Airbus says 3 of 4 engines failed on crashed A400M

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By GREG KELLER

PARIS (AP) — Airbus said Wednesday that three of the four engines on an A400M military plane failed before it crashed near Seville, Spain last month, killing four people.

In a statement, Airbus Defense and Space says the faulty engines were confirmed by Spanish accident investigators after completing their preliminary analysis of the aircraft's digital flight data and cockpit voice recorders.

The crash May 9 killed two pilots and two flight test engineers. The crash remains under investigation.

Three of the hulking gray aircraft's four turboprop engines suffered what it called "power frozen" after lift-off, and failed to respond to the crew's efforts to regain control. A fourth engine responded normally. No other problems have been identified by the preliminary analysis.

FULL story at link.



FILE - In this May 9, 2015 file photo, emergency services personnel work at the scene of a plane crash near Seville airport, Seville, Spain. Airbus Defense and Space said In a statement Wednesday June 3, 2015 that three of the four engines on an A400M military plane failed before it crashed near Seville, Spain last month, killing four people. The crash on May 9 killed two pilots and two flight test engineers. The crash remains under investigation. (AP Photo/Miguel Angel Morenatti, File)

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/d91b98970f4b48a093f45089886fa089/airbus-says-3-4-engines-failed-crashed-a400m

[Duckhunter935]

1. Very odd

Triple failure

[Recursion]

2. One engine is spec'd to control a descent, though, isn't it?

Not that that would be fun to attempt...

[Duckhunter935]

3. Guess it depends when they failed

and what height, too low and no time to even react

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. I'm not sure that ability to use just 1 out of 4 engines would be a requirement

1 out of 2, yes; but they might not say that an aircraft should be able to function with just 25% of power.

They did attempt to land, but had only just taken off, so didn't have a lot of altitude to play with when things went wrong; they struck an electricity pylon.

Airbus said 'black box' data and cockpit recordings indicated that three out of four of the plane's turboprop engines became stuck at high power shortly after takeoff.

At first, the three affected engines "did not respond to the crew’s attempts to control the power setting in the normal way," Airbus said in a statement.

Pilots succeeded in reducing power only after setting the thrust levers to 'idle,' only to find that the power had frozen once again as they tried to increase it, Airbus added.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/03/us-airbuis-a400m-idUSKBN0OJ12I20150603

The newspaper El Pais said the crew had detected a fault and asked permission to land, but hit an electricity pylon while attempting an emergency landing.

Tracking data from the Flightradar24 website indicated the plane had wheeled to the left before coming down.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/09/spain-crash-idUSL5N0Y009720150509

[Calista241]

5. It's a transport aircraft also. So it depends on what cargo they were hauling.

[Plucketeer]

6. It was a BRAND NEW aircraft

on a certification flight before delivery to it's new owner. There would've been no "cargo" in the plane.

[Kelvin Mace]

7. Seems like a software bug

Not the thing you want in the computers controlling your engines.

[GliderGuider]

8. It does sound like that, doesn't it?

As a retired embedded systems programmer, that thought always gives me nightmares.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. They talk about " the configuration of engine software"

A senior Airbus executive was quoted shortly afterwards as saying the initial investigations had confirmed the crash was caused by a problem with the configuration of engine software.

and people are talking about the plane being prepared in a hurry to meet a deadline:

Several safety protocols were allegedly ignored during the final assembly of the A400M military plane which crashed in Spain, killing four, reportedly to make up for delays in delivery, online news site El Confidencial said Tuesday.

"Several protocols were ignored," it said citing unnamed aeronautical sector sources.

The computer system that controls the plane's engines, the Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC), "should have been tested before, in a simulator, to check if everything worked," it added.

The sources claimed the protocols were skipped because Airbus was in a hurry to make up for delays in the development and delivery of the A400M military cargo and troop transport plane which is assembled in Seville.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2015/06/02/report-safety-protocol-breaches-may-be-behind-a400m-crash/28352321/

[MosheFeingold]

10. Probably not at that speed, no n/t

[SoapBox]

11. The company isn't called ScareBus for nothing.

[Gloria]

13. When the Airbus first appeared and the computerization

was touted, I knew I would never get on one. I found an airline accident/problem site and it really concerned me.

I won't get on an old MD-80, either. Friends who often traveled on them had at least a couple of scares
with smoke coming out of the A/C on different planes. The MD-80 is no prize either from what I learned on that site.

The incident logs sort of counter the "flying is the safest...blah blah blah" thing we always hear. White-knuckle flying (which I
also experienced), of course, is never mentioned.

I went to auto school in the mid-80s when cars were starting to get computers and sensors. I remember people from Mitsubishi
in white lab coats (really) hovering around a car that wouldn't turn off. They even replaced the entire wiring harness. Then you get the "intermittents," the problems which never show up when you are looking for them, but are sitting in the wiring or the electronics.

I imagine all that on a PLANE!

I have to say, I have now desire to get on a plane, esp. with the current sardine-can seating.

Reading descriptions at SeatGuru about the numbness, inability to bend over to even find a life vest, makes me
wonder how safe this cramming is. I heard that there is some entity is starting to look at the safety issues...how
do you evacuate a plane within the guidelines when only one person can move down an aisle (on Southwest) or if you can't get out of your seat quickly??

UGH!

[Gloria]

14. From today's Aviation Herald...another Airbus with engine shutdown, this time by the pilots:

Incident: US Airways A319 near Orlando on Jun 3rd 2015, engine shut down in flight
By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Jun 3rd 2015 21:21Z, last updated Wednesday, Jun 3rd 2015 21:21Z

A US Airways Airbus A319-100 on behalf of American Airlines, registration N737US performing flight US-1902/AA-1902 from Orlando,FL to Washington National,DC (USA) with 72 passengers and 5 crew, was climbing out of Orlando when the crew stopped the climb at FL210, shut the left hand engine ( down and decided to return to Orlando. The crew requested right turns and asked emergency services to have a look over the engine to make sure there was no smoke coming out, they were not seeing any fire. The aircraft landed safely on Orlando's runway 18R about 25 minutes after stopping the climb and stopped on the runway for inspection by emergency services ("we stop on the runway making it safer for them" referring to emergency services). Following inspection the crew taxied the aircraft to the apron with emergency services following the aircraft.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL1902/history/20150603/1120Z/KMCO/KDCA


And, yesterday...smoke

Incident: Jetstar A320 near Solomon on Jun 2nd 2015, fumes in cabin
By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Jun 2nd 2015 13:37Z, last updated Tuesday, Jun 2nd 2015 13:37Z

A Jetstar Airbus A320-200, registration VH-VFV performing charter flight JQ-2933 from Solomon,WA to Perth,WA (Australia) with 87 people on board, was climbing out of Solomon Airport when an odour of burning rubber was noticed in the aft cabin prompting the crew to stop the climb at about FL150 and return to Solomon Airport for a safe landing about 20 minutes after departure. Emergency services did not detect any trace of fire, heat or smoke, the odour had subsided by the time of landing.

The aircraft is still on the ground 13 hours later.

Another flight made an intermediate stop at Solomon to take a number of passengers to Perth, a replacement aircraft is estimated to take the other passengers to Perth later the day.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/JST2933/history/20150602/0005Z/YSOL/YPPH


The Aviation Herald will give you the willies....

[jmowreader]

12. If it's a computer problem, why was one engine still running normally?