Posted on 01/20/2009 1:56:27 AM PST by malkee
The US Airways jet that made a dramatic emergency landing on New York's Hudson River last week experienced an engine compressor failure two days earlier, according to the National Transportation Safety Board. NTSB spokesman Peter Knudson said Monday that the board's examination of the Airbus 320's maintenance records show "there was an entry in the aircraft's maintenance log that indicates a compressor stall occurred on Jan. 13." The compressor, or fan, draws air into the engine. He said the flight had a different pilot that day, and the board planned to interview that pilot to learn more about the incident. NTSB investigators so far have not uncovered "any anomalies or malfunctions with Flight 1549 from the time it left the gate at LaGuardia Airport on Jan. 15 to the point the pilot reported a bird strike and loss of engine power," Knudson said. Pilot Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger was able to glide to plane to an emergency river landing and there were no fatalities. CNN reported Monday that passengers on the Flight 1549 that left LaGuardia Airport on Jan. 13 reported hearing loud bangs followed by an announcement from the pilot that the aircraft was either returning to LaGuardia or going to try to land. There were differing accounts of the pilot's statements. However, passengers said that a short time later the situation appeared to return to normal and the flight continued on to Charlotte, N.C., CNN reported. It's not unusual for a flight to continue on to its destination after a compressor stall if the engine returns to normal functioning.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
Maybe it wasn’t the geese.
“Lots to digest here.”
Yeah, like an engine eating geese.
There is probably no airplane in the air or ready to go in the air that has not had a recent malfunction.
Which could be said about any aircraft with more than one hour of flight time.
CNN reported Monday that passengers on the Flight 1549 that left LaGuardia Airport on Jan. 13...
So? Was it the same aircraft.
compressor stalls can be caused by strong crosswinds, especially at power run up for takeoff. pilots have crosswind procedures they follow to ‘spool up’ before they start their takeoff roll.
a report of a compressor stall in one engine is likely unrelated to this crash, BUT it could be IF it indicated an actual failure or such in the engine.
we’ll see ...
The question is, was it addressed on this aircraft, and what will the engine teardowns show....
someone pass me some of that whose to blame popcorn.....thanks!!!
Records show plane suffered previous malfunction
By JOAN LOWY – 3 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — The US Airways jet that made a dramatic emergency landing on New York's Hudson River last week experienced an engine compressor failure two days earlier, according to the National Transportation Safety Board.
NTSB spokesman Peter Knudson said Monday that the board's examination of the Airbus 320's maintenance records show "there was an entry in the aircraft's maintenance log that indicates a compressor stall occurred on Jan. 13." The compressor, or fan, draws air into the engine.
He said the flight had a different pilot that day, and the board planned to interview that pilot to learn more about the incident.
NTSB investigators so far have not uncovered "any anomalies or malfunctions with Flight 1549 from the time it left the gate at LaGuardia Airport on Jan. 15 to the point the pilot reported a bird strike and loss of engine power," Knudson said. Pilot Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger was able to glide to plane to an emergency river landing and there were no fatalities.
CNN reported Monday that passengers on the Flight 1549 that left LaGuardia Airport on Jan. 13 reported hearing loud bangs followed by an announcement from the pilot that the aircraft was either returning to LaGuardia or going to try to land. There were differing accounts of the pilot's statements.
However, passengers said that a short time later the situation appeared to return to normal and the flight continued on to Charlotte, N.C., CNN reported. It's not unusual for a flight to continue on to its destination after a compressor stall if the engine returns to normal functioning.
The ambulance chasers will latch on to this nonevent and run with it.
Or the geese eating engines.
it could have been a cluster f*** of one engine sucking down a goose or 3, and the other having compressor failure.
I suppose they will find out after the year long investigation.
More details here.
Compressor stall occurred in flight on the departure route over Newark.
Passengers (obviously) heard the BANG BANG BANG of the compressor stall, but the crew got the engine stabilized and flew on.
It is *possible* (pure flame-worthy conjecture) that when the left engine failed due to bird strike, the change in attitude (AOA/yaw) may have contributed to a compressor stall (but no BANG BAN BANG BANG was reported by passengers in last week’s ‘crash’) in the right engine that the crew couldn’t deal with.
We’ll see.
But dual bird strike passes the Ockham’s Razor test.
oops. forgot the”more details” link
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/19/hudson.plane.folo/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
more coffee ...
Such as reporting at first that one engine was missing from the plane when they were attempting to retrieve it from the river.
Then they said both engines were missing.
Of course, people watching could see that the plane still had one engine attached when it was lifted from the water.
Story changes and it’s oops, only one engine is missing.
They will continue the search Wednesday.
And in an other instance where the plane ran off the runway at Denver International Airport the NTSB reported that the black boxes stopped at the moment of impact. That plane was barely off the ground when it left it’s designated runway, crossed another runway and landed in a ditch. There is no way those black boxes should have or could have stopped working on impact.
While these two ‘incidents’ ended with no deaths, it seems that the truth is being buried.
I wonder if US Air uses the V2500 engines on their A319 and A320 airplanes (not sure if they fly the 319)
multimillion dollar birdomatics they are
The A320 aircraft that ditched in the Hudson was powered by CFM56-5B engines.
Thanks for that info.
Do I really need a sarcasm tag?
I do NOT know about these engines... but is there not a way that some sort of mesh wire could be placed over them so as to prevent anything as large as say a goose from getting into the engine housing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.