4 ms·

obviously not good if one falls off the plane????!! you are talking about major structural damage to the airplane, the center of mass will be completely off and

obviously not good if one falls off the plane????!! you are talking about major structural damage to the airplane, the center of mass will be completely off and the airplane will fall as hard as a rock.

wkat4242 2y ago
If one falls off the way it was planned it will be a very bad but not necessarily terrible situation. Someone else already linked to the excellent admiral cloudberg article that describes how it should have happened (which there it didn't), as designed the engine would flip over the wing and not hit anything. Though of course the damage to the wing and pylon might rip hydraulics or wiring out or something. It's never a good thing. Also, the engines are pretty close to the centre of mass so it's not a huge deal. Asymmetric thrust will be a problem but the drag situation will be better than with 1 engine disabled! After all there is no inactive engine face catching a whole load of air. And an engine failure situation is already a known situation.
- giosalinas 2y ago
  Well, El Al 1862 crashed anyways, isn't it? You can't compare losing 1/4 engines to 1/2 of the massive GE9X engines and center of mass will be off by a lot. There are several crashes related to weight imbalance (usually cargo bay) and there is a reason why there are several precautions regarding how to load a plane. We also have the 737-Max, that needs a counterbalance mechanism to make it work.
  - wkat4242 2y ago
    Yes but it crashed because the pylons failed in the wrong way. It was a design flaw. Also, if it had failed as designed it would have only lost one. The other one was only lost because the first engine hit it on the way out. As well as the leading edge of the wing and the slats. The plane was doomed but not because of imbalance. It just could not fly under 270 knots.
jojobas 2y ago
Structural damage aside, modern planes have ridiculous safety margins on center of mass, drag and lift. A cleanly separating engine wouldn't be that much of a problem, mostly sorted by pumping fuel and rudder trim.

wkat4242 2y ago

If one falls off the way it was planned it will be a very bad but not necessarily terrible situation. Someone else already linked to the excellent admiral cloudberg article that describes how it should have happened (which there it didn't), as designed the engine would flip over the wing and not hit anything. Though of course the damage to the wing and pylon might rip hydraulics or wiring out or something. It's never a good thing. Also, the engines are pretty close to the centre of mass so it's not a huge deal. Asymmetric thrust will be a problem but the drag situation will be better than with 1 engine disabled! After all there is no inactive engine face catching a whole load of air. And an engine failure situation is already a known situation.

giosalinas 2y ago
Well, El Al 1862 crashed anyways, isn't it? You can't compare losing 1/4 engines to 1/2 of the massive GE9X engines and center of mass will be off by a lot. There are several crashes related to weight imbalance (usually cargo bay) and there is a reason why there are several precautions regarding how to load a plane. We also have the 737-Max, that needs a counterbalance mechanism to make it work.
- wkat4242 2y ago
  Yes but it crashed because the pylons failed in the wrong way. It was a design flaw. Also, if it had failed as designed it would have only lost one. The other one was only lost because the first engine hit it on the way out. As well as the leading edge of the wing and the slats. The plane was doomed but not because of imbalance. It just could not fly under 270 knots.

jojobas 2y ago

Structural damage aside, modern planes have ridiculous safety margins on center of mass, drag and lift. A cleanly separating engine wouldn't be that much of a problem, mostly sorted by pumping fuel and rudder trim.