HossHarris Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 You are correct, the engine case is designed to contain the blade in a blade out event. Maybe in fatty motors, but I'll betcha an exploding viper at Luke that fighters throwing a blade is generally catastrophic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Condition Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I'm guesssing you've never flown TF-33-equipped -135s before; I trust the -1 is a good enough reference...? The -1 is good enough for me. FWIW there are no such references in the R-model -1 or performance manual. Is the WC the only 707-type airframe still flying (USAF) without the CFM-56s? I doubt that a fuselage on an F/A-18 can cause similar problems though. This was probably actually due to their zippers being below their nametags, sleeves rolled up, reflective belts missing, wrong color socks, and the abdominal circumference not being under 39". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breckey Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 JSTARS still use the TF-33's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 <yawn> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BQZip01 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 This is going to turn into a political shit storm given the vocal nature of local opponents to the base. Sadly I have to agree, but it shows just how hypocritical they are. Runway is present when the guys build houses and apartments. The traffic pattern hasn't changed appreciably. People move into these houses/apartments KNOWINGthey are both in an active flying area on approach/departure (a known accident area) and still purchase/rent anyway? WTF? FWIW, I lived near the departure end of Eglin and was HAPPY to hear 8-ship F-15 takeoffs at 6 AM. THE SOUND OF FREEDOM!!! I was also not stupid enough to live along their intended flightpath or within their standard pattern. I also didn't complain even once Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BQZip01 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Back to the actual topic, it appears there were NO fatalities on the ground. Truly amazing given the quick destruction of 5 buildings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
60 driver Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I call bullshit. You got a reference for this? From the 727 Flight Manual: ENGINE OPERATION ON CROSS/TAIL WIND TAKEOFFS With a strong crosswind/tailwind component, engine surges or compressor stalls can occur if takeoff thrust is set aggressively. In these conditions, slowly and smoothly advance engine throttles to approximately 1.5 EPR with the brakes released allowing the aircraft to begin takeoff roll. Match the rate of throttle movement with engine acceleration. I thought I remembered an actual limit but couldn't find one. The non-Boeing heavy I most recently flew doesn't have an equivalent paragraph to the one above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I feel like this is a discussion about a quarterback's torn ACL that was ruined by the chess team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BolterKing Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 (edited) Bolterking, How likely was it that the crew was intentionally dumping fuel versus leaking fuel? With as little time as they apparently had then they were sure on top of things either way. If a part of the engine liberated (I'm referring to something heavy like a disk as opposed to blade(s) which I would suspect would stay contained) then it could easily puncture a tank and maybe account for some witnesses (assuming they're right) saying they saw fire prior to impact. Have to wait for the report to come out. I've heard contradictory reports in the media that they were circling over head dumping prior to the crash, and others that they crashed right after take off. While they could've been dumping, I'm not sure why. Heavy landing isn't that big of a deal, getting on deck is the higher priority when you're on fire, but that's all speculation based on inconsistent data. A catostrphic failure in the AMAD bay (gear box that drives fuel pump, gen, hyd pump, etc) could have let to fuel pouring out from there under pressure. Don't know though. You are correct, the engine case is designed to contain the blade in a blade out event. We spend a lot of time and money making sure of this, including running fan blade out tests where we rig a blade with explosives and let it loose at a certain point in the cycle to prove the case worthy of containing the blade. While it's possible that a rotor failed, it is very, very unlikely. We do extensive design work to prevent these. Why? Because we cannot contain a rotor failure event, there is too much energy in the rotor. There has only been one situation that I am aware of where a rotor has failed on one of our engines and that was in the 80's. Yes, this is possible, though the engine design should account for it. This is another event we design for and test, though there are other operability systems that could unload the compressor and keep it from stalling in this kind of situation. This would be a very unique situation and I think you would have to be really pushing the engine to the edge of its operability envelope and then have some other failure occur where the engine couldnt unload the compressor. Wrong-O dude. Hornet had an uncontained engine failure last year on the flight deck during CQ, injured 8 or 9 people. Another a few months before that in the Arabian Sea made an emergency landing with a dual engine fire. While not common, it does happen. Edited April 8, 2012 by BolterKing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fire4effect Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I feel like this is a discussion about a quarterback's torn ACL that was ruined by the chess team. I was actually on the debate team. I rose to the level of Master Debator. Not nearly a sexy conversation but yes a lot behind the scenes goes into keeping engines safe and functional Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Back to the actual topic, it appears there were NO fatalities on the ground. Truly amazing given the quick destruction of 5 buildings Agreed. But that doesn't stop some from debating the possibilities to death... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Wait...What? You are saying the airliners are so poorly designed, that they would compressor stall becuase of the disturbed airflow into the engine due to the crabbing for the crosswind? Please enlighten us. Cheers, Cap-10 Yes, having flown the 727, 757, 767, and now the 737, there are heavy jets that might compressor stall in a high crosswind. The 727 and 737 both have notes in their ops manuals. In the 737, you can set de-rates for 22K, 24K, and 26K power settings and it says to use 26K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 M2, I'm no moderator but maybe we should start a stupid crosswind compressor stall thread and move this stuff. Put it next to the "flying instruments is cool and fun and so is the instrument weapons school!", "Here's all my scores and we're having a baby and my wife isn't sure about me being a pilot and I'm not sure about the ARC or AD and I smoked a bunch of weed but only because I'm a fucking pot head so what are may chances?" and "1001 reasons to give the boom your tail number over the radio because he can't read what's painted right next to the receptacle" threads. Just sayin'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muscle2002 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 M2, I'm no moderator but maybe we should start a stupid crosswind compressor stall thread and move this stuff. Put it next to the "flying instruments is cool and fun and so is the instrument weapons school!", "Here's all my scores and we're having a baby and my wife isn't sure about me being a pilot and I'm not sure about the ARC or AD and I smoked a bunch of weed but only because I'm a ######ing pot head so what are may chances?" and "1001 reasons to give the boom your tail number over the radio because he can't read what's painted right next to the receptacle" threads. Just sayin'... Forgot the Metamucil this morning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Forgot the Metamucil this morning? Metamucil? C'mon dude, get with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jtsmith1 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 (edited) Wrong-O dude. Hornet had an uncontained engine failure last year on the flight deck during CQ, injured 8 or 9 people. Another a few months before that in the Arabian Sea made an emergency landing with a dual engine fire. While not common, it does happen. Wrong-O about what? A blade out or a rotor failure? I understand it is possible, just saying an uncontained blade out event is highly unlikely and a rotor failure (which cannot be contained) is highly unlikely. Our normal design practice would not allow a blade out event to be uncontained. Some other failure, MX mishap/oversight, or what have you may contribute to a blade out event not being contained, but it by itself will not penetrate the case. This holds true for any size engine we build, the fundamental physics don't change with engine size. Back on topic, glad to see nobody was killed. Edited April 8, 2012 by jtsmith1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seriously Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Wrong-O about what? A blade out or a rotor failure? I understand it is possible, just saying an uncontained blade out event is highly unlikely and a rotor failure (which cannot be contained) is highly unlikely. Our normal design practice would not allow a blade out event to be uncontained. Some other failure, MX mishap/oversight, or what have you may contribute to a blade out event not being contained, but it by itself will not penetrate the case. This holds true for any size engine we build, the fundamental physics don't change with engine size. Back on topic, glad to see nobody was killed. jtsmith1, Just out of curiosity, what's your background (to give credence to your statements)? Everything you've said sounds legit though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jtsmith1 Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 As a civilian, I am a Design Engineer in the aviation industry. I design, analyze, test, and support manufacturing/production of hardware for jet engines, currently working on a new engine for the narrow body market. When I put on my uniform I work the flightline on 16's. Just trying to provide a little insight from the design side of things. Though I know many understand the operation of the engine(s) in their specific aircraft, few (read: probably none) understand how much work is put into the design to make sure it doesn't fail. For example, when it comes to rotors, there are only 3 suppliers in the world that we buy our material from, completely disregarding the cost, because we need the material to be so pure. With that being said, anything can happen. Airplanes don't typically crash because of 1 foreseeable event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Condition Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 I feel like this is a discussion about a quarterback's torn ACL that was ruined by the chess team. Yeah, 'cause you're such an awesome athlete that you take time away from your professional tour to comment on this board. I'd be willing to be to bet that if you looked at all the high school chess team captains from 20 years ago, they're probably a hell of a lot more successful in life than the QBs. Or is Al Bundy your model of success? You never know who's making comments on this board, so I'd suggest reserving judgment until you actually get to know someone. Or, keep up the hubris - it's gonna bite your ass in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Noonin Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Sand in your vagina? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Yeah, 'cause you're such an awesome athlete that you take time away from your professional tour to comment on this board. I'd be willing to be to bet that if you looked at all the high school chess team captains from 20 years ago, they're probably a hell of a lot more successful in life than the QBs. Or is Al Bundy your model of success? You never know who's making comments on this board, so I'd suggest reserving judgment until you actually get to know someone. Or, keep up the hubris - it's gonna bite your ass in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 You never know who's making comments on this board, so I'd suggest reserving judgment until you actually get to know someone. That's not true. I know a lot of people making comments on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Condition Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 That's not true. I know a lot of people making comments on this board. Fair enough, judge away. I don't know you. I agree with what you say sometimes and disagree sometimes, and when I do disagree I wouldn't spout off about how I think you're a retard. I'm pretty certain you're not. My point was that the "hey look how cool I am" statement earlier is unnecessary. It's completely within his right to do it, just like never emotionally leaving high school is his right as well. Oh, and no, I'm not mad. If I were mad, I'd be silent. "Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret." -Ambrose Bierce Anyway, back to the thread. I'm sure there were several people in Virginia Beach who have a much different view on life now (and I'm not just talking about the view from what used to be their kitchen window). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 For someone who proclaims emotional maturity, self control and swearing off judging others you seem to be pretty good at representing the opposite...albeit in a passive aggressive captain of the booger eating window licking I wanna be a navigator someday chess team kind of way. Bravo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BQZip01 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 (edited) For someone who proclaims emotional maturity, self control and swearing off judging others you seem to be pretty good at representing the opposite...albeit in a passive aggressive captain of the booger eating window licking I wanna be a navigator someday chess team kind of way. Hey, Navigators don't lick windows! (usually we don't even get a window...) Edited April 10, 2012 by BQZip01 1 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