[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by audioholic

. The pilot can choose a preferred runway exit. Whether or not the tower agrees is a different thing altogether.

That is what I said I believe?
Jeroen

[A350XWB]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Although it is very likely he felt it was a near death experience, in all reality it most likely wasn't.
So the engine had some problems and made loud noises, fire smoke etc which must all be very unsettling.

Engine shutdowns happen more often than one thinks and as mentioned by Jeroen, most of the passengers will be aware of it, only if there is a resulting noise, vibration, fire, smoke etc. If there is no perceivable indications, most of the shutdowns go unnoticed by most of the passengers. I think that the "near death experience" in this case is a bit far fetched, from a situation stand point. One will be definitely scared, if he/she has not experienced something like this earlier.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

It is not the pilot who decides where to exit the runway. The tower will tell you. You can ask for your preference though. Planes typically don't come to a full stop on the runway either.

He's talking about the Brake to Vacate feature. (From Wikipedia)
Quoted from Airbus press release:

BTV was designed by a transnational team in Toulouse, France and Filton, England. By harnessing the power of the A380's integral GPS and airport database based On-Board Airport Navigation System (OANS) combined with the Auto-Flight and Auto-Brake facilities, BTV gives pilots real-time visibility on realistic braking distances to reach their preferred exit. It also allows in-flight operational landing distance assessment during landing preparation. When the pilot chooses a runway exit point, the system indicates the estimated runway occupancy time and the minimum turnaround time. During the subsequent landing phase, and according to encountered runway conditions (i.e. 'wet' or 'dry'), the aircraft's deceleration is automatically regulated so it reaches the chosen exit at the correct speed. BTV benefits operators in the following additional ways: by lowering overall braking energy requirements and temperatures (thus reducing brake-wear); relieving maximum thrust-reverser usage on dry runways; respecting passengers' comfort (through regulated smooth deceleration); reducing noise, fuel consumption and CO2 emissions; enabling air traffic control to schedule up to 15 percent more aircraft departures; enabling airlines to maximise the number of aircraft rotations; and reducing the exposure time to a runway incursion risk (by minimising runway occupancy time).

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by A350XWB

He's talking about the [url="http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-releases/en/2009/10/easa-certifies-brake-to-vacate-btv-and-runway-overrun-warning-and-prevention-row-rop-systems-on-the-airbus-a380.html"]Brake to Vacate:

It's clever system on top of the normal Auto Brake System.

I wonder how much use it gets by pilots. Would like to understand if there is much call for this in practice. There was quite an interesting discussion on "the overuse of autobrakes"on the PPrune forum recently:

https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/605246-over-use-autobrakes.html?highlight=autobrake

Some pilots would argue any pilot worth his/her salt should be able to do better than the auto-system, especially on clean non contaminated runway surfaces.

Depending on one's point of view of course, but a lot of pilots/carriers seem to be relying on the use of Autobrakes all the time, whereas a lot can be said for manual braking.

Othen than on the Full Motion 744 SIM I have no experience with AutoBrake systems. My little planes are only manual braking. And even then, in most cases, depending on runway length, just powering back to idle gives more than sufficient braking action and only the last bit of slowing down as you exit the active runway you might have to use the brakes.

And of course, some of the planes I fly get steered by differential braking only, so a castoring nosewheel. Gets a bit of getting used to.

Jeroen

[para_7k]

Originally Posted by para_7k

I had an upcoming MAA-COK return flight in GoAir booked for the end of April. The flight was being cancelled since March 1 2018.

So Go Air gave me a call and mentioned that they would process a full refund as they do not have an alternate flight. The refund was processed within 4 hours by PayTM which is pretty impressive.

I was travelling for leisure and point to point but I do feel for Business travelers and people who had connecting flights matched to these cancelled flights.

[para_7k]

I have an upcoming flight today and it seems to be an A320Neo. I tracked it through flightstats. The tail number is VT-IVC and it does have a PW1127 engine.

How is that this aircraft is still flying? Does this directive apply to a very specific batch of engines ?

[A350XWB]

Originally Posted by para_7k

How is that this aircraft is still flying? Does this directive apply to a very specific batch of engines ?

The DGCA directive have asked to ground airplanes fitted with PW1100 engines beyond ESN 450. So, airplanes with engine serial numbers below this are not affected by the directive.
(News Article 1, News Article 2)

[A350XWB]

As we are talking engines and engine failures here, on Tuesday, 17th of April, Southwest Airlines Flight 1380 (B737-7H4) flying LGA-SFO suffered an uncontained engine failure of engine no:1 (left/port side) which resulted in one fatality due to flying engine debris piercing the window. An emergency landing was done at Philadelphia International airport (PHL). The engines were CFM International CFM56-7B24 (CFMI is a 50–50 joint-owned company of Safran Aircraft Engines (formerly known as SNECMA), France, and GE Aviation (GE)). The below articles show the extent of damage, which is pretty bad; scary.
Quote from Wikipedia:

The NTSB reported that its preliminary investigation had revealed that an engine fan blade had failed, and there was evidence of metal fatigue where the blade broke off. The full investigation is likely to take 12 to 15 months.

Articles from:
Airliners.net
Wikipedia
The New York Times
CBS News

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by A350XWB

As we are talking engines and engine failures here, on Tuesday, 17th of April, Southwest Airlines Flight 1380 (B737-7H4) flying LGA-SFO suffered an uncontained engine failure of engine no:1 (left/port side) which resulted in one fatality due to flying engine debris piercing the window. An emergency landing was done at Philadelphia International airport
Articles from:
Airliners.net
Wikipedia
The New York Times
CBS News

Thank you for sharing. A sad but unusual incident. Speaks volumes for the skill, presence of mind and professional discipline of both pilots as well as of the cabin crew. I am sure the next question from some will be - are Indian pilots as well trained. I am pleased to see the captain is a lady. I will say it again women make first class pilots. The sad death of one passenger highlights the need to always try and keep your seat belts on. From what seems to have happened she most probably had undone the seat belt after take off, as most of us do, which most tragically left her free to be slammed against the cabin fuselage by the exit air pressure. RIP.

One challenge pilots face is that almost any mid-air damage that occurs happens behind them and there is little way of pooping your head out and getting a direct visual feel of what has happened. They have to rely solely on their instruments to figure out what may have happened, gauge the degree of the situation and determine the course of action.

[BoneCollector]

Originally Posted by A350XWB

As we are talking engines and engine failures here, on Tuesday, 17th of April, Southwest Airlines Flight 1380 (B737-7H4) flying LGA-SFO suffered an uncontained engine failure of engine no:1 (left/port side) which resulted in one fatality due to flying engine debris piercing the window. An emergency landing was done at Philadelphia International airport (PHL).

I read about this incidence yesterday and was shocked to see the amount of damage. The flight made a safe landing but that was one scary flight for passengers as well as ground handlers. If you read through the transcripts available, the pilot did a commendable job. Here is short video link available on Twitter about her, she is a veteran USAF fighter pilot! Check out @CBSNews’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/986635647711670273?s=09

There are many available snaps on Twitter which show the extent of damage to South West Airlines flight WN1380.










Miracle landing is what I can say. (There's a movie by same name https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mira...ng?wprov=sfla1 ).

[libranof1987]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

I am pleased to see the captain is a lady. I will say it again women make first class pilots.

An extremely accomplished one at that, a Navy veteran.

The sad death of one passenger highlights the need to always try and keep your seat belts on. From what seems to have happened she most probably had undone the seat belt after take off. RIP.

Could having worn a seat-belt saved her? It would have allowed enough room for her head to be stuck in the window as well.

This incident reminds me of another Southwest incident, also related to metal fatigue. One where an sizeable chunk of the fuselage itself broke off mid-flight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southw...nes_Flight_812

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by libranof1987

Could having worn a seat-belt saved her? It would have allowed enough room for her head to be stuck in the window as well.

I am not an expert but the seatbelt would have significantly lessened the ferocity with which her upper body banged against the inner fuselage. I mean that was like hitting a wall a high speed. Her arms and head might still have got sucked towards the window by the outwardly exploding air but limited the injury. All this is post facto. It seems she was a mother of two.

[A350XWB]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

The sad death of one passenger highlights the need to always try and keep your seat belts on.

Call me paranoid, but I feel safe when I'm pinned to the seat, literally, whether it's in a car or in an airplane. I'm always buckled up, when I'm at my seat.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

One challenge pilots face is that almost any mid-air damage that occurs happens behind them and there is little way of pooping your head out and getting a direct visual feel of what has happened. They have to rely solely on their instruments to figure out what may have happened, gauge the degree of the situation and determine the course of action.

Very true. There are lots of accidents like this one, UA232, AA191 etc where a direct visual could have helped the crew to see how bad the damage/situation is. Today, I think this can be addressed to some extent, with the cameras mounted at various places like tail cam on the A380.

Originally Posted by BoneCollector

Miracle landing is what I can say. (There's a movie by same name https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mira...ng?wprov=sfla1 ).

Difference is that, in case of Aloha Airlines Flight 243, half of the plane was ripped open like a sardine can.

Image courtesy - Wikipedia.

[itwasntme]

Ironically she was sitting in the strongest and 'safest' passenger area. Whenever I fly on dodgy airlines or the ATR/Q400 class, I tend to choose the wing area.

But if Fate has it's way, anything can happen.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by A350XWB

LGA-SFO suffered an uncontained engine failure of engine no:1 (left/port side) which resulted in one fatality due to flying engine debris piercing the window.

I have always been wary of sitting close to the engine for this reason, but I always felt that it is just a remote possibility.

"There's a ring around the engine that is meant to contain the engine pieces when this happens," said John Goglia, a former NTSB member. "In this case it didn't. That's going to be a big focal point for the NTSB - why didn't (the ring) do its job?"

[A350XWB]

Originally Posted by alpha1

"There's a ring around the engine that is meant to contain the engine pieces when this happens," said John Goglia, a former NTSB member. "In this case it didn't. That's going to be a big focal point for the NTSB - why didn't (the ring) do its job?"

There are specific tests done during engine development, for containment of debris due to fan blade failure. But in real life scenarios, a lot depends on the nature of failure and the current dynamics. Some videos of the tests.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8jgGoTc1Fc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcALjMJbAvU