Engine fire. Rejected takeoff. Southwest Boeing 737 has engine fire on takeoff at Austin. Real ATC

[@Secretlyanothername]

This is why passengers should stay seated and obey flight attendant instructions.

[@maireweber]

I love how the communication between ARFF and the pilots was perfectly adapted to the specific situation, colloquial and all. Standard phraseoulogy is super important, but in this specific case, they each knew what the other was thinking or concerned about, and they got the message across in the most efficient way, human to human.

[@Hopeless_and_Forlorn]

It might help viewers to know that the fire extinguishing (Freon) bottles on the aircraft discharge into the spaces between the engine outer casing and the cowling, where the fuel components, oil tank, and accessories such as generator, hydraulic pump, and starter are located. These are the areas where a fire could propagate and damage aircraft systems and structures. The extinguishing agent is not introduced into the fan or core engine where intake air flows because the high volumes of air flowing through them during operation would make the agent ineffective. The core engine itself operates at such high temperatures that it is normally able to withstand the effects of a fire long enough for the crew to shut down the engine and stop the supply of fuel to it. Although the production of Freon was suspended years ago because of its adverse environmental effects, a supply of the agent has been reserved for aircraft fire extinguishers because it is the most effective non-toxic substance available.

[@chrisharris7893]

Only it's not Freon. It's Halon 1301. Freon is a refrigerant and trademarked to DuPont.

[@driftspecs13]

Halon, not freon. Halon displaces the oxygen in a space, and freon is a refrigerant.

[@Hopeless_and_Forlorn]

@@chrisharris7893 Halon 1211 and Freon12B1 are the same stuff, CF2ClBr.

[@Hopeless_and_Forlorn]

@@driftspecs13 Brand names same substance.

[@soniclettuce]

@@driftspecs13 Halon disrupts the chemical chain reaction of fire, it's effective far below concentrations that would be displacing enough oxygen to stop a fire.

[@ghostrider-be9ek]

excellent job all around from crew, ground and ARFF ....well done!

[@YouCanSeeATC]

Thank you for watching 🙂👍😎

[@BoomerG21]

Love how passengers refuse to ever follow instructions or hurry up. Never fails.

[@unr3alGaming]

After seeing so many horror stories about planes crashing and burning due to what should be obvious problems during the takeoff roll, I'm very glad to see these pilots were well disciplined enough to keep their egos in check and cancel the takeoff roll out of an abundance of caution. I hope they're commended for how they handled the situation. Everyone worked very well together here.

[@speed150mph]

I’m not sure how familiar you are with jets so I’ll explain this anyway. Before each takeoff the flight crew will brief for rejected takeoff, namely what will be grounds for a rejected takeoff at what time, who will be doing what, V speeds, ect. Rejected takeoffs will come in 2 flavours, a low speed and a high speed rejection. In the 737, the tipping point between a low and high speed rejection is 80 knots (which is why you’ll hear the 80 knots call-out if you watch a takeoff video). Essentially below 80 knots the takeoff can be rejected for pretty well anything. Above 80 knots the risks of rejecting get higher, so they will only reject after 80 knots for major issues such as a fire, engine failure, or anything that pose an extreme risk to the aircraft. For example, they would not reject for something like a bleed air fault or a door warning at above 80 knots, they’d take off then come back to land. Then once you reach the point of no return (V1) your pretty well committed to the takeoff because you likely have insufficient runway to stop. Your committed to the takeoff, and in a 737 with good conditions and a long runway, you V1 and VR (the point where you rotate the aircraft and start trying to lift off) is the same so by that time your going to be flying anyway. So that discipline your commenting on is the result of a great safety culture inspired by the incidents you mentioned. It’s not an on-the-spot judgement by the captain, but a preplanned contingency that they briefed ahead of time in case this should happen. After that, it’s just a matter of following the plan.

[@unr3alGaming]

@@speed150mph I am familiar with the procedure, but good explanation. Unfortunately, past events have shown that in certain cases the pilots considered themselves the ultimate authority regarding aircraft operation, sometimes even beyond what the manufacturer says or what airline policy says and they will continue with unsafe takeoffs anyway. This can also manifest itself via confirmation bias, and not picking up on things the aircraft is telling you about itself or what the surroundings are telling you about takeoff conditions. These types of takeoffs can be seen in incidents like Aero Peru Flight 603, Air Florida Flight 90 or Comair Flight 5191.

[@geoffreyfield6686]

This is some excellent work.

[@klausbellroth5451]

Except for the passengers that got up. I suppose they were panicking and wanted to get off the plane asap. I'm not going to judge them from the comfort of my armchair, but I really wish they could just trust their pilots to do the right thing. It's in their own best interest no to be anywhere near a running engine.

[@chriskelishes6852]

@@klausbellroth5451 Flight attendant here. They probably got up to use the lavatory. It happens all the time at the worst times. Lack of awareness.

[@Tigers9596]

Really good communication between everyone.

[@legofreak4895]

How long should it take the fire brigade to reach the aircraft? If the time in the video is correct, it was more than two minutes.

[@samuelcolt502]

tThey have to put on their gear, and get clearance to cross runway/taxiway. Two minutes is good time.

[@mando074]

Since their brakes needed cooling would it be better to tow them to a safe location instead of waiting for the brakes to cool off?

[@hb1338]

The aircraft made its' own way directly to the maintenance ramp without needing to be towed - it did not have to wait for its' brakes to cool before moving, but the hot brakes meant that it was not safe to put it on a stand at the terminal.

[@techmonster2632]

u win a new engine

[@austintx_planespotter8561]

Actually she got to I believe around 110 knots before rejecting. RWY 18R was closed for about 4 hrs

[@YouCanSeeATC]

Maybe you're right but ADS-B shows around 77. I did the video based on that data.

[@SteveHaroz]

Why would they close the runway for 4 hours if they exited right away? Would checking for debris take that long?

[@austintx_planespotter8561]

@@YouCanSeeATC FR24 playback shows 110 knots

[@austintx_planespotter8561]

@@SteveHaroz don’t know how long it was cleaning up the debris OPS said it would be closed for a few hours.

[@alexrex20]

@@SteveHaroz because it's Austin

[@saxmanb777]

They would shut down the engine at a safe altitude, blow the fire bottles into the engine to put it out, and then return to the field on the remaining engine.

[@leeclemens879]

the safe altitude being 0? Did they ever leave the ground?

[@wyrmhand]

For the algorithm

[@DBR00]

Whatever you say, Chief.

[@w4o8l15f16i23g48]

They should have extinguished the fire right away when ARFF reported the smoke.

[@ghostrider-be9ek]

the SWA crew blew a fire bottle in already

[@vimmentors6747]

Is this the same controller who cleared a Southwest plane onto a runway with another plane on short final? Makes me want to not fly out of AUS.

[@jonathankleinow2073]

I don't think it is, but even if it was, this was a mechanical issue, and the controller didn't contribute to the incident in any way.

[@vimmentors6747]

@@jonathankleinow2073 Other than being confused, in over his head and inarticulate, I agree. But that seems to happen at AUS a lot.

[@user-ll8be9vt4u]

Also happens at SFO (San Francisco) routinely

[@vimmentors6747]

@@user-ll8be9vt4u Well, SFO seems to have issues with traffic. Not surprising as they have 50% more operations than AUS on the same number of runways.

[@ManoliGreek2640]

Now what would happen if it did take off..

[@childofcascadia]

Depends on what was actually wrong with the blown engine, how fast they were going when the engine blew, and how heavy the plane was. Most modern planes can limp into the air with one engine but it takes longer so you might have to travel down the runway farther before reaching v2. This could be a problem with a fully loaded plane on a short runway. If the engine blows after v1, you continue to take off, announce the failure, circle and land. If the engine blows far before v1 you abort as they did. If you cant abort for whatever reason, you continue the takeoff. Then you circle around and land the plane asap.

[@Aviation.addict]

I'm the first comment pls pin

[@Southwest_923WR]

Got your rocks off just saying that, huh. Dumb.

[@childofcascadia]

Are you a child?