Hopefully, they'll take the time to read the investigation when it finally comes out and discover how wrong they were. And at that point resolve never to get into a public debate about the causes of aircraft accidents again, especially when the founding post is based on an account by someone so obviously unfamiliar with aircraft engine/pressurization systems.

You want an illustration. Read the Mach 3.18 breakup post and compare it the the first one in this thread. One is written by an expert aviator, the other is written by some hysterical F/A who's just happy to be alive. Ask yourself which one is more credible?
Click to expand...

Good, real professional of you there sport.

Instead of taking the following people who have been posting in this thread:

-A mechanic with experience with the CFM-56 engine
-A captain that just passed his 737 type ride
-A pilot who has a degree in human factors/flight safety from one of the top programs in the country

And saying, "Hey, that was close but let me tell you what my experience on the 737 would lead me to believe," you have instead made an attempt to ostracize these people in front of a group of their peers.

That's not good leadership. It never has been and never will be.

You had an opportunity to shine here, yet another situation where you could lead by example and mentor some pilots, but you pissed it away.

For being somebody that harps on professionalism you don't exactly seem to exude this trait that you seemingly hold so dear, but good luck next time.
 
I went looking for some more information about this, and found these pictures:

http://img409.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img01622yl1.jpg

http://img406.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img0163gu3.jpg

http://img409.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img0164jx7.jpg

Also, here is a good discussion of the event happening at PPRUNE:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=301521

Now, I am man enough to admit when I am wrong. From the original picture, it appeared to me that the entire fan section was missing. From the better pictures I linked above, it is clear that is not the case. It makes me wonder what caused this to occur, however. Either way, the crew did an awesome job of getting that aircraft on the ground safely.

Velocipede, rather than politely explain how and why I was wrong, you decided rather to hold to your true form and be completely condesending. I should expect no less. Can you ever respond without using personal attacks? You speak of professionalism and enhancing the profession, yet it seems you continuously cannot do that in your discussions with the membership here. We could learn from what you have to say, but you would rather come off in a harsh manner, almost in an attempt to make yourself feel more important than any of us who do not have your flight time or experience.

I do have a background in accident investigation classes, and work in a department within our company that deals a lot with airline safety. I also hold a type rating in the B737, and have seen the CFM56 engine up close and personal many times. I made a mistake, and I will admit that. I do not have the experience you do with the B737, but I would love to learn from what you have to say. However, that is only if you can remove the condesending attitude from your posts which belittle our members.
 
***before you respond you should read this***
http://forums.jetcareers.com/general-topics/announcement-paying-forward.html

Velocipede said:
. . .The problem I have is when people (and especially PILOTS, for godsake) get on the Internet and start spewing opinons about what happened in an aircraft accident/incident.

They are often universally wrong, sometimes laughably so, as this thread indicates. All it takes is one uniformed (uninformed?) opinion (like "fan burst") to set off a whole B.S. discussion about cowl containment, blade shrapnel, etc., etc.

And off the herd goes on their merry way. Pilots are supposed to know better and not act like a bunch of uninformed yellow journalists.

Again, that, perhaps, is a measure of the general experience level of the board. Its nothing about 20 years and 10,000 hours in aviation can't cure. Hopefully, they'll take the time to read the investigation when it finally comes out and discover how wrong they were. And at that point resolve never to get into a public debate about the causes of aircraft accidents again, especially when the founding post is based on an account by someone so obviously unfamiliar with aircraft engine/pressurization systems.

You want an illustration. Read the Mach 3.18 breakup post and compare it the the first one in this thread. One is written by an expert aviator, the other is written by some hysterical F/A who's just happy to be alive. Ask yourself which one is more credible?
Click to expand...

This is why a lot of us are here. We are inexperienced. I have only been flying for four years, and have been in college the whole time, so my ability to take on anything extra is severely limited. I come on these boards to fill in the gaps, sort of my time for hangar talk.

You have the opportunity to help us understand with the eyes of experience, and yet you ridicule, demean and act superior forgetting that we all had to start somewhere. You act in direct opposition to the predominate attitude of the founder, and most of the members of this forum.

I didn't know anyone in aviation when I started. Along the way on these boards there have been many who have educated and mentored, not been demeaning and rude. You sir have all of the potential to be one of those people but you refuse to come around.

You are no leader. You may hold the position of Captain, but you have not demonstrated any of the personality traits I respect in a Captain. I don't know how you act in person, but I have worked for and seen (fortunately only a few) captains on the fire department and only one so far at my airline who make the same kind of statements you do, and, to a fault, they were trying to mask some deficiency.


I have responded to your posts in a couple of threads around here in a respectful and friendly manner, hoping that you may take the time to reflect on the way you are interacting here. Your posts, although somewhat informative, often times demonstrate your vehement hostility towards the rest of us less experienced in aviation. You have not responded to any of those posts, and continue to take cheap shots meant to insult or inflame. I’ve seen several times where you appeal to your friend WildCougar that “us kids” just don’t get it.

I say you sir, do not get it.

I'm no punk kid, have vast life experience and if you came into my living room spouting off the poison you do here I would grab you by your ear and throw you out.
 
Velo, you're an ass.

If you think you embody the ideals of a professional, you don't. You, in fact, destroy the ideals of professionalism with your attitude. Your best place in life would be somewhere very rural, where you don't have to interact with anyone. That kind of pompous arrogance makes you clearly unable to deal with other people.
 
Ophir said:
Velo, you're an ass.

If you think you embody the ideals of a professional, you don't. You, in fact, destroy the ideals of professionalism with your attitude. Your best place in life would be somewhere very rural, where you don't have to interact with anyone. That kind of pompous arrogance makes you clearly unable to deal with other people.
Click to expand...
Noooooooo! I live very rural!:D Maybe he should go to Tom Hank's island . . . he could talk to Wilson!
 
I'd like to leave this thread open, to possibly discuss this incident in a mature, non-condescending, informational way.

Please?


Dale, your eloquence has amazed even me :)
 
This thread =
plane1_420x284.jpg
 
Those pics look like the entire N1 (fan) is gone and what you are seeing is the booster section??? If it is, that cowling did one hell of a job containg the entire fan section minus a few "minor" holes.
 
Velocipede said:
Thank-you, realms. The problem I have is when people (and especially PILOTS, for godsake) get on the Internet and start spewing opinons about what happened in an aircraft accident/incident.

They are often universally wrong, sometimes laughably so, as this thread indicates. All it takes is one uniformed opinion (like "fan burst") to set off a whole B.S. discussion about cowl containment, blade shrapnel, etc., etc.

And off the herd goes on their merry way. Pilots are supposed to know better and not act like a bunch of uninformed yellow journalists.

Again, that, perhaps, is a measure of the general experience level of the board. Its nothing about 20 years and 10,000 hours in aviation can't cure. Hopefully, they'll take the time to read the investigation when it finally comes out and discover how wrong they were. And at that point resolve never to get into a public debate about the causes of aircraft accidents again, especially when the founding post is based on an account by someone so obviously unfamiliar with aircraft engine/pressurization systems.

You want an illustration. Read the Mach 3.18 breakup post and compare it the the first one in this thread. One is written by an expert aviator, the other is written by some hysterical F/A who's just happy to be alive. Ask yourself which one is more credible?
Click to expand...

Question...

Jetcareers being a message forum, and an aviation one at that, is it wrong to surmise, about possible things relating to an aviation accident? But in a respectful manner while admitting that you're not stating facts about what happened?

I hear alot on here that it is wrong to guess the cause of accidents and incidents. But the thing is, is that this is a discussion forum.

The alternative would be Flychicaga or another member posting an article on here about an aviation accident/incident, and immediately asking a mod to close the thread, making it read only thread.

What fun is that, on a discussion forum of all things? Not all of us are on here are accident investigators, but if making a possible guess about why something occured is bad form, then we might as well, in my opinion shut the whole site down. As both facts and opinions are equally prevalent in well over 99% of threads on here.

Me, I think it would be fine to do as long as it is done in a humble manner, that respects any possible dead, and you preface your possible conclusion by stating that you're not speaking from a point of certainty. Yielding respectuflly to someone more experienced on the topic and it doesn't turn into an A.net-esque "I know more about the B-737 900 than you" death cage match!

Conversation on a topic can help eduate anyone reading. Much like was done in this thread, when we learned in fact that it wasn't a "fan burst."

Had a discussion of assumptions/opinions not broken out he (Chicaga) would have never searched the net for new pictures of the engine at a different angle, and myself and others would never have been informed about the reality of the situation from someone like you with your experience.

Dunno, just some random thoughts...
 
Dugie8 said:
Those pics look like the entire N1 (fan) is gone and what you are seeing is the booster section??? If it is, that cowling did one hell of a job containg the entire fan section minus a few "minor" holes.
Click to expand...

I don't have a 737 type (does an SIC type count?), but here's my take:

No, what you're seeing is the N1 fan, or what's left of it. There's only one stage, then the stators that deflect outer air out the rear of the cowl, and inner to the gas generator. There's supposed to be a center cone. Don't know if it let loose and caused the damage or if it departed the scene as a result of whatever chewed up the rest of the fan.

Pretty gnarly!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top