Kreindler Successfully Represents Victims of Southwest Airlines Flight 1380 Catastrophic Engine Failure
Attorneys
What Happened to Southwest Airlines Flight 1380
Southwest Airlines Flight 1380, a scheduled flight from New York, New York (LGA) to Dallas, Texas (DAL), suffered a catastrophic engine failure on Tuesday morning. Preliminary Investigation has revealed that the airplane’s left (no. 1) engine suffered a turbofan blade failure that severely damaged the engine and the leading edge of the wing, then penetrated the fuselage, including a cabin window. Tragically, the passenger seated closest to the broken window lost her life. While investigators have not yet determined whether the failure met the technical definition of an “uncontained” engine failure, the undisputed facts show that components of the failed engine were projected out of the engine at extremely high speed causing severe damage to the airplane.
Update:
Kreindler successfully represented multiple injured passengers and the family of the sole passenger who was killed during the flight of the Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 that suffered a mid-air fracture of a cabin window and the subsequent rapid depressurization of the aircraft. Critical to Kreindler’s success in resolving the case against the airline was the firm’s use of multiple focus groups to gain insight into how a jury would view the facts of the case. Below are earlier details about the case. The tragic flight was scheduled to go from LaGuardia Airport in NewYork to DFW International Airport in Dallas, Texas. The pilot and crew conducted an emergency descent and diverted the plane which landed at Philadelphia International Airport in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Reports indicate the aircraft experienced the engine failure approximately twenty minutes into the flight as the plane approached cruising altitude over Pennsylvania. When debris caused by the engine blade failure ruptured the airplane’s cabin, it caused the airplane to rapidly depressurize and its oxygen masks to deploy. The pilots initiated an emergency descent and diverted to Philadelphia for an emergency landing. In addition to the passenger who was killed during the flight, seven other passengers were treated for injuries after the plane landed in Philadelphia. Photographs and video of the accident aircraft depict catastrophic damage to the plane’s left engine and one passenger window, with additional damage to the left wing and fuselage. The accident aircraft, a Boeing 737, was delivered to Southwest in July 2000. The failed engine, a model CFM56-7B22, was manufactured by CFM International, a joint venture between GE and Safran Aircraft Engines. On April 20, 2018, CFM issued a new service bulletin caling for increased ultrasonic inspections of fan blades on long-service engines.
Our Approach to the Case
In order to hold Southwest and the engine manufacturers responsible, Kreindler attorneys and our experts researched and thoroughly investigated the engine of the aircraft, the engine manufacturer, the turbine fan blades, the blade service directives, inspection procedures, FAA communications and the actions of Southwest in response to warnings about the safety of the engine’s turbine fan blades.
In addressing the legal claims and damages, the firm engaged in a series of mock trial work leading to successful mediation efforts and resolution for the family.
Though the NTSB did not discover any pieces of engine components inside the fuselage during its initial inspection, it is clear that parts of the engine caused the cabin and window to rupture. The post-accident investigation will need to determine which specific parts caused the fuselage and window to rupture and what changes should be made to the airplane’s design to better protect passengers. The NTSB also intends to investigate exactly how the defect in the fan blade led to engine failure since, according to Chairman Robert Sumwalt, the crack was “certainly not detectable from looking at it from the outside.” Chairman Sumwalt further reported in a media briefing that the blade had broken twice, once where the blade attached to the hub and again nearly halfway through it, and attributed at least one of the cracks to metal fatigue.
Tuesday’s mishap was eerily similar to an incident that occurred less than two years earlier involving another Southwest Airlines flight. On August 27, 2016, Southwest Flight 3472 experienced engine failure at cruising altitude on its way from New Orleans, Louisiana, to Orlando, Florida. The plane sustained immediate damage from debris striking its fuselage, wing, and tail area, and was caused to suddenly depressurize. The flight was diverted to Pensacola, Florida, and landed safely with, fortunately, no injuries to passengers. Although the accident remains under investigation, the NTSB’s preliminary report indicates that the plane’s engine failed when one of its fan blades separated from the fan disk mid-flight. According to the report, the separation was likely attributable to metal fatigue on the fracture surface of the missing blade’s root. Just as in Tuesday’s accident, the aircraft involved in the 2016 event was a year-2000 Boeing 737, while the accident engine was a model CFM56-7B24 manufactured by CFM International.
Update: 4/21/2018
Read the newly issued FAA Emergency Airworthiness Directive (AD):
1. Sent to owners and operators of CFM International S.A. (CFM) Model CFM56-7B engines.
2. Refers to 4/20/18 CFM Service Bulletin describing procedures for performing ultrasonic inspection for cracks in fan blade assembly.
”We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.”
On August 25, 2017, almost exactly one year after the 2016 Southwest incident, the FAA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for an Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandating ultrasonic inspections of certain CFM turbofan engines after a fixed number of cycles. Airlines would be required to conduct the inspections within 12 months of the proposed AD’s issuance. The proposed AD was intended to address an unsafe condition in the engines caused by manufacturing issues that had resulted in cracks appearing during forging of certain high-pressure turbine disks. In response to the proposed AD, Southwest submitted comments noting that they would need more time than recommended to conduct the inspections, estimating at least 18 months. The airline also suggested they be given credit for previous inspections conducted on subject fan blades and expressed concerns that the cost of the mandated inspections would be more than anticipated by the FAA.
While the 2017 AD is still pending, it remains to be seen whether Southwest has proactively complied with the proposed requirements or simply allowed their CFM56 engines to continue flying unexamined. The FAA announced just yesterday that it plans to issue the AD within two weeks, in direct response to the Southwest Flight 1380 incident. Subsequent investigations should examine why it took the FAA so long to issue the AD, with hopes that this incident will prompt the FAA to be less deferential to the airline industry and act more promptly in the future.
Prior to Tuesday’s accident aboard Southwest Flight 1380, it had been over 20 years since a passenger had perished as the result of an uncontained engine failure aboard a commercial aircraft. The last incident of its kind occurred on July 6, 1996, while Delta Air Lines flight 1288 was on a takeoff roll in Pensacola, Florida, for its regularly-scheduled flight to Atlanta, Georgia. As the plane accelerated down the runway at an airspeed of 40 knots, the aircraft experienced an uncontained, catastrophic engine failure in its (no. 1) left engine. Debris produced by the failure was propelled through the left aft fuselage killing two passengers and severely injuring three others. Alerted to the emergency, the pilots were able to bring the plane to a stop before the wheels left the runway. The NTSB concluded that the fatal incident had been caused by a fracture in the left engine’s front compressor fan hub, which had gone undetected during Delta’s inspection process despite originating during the engine’s initial manufacture. Delta’s maintenance team was assigned partial blame for failing to locate the problem prior to the flight. The accident aircraft was a McDonnell Douglas MD-88 equipped with Pratt & Whitney JT8D-219 turbofan engine. The two deceased passengers were revealed to be a mother and her 12-year-old son, while two of the severely injured passengers were the boy’s two siblings.
Seven years prior, on July 19, 1989, 111 passengers were killed when United Airlines Flight 232 crash-landed in Sioux City, Iowa, after experiencing catastrophic engine failure at cruising altitude. The McDonnell Douglas DC-10, powered by General Electric CF6 turbofan engines, was approximately one hour into its scheduled flight from Denver, Colorado, to Chicago, Illinois, when a cracked fan blade in the aircraft’s rear engine suddenly disintegrated, causing the engine to fail. The resulting debris pierced the plane’s horizontal stabilizer and severed its hydraulic systems, cutting power to the plane’s autopilot and manual controls. With very limited control of the aircraft, the pilots diverted to Sioux City as the plane rolled to the right and descended rapidly. Barely managing to line up with the runway, the pilots impacted terrain with the aircraft’s right wing causing the tail and cockpit to break off and the fuselage to flip over and careen to a fiery stop in a nearby cornfield. Miraculously, there were 185 survivors, including both of the pilots and all but one flight attendant.
The NTSB blamed the crash of Flight 232 on “inadequate consideration given to human factors limitations in the inspection and quality control procedures used by United Airlines’ engine overhaul facility, which resulted in the failure to detect a fatigue crack originating from a previously undetected metallurgical defect located in a critical area of the stage 1 fan disk.”
The crash of Flight 232 spurred significant change within the aviation industry with respect to safeguards against the risk of uncontained engine failure. Shortly after the crash, airworthiness directives were issued by the FAA to mandate the inspection of fan blades on the GE CF6 engine. After it was determined that the failed fan disk’s metallurgical defect had formed during the manufacture of the titanium alloy material used to create it, the manufacturing process for titanium was altered to eliminate the type of anomaly that had acted as the crack’s starting point. Additionally, engine containment and testing requirements were imposed by the FAA to certify the safe operation of jet engines. The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) was amended to require engine manufacturers to carry out at least two tests to ensure that an engine can survive a compressor, turbine, or fan blade breaking off inside it without debris being propelled through its outside enclosure.
If Tuesday’s catastrophic engine failure is found to have been due to an uncontained fan blade failure, it will necessarily require enhanced fan blade inspection protocols and a review of the current containment ring design, testing, and certification criteria to ensure such an incident is not repeated.
Previous Southwest Airlines cases:
Southwest Flight 812 - Rapid Decompression of Cabin Due to Hole in Fuselage
Southwest Flight 2294 - Rapid Decompression of Cabin Due to Hole in Fuselage
About Kreindler & Kreindler
Kreindler is one of the largest and most distinguished aviation accident law firms in the world. Since 1950, our attorneys have served as lead counsel in nearly every major commercial aviation disaster litigation. Additionally, we have handled countless private, charter, military, general aviation, and helicopter accident cases. Our partners have authored numerous highly acclaimed books, articles, and treatises on aviation litigation, including the leading treatise in the field, Aviation Accident Law.
We wrote the book
Kreindler has literally written the book on aviation accident law. Our partners have authored numerous highly acclaimed books, articles and treatises, including the leading treatise in the aviation litigation field, Aviation Accident Law.