On October 29, 2024, a Jet2.com Boeing 737-800, registration G-DRTW, encountered an in-flight engine failure shortly after takeoff from Antalya Airport (LTAI), Turkey. The aircraft was operating flight LS-1702 from Antalya to Manchester, UK. During the initial climb, the left engine (a CFM56-7B model) failed, prompting the crew to shut down the engine and safely return to Antalya Airport. This analysis covers the details of the incident, technical aspects of the engine, passenger accounts, emergency procedures followed by the crew, and the steps taken by Jet2 to ensure a safe arrival for affected passengers.
Incident Overview and Flight Details
• Aircraft Model: Boeing 737-800
• Registration: G-DRTW
• Engine Type: CFM56-7B turbofan engines, manufactured by CFM International
• Flight Number: LS-1702
• Departure: Antalya (LTAI), Turkey
• Destination: Manchester (EGCC), UK
• Incident Location: During the initial climb after takeoff from Antalya’s Runway 36R
• Altitude at Incident: Approximately FL180 (18,000 feet)
• Time of Incident: October 29, 2024
• Return Time: Landed approximately 85 minutes after departure
The aircraft, which had recently taken off from Antalya’s runway 36R, had reached an altitude of FL180 when the crew noted an anomaly in the left-hand engine. Following standard safety protocols, the crew halted further ascent and immediately began procedures to stabilize the aircraft.
Technical Details of the CFM56-7B Engine and Possible Failure Scenarios
The CFM56-7B engine, developed by CFM International, is the most widely used engine on the Boeing 737 Next Generation (NG) aircraft series, including the 737-800. Known for its reliability, this high-bypass turbofan engine has a strong safety record. However, like any complex machine, the engine can experience failures. Below are some technical details and scenarios that may explain what caused the incident:
Key Engine Specifications:
• Thrust Output: 20,600 to 27,300 lbs per engine
• Fan Diameter: 61 inches
• Bypass Ratio: Approximately 5.5:1
• Fuel Consumption: Noted for being 15-20% more efficient than previous generation engines
• Core Components: Consists of a single-stage fan, a 10-stage high-pressure compressor, and a two-stage high-pressure turbine
Possible Failure Scenarios:
1. Compressor Stall or Surge: This type of disruption can occur when there is an imbalance in the pressure and airflow through the engine. A compressor stall often leads to loud banging noises and can emit smoke or burning odours, as noted by passengers. It can be triggered by sudden power changes, environmental factors (such as high temperatures), or foreign object ingestion.
2. Hot Section Malfunction: The “hot section” of the engine, which includes the combustor and high-pressure turbine, operates at extremely high temperatures. A malfunction in this area, potentially due to wear and tear or a component failure, could lead to a burning smell in the cabin if gases are vented improperly.
3. Fan Blade Fracture or Debris Release: Over time, fan blades can develop fatigue cracks. Although rare, fan blade fractures can lead to a loud noise followed by vibration and shutdown. In severe cases, debris can escape containment, though this appears not to have been the case here.
4. Oil or Fuel Leak: A leak in the oil or fuel system could create burning smells within the engine nacelle. If not detected, this may also lead to overheating and potential engine shutdown.
Given these scenarios, Jet2’s maintenance team and regulatory authorities would likely conduct a detailed examination to pinpoint the exact cause.
Passenger Accounts and Cabin Crew Response
A passenger onboard reported hearing a loud bang, followed by a burning odour in the cabin. Such sensory cues are often associated with engine anomalies, particularly in cases of compressor stalls or material failure within the engine.
Cabin Crew Actions:
1. Securing the Cabin: Cabin crew would have immediately responded by securing the cabin, ensuring passengers remained seated and calm. Passengers would likely have been informed of an “engine issue” or “technical problem” without specific details to avoid undue alarm.
2. Emergency Protocols: Following standard procedures, the cabin crew would also prepare for a potential emergency landing, ensuring that passengers were briefed on brace positions and emergency exits, should a rapid descent be required.
Flight Crew Actions and Emergency Procedures
The flight crew followed established protocols for an engine failure in flight:
1. Engine Shutdown: Upon identifying the issue with the left engine, the crew would have initiated an emergency shutdown. The shutdown process for a CFM56 engine involves cutting fuel to the engine and feathering or isolating the failed engine to prevent further damage.
2. Holding Pattern and Fuel Burn: The crew held the aircraft at FL170 (17,000 feet) and later descended to FL100 (10,000 feet) to burn off excess fuel. Reducing the aircraft’s weight via fuel burn is essential for meeting safe landing weight requirements, particularly in emergency scenarios, as excessive landing weight can risk structural damage.
3. Return and Landing: After burning off fuel for approximately 85 minutes, the crew made a safe landing on Runway 36L at Antalya. The choice of a different runway (36L instead of 36R) may have been influenced by wind direction, proximity to emergency services, or ease of access for inspections after landing.
Jet2’s Response and Recovery Plan
After the safe return of flight LS-1702 to Antalya, Jet2 arranged for a replacement aircraft to continue the journey to Manchester. An Airbus A321-200, registration G-HLYF, was dispatched to Antalya, though it was estimated to reach Manchester with a delay of approximately 17.5 hours.
Jet2’s prompt response demonstrates a robust contingency plan for operational disruptions:
1. Passenger Assistance: Passengers affected by the delay were likely provided accommodations and meals by Jet2, following the airline’s customer service policy.
2. Crew Coordination: Jet2 arranged for a replacement crew to operate the Airbus A321-200, ensuring that affected passengers would reach their destination with minimal further disruption.
Technical Review and Regulatory Implications
Following incidents of in-flight engine shutdowns, airlines conduct a comprehensive review in collaboration with regulatory authorities. This review often involves:
1. Detailed Engine Inspection: The failed engine (CFM56-7B) will undergo a teardown inspection to determine the root cause. Technicians would assess for signs of compressor damage, fan blade wear, or other malfunctions.
2. Flight Data Analysis: Data from the flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) will help determine the sequence of events. Key parameters like engine RPM, vibration levels, and temperature readings provide insight into the cause of the failure.
3. Incident Reporting to Authorities: Jet2 would report this incident to relevant aviation authorities such as the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), as engine failures are serious occurrences under international aviation safety standards.
4. Maintenance Review for Fleet-Wide Safety: Given the failure involved a CFM56 engine, Jet2 might increase inspections or maintenance checks on similar engines in their fleet, particularly those on other 737-800 aircraft.
Comparative Analysis: 737-800 Engine Shutdown Incidents
Engine failures on Boeing 737-800 aircraft are uncommon but have occurred globally. In general, the CFM56-7B engine has a solid reliability record, with an in-flight shutdown rate of approximately 0.01 per 1,000 flight hours. However, when incidents do occur, they tend to be caused by factors like:
• Environmental Factors: Exposure to foreign object debris (FOD), such as bird strikes, can contribute to engine failure.
• Operational Strain: High cycle counts (takeoffs and landings) can increase wear on critical engine components.
• Aging Components: Older engines, especially those nearing their scheduled overhauls, have a higher risk of component fatigue.
For airlines, this rate represents an acceptable level of risk, particularly given the redundant safety systems on twin-engine aircraft like the 737-800. Engine shutdowns are rare but handled with extensive safety protocols, minimizing risk to passengers and crew.
Conclusion and Safety Reflections
This incident involving Jet2’s Boeing 737-800, G-DRTW, highlights the importance of rigorous safety protocols and crew training. While in-flight engine failures are rare, this event underscores the effectiveness of standard emergency procedures. The quick response from Jet2’s flight and cabin crews helped ensure a safe return for all passengers.
Jet2’s operational preparedness, including the prompt dispatch of a replacement aircraft and support for affected passengers, demonstrates their commitment to customer safety and service. The airline’s post-incident review, likely to be conducted alongside regulatory authorities, will focus on identifying and mitigating any technical issues that may affect the reliability of the CFM56 engine fleet.
Disclaimer
This analysis is based on currently available data and post-incident reports. While every effort has been made to provide accurate and detailed information, this summary is subject to change as further investigations by Jet2 and aviation authorities proceed. Any updates or corrections from subsequent findings will be incorporated as they become available.
