F.A.A. Orders Closer Engine Inspections After Southwest Airlines Failure


Photo

Federal investigators in Philadelphia examined damage to the turbofan engine on Southwest Airlines Flight 1380 that failed on Tuesday, leading a passenger’s death.

Credit
Getty Images

The Federal Aviation Administration on Friday issued an emergency order instructing airlines with the same type of engine as the one that failed catastrophically on Tuesday on a Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 to more thoroughly inspect the engines’ fan blades.

The agency told airlines to perform ultrasonic inspections — which can detect flaws or cracks not visible to the unaided human eye — within the next 20 days on fan blades of engines with more than 30,000 cycles. A cycle includes an engine start, takeoff, landing and shutdown.

The F.A.A.’s order came shortly after the manufacturer of the engines, CFM International, issued guidelines for the ultrasonic inspections. CFM, a joint venture of General Electric and the French company Safran Aircraft Engines, went further than the F.A.A., recommending that fan blades with 20,000 cycles be inspected by the end of August. It also recommended inspections of all other fan blades when they reach 20,000 cycles, and repeating the inspections every 3,000 cycles, which, it said, “represents about two years in service.”

The F.A.A. said it was acting because it determined that fan blade cracking “is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.”

The agency’s order does not address those lesser-used engines, but said it was “considering further rule making to address these differences.” Airlines are not legally bound to follow a company’s guidelines. They are bound by the F.A.A. directive.

Continue reading the main story

Southwest’s Fatal Accident Prompts Scrutiny of Engine Inspections


The chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, Robert L. Sumwalt, said a blade in the engine had broken in two places — where the blade attaches to the main hub and higher up, approximately at the midpoint of the blade. He said that a crack “was on the interior of the fan blade,” and that it was “more than likely not detectable from looking from the outside.”

But Mr. Sumwalt said it was too soon to reach conclusions on the cause of the engine failure. The board, he said, had not yet examined maintenance records, and was still examining the plane and interviewing its crew. He did say parts of the exterior of the plane’s engine had been recovered on the ground in a rural area outside Philadelphia.

The authorities are still finishing up their investigation of a similar incident on a Southwest flight in 2016, when a fan blade separated and debris ripped a 16-inch-long hole in the fuselage. No one was injured.

Photo

Exterior engine parts that landed in Penn Township, Pa., were photographed by an investigator from the safety board on Wednesday.

Credit
Bill Uhrich/Reading Eagle, via Associated Press

That was when CFM International recommended that airlines conduct ultrasound inspections of the blades. In the United States, carriers aren’t required to follow manufacturers’ guidelines.

The Federal Aviation Administration said a directive that it proposed last year to compel airlines to perform such inspections would take effect within the next two weeks. The European Aviation Safety Agency established such regulations for European carriers in late March.

Finding flaws isn’t always easy.

Metal fatigue, which investigators suspect is a factor in this week’s engine failure, can be a visible or an invisible weakness that is the result of bending, vibration or other stress. While it is often associated with older airplanes and engines, it can sometimes be the result of manufacturing flaws that cannot be seen.

“The forces in the engine are extraordinary,” said John Gadzinski, a 737 pilot and the founder of Four Winds Aerospace Safety, an aviation consultant. “Those small cracks that you may only see with an electron microscope will go from small to catastrophic failure in an instant.”

What occurred midair on Tuesday — a failure in which the engine parts are not contained in the housing and threaten the integrity of the airplane — is exceedingly rare, aircraft analysts said. The fact that it happened twice with the same airline in such a short time span makes it even more worrisome.

“It’s unusual that a fan blade would fail twice on the same engine model, with the same carrier, over two years,” said Kevin Michaels, the president of AeroDynamic Advisory in Ann Arbor, Mich., who has worked as a gas turbine engineer.

In the 2016 incident, a fan blade and another component separated from the engine. The debris did not enter the cabin. It did produce a gash in the aircraft’s side, causing depressurization, according to a preliminary report from the transportation safety board.

Photo

The Boeing 737 window that the Southwest plane’s engine debris shattered.

Credit
Marty Martinez, via Associated Press

The Boeing 737 involved was on its way to Orlando, Fla., from New Orleans and made an emergency landing in Pensacola, Fla.

If it turns out that this week’s engine failure had the same root cause, said Robert W. Mann, an airline analyst based in Port Washington, N.Y., the need to inspect 737 engines could be much more urgent.

“It could drive a significant event industrywide, but it’s hard to tell at this point,” he said. “It could be a defect of design, which would mean it’s subject to fatigue failures.”

In February, a United Airlines Boeing 777, which uses a different kind of engine, also experienced a blade separation and loss of other engine parts. That flight landed in Honolulu virtually on schedule, with no injuries reported and only minor damage, according to the safety board.

Aircraft experts say there’s no reason to worry about Southwest in particular, or about what this might say about the safety of flying in general. Southwest got into the aircraft business to “compete with the family car, which means they have saved tens of thousands of lives,” said Richard Aboulafia, an aviation analyst at the Teal Group in Fairfax, Va., alluding to the statistical fact that flying is safer than driving.

“The extreme worst-case scenario from these two incidents is that it might be prudent to inspect slightly more often,” he said.

Gary C. Kelly, Southwest’s chief executive, said in a news conference on Tuesday that the accident had not caused him to doubt the 737.

“The airplane, in my opinion, is proven,” Mr. Kelly said. “It’s very reliable. It has the greatest success of any other aircraft type.”

Continue reading the main story