AF66 CDG-LAX (A388-F-HPJE) diverts to Goose Bay (YYR) with an uncontained engine failure to #4 engine

qf789 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:24 pm

Air France operating CDG-LAX has diverted to Goose Bay (YYR) after declaring an emergency.

There is reports that the leading edge of the wing has been damaged above #4 engine and #4 cowling disintegrated

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 7604806656

atcsundevil · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:29 pm

Must be an engine failure? I can't think of any other reason an aircraft at cruise would receive such damage.

qf789 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:29 pm

Picture of damage to #4 engine

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 3617082370

wiss · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:29 pm

The whole cowling of the number 4 engine is missing

https://twitter.com/DanMcneely/status/914163681088466944

qf789 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:30 pm

and another photo in flight

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 2511842304

Btblue · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:32 pm

Oh my goodness - uncontained engine failure. Blimey the whole front is basially stripped down without the fanblade from what I can make out. That's quite some engine failure there.

sadiqutp · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:38 pm

Wow, scary indeed .. My initial guess is a failure with fan disc causing all other damage.

MrHMSH · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:39 pm

Ouch. Glad it got down safely with that much damage!

dampfnudel · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:42 pm

That definitely looks bad. I can imagine some nervous passengers who are grateful to be on the ground.

ikolkyo · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:45 pm

pugman211 wrote:
Wow! That is Some serious damage! Is the whole front fan missing or just the cowling??

Is this a GE or RR engine?

GE/PW

pugman211 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:45 pm

Wow! That is Some serious damage! Is the whole front fan missing or just the cowling??

Is this a GE or RR engine?

ikolkyo · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:45 pm

It looks like front fan is completely gone? Must have been a serious failure.

qf789 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:46 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
pugman211 wrote:
Wow! That is Some serious damage! Is the whole front fan missing or just the cowling??

Is this a GE or RR engine?

GE/PW

They have the GP7200 powerplant

Boeing778X · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:49 pm

Holy Shhhmokes! That is not good! Damn! :eyepopping:

That is some serious damage! The nacelle is ripped off, and it's barely hanging on the pylon!

Gonzalo · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:50 pm

Wow... that's a very good reason to divert !!
I hope the pax will be happy for being on the ground and not suffering with the cold in Goose Bay, probably they haven't the adequate clothing to be there considering the weather in Los Ángeles is "slightly" different.

pugman211 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:52 pm

qf789 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
pugman211 wrote:
Wow! That is Some serious damage! Is the whole front fan missing or just the cowling??

Is this a GE or RR engine?

GE/PW

They have the GP7200 powerplant

Apologies, that's what I meant.

Gonzalo · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:58 pm

I'm sure someone with the proper knowledge here will correct me if I'm wrong, but this could be as serious as the QF incident years ago, this time they had more luck and apparently the fragments didn't cause the same amount of damage, they had luck the fan blades and all the other missing parts flew away from the aircraft in the wingtip direction, it will be a very different story if those fragments depart towards the fuselage/engine 3...

Btblue · Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
Must be an engine failure? I can't think of any other reason an aircraft at cruise would receive such damage.

Out of curiosity googled birds and migration, Swans can fly at 27,000 and a type of goose flies at 29,000 feet but this flight was flying higher so rules out that possibility and looks like engine failure.

Gonzalo · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:04 pm

Btblue wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
Must be an engine failure? I can't think of any other reason an aircraft at cruise would receive such damage.

Out of curiosity googled birds and migration, Swans can fly at 27,000 and a type of goose flies at 29,000 feet but this flight was flying higher so rules out that possibility and looks like engine failure.

I'm the kind of guy who applies the "never say never" rule but this flight was probably cruising way above the capacity of any living thing or FOD, I think this time a fatigued material will take the culprit, but that is something that will be known in many weeks, or even months in the future.

qf789 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:04 pm

Another photo, this one compares #3 to #4

https://twitter.com/AlexBeaurepaire/sta ... 4657609729

sadiqutp · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:12 pm

A passenger on board on twitter
" Inflight pictures. Loud thud and a lot of vibration."
https://twitter.com/RickEngebretsen/sta ... 6240766977

qf789 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:13 pm

Picture of the front of the engine

and from the top

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/statu ... 9353861120

ikolkyo · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:15 pm

Video from behind the wing showing Engine #4 in flight.
https://twitter.com/theamadoor/status/9 ... 4095513600

jeffrey0032j · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:16 pm

Gonzalo wrote:
I'm sure someone with the proper knowledge here will correct me if I'm wrong, but this could be as serious as the QF incident years ago, this time they had more luck and apparently the fragments didn't cause the same amount of damage, they had luck the fan blades and all the other missing parts flew away from the aircraft in the wingtip direction, it will be a very different story if those fragments depart towards the fuselage/engine 3...

If we are just looking at the engine and not the impact on the airframe, at first glance, this looks more serious than QF32. The fan is gone.

Btblue · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:22 pm

Quite unbelievable - those are some amazing photos and video, total disintegration of the engine. Really lucky the debris flew outward and not inward. Just look at the state of that engine, I've not seen anything quite that bad for a fair old while. Surprised the rest didn't go with it, they're like any engine, designed to shear off with too much vibration?

shankly · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:32 pm

I bet that was a bang and a half. Amazing pictures and super job by the crew

One assumes complication here will be lack of significant parts as transit was oceanic. At least with the RR QF 32 the locals brought the ejected parts back on their mopeds

Interesting times ahead for the GP7200

Aesma · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:32 pm

I wonder if there was a bird ingestion or something like that around the take-off that weakened the engine.

Gonzalo wrote:
I'm sure someone with the proper knowledge here will correct me if I'm wrong, but this could be as serious as the QF incident years ago, this time they had more luck and apparently the fragments didn't cause the same amount of damage, they had luck the fan blades and all the other missing parts flew away from the aircraft in the wingtip direction, it will be a very different story if those fragments depart towards the fuselage/engine 3...

Fan blades can do damage, even go through the skin and kill passengers, however there is less energy involved than a turbine disc escaping from an engine, so less risk of doing crippling damage.

pugman211 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:37 pm

Is it right to say that looking at the photo's nearly all of the low compressor section is nearly missing or is it just the N1 fan?

No idea on the schematics of the engine so just asking

KLDC10 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:41 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
Gonzalo wrote:
I'm sure someone with the proper knowledge here will correct me if I'm wrong, but this could be as serious as the QF incident years ago, this time they had more luck and apparently the fragments didn't cause the same amount of damage, they had luck the fan blades and all the other missing parts flew away from the aircraft in the wingtip direction, it will be a very different story if those fragments depart towards the fuselage/engine 3...

If we are just looking at the engine and not the impact on the airframe, at first glance, this looks more serious than QF32. The fan is gone.

Purely in terms of the engine, the damage is significant. You seem familiar with QF32, but for those that aren't, let me just explain that in the latter case, the engine failure (specifically a turbine disk failure) resulted in significant damage to the flight controls and wing. While we don't know for sure what happened in this Air France incident, the fact that they got it on the ground very quickly suggests that they did not experience the same kind of control problems as those which struck QF32. In fact in the Qantas case the situation was so bad that the pilots were unable to turn off the No.1 engine after bringing the plane to the ground - it eventually flamed out after the airport fire crew sprayed it for a full three hours.

AlexA340B777 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:41 pm

shankly wrote:
I bet that was a bang and a half. Amazing pictures and super job by the crew

One assumes complication here will be lack of significant parts as transit was oceanic. At least with the RR QF 32 the locals brought the ejected parts back on their mopeds

Interesting times ahead for the GP7200

Seems the incident happened when flying over Greenland...

if you look at the replay on flightradar24, the aircraft is starting to descent while still over Greenland.

However, area looks like icy or a glacier... most likely still difficult to find and reach the debries of that engine.

But better than the Atlantic ocean anyway.

I am very happy to hear they have made it all safely to Canada.

flyguy84 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:47 pm

Really just goes to show how safe modern day aircraft are... to have something that serious happen and the aircraft to be able to continue and fly and land safely.

Btblue · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:49 pm

Here's a side on view of the engine without cowlings etc. Appears the whole of the front section has been taken away (coloured brown in the photo).

Cebo29 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:56 pm

Looks like an uncontained engine failure to me...let's see what the official report says...

qf789 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:09 pm

Air France statement so far

http://corporate.airfrance.com/en/infor ... ember-2017

neutronstar73 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:14 pm

Engine Alliance will need to do some serious investigation, as I'm sure this will not make Emirates feel comfortable, along with all the other GP7x users.

Gonzalo · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:18 pm

I'm on the phone so I don't know how to insert pictures here but in the avherald report there is a picture of the engine from a different angle, if someone can bring it here would be great.
Rgds.
G.

Gonzalo · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:24 pm

AFAIK Pax still on the plane since Goose Bay airport can't provide stairs for an A380

Tugger · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:24 pm

Here they are but I think they are actually posted above:
http://avherald.com/h?article=4af15205

Tugg

Channex757 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:25 pm

neutronstar73 wrote:
Engine Alliance will need to do some serious investigation, as I'm sure this will not make Emirates feel comfortable, along with all the other GP7x users.

The fan assembly and LPT is a Pratt and Whitney manufactured section, from the PW4000 engines used on the 777. Those have a few decades of usage now and I don't recall there being any major issues with fan disk disintegration.

sadiqutp · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:25 pm

Gonzalo wrote:
I'm on the phone so I don't know how to insert pictures here but in the avherald report there is a picture of the engine from a different angle, if someone can bring it here would be great.
Rgds.
G.

Do you mean this one? Seems there is damage to the rear side of the pylon

Tugger · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:28 pm

Interesting to see the bits that flew off during the descent and landing.

All I have to say is: :eyepopping:

Wow!

Tugg

LAX772LR · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:29 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
at first glance, this looks more serious than QF32. The fan is gone.

Hardly.

Besides, QF was more about hydraulic damage and loss of control. Doesn't appear to be the case at all here.

ACCS300 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:31 pm

Pax should be ok without winter clothes, 10C in Goose Bay at the moment.

seat55a · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:31 pm

In the sharper pictures of the engine front, we see an asymmetrical part in the center. To my uneducated eye this looks like a break due to crack propagating. What part is this?

jeffrey0032j · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:31 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
at first glance, this looks more serious than QF32. The fan is gone.

Hardly.

Besides, QF was more about hydraulic damage and loss of control. Doesn't appear to be the case at all here.

If you had read the first part of my sentence, it said "If we are just looking at the engine and not the impact on the airframe". The QF32 case was the impact on the airframe, which I have excluded from this comparison.

cv990Coronado · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:32 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
at first glance, this looks more serious than QF32. The fan is gone.

Hardly.

Besides, QF was more about hydraulic damage and loss of control. Doesn't appear to be the case at all here.

I wonder how different it would have been if it were number 3 not number 4? Fortunately not the case but it makes you think.

qf789 · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:33 pm

KLDC10 wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
Gonzalo wrote:
I'm sure someone with the proper knowledge here will correct me if I'm wrong, but this could be as serious as the QF incident years ago, this time they had more luck and apparently the fragments didn't cause the same amount of damage, they had luck the fan blades and all the other missing parts flew away from the aircraft in the wingtip direction, it will be a very different story if those fragments depart towards the fuselage/engine 3...

If we are just looking at the engine and not the impact on the airframe, at first glance, this looks more serious than QF32. The fan is gone.

Purely in terms of the engine, the damage is significant. You seem familiar with QF32, but for those that aren't, let me just explain that in the latter case, the engine failure (specifically a turbine disk failure) resulted in significant damage to the flight controls and wing. While we don't know for sure what happened in this Air France incident, the fact that they got it on the ground very quickly suggests that they did not experience the same kind of control problems as those which struck QF32. In fact in the Qantas case the situation was so bad that the pilots were unable to turn off the No.1 engine after bringing the plane to the ground - it eventually flamed out after the airport fire crew sprayed it for a full three hours.

According to the avherald the engine failure occurred about 2 hours before landing

http://avherald.com/h?article=4af15205&opt=0

RB211trent · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:45 pm

Looks like a fan disk failure to me

shankly · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:47 pm

qf789 wrote:
According to the avherald the engine failure occurred about 2 hours before landing

http://avherald.com/h?article=4af15205&opt=0

The AVHERALD was really slow in reporting this. Airliners.net and aviation-safety network were miles ahead so I think all the best and current info is elsewhere.

Runway28L · Sat Sep 30, 2017 6:52 pm

Unbelievable! Glad they landed safely!

Reminds me a lot of WN3472 and QF32.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net