Turbine engine failure: Difference between revisions

A '''turbine engine failure''' occurs when a [[Gas turbine|turbine engine]] unexpectedly stops producing [[Power (physics)|power]] due to a malfunction other than [[fuel exhaustion]]. It often applies for [[aircraft]], but other turbine engines can fail, like ground-based turbines used in power plants or [[combined diesel and gas]] vessels and vehicles.

Turbine engines in use on today's turbine-powered aircraft are very [[reliability (engineering)|reliable]]. Engines operate efficiently with regularly scheduled inspections and maintenance. These units can have lives ranging in the tens of thousands of hours of operation .<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.poentetechnical.com/news/what-is-the-lifespan-of-an-airplanes-engine/ |title= WHATWhat ISis THEthe LIFESPANLifespan OFof ANan AIRPLANE’SAirplane's ENGINEEngine?|date= 13 January 2023}}</ref>. However, engine malfunctions or failures occasionally occur that require an engine to be shut down in flight. Since multi-engine airplanes are designed to fly with one engine inoperative and flight crews are trained to fly with one engine inoperative, the in-flight shutdown of an engine typically does not constitute a serious safety of flight issue.

The [[Federal Aviation Administration]] (FAA) was quoted as stating turbine engines have a [[failure rate]] of one per 375,000 flight hours, compared to of one every 3,200 flight hours for aircraft piston engines.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://archives.profsurv.com/magazine/article.aspx?i=1950 |title= Aerial Perspective: Flying Dollars and Sense |work= Professional [[Surveyor]] Magazine |date= September 2007 |author= Steven E. Scates}}</ref>{{Unreliable source?|date=July 2024|certain=y|reason=Source is a magazine article which makes the same statement without reference to any verifiable FAA statements or data}}

[[Continental Motors, Inc.|Continental Motors]] reports the FAA states general aviation engines experience one failures or IFSD every 10,000 flight hours, and states its [[Centurion engines]] is one per {{Format price|{{#expr:100000/4.83round0}}}} flight hours, lowering to one per {{Format price|{{#expr:100000/0.61round0}}}} flight hours in 2013-20142013–2014.<ref>{{cite press release |url= http://www.continentaldiesel.com/typo3/index.php?id=106&Year=2014&NewsID=112&L=1 |date= 10 April 2014 |title= Continental: 4 Million Diesel Flight Hours |publisher= Continental Motors}}</ref>

Most in-flight shutdowns are harmless and likely to go unnoticed by passengers. For example, it may be prudent for the [[flight crew]] to shut down an engine and perform a precautionary landing in the event of a low [[oil pressure]] or high oil temperature warning in the cockpit. However, passengers in a [[Jet engine|jet powered aircraft]] may become quite alarmed by other engine events such as a [[compressor surge]] — a malfunction that is typified by loud bangs and even flames from the engine's inlet and tailpipe. A compressor surge is a disruption of the airflow through a gas turbine jet engine that can be caused by engine deterioration, a crosswind over the engine's inlet, ice accumulation around the engine inlet, ingestion of foreign material, or an internal component failure such as a broken [[turbine|blade]]. While this situation can be alarming, the engine may recover with no damage.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/engine_prop/media/engine_malf_famil.doc {{Bare|format=DOC URL|title=Airplane Turbofan Engine Operation and Malfunctions Basic Familiarization for Flight Crews DOC|website=[[Federal Aviation Administration]] |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230422050236/https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/engine_prop/media/engine_malf_famil.doc |archive-date=JuneApril 22, 2023 |access-date=January 4, 20222024}}</ref>

Also, the failure of certain components in the engine may result in a release of oil into [[bleed air]] that can cause an odor or oily mist in the cabin. This is known as a [[fume event]]. The dangers of fume events are the subject of debate in both aviation and [[aviation medicine|medicine]].<ref name=WSJ>{{cite web |last=Nassauer |first=Sarah |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204900904574302293012711628 | title=Up in the Air: New Worries About 'Fume Events' on Planes | publisher=[[The Wall Street Journal]]| date=30 July 30, 2009 | access-date=29January December4, 20122024 | authorurl-access=Sarah Nassauerlimited}}</ref>

The very specific technical distinction between a contained and uncontained engine failure derives from regulatory requirements for design, testing, and certification of aircraft engines under Part 33 of the U.S. [[Federal Aviation Regulations]], which has always required turbine aircraft engines to be designed to contain damage resulting from rotor blade failure.<ref name="AC_33-5" /> Under Part 33, engine manufacturers are required to perform [[Blade off testing|blade off tests]] to ensure containment of shrapnel if blade separation occurs.<ref name="14CFR">[http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=466022f9e574a12e0b383c9ddebced01&rgn=div8&view=text&node=14:1.0.1.3.16.6.363.13&idno=14 Blade containment and rotor unbalance tests.] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110612142218/http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=466022f9e574a12e0b383c9ddebced01&rgn=div8&view=text&node=14%3A1.0.1.3.16.6.363.13&idno=14 |date=12 June 2011 }}, 14 CFR 33.94, 1984</ref> Blade fragments exiting the inlet or exhaust can still pose a hazard to the aircraft, and this should be considered by the aircraft designers.<ref name="AC_33-5" /> Note that aA nominally contained engine failure can still result in engine [[parts departing aircraft|parts departing the aircraft]] as long as the engine parts exit via the existing openings in the engine inlet or outlet, and do not create new openings in the engine case containment. Fan blade fragments departing via the inlet may also cause airframe parts such as the inlet duct and other parts of the engine nacelle to depart the aircraft due to deformation from the fan blade fragment's residual kinetic energy.

* Two [[LOT Polish Airlines]] flights, both [[Ilyushin Il-62]]s, suffered catastrophic uncontained engine failures in the 1980s. The first was in 1980 on [[LOT Polish Airlines Flight 7]] where flight controls were destroyed, killing all 87 on board. In 1987, on [[LOT Polish Airlines Flight 5055]], the failure of the aircraft's inner left (#2) engine, damaged the outer left (#1) engine, setting both on fire and causing loss of flight controls, leading to an eventuala crash, whichthat killed all 183 people on board. In both cases, the turbine shaft in engine #2 disintegrated due to production defects in the engines' bearings, which were missing rollers.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Antoni Milkiewicz|title=Jeszcze o Lesie Kabackim |trans-title=More on the Kabacky Forest |language=pl |date=October 1991 |journal=Aero: Technika Lotnicza |location=Warsaw|publisher=Oficyna Wydawnicza Simp-Simpress|pages=12–14|issn=0867-6720}}</ref>

* The [[Aeroflot Flight 3519|Tu-154 crash near Krasnoyarsk]] was a major aircraft crash that occurred on Sunday, December 23, 1984, in the vicinity of Krasnoyarsk. The Tu-154B-2 airliner of the 1st Krasnoyarsk united aviation unit (Aeroflot) performed passenger flight SU-3519 on the Krasnoyarsk-Irkutsk route, but during the climb, engine No. 3 failed. The crew decided to return to the airport of departure, but during the landing approach a fire broke out, which destroyed the control systems and as a result, the plane crashed to the ground 3200 meters from the threshold of the runway of the Yemelyanovo airport and collapsed. Of the 111 people on board (104 passengers and 7 crew members), one survived. The cause of the catastrophe was the destruction of the disk of the first stage of the low pressure circuit of engine No. 3, which occurred due to the presence of fatigue cracks. The cracks were caused by a manufacturing defect – the inclusion of a titanium-nitrogen compound that has a higher microhardness than the original material. The methods used at that time for the manufacture and repair of disks, as well as the means of control, were found to be partially obsolete, which is why they did not ensure the effectiveness of control and detection of such a defect. The defect itself arose probably due to accidental ingestion of a titanium sponge or charge for smelting an ingot of a piece enriched with nitrogen.

* OnValuJet June597: 8, 1995, aA [[DC-9|DC-9-32]] doingtaking serviceoff as,from ValuJet[[Hartsfield FlightJackson 597Atlanta International Airport]] on June 8, 1995, suffered an uncontained engine failure of the 7th stage high pressure compressor disk due to inadequate inspection of the corroded disk. The resulting rupture caused jet fuel to flow into the cabin and ignite, and the fire caused the jet to be a write-off.

* [[Air France Flight 66]]: an [[Airbus A380]], registration F-HPJE performing flight from Paris, France, to Los Angeles, United States, was en route about {{convert|200|nmi|mi km||}} southeast of Nuuk, Greenland, when it suffered a catastrophic engine failure in 2017 (General Electric / Pratt & Whitney Engine Alliance GP7000). The crew descended the aircraft and diverted to [[CFB Goose Bay|Goose Bay]], Canada, for a safe landing about two hours later.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-air-france-canada/air-france-flight-with-engine-damage-makes-emergency-landing-in-canada-idUSKCN1C50PV?il=0 |title=Air France flight with engine damage makes emergency landing in Canada|firstfirst1=ReutersVictoria |lastlast1=EditorialBryan |newspaperfirst2=Alex |last2=Dobuzinskis |work=Reuters |date=30 September 2017 |access-date=18 April 2018}}</ref>