“Fire out of the engine”. Aer Lingus A333 declared PAN-PAN. New York Kennedy Airport. Real ATC

[@khiggins7231]

When I heard the audio and realised it was Liam Neeson piloting the plane I knew everything was going to be ok.

[@ojurik]

I was on this plane. Not fun when I heard two very loud bangs and saw engine flames from my seat just behind the window on on the right side. Everyone inside was very quiet during this procedure and the longest 15 minutes in my life. Glad to hear how both the captain and air control worked through this and got us back to the ground.

[@conorbyrne2307]

Glad you’re okay

[@malahammer]

@@conorbyrne2307 why wouldn't he be? All twin engined a/c are certified to fly on one engine.

[@conorbyrne2307]

@@malahammer didn’t even know that lol was just being polite

[@vbscript2]

Thanks for the additional information! I'm kind of surprised that the flight crew didn't mention the loud bangs. What you saw sounds exactly like a compressor surge. For what it's worth, this does not actually indicate an engine fire. It's just burning fuel/air mix from the core (which is supposed to be on fire) getting ejected out of the engine due to airflow problems in the compressor. It's loud and understandably disturbing, but not particularly dangerous, at least as long as the other engine continues normal operation. This can happen for quite a few different possible reasons. With it only being 2 of the loud bangs rather than a continuous cycle of them, though, it sounds like it was most likely a transient problem with airflow through the engine. This could be caused by a number of different problems, but the engine sucking in a bird or debris from the ground is one of the more common ones. If the foreign object doesn't cause any significant damage as it's moving through the engine, then the result is usually something like what you describe - one to a few loud bangs, followed by the engine returning to normal operation. If it does significantly damage parts of the engine, then the bangs will usually continue happening every second or so until the pilots shut down the engine.

[@Vigi1ante89]

Thanks for making this video. I was on this flight with a window seat, row 28 I think, overlooking the right wing. I thought there were around 5 flame bursts from the engine when on the plane but from a ground video I’ve seen it occurred 9 times. A strong double vibration was felt on each burst but the flames didn’t linger. When on the ground the fire service took a quick look at the engine from their vehicles. After that we were sat on tarmac for 2 hours waiting for a gate. Hats off to the flight crew for getting us down safely. What they said to us on the PA system was accurate to what I’ve listened to here. A stellar job by them. There was no recovery flight so we all lost out on Christmas Day back home but we were safe. I understand the plane is still grounded at JFK after 5 days.

[@conorbyrne2307]

Glad you’re ok

[@vbscript2]

For what it's worth, your description and those of other passengers who have commented here sound exactly like a compressor surge. This happens when airflow gets disturbed through the compressor stages at the front of the engine causing the pressure in the combustion chamber to exceed the pressure that the compressor can push back on it with, leading to a loud bang as burning fuel/air mixture from the engine core gets blown out of the engine. It's not great for the engine, but it's also not particularly dangerous. Nothing is burning that isn't supposed to be, just the flames from the burning fuel get expelled out of the engine where the become visible. One of the most common reasons for this to happen during takeoff is the engine ingesting a bird or other debris from the ground, which can temporarily disrupt the airflow through the fan and compressor stages. Compressor surges sound and look dramatic, but they aren't especially dangerous as long as the other engine is still working fine.

[@kiloechocharliekool2151]

Calm veteran Captain there, well done sir...

[@arliesam948]

HAPPY HOLIDAYS YCSATC

[@YouCanSeeATC]

Thank you, you as well.

[@2004JETTA]

Kudos to the controller for specifying pounds when requesting fuel. Glad they made it on the ground safe. Kudos to ATC and pilots. Hope everyone has a Merry Christmas 🎅🎄

[@rubz_77]

Why did the pilots give it in Tons instead?

[@2004JETTA]

@rubz_77 Aer Lingus uses kilos or tons when if comes to fuel quantity. Easier and quicker for the pilots to look up what it is in tons then convert kilos to pounds. The controller can easily convert it at a later time. Hope this helps 👍👍

[@Someone-dv8uj]

@2004JETTA The rest of the world uses metric. Only the US and Burma do not. Time they caught up!🙄

[@gregorymsimmonscpo2692]

Souls on Board + Fuel Remaining ? is a standard request.

[@gregorymsimmonscpo2692]

1. Aviate 2. Navigate 3. Communicate. In that Order.😊

[@joegriffin832]

Video of engine fire from ground here: kzbin.infoCc0MiTBthxw?feature=share

[@ehsan83]

00:37 have anyone noticed the small mistake there? Shamrock 107 instead of 106. great job from everybody, radar, approach, ATC and pilots. well managed

[@N1120A]

Who cares?

[@RLTtizME]

See your shrink.

[@stijnvandamme76]

@@N1120A when there are other planes with similar callsigns in the area there have been accidents because of such confusions. So yeah, it matters.

[@flyc3]

As does the correct phonetic pronunciation of ‘zero’ instead of ‘oh’.

[@RLTtizME]

@@stijnvandamme76 Name 3.

[@NicolaW72]

Thank you very much!🙂

[@YouCanSeeATC]

👍

[@ksbear2]

Still in NYC 12-26-22 at 16:45 EST

[@baconoverflow4384]

Back in action! Looks like it flew EI992 on Dec 30

[@christophermilner1808]

Makes me think of Aleister Crowley shouting pan 530 times

[@justinhink4198]

I do not get this as a Pan-Pan-Pan I would just declare for them as a controller and call it a day. It is an emergency.

[@vbscript2]

Agreed. I seem to see this kind of stuff on here a lot with European carriers, though. I don't get the reluctance to declare an emergency. Especially when you're requesting emergency services to come out and take a look (which is the right call in cases like this.) There's a video on where also in NYC where a Lufthansa 747 lost an engine and didn't even declare PAN-PAN and said they didn't need the trucks to come out and look at it. Sure the 74 has 3 engines remaining when one quits, but still better to declare the emergency for priority handling and get the trucks to come out and take a look at the engine before taxiing back in just in case.

[@stephenandhillary4256]

We were on the plane, row 14 directly over the wing and engine. It was terrifying. After we landed at JFK (at 10 pm), we were on the plane for an hour, sat inside the airport at the gate for several hours, and then waited at baggage claim for our bags for 3-4 hours. We didn’t get our bags till 3:45 AM. Aer Lingus hasn’t done a thing about it, no refund, never once reached out to us, and we didn’t get us to Ireland until 12/27, missing Christmas eve and Christmas. They didn’t even rebook us, we had to do it ourselves. The miscommunication and misinformation during the whole process was terrible.

[@vbscript2]

Sorry to hear Aer Lingus did a terrible job with service recovery. :( From the descriptions from others who were on the flight here in the comments, it sounds like this was a case of compressor surge. Those are loud and look dramatic, so it's certainly understandable why they'd be terrifying. As loud and dramatic as they are, though, they're thankfully actually not very dangerous as long as the other engine is still working normally. It's just what happens when airflow through the engine gets disrupted causing the high-pressure burning fuel/air mix in the core to get expelled from the engine. Nothing is on fire that isn't supposed to be, but it definitely looks and sounds dramatic and it will disrupt thrust from that engine. From what the pilots said in the video and what other commenters have said here, it sounds like it was a transient problem, after which the engine returned to normal operation, so ingesting a bird or debris from the ground seems pretty likely.

[@gregorymsimmonscpo2692]

Problem was more to do with Irish Airports being closed on Christmas Day. I believe that was a major factor. Not Aer Lingus’ problem.

[@wolfgangwust5883]

AP disabled at 2:28

[@NicolaW72]

Yes, indeed.

[@Therealprinceofcobh]

A/C EI-EAV is still in JFK and appears it’ll need a new engine

[@mic1028]

It's back in Dub awaiting engine change!

[@Therealprinceofcobh]

@@mic1028 pretty sure they’ve installed the new one already as she flew back as EI-992 on December 30/31st. Wouldn’t make sense to fly her back with a damaged one

[@gregorymsimmonscpo2692]

I alerted a Delta Pilot about this , his tongue in cheek response “ …. I wouldn’t worry about those engines, they have two for crying out loud. Besides, the Irish are make do kinda folks…”

[@paulwest8185]

Could you do the Cincinnati Bengals flight? Providence to Cincinnati and diverting to JFK because an engine blew

[@jude_the_apostle]

Does the A330 not need to dump fuel?

[@vbscript2]

JFK-DUB isn't that long of a flight for the A330, so it probably wasn't overweight by much, if at all. Even if they were over max landing weight, given the report of fire seen from an engine from the ground, they probably decided to just go ahead and return and land a little heavy, which isn't that big of a deal.

[@christophermatthews6972]

From what i have seen, Ita Air would probably have carried on to Italy.

[@Eoin_stuff]

It was going to Ireland

[@NicolaW72]

@@Eoin_stuff You don´t get the Joke.

[@NicolaW72]

Most Probably.

[@EdOeuna]

An easy enough situation to control, and kudos to the ground workers for making a report. Maybe it was clipped from the video but passing on information about where you’ll likely stop on the runway, higher approach speed and asking for no departures immediately prior to your arrival would be helpful too.

[@gregorymsimmonscpo2692]

My understanding is that it was a civilian in Queens that spotted and called it in.

[@franco_albi9559]

Buon Natale

[@YouCanSeeATC]

Grazie! Buon Natale!

[@richardgrant2019]

I hope they issued everyone with clean pants.

[@deakhanani]

I love Pan-Pan!!!!! MORE PAN-PAN!!!!!!!

[@RLTtizME]

No...Pan Pan has been phased out. It will be gone in a few months. Emergency makes more sense.

[@MickiSel]

@@RLTtizME What is your source for this? PAN-PAN is still standard phraseology in Europe for situations that are not life threatening but require urgency.

[@RLTtizME]

@@MickiSel The EOPA. It is a ridiculous term you have to admit. At least Emergency has some direct meaning that is impossible to misinterpret. Keep up now.

[@MickiSel]

@@RLTtizME It’s a great term for when there’s no need to call mayday, but you still want to tell ATC there’s an urgency to the situation. Like in this instance where both engines are functioning normally, but they want to get on the ground soon. I have never heard of EOPA, do you mean AOPA? They don’t decide any of this stuff, they’re an association mainly for GA pilots in the US.

[@tillycatcat]

Don’t worry @Micko this chap seems to get triggered by standardised phraseology. There is life outside America old chap. ICAO, EASA, FAA have made no changes.

[@bingbong7316]

Did ATC give QNH in inches of mercury there??

[@Shamrock100]

In the US, that is the standard and is well understood.

[@Eoin_stuff]

My uncle and his girlfriend were on that flight

[@annaariza1575]

A friend of mine was also on this flight. Glad they made it back safe!

[@michael1968-m9b]

another pointless video