This happened Monday; running behind on reading the Times.
Metal baggage container sucked into jet engine at LAX
Metal baggage container sucked into jet engine at LAX
Geeeeeze. Talk about a square peg into a round hole.This happened Monday; running behind on reading the Times.
Metal baggage container sucked into jet engine at LAX
Yes of course, but if the bozos or clowns or however they would like to be refered to, can do such a thing on the ground, immagine how easy it is to get in serious trouble when not being on the ground, reasons for plane crashes are usually quite simple things.Also, this happened on the ground, so the chances of an instant death are next to nil.
Actually most plane crashes are caused by a complex chain of events that lead up to the crash. Even what may seem as simple causes can often be traced to before the plane even left the ground. Thats why even the most simple incidents are investigated thoroughly so as to learn from others mistakes. Unfortunately, many of the regulations are written in blood. I'm sure same goes for many railroad regulations as well.Yes of course, but if the bozos or clowns or however they would like to be refered to, can do such a thing on the ground, immagine how easy it is to get in serious trouble when not being on the ground, reasons for plane crashes are usually quite simple things.Also, this happened on the ground, so the chances of an instant death are next to nil.
I think your description is closer to what happens in a helecopter than an airplane, and even in a helicopter it is sometimes possible to safely land after the engine quits if the helicopter was moving fast enough at the time and if the pilot doesn't screw up.Things like this are exactly the reason why I love train travel.If the engine breaks it just means a delay and not instant death like in a plane.
Actually, instant death from an airplane engine on the ground is quite possible.Also, this happened on the ground, so the chances of an instant death are next to nil.
In the case of the jet engine in this incident it's fortunate that the container was so large as to be inedible. A smaller, hard item ingested could have caused the engine to start disintegrating and throwing turbine blades. They'd shoot right through the engine housing, cowling, and possibly - depending on direction - straight through the skin of the passenger compartment, shredding anything or anyone in their path. Joel is right: instant death from an airplane engine on the ground is quite possible.Actually, instant death from an airplane engine on the ground is quite possible.Also, this happened on the ground, so the chances of an instant death are next to nil.
On planes with propellers, a spinning propellor is nearly invisible, and walking into it can be deadly.
There's a part of the opening sequence to MacGyver with Richard Dean Anderson resting his arm on a propellor. I'm sort of amazed that they shot that at all; the design of the typical magneto shutoff switch is not fail safe at all. (Specifically, if the wire to that switch is inadvertently disconnected, the failure will be in the direction of having the engine on when the pilot intends for it to be off.) Though maybe someone was sure that the fuel mixture was set such that the engine couldn't run?
Reminds me of this story;I think your description is closer to what happens in a helecopter than an airplane, and even in a helicopter it is sometimes possible to safely land after the engine quits if the helicopter was moving fast enough at the time and if the pilot doesn't screw up.Things like this are exactly the reason why I love train travel.If the engine breaks it just means a delay and not instant death like in a plane.
An airplane without working engines is a glider. There are plenty of pilots who intentionally fly gliders that simply don't have their own engines, generally by getting a powered plane to tow them to a reasonable altitude. Admittedly, an airplane with no working engines has handling characteristics that aren't quite as desireable as the handling characteristics of a purpose built glider, but an engine failure at altitude is certainly not instant death.
Also, scheduled commercial flights with a reasonably large number of passengers happen on planes with multiple engines that are generally designed so that one engine can fail without the plane turning into a glider.
One incredible story here ...Reminds me of this story; (image in quote snipped)The Gimli Glider
Like: Somebody built in a non working altimeter.Actually most plane crashes are caused by a complex chain of events that lead up to the crash.
Indeed. You can never go near a plane because you are scared of flying or you dislike the dehumanisation, and think you are safe. Till the plummeting plane lands on your house.....Joel is right: instant death from an airplane engine on the ground is quite possible.
Have we? I'm pretty sure AOPA has concluded that there are still plenty of cases of private airplanes running out of fuel.But just because humanity at least learned that one should check whether there is still enough fuel in the tank BEFORE take off (After crash caused by lack of fuel they invented the checklist),
Wasn't there a 767 that crash-landed up in Canada a number of years ago (mid '90s, IIRC)? The fuel gauge was broken, so a dipstick check of fuel in the tanks was done prior to take-off. The dipstick was calibrated in pounds, but the crew thought it was in kilos (Canada is a metric country!), meaning the plane took off with less than half the fuel it was expected to be carrying.Have we? I'm pretty sure AOPA has concluded that there are still plenty of cases of private airplanes running out of fuel.But just because humanity at least learned that one should check whether there is still enough fuel in the tank BEFORE take off (After crash caused by lack of fuel they invented the checklist),
This is actually not as simple as checking that there's fuel in the tank before taking off, because, especially if all the seats are occupied, the airplane often doesn't have capacity to carry enough fuel to fly for an extra two hours beyond the proposed destination. If weather deteriorates or there are unexpected headwinds, the fuel that was supposed to be extra can be used up fairly quickly.
Actually no. Disintegration of the turbine and fans would not send anything flying out of the engine unless there was something else that went wrong. Such things used to happen in previous generation engines. The current engines are designed to disintegrate without sending missiles every which way.In the case of the jet engine in this incident it's fortunate that the container was so large as to be inedible. A smaller, hard item ingested could have caused the engine to start disintegrating and throwing turbine blades. They'd shoot right through the engine housing, cowling, and possibly - depending on direction - straight through the skin of the passenger compartment, shredding anything or anyone in their path. Joel is right: instant death from an airplane engine on the ground is quite possible.
Or worse..... on your train!Indeed. You can never go near a plane because you are scared of flying or you dislike the dehumanisation, and think you are safe. Till the plummeting plane lands on your house.....Joel is right: instant death from an airplane engine on the ground is quite possible.
And it was put back in service and flew for many many years. It was finally decommissioned last year as I recall.It didn't crash, it successfully made an emergency landing:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider
Per 100 million miles traveled, 1.018 for the airplane vs. 7.6 for trains. Average of the last 10 years from 1997-2007, the last year for which stats are available.Or worse..... on your train!Indeed. You can never go near a plane because you are scared of flying or you dislike the dehumanisation, and think you are safe. Till the plummeting plane lands on your house.....Joel is right: instant death from an airplane engine on the ground is quite possible.
I suggest people go and look up passenger fatalities per passenger mile traveled and compare figures between trains and planes.
My point exactly. It is inconsistent with documented facts to claim that flying on a commercial airliner in the US is significantly more unsafe than riding a train.Both modes are incredibly safe. The old adage is that the most dangerous part of any flight (or train ride) is the drive to the airport (or train station). That's true.
Apparently the container did not make it past the nacelle, so internal damage was possibly minimal - perhaps some damage to the front fan disc or two. The nacelle would of course need - shall we say - a significant replacement.Depending on the damage, that could be one expensive boo boo at LAX. A 747 engine runs about $20 million.
Enter your email address to join: