Live data from Hacker News

United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

avherald.com

51–60 of 483 posts

Re: United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

#51

I have wondered in the past if the benefits of a 'jettison damaged engine' feature would outweigh the risks.

It's unclear what benefit there would be. On the other hand, instantly changing the balance of the aircraft by jettisoning a large mass from one wing would almost certainly make the aircraft uncontrollable.

An American Airlines DC-10 crashed after takeoff from Chicago in 1979 (?), after one engine separated from the wing. At the time, it was the deadliest crash in the US.

Re: United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

#52
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could go faster with a single larger engine. Why do you think they went with two engines instead of a single larger engine? Redundancy.

Not clear to me that you'd design a commercial turbofan aircraft with one engine if you eliminated reliability requirements. You need to feed air to the engine and, to the degree you have wings, might as well have 2 engines.

The idea that the engines need to sit on the wings like they do is something seems important, because it's so often done, but is actually not necessary. You can put a single engine in the tail, or on top of the cabin, or on the top of the cockpit, or underneath. They go on the wings because when you need two (for redundancy) it's a good place to put them for balance, and because it makes them nicely accessible for maintenance.

Re: United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

#53
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily flight plans are always required to be within a certain number of minutes of a place to land, and are certified to operate on one engine for that period. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS

How do you account for oceans?

By staying as close to land as required to ensure safety. until fairly recently, flights to Hawaii were largely served by 3- or 4-engine jets. It's only in the last several decades that ETOPS regulations have shifted enough to allow regular twin-engine service to Honolulu.

See the 3rd response... https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=119921

Re: United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

#54

I really appreciate focused news sites like avherald. Just the facts, a collection of photos and videos, straightforward. The video of the landing & the passengers cheering—- that huge sigh of relief. Brings a smile to my face.

What, you don’t like the anchor people on TV asking each other how they feel about every piece of news and making horrible puns at every opportunity? Or having expected announcements be reported as BREAKING NEWS?

As a European who tuned in to US News for the US election I thought that was crazy.

I'd watch a few of the right media orgs to see what they were saying and then stay on CNN/MSNBC etc for most of it. It's mad how so much of it every hour was essentially people just regurgitating stuff to fill the time. I mean OK what's happening is important but if you can't fill the airtime why not shift to other news (as in everything else happening in the world - HK democracy leaders were arrested during that time and I don't remember any proper mention through days upon days).

Also the fake breaking news thing was stupid. The amount of times I'd turn up Wolf Blitzer or something because I would hear breaking news announcements in the background and thinking like you'd get at the BBC, Channel 4, RTE, France 24 Al Jazeera English, etc that something important was happening. Only to find breaking news was basically just random scheduled things or just regurgitation of what happens. Here Sky News is bad for playing things up but nowhere near as bad as any of them.

News on the right in the US is awful but the Left isn't much better unfortunately. What do people watch that's in the Centre and actual news rather than hyperbole? PBS?

Re: United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on, we all know so they can go faster.

They could go faster with a single larger engine. Why do you think they went with two engines instead of a single larger engine? Redundancy.

Citation needed. It's not at all obvious that a single huge engine is in any way better than two for a given speed.

Re: United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

#58
post #3

How's that possible it managed to fly with only one engine ?

The other engine provides enough thrust to keep the plane airborne. The pilots (and likely other onboard systems) compensate for the asymmetric thrust with the rudder. As scary as it looks, this is one type of event that pilots routinely train for, both to get their initial multi-engine certification, and on their airlines’ simulators.

They happen pretty frequently... Just normally they don't look as visually spectacular as this.

Re: United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

#59
post #5
post #3

How's that possible it managed to fly with only one engine ?

Amazingly, I believe planes are designed/certified to do everything (e.g. take off fully loaded) with only a single working engine.

And if they loose the remaining one, all goes south: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn1a2lSk_UI&feature=emb_logo

Re: United B772 at Denver on Feb 20th 2021, engine inlet separates from engine

#60

I worked at a Large Internet Infrastructure Company for a long time, and saw software development practices that made my hair curl. All I could think was, "Gee, I'm glad we're not working on aviation software!" Seriously, though: software "engineering" could actually earn the name, if we had rigorous professional standards, regulatory oversight, and product liability.

General software requirements can change drastically in a short period. Heck one of our clients requested major parts of our solution to be rebuilt for the third time within 6 months to accommodate the whims of their new leadership.

You don't see that happening with aviation software where requirements are set in stone.

Post reply on HN