机务在线

搜索
查看: 19482|回复: 51

[70-80 V2500] 空客320风扇整流罩脱落事件历史案例

[复制链接]

24

主题

270

帖子

630

积分

机务正式工-无执照

Rank: 4

积分
630

南航实名认证南京航空航天大学

发表于 2013-2-20 23:36:27 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式 来自: 中国河南郑州
2013年2月18日南航CZ-3624,空客A320风扇整流罩脱落事件发生后,原因仍在调查,搜索整理了些历史案例,仅仅320系列,不少于20起,供大家参考。
2009年7月13日FAA发布的Information for Operators:InFO 09013
01.jpg

2009年8月20日颁布的NOTICE N 8900.91:
02.jpg
03.jpg
    可以看出截止到2009年5月6日发生的这起,自1992年以来,空客已经发生过15起,庞巴迪33起,其它17种机型26起。
    空客官方网站上关于Human Performance的课件Error management恰恰以风扇包皮脱落为例,
    链接:
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/safety_library_items/AirbusSafetyLib_-MAINT-HUM_PER-SEQ02.pdf

    之后,网上还搜索到如下7起:

一、Turkish Airlines A320 at Istanbul on Nov 4th 2009, lost engine cowling on takeoff

A Turkish Airlines Airbus A320-200, registration TC-JPA performing flight TK-1144 from Istanbul Ataturk (Turkey) to Cairo (Egypt) with 103 people on board, had just taken off runway 18L, when the tower noticed a part of the left hand engine cowling separated and fell to the ground. The controller radioed the crew accordingly. The crew decided to return to Istanbul, where the airplane landed safely about one hour later.
Untitled-1.jpg

二、Mexicana A318 at Cancun on Jan 19th 2010, lost engine cowling on takeoff

A Mexicana Airbus A318-100, registration XA-UBQ performing flight MX-368 from Cancun to Mexico City (Mexico) with 45 passengers, was during its takeoff run above V1, when both outboard and inboard core cowling of the left hand engine separated. The crew continued the takeoff and returned to the airport a few minutes later for a safe landing.
A post flight inspection revealed, that the cowling had impacted the engine pylon, the wing and the rear fuselage and thus produced substantial damage to the airframe.
<st1:country-region w:st="on">Mexico's Directorate General of Civil Aviation DGCA reported, the airplane had already reached Vr and had begun rotation, when the engine cowling separated. No injuries occured, there was no damage to the airport's infrastructure


三、Volaris A320 at Tijuana on Jan 26th 2010, lost engine cowling on takeoff

A Volaris Airbus A320-200, registration XA-VON performing flight Y4-219 from Tijuana to Culiacan (Mexico), lost an engine (V2527) cowling during takeoff from Tijuana and returned to Tijuana for a safe landing.
The cowling impacted the wing causing substantial damage to the wing. The airplane is expected to be out of service for about a month with Airbus sending a repair team to Tijuana to get the airplane repaired.


四、JetBlue Airways A320 in Newark April 05, 2010,registration: N535JB

A Jetblue Airbus A320-200, registration N535JB performing flight B6-507 from Newark,NJ to Fort Lauderdale,FL (USA) with 134 passengers and 6 crew, dropped parts of the left hand engine's (V2527) cowling during the takeoff run from Newark's runway 22R. The crew continued takeoff, levelled off at 3000 feet and flew a right hand traffic pattern for a safe landing on runway 22L about 12 minutes after departure.

The NTSB reported on May 4th 2010, that the left hand engine's cowling separated during takeoff. The flight remained unaware of the separation until passengers pointed out the loss of the entire left engine cowl assembly. A post flight inspection revealed further damage to the left hand engine pylon, leading edge flaps, left main landing gear and horizontal stabilizer. The separated cowl is being examined for evidence of failures of the latching mechanism, the hinges or structure.

On Mar 15th 2011 the NTSB released their factual report that no damage was found that would be consistent with properly fastened and secured latches to keep the cowling in place.


Jetblue had developed some visual highlight to permit identification whether a latch was properly fastened and secured. The latches are weighted, the inside and side of the latches are painted in a different colour (usually red or orange) to the cowling skin. If the latch is fastened and secured the latch is flush with the cowling skin and shows the same colour as the skin with the other colour being invisible. If the assembly is not properly secured the latch handle exposes at least part of the painted surface. An examination shows all latches and handles were properly weighted and painted.

In examination of other aircraft the NTSB identified a false latch condition that could mask an otherwise unlocked position. While working on engines mechanics routinely push the latch assembly up against the latch keeper housing assembly in order to stow the latch to avoid inadvertent head injuries while working underneath the engine. In this position the latch is neither fastened nor secured, but the latch assembly is flush with the engine cowling with the coloured part of the latch handle not being visible giving the impression the latch is fastened and secured. NTSB staff and Jetblue safety investigators repeated that temporary stowing of the latch assembly and were able to demonstrate that the latch assembly could get stuck within the latch keeper housing giving the false impression the cowling latch was properly latched and locked.

The NTSB subsequently concluded the probable cause was:
The separation of both halves of the left engine fan cowl assembly due to improper latching and locking of the all the fan cowl latches. The cause of the improper latching and locking of the fan cowls was due to the failure of the mechanic to unstow and properly latch and lock the fan cowl latches after the engine maintenance had been completed, and the failure of the maintenance inspector to detect and identify the unlatched condition. Contributing the incident is the design of the fan cowl latch assembly that can provide a false latch condition when the latch is neither latched or locked. Also contributing incident is the lack of adequate Airbus and Jet Blue fan cowl latch inspection guidance to detect and identify an unlatched condition.

五、Air India A319 at Bangalore on Nov 27th 2010, lost engine cowling

An Air India Airbus A319-100, registration VT-SCL performing flight AI-444 from Bangalore (India) to Singapore (Singapore), lost the cowling of the right hand engine (CFM56) during takeoff from Bangalore, which initially went unnoticed until a passenger excitedly reported the engine missing to the cabin crew. A subsequent runway inspection revealed the cowling and debris on the runway. The crew declared emergency and returned to Bangalore for a safe landing.
Bangalore Aviation reports that the airplane received substantial structural damage, which required Airbus structural specialists to perform the repairs in Bangalore. The airplane sits on the apron of Bangalore with the engine wrapped in plastics for three weeks now awaiting the repairs.
04.jpg

六、TAM A320 at Natal on May 19th 2012, dropped fan cowl doors

A TAM Linhas Aereas Airbus A320-200, registration PR-MYP performing flight JJ-3317 from Natal,RN to Sao Paulo Guarulhos,SP (Brazil) with 166 people on board, was departing Natal when both inboard and outboard fan cowl doors of the left engine (CFM56) opened in flight and were ripped off the engine. The crew levelled off, burned off fuel for about one hour and returned to Natal for a safe landing.
tam_a320_pr-myp_natal_120519_1.jpg

七、THY A320 at Istanbul on Dec 23rd 2012, dropped engine cowl

A THY Turkish Airlines Airbus A320-200, registration TC-JPN performing flight TK-1825 from Istanbul (Turkey) to Dusseldorf (Germany) with 130 passengers, was departing Istanbul Ataturk Airport's runway 35R when parts of the right hand engine cowling (V2527) departed the engine. The crew levelled off at 8000 feet and returned to Istanbul for a safe landing on ruway 35R about 40 minutes after departure.
   
网上更为清晰的先前风扇包皮脱落图片:
2004-7-13,N951LF, operated by Ryan International Airlines

airtranengine.jpg 0577411.jpg
0577413.jpg 0577414.jpg

波音系列也曾今发生过,但很少。空客如此之多,锁扣也颁布过AD,还有厂家SB,帖标牌,刷警示标志等等,FAA也提了许多建议性要求,维修人员进行相关工作后,双人检查,签字,只要开过包皮就通知机组,要求机组绕机检查等等。所有以往调查结果都显示是人的因素大,但是设计上难道没有还可改进的地方吗?
还有,CAAC的飞标或安全部门曾经也发布过提醒吗?至少CAAC网站搜索不到,许多值得反思的地方!
最后再给大家看看空客2012年7月版航空安全杂志......
01.jpg








02.jpg

03.jpg

04.jpg

评分

参与人数 1 +201 收起 理由
ljj + 201 我分享,我快乐!!!

查看全部评分

回复

使用道具 举报

24

主题

270

帖子

630

积分

机务正式工-无执照

Rank: 4

积分
630

南航实名认证南京航空航天大学

 楼主| 发表于 2013-2-22 13:47:42 | 显示全部楼层 来自: 中国河南郑州

回 047010216 的帖子

047010216:人为因素 (2013-02-22 11:44) 
不觉得民航界近些年把human facor整合到SMS里面去了吗?任何差错(ERROR),事故症候(INCIDENT),事故(ACCIDENT)都可以归为人为因素!没怎么维护过空客的飞机,但是发此贴主要想从SMS的角度看本起事件,不管最终调查结果如何,个人始终认为追究某个人,某个单位,某个航空公司的责任都太狭隘,320的手册中对风扇包皮有许多注释,如果按常规追究责任,一定是机务的,但是我不知道在这起事件之前,局方或者航空公司拿本贴空客官网的链接课件培训过吗?(也许培训过,强调过)提醒过吗?我觉得需要反思的是这点。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

24

主题

270

帖子

630

积分

机务正式工-无执照

Rank: 4

积分
630

南航实名认证南京航空航天大学

 楼主| 发表于 2013-6-11 15:59:26 | 显示全部楼层 来自: 中国河南郑州
2013年5月24日英国航空公司的一架A319客机执行BA-762航班,从伦敦起飞后不久,右发起火,迫降希斯罗机场,未造成人员伤亡。落地后发现双发风扇整流罩脱落,这也是右发起火的原因。详情可见:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ ... rgency-landing.html  
291562769.jpg
article-2330187-19F8E024000005DC-61_634x440.jpg
article-2330187-19F92FCD000005DC-642_634x551.jpg
193652294.jpg
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表