UA 777 engine cowling comes off in flight

I don't know if I'm a numbhead or just plain dumb but this incident would be a non-issue for me. The engine is still there and running, there is no fire or pieces filling the air, there is another engine running, and the airplane is flying just fine. Some body didn't crank hard enough on a cowl panel fastener and the damn thing flew off.

 

I am a very strong proponent of planes that land with 100% of the parts they took off with. Going for an emergency landing seems like a rational response to an engine that might fall off.

 

Unfortunately I don't all have your experience, I for one would be looking for my spare underwear in my carry on luggage. [emoji6]

Sent from my SM-N950W using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

Well Bob... I fly the 777 across the Pacific 20 times a year. If that happened on my flight, I can tell you it wouldn't be a "non-issue" for me!

 

Okay, I'm not vastly experienced and I don't fly 777's every day but I know that the cowling is an aerodynamic fairing and not primary structure. I Would worry if the engine was on fire and vibrating and even if it fell off there would be little chance that the fire would get into the strut. The 777 is rated for ETOPS and it would get to dry land if one of the engines failed or departed.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Youtube vid showing the plane vibrating outside (engine) then inside. 1min long. Obvious w/o the cowling it disrupts the airflow thereby causing the plane to shutter and/or vibrate.

EMERGENCY United Airlines B777 LOSES ENGINE COWLING over Pacific !!

 

I can see how it would be frightening to someone with less knowledge of aircraft, but you're right. I don' think the average customer would understand the difference between an aerodynamic fairing and a primary structure.

 

Tell that to my stomach!

 

I miss the 747.

 

I see a British Airways (I think) 747 taking off from LAS on my way home some days. It's still the best looking commercial jet in the air.

 

Irrelevant to me; what is relevant is a seeming failure of correct service. Unfortunately this incident adds to my instinctive antipathy toward United Airlines, given the multiple incidents of atrocious flight crew conduct towards their passengers. I did not fly UAL prior to the disrobing of their engine nacelle and will surely not begin now.

 

There are still a lot of 747 in service but none by US airlines. Lufthansa has several 747-8's which are really very nice to fly.

United is too cheap to get them.... Better to get a cut rate deal on 777's from Boeing.

 

Ummm....ok?

 

That's..... a big piece of metal missing!

 

It's sad to see the 747 going away, but it is what it is. I'm still happy any time I see one coming or going.

 

At one time I had an ex UA A&P and an ex UA ground equipment mechanic working for me. Both told me the fact that it is not raining airliners has a lot more to do with their quality of design and build than it does with the quality of service and repair.

 

There are two types of these failures, one where the engine comes apart and takes out the cowling, bad, and one where somebody forgot to fasten the cowling down, like Bob said, and it came off, not so bad. The average passenger cannot tell the difference, but all of us should be able to know how much of the seat cushion to suck up.

 

I would not be that alarmed... nothing wrong with the engine itself... I've seen a LOT more 'vibration' due to turbulance.

Not an uncontained failure like the Quantas plane. No fire, no fluids spewing... the engine is still spinning.

Maybe an insinuation that it would not happen on a 747... that's silly; could and has happened on any plane, including turboprops and pistons.
BTW, 747's used the same engine.

So, Bob and others... what would the pilot do?
Assume an airspeed reduction.
Maintain some (or normal) power on the R engine?
Since there's more drag on the R side, increase power on the L engine to compensate, or just more R rudder? Would the autopilot take care of it?

 

OK. So almost the entire nose cowl is gone. How much of that was digested through the fan? Were any of the blades damage? Kind of hard to determine in flight. Even after shutdown the engine will continue to windmill and actually has increased vibration over an operating engine. Structural substantiation for these types of failures make a lot of assumptions, and if the analysis is not showing good margins then the assumptions are adjusted to make things better (the old 'sharpening the pencil' approach). Without knowing the extent of damage, or whether further failures could occur making things worse, an immediate course change to the nearest suitable airport is just common sense.

 

Did anyone say diverting wasn't the right move?

 

No, you are correct, but why divert if it is something that would not be alarming, worrying, or frightening?

 

Exactly where would they divert to? Closest was their destination, it looks like.

 

Article just says 'one of the plane's engines began to fall apart mid-flight'. What does that mean. Depending on winds the shortest flight time could be back to point of origin, even if over half the distance to destination.