2.6M views · Nov 13, 2006 · 5:36 · 1 HN recommender · 4 mentions · discussed 2010–2026
Footage of an Airbus A380 engine blade-off test, in which a fan blade is deliberately released at full thrust to show the engine contains the failure.
Why Hacker News points people here: Linked in aviation threads to show that engines are designed to contain a failed fan blade.
“There are much longer versions on YT, e.g. this one [0] which covers it in more detail”HN comment, 2021
“There are much longer versions on YT, e.g. this one [0] which covers it in more detail”
Longer version of the blade-off test footage in more detail
They normally have high-speed cameras running; that short video is a mish-mash of super-slow-mo and regular speed footage. There are much longer versions on YT, e.g. this one [0] which covers it in more detail (watch the people in the room jump when it blows - despite being a fair distance away). [0] this video
“the engines are designed to contain a fan blade[1], not a turbine disk”
Shows engines are designed to contain a fan blade failure
the engines are designed to contain a fan blade[1], not a turbine disk [2]. Fan blade is a thin piece of light alloy where turbine disk is solid piece of steel. [1] this video [2] link
“Engines are designed to contain failed blades.”
Footage of a full-throttle blade-off test where damage is contained
fan blade failures are expected. Engines are designed to contain failed blades. There is a huge test that is done whereby a blade is "failed" at full throttle. Engine dies but damage is to be contained. this video (A380 "blade off" test, rare footage of giant engine failing)
“The engine must be able to contain a "blade off" event where a blade snaps during full rated thrust.”
Evidence that engines must contain a blade-off event
> A failure in these blades would be catastrophic, resulting in the destruction of the engine, likely followed by the plane itself. Aaaaand the author just lost any credibility with me whatsoever. This is someone who knows big words, maybe did some research and ChatGPTing, and doesn't actually know shit about aircraft or their engines. On passenger aircraft because passengers sit directly inline with the path a blade with insane levels of kinetic energy will probably go, the nacelle is designed to contain it. The engine must be able to contain a "blade off" event where a blade snaps during full rated thrust. Two videos: this video link The aircraft will not be "destroyed." The blade could fail during takeoff climb and the plane would still be able to climb because all twin engine passenger jet aircraft must be able to conduct all phases of flight on one engine. SWA 1380 had a passenger fatality not because of the blade hitting them, but because part of the cowling disintegrated, broke the window, and she was partially sucked out of the aircraft, which killed her. If she'd been wearing her seatbelt, she would likely be alive today. As would several other passengers who, over the years, have been killed by debris breaking the window and them being sucked out. The blade itself did not leave the engine. link That article lists a number of incidents, in roughly half of which the blade was contained. All the flights made it back to an airport...
