UAL flight 328

21-Fev, 2021
66 610 Ko‘rishlar soni

Observations of the video available showing the engine failure and fire aboard United Airlines flight 328 on Feb 20 2021.
From the point of view of an engine guy.
Here is a link to P&W's page about this engine:
prattwhitney.com/products-and-services/products/commercial-engines/pw4000-112
Here's an operating manual for the P&W4000 series engines for pilots:
www.theairlinepilots.com/forumarchive/a310/a310pw4000seriesoperation.pdf
The Turbofan design engineer referred to in the video is my friend grahamj9101
When the final NTSB report is released, we will see how close or how far off the mark I really am.

Fikrlar
  • (2/20/21 Denver->Honolulu) None of the vids I've seen on this yet mention what date this happened, and most not where they were headed from Denver. An extra couple seconds would be appreciated. Thanks!

    Richard ReavisRichard ReavisSoat oldin
    • I don't get it. You answered your own question before you asked it.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ39 daqiqa oldin
  • Well said and mostly accurate. To a news reporter, the whole thing below the wing is an 'engine.' To the real world, the engine (built by P&W and others) is covered in cowling, which is what flew off. I've seen one UZworld video that showed how the bigger fan blade flew FORWARD of the engine inlet flange, slicing the aluminum nose cowl (landed in someone's front yard). That caused a chain reaction that led to loss of the fan cowl and parts of the Thrust Reversers (honeycomb composite, not metal). Furthermore, that blade then sliced open the wing-to-body fairing (non-structural composite), so this just might be an uncontained failure and it could have penetrated the fuselage. You can bet no one at Pratt is sleeping well tonight.

    Greatdome99Greatdome993 soat oldin
  • Maybe there is a comment amongst the 945 preceding comments about who would call PAN, PAN, PAN meaning the vessel is in danger but the passengers aren't. I guess this would be a single seat military aircraft where there are no passengers.

    Daniel SDaniel S6 soat oldin
  • Jay, With engine damage like that you can't fly theoretically an ETOPS flight. The main reason is that the drag would be much higher than the standard estimates - [performance and fuel consumption would be as a test flight], besides a catastrophic failure has many other unknowns, structural, leaks etc. An ETOPS continuation is based on an engine shutdown only. Now it "should" be able to fly on for several hours on one engine, but you won't be going anywhere far away unless you have no other choice. What is your opinion about evidence suggesting a fan blade part sliced forward thru the leading edge anti-ice ring?

    DejezeriDejezeri6 soat oldin
  • Interesting.

    Chris SzumiloskiChris Szumiloski6 soat oldin
  • Hmm, theres something weirdly exciting about an engine failure once the plane is safely back on the ground and everybody is safe. Is it just me who loves the investigation and learning what went wrong? I guess i get it from my Grandad who loved his car breaking down so that he could repair it! Im surprised to hear that they will likely repaor this engine. I thought it would of been scrapped Have you ever had any engines in for repair with heavy damage like this Jay, broken blades etc?

    John MellingJohn Melling7 soat oldin
  • Totally agree on the bad coverage on the news! Love your videos. Remember the pilot has "fuse pins" which in theory should have had the engine break free (in theory) before it damaged the structure of the wing. Why not fly to Hawaii 1. You shatter one engine ETOPS be damned you may have the same failure. 2. (biggest reason) you can't maintain cruise altitude with 1 engine spinning and all the drag of the missing nacelle.

    MrRexQuandoMrRexQuando8 soat oldin
  • Surprised how heavy each blade is.. aren't these hi cycle engines having issues..?

    greg smithgreg smith10 soat oldin
    • Hmmm, my response to your vagueness is some vagueness of my own: " It certainly appears so, doesn't it?"

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ10 soat oldin
  • What’s that old thing behind you I have been working on large aircraft since I was 22 years of age

    robert mrobert mKun oldin
    • Orenda 14. Fighter jet engine. Canadair Sabre 6. North American Aviation F86-F, but made in Canada.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ21 soat oldin
  • After reading many of the comments I was impressed by the number of professional jet engine technicians on here. If it was uncontained the fuselage would have looked like a strainer.

    Alex AltrichterAlex AltrichterKun oldin
  • The -300ER and the 200/200ER have “Major” differences and is worth the time to look up! Totally different Engines, Specs, Wings and Landing Gear.

    Mike HoolihanMike HoolihanKun oldin
  • The 'it is unless it isn't' politician approach to the partly pregnant contained or not turbine engine failure. Not wanting to get into the debate-discussion as to what is contained and uncontained. The FAA skirts this issue that demonstrates quite admirably there are a lot of politicians or would be politicians among their ranks. www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_33-5.pdf Jay's point > The engine casing is the only containment of the engine in the event of a catastrophic engine failure. Technically therefore, if an excursion did not pass through the casing there was no Uncontained Failure - with the possible exception of debris exiting out the back of the engine. UA Flight 328 incident involved debris which penetrated the fuselage directly below and approximately center of the wing and included a section of the wing box fairing. This is regarded as an incidental excursion outside engine design specifications. All the rationalizing and hair splitting aside, Jay is correct. The engine casing performed within design specifications. There was no uncontained excursions. If the engine casing was to extend, say, out beyond the nose and tail of the aircraft the potential for flying debris from a catastrophic failure would be significantly reduced, but not entirely eliminated. Of course such engines would never be attached to an aircraft. And to address another talking point. No, a private citizen may not keep parts that flew off of aircraft. All such parts are considered evidence in an investigation. In the event that the investigation does not lead to criminal charges said individual can petition the court to release debris that was found upon the property of the individual. Best of luck there since the court would be keeping in mind a precedent may be set by such a determination. Jay, can we get back to jet engines don't burn fuel in flight? Or maybe an in depth discussion of the JT11D-20 engine? Or start a new topic -> 10 fun things you can do with triethylborane in your house?

    Sheila WalkerSheila WalkerKun oldin
  • - Contained Failure - The amount of kinetic energy of all moving parts within a turbine engine, as most already understand, is tremendous. In the case of a catastrophic turbine engine failure, the energy released is equivalent/similar to that of a detonation of a high explosive (nitroglycerin, TNT, HMX). What the industry is realistically concerned about, is containing that "explosion", thus safeguarding the airframe from being damaged/destroyed, and the lives of the passengers from being put to danger by the high velocity shrapnel (fan blades, turbine disc etc). Debri/engine parts falling off harmlessly (hopefully) after that initial "explosion" is inevitable, and realistically unavoidable. If after a turbine engine failure, the engine cases are intact (not breached) that is in fact, and realistically speaking a successful contained failure. In other words, the engine cases have successfully contained the "explosion" (i.e. the lethal high energy/velocity shrapnel).

    Ὅρα Μή·Ὅρα Μή·Kun oldin
    • Yes, but an explosion involves a chemical reaction. This was a mechanical "crash"

      Greatdome99Greatdome992 soat oldin
  • Wait until that clown from NBC News, Chief Aviation Correspondent gets his teeth into this engine failure. He works for the same company that tried to prove GM trucks gas tanks exploded. When they could get it to explode from a rear end collision, they planted explosives to be sure it would. The media is just a circus. This is a great channel.

    Craig ArndtCraig ArndtKun oldin
  • Truth isn't as profitable as selling amplified and manufactured drama.

    humanhiveanomalyhumanhiveanomalyKun oldin
  • The power of the cellphone camera! Had a few seconds of video not been recorded by a passenger we wouldn't have even heard of this failure. Humans like being emotional. It's more fun than being objective.

    vaughnbayvaughnbayKun oldin
  • I'm sure the good folks over at the NTSB will get arrive at the right answers when the dust settles, but as long as we're all speculating: There ought to be some consideration that the broken fan blade might be a result, and not the cause. After all, severe vibration notwithstanding, no real theories have been offered as to why a thrown blade would cause a fire in the hot section. Compressor stalls could result in that. When they do occur --at a rate way more frequent than that of failed fan blades, I think-- they may manifest themselves across the whole range of drama, from the barely noticeable, discernable only by discrete powerplant-monitoring instrumentation, all the way to the very attention-grabbing loud bangs, explosions, and shaking, with flames blowtorching out of both the back and front ends. Along with broken engine parts, sometimes. "Axi-symmetric stall, more commonly known as compressor surge; or pressure surge, is a complete breakdown in compression resulting in a reversal of flow and the violent expulsion of previously compressed air out through the engine intake, due to the compressor's inability to continue working against the already-compressed air behind it." en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressor_stall "If... the conditions that induced the stall remain, the return of stable airflow will reproduce the conditions at the time of surge and the process will repeat." "Such a "locked-in" or self-reproducing stall is particularly dangerous, with very high levels of vibration causing accelerated engine wear and possible damage, even the total destruction of the engine through the breaking of compressor and stator vanes and their subsequent ingestion, destroying engine components downstream." Could happen. The NTSB investigation will reveal all.

    desiatohotblackdesiatohotblackKun oldin
  • As always excellent review thank you AgentZ.

    D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
  • Your recognition of the specialized knowledge that engineers possess is refreshing and appreciated. Good engineers recognize that the mechanics and maintenance personnel also possess the unique mix of knowledge and skills needed to make the whole big thing work. Great video!!

    Justin FritzJustin Fritz2 kun oldin
  • Praise the wing they can handle a lot of stress and load

    A HannamA Hannam2 kun oldin
  • Love your channel and info however, if *I* were P&W, that particular engine would be scrapped after investigation. What customer (Boeing or airline) would want to take delivery of that particular engine?

    Star GazerStar Gazer2 kun oldin
    • I imagine an exchange between the owner of the engine and the overhaul shop might go a little like: Well, the estimated cost for rebuilding and recertifying this engine will be about 15 million dollars, or we can get a new one for 21 plus taxes... Your choice.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZKun oldin
    • @AgentJayZ what I mean is that: Who would want to take delivery of this engine?- by serial number- and being "rebuilt" by P&W and say "yeah, it's good, we trust it...". If I'm an airline, Imma say "No, you provide me a different engine than the one that blew up...". AgentJayZ, you don't know me but we both fix airplanes. I'm just sayin that no airline or even Boeing should accept this engine, by serial number, as "repaired" enough to fly again. If they choose to part it out, fine, but to repair it and send it on it's way, no. No one should want this one. If I owned a personal airplane and the Lycoming IO540 blew and seized and Lycoming "rebuilt" it, I don't think I'd want that particular engine block, I'd want a different one altogether.....

      Star GazerStar GazerKun oldin
    • Blaaaagh. There are procedures the professionals follow regarding the evaluation of multi million dollar parts that people like you are completely ignorant of. You bet I said people like you, and you bet I said ignorant. Ignorant people like you. Now go away.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ2 kun oldin
  • Please don't stop your rantings you, Juan Browne and Victor at Vass Avaition are the no nonsense professionals. You have every right, you all tell it straight! Keep up the great work! Love to learn the incredible design and engineering that make these machines power our world. Bet we all would be lost if there were no turbine engines or those that keep them flying, etc.

    Gavin GreenGavin Green2 kun oldin
  • Engine is not scrap? are you serious? Sure as hell looks scrap to me! Why would they in their right mind even take a chance with repairing it with parts? That's absolute lunacy!

    Adnan KabaAdnan Kaba2 kun oldin
    • @AgentJayZ Morning AgentJayZ. Yes, to a working stiff AMT like myself it's a hell of a lot of money! But like you said it'll be torn down, inspected piece by piece to determine what happened, and if there's anything left to salvage it'll be put back into service. It'll be interesting to see if the Feds require that the NDT inspection intervals be updated on the PW's. I don't work for UA, and my experience is mostly with GE's and Roll's, but whenever we pull blades for a fan lube the blades are NDT'ed before reinstallation. I'm sure UA does the same so I'm also curious to know why it failed. Had corrosion set in? Did a stress riser form due to FOD damage? Was the blade ever dropped? I can't imagine it left PW with a flaw in the metallurgy, but I guess it could happen. Regardless, I have no doubt Pratt, UA, and the Feds are all over this and will figure it out!

      L JL JKun oldin
    • Thanks, L J. I just checked, and the new cost of P&W 4000-112 is 21 million US Dollars. That's a lot, right?

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ2 kun oldin
    • It looked much worse than it actually was. That's a 10 million dollar engine, just for a worn out core, so yes it'll be repaired. People don't realize a lot of times on these older airframes the engines are worth more than the aircraft itself and most of times are leased.

      L JL J2 kun oldin
    • So says another expert... Everything will be inspected, and each part will either fail or pass the required tests. If a part passes, it is serviceable. Now, Mr. Adnan Kaba: go away, read some books, and do not comment until you reach the minimum level of competency. Thank you.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ2 kun oldin
  • I'll tell you the same thing I told Blancoliro--- You have a fascinating channel and you do a great job explaining. But there is nothing to be gained by bashing the media and calling them alarmists. To your own admission this was a big deal. To the untrained it was even a bigger deal. Semantics of whether it was contained or uncontained is irrelevant to those involved and the community below where the parts rained down. I'm sure pax on the right side especially were terrified at the sight. You may have been as well if you were on that plane. I probably would have been as well and I'm a very calm person, ppl and engineer. The crew called may day which meant they thought it was a big deal as well. Even a contained failure can be deadly as we tragically witnessed on SW 1380. Seems like it was pure luck that the fan blade didn't rip through the cabin of this UAL flight in the same manner.

    andy5478andy54782 kun oldin
    • I don’t feel your accusations towards Blancolirio of bashing the media was anywhere near warranted but clearly understood by his viewers well, with the exception here, what he was referring too. I think the track record of the media with their hype and fabrication of incidences of this nature plus improper use of terms speaks for itself. You sound like a very knowledgeable person and your defense for the media may be due to having a relative or close friend in the occupation. However, to the loyal viewers it doesn’t hold water how they feel about them.

      D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
    • I don't have this channel to attack, defend, or argue. It's information based, where I share my work, and my opinions sometimes. All I can tell you is contained means the engine cases were not penetrated by engine parts. A lot of strange, unfortunate things happened with this engine, but the engine cases were not breached by anything. I am not interested in debating or redefining what accepted industry standards mean.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ2 kun oldin
    • @AgentJayZ Wasn't SW 1380 also a contained failure and a part from the engine broke the window resulting in the pax death? Maybe it wasn't a fan blade but something flew off that engine and broke the window that resulted in a tragic death. It has to be moving fast and deliver sufficient force to break the window. Also as for the blade not having high energy when it departed the engine, this is curious to me. It's spinning very fast and it wants to pull itself forward as it leaves the engine when it fails, doesn't it? It still must have a whole lot of centripetal force that wants to throw itself radially outward, no?

      andy5478andy54782 kun oldin
    • Everything you said was great. Right up until the last sentence. This was a contained failure, which means no high energy parts ripped through the cases and penetrated the fuselage. The whole contained/uncontained issue is of critical importance to the aircraft maker, and the engine maker... and to the people who did not die. Luck had nothing to do with it... it was engineering, and it was safety requirements set by the NTSB and the FAA, and it was the skills of the flight crew, who dealt with this engine failure in the best way that any crew could have. No injuries is the most important part of the story.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ2 kun oldin
  • well explained with you in-depth knowledge. thx

    charlie tangcharlie tang2 kun oldin
  • What I think I saw was yet another lack of proper ND Testing from United's engine overhaul practices. This is not the first time that this has happen to them. When the R/H start lever was moved to cutoff the EEC shut the engine off as its suppose to. The pylon fuel valve was closed by the R/H fire handle (there is no eng. 1 OR 2 on the 777) The fire in the right engine was the 5 quarts of fuel from the fuel filter case that ruptured at the lines and what was left from the main feed from the pylon. The 777 was climbing at a CLMB 1 power setting at a cost index of zero which translates to 314 knots when it gave way. Also when a two engine aircraft looses one of its engines, it a MAYDAY! This is standard world wide ICAO lingo and consistent with Boeing's FOM. Regardless of all the Monday night quarterbacking. Mine included. United has to answer as well as the ENGINE PMI (FAA) for lack of proper Non destructive testing and oversight of the fan blades.

    Arthur SaenzArthur Saenz2 kun oldin
  • Could not the engine and or the wing have easily exploded into flame?

    Jerry FoustJerry Foust2 kun oldin
    • If it was easy, it woulda happened.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ2 kun oldin
  • Hi AgentJayZ. If the outer half of the broken blade was found in the soccer field amongst the cowling debris, and the other blade was found in the fuselage wing/LG fairing, it does not sound very contained to me. Perhaps the Kevlar blanket contained the blades at failure, but then they escaped? Kudos to Boeing for building an aircraft that could stand up to that vibrational abuse.

    Lon LeVineLon LeVine2 kun oldin
  • Don't know which videos you have watched but, in one of the ones I saw, for just a moment it looked like the was light passing through the Kevlar containment blanket at approximately the 11:00 to 11:30 position. My guess would be that the 1st fan blade that separated struck the 2nd blade on it's way out, fracturing it, then cutting through the nose cowl causing it to separate, with the rest of the cowl panels, not wanting to be left out, followed very quickly due to the slipstream air pressure. The second fan blade, the one with the outer 1/3 to 1/2 gone, may be the one that made the hole in the Kevlar containment blanket. . Just my thoughts and even though DIA is just a stones throw away, doubt they would let my butt in to look....LOL. Nice to have an A&P's side of the story.

    Stephen GileStephen Gile2 kun oldin
  • INHO, the High Pressure compressor and its turbine(s) are probably trashed as well. When fan blades break off the collateral damage to the nacelle, other fan blades etc send bits of metal down stream and ultimately pass through the rest of the engine increasing the damage as it goes along. The fire in the thrust reverser area looks like an oil (hydraulic/lubricating). I don't trust the mainstream media to get anything right. P&W needs to get to the root of this problem and resolve it. This is not the first engine to have this failure mode.

    Bryan RockerBryan Rocker2 kun oldin
  • Everybody is the expert on the internet.

    Covid HoaxCovid Hoax2 kun oldin
  • Journalism is on life support these days. Most newspapers will just google "jet expert" and call the first number they find without checking if the person knows what they're talking about. That's assuming they even call somebody and don't just guess on their own.

    AndrewAndrew2 kun oldin
  • When engine fire handle was pulled, we’re all fluids shutoff? Fuel, oil, hydraulics cutoff? Source of fire could have been hydraulic fluid or as you mentioned oil?

    Robert BanduskyRobert Bandusky2 kun oldin
    • When the Fire extinguisher handle is pulled it automatically shut off engine fuel.

      Mark ThompsonMark Thompson23 soat oldin
    • There is no magic valve that handles everything. The oil is in a tank on the engine. Even if hydraulic fluid was shut off to the engine, the amount that was already there would suffice to keep such a small fire going for a few minutes.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ2 kun oldin
  • The same day above Meerssen, Netherlands, was rained by turbine parts from a B747 going to Lége (Luik) in Belgium due to engine failure: uzworld.info/player/video/qWucoLp3qKizk3g

    John van KampenJohn van Kampen2 kun oldin
  • What do you think caused the damage to the underbelly of the plane? Just a piece of the outer casing shooting off?

    Matthew SpychalskiMatthew Spychalski2 kun oldin
    • @AgentJayZ awesome, just watched that, makes sense. Thanks for your video too, very informative

      Matthew SpychalskiMatthew Spychalski2 kun oldin
    • The NTSB has released an early statement about this. Blancolirio mention it in his latest vid.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ2 kun oldin
  • Great to get all the facts. Aviation info for me is generally broncolirio or mentour pilot. You're the man for jet engines. 👌

    zoidberg444zoidberg4442 kun oldin
  • Hairline Cracked fan blades is nothing new and FAA directives were already in place for X-raying fan blades at certain maintenance intervals - were these established FAA maintenance directives ignored or was this a failure in spite of the maintenance? In other words, was this engine maintained to existing standards or is it negligence?

    Rob P.Rob P.2 kun oldin
    • Per the EAD, the FAA is requiring thermal imaging tests and reviewing previous tests on the blades. A previous blade failure in 2018 on a P&W 4000 had already prompted increased inspections on the fan blades. (Obviously did not solve the issue unfortunately.)

      Stephen BrittStephen Britt2 kun oldin
  • I think one of the blades failed and took out another one. I've flown times when a return to the FBO was needed because of an bad indicator light. A PITA. But I appreciate the Airline Co. taking safety seriously. Great observations Agent Jay Z!

    Robert DavisRobert Davis2 kun oldin
  • Thanks for the explanation, when I saw the flames I thought I was looking at the exposed insides of the combustors.

    Fernando LichtscheinFernando Lichtschein2 kun oldin
  • I agree that MSM makes too much of aviation events. But it was an emergency and a serious event. Everyone stop complaining about MSM lying. It’s hyperbole and exaggeration out of ignorance, not lying. And by the way, there was an explosion strong enough to shed aircraft aircraft parts so that was a pretty major engine failure.

    A RA R2 kun oldin
    • Hyperbole or exaggeration out of ignorance it’s still unprofessional and uncalled for.

      D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
  • Question: was that damaged engine still producing thrust? Or it spinning due to air speed?

    BogbanterBogbanter2 kun oldin
    • You should subscribe to Juan’s channel he like AgentZ explained that very well.

      D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
    • If it didn’t windmill it would create excessive drag and make the aircraft very difficult to fly.

      James SamuelJames Samuel2 kun oldin
    • It's windmilling as he said.

      Johan FasthJohan Fasth2 kun oldin
  • Are you saying that the media is using fear-mongering to inflate a certain event? That's just impossible!

    DraviatorDraviator2 kun oldin
    • The object to them is to get the majority to watch or read their Channel because it’s more interesting. Of course this is totally opposite of reporting the straight facts and not in line with what they’re real position should be.

      D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
    • :) Spot on...

      Johan FasthJohan Fasth2 kun oldin
  • I am struggling to understand, If none of the separated fan blades or fragments were to be found WITHIN the engine (I assume they were not-I may be wrong), then did they not DEPART the engine? And if so, how could that then be labelled a "contained failure" if they are nowhere to be seen ?

    Paul GlinzPaul Glinz3 kun oldin
    • ​@Paul Glinz Sir. The amount of kinetic energy of all moving parts within a turbine engine, as you already understand, is tremendous. In the case of a catastrophic turbine engine failure, the energy released is equivalent/similar to that of a detonation of a high explosive (nitroglycerin, TNT, HMX). What the industry is realistically concerned about, is containing that "explosion", thus safeguarding the airframe from being damaged/destroyed, and the lives of the passengers from being put to danger by the high velocity shrapnel (fan blades, turbine disc etc). Debri/engine parts falling off harmlessly (hopefully) after that initial "explosion" is inevitable, and realistically unavoidable. If after a turbine engine failure, the engine cases are intact (not breached) that is in fact, and realistically speaking a successful contained failure. In other words, the engine cases have successfully contained the "explosion" (i.e. the lethal high energy/velocity shrapnel).

      Ὅρα Μή·Ὅρα Μή·Kun oldin
    • @AgentJayZ exactly it is a contained engine failure as it is defined for engine certification : no radial ejection of engine parts. for exemple AF and QL A380 engine failure were uncontained engine failure: Engine fairing gone as well but Fan gone on AF and HPT ripped off on QL. in both cases radial ejection did damaged wing and fuselage. UAL fligth may have damaged on wings due to fairing impact but these are low energy impact resulting of the aerodynamic forces applied on the fairing, not high kinetic energy impact resulting from rotating blades.

      damientelledamientelle2 kun oldin
    • @AgentJayZ Thanks for the explanation. Don't get p.o.'d I'm just trying to learn something. Obviously I'm not a pilot or mechanic, just trying to understand the terminology being applied. Obviously it is a very "narrow" and legalistic definition of the word "contained" and not one used in everyday speech which is what most of the planet uses.

      Paul GlinzPaul Glinz3 kun oldin
    • So tired of trying to explain to you people... Conversational definitions of words mean whatever you want. The industry definition of contained means the engine cases were not breached. The engine cases were not breached.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ3 kun oldin
    • My understanding is that it can still be considered a contained failure if debris was ejected out the back, presumably not at extremely high speed, as that shouldn't damage the rest of the aircraft or endanger anyone - nothing behind the engine for it to hit. Uncontained would mean it threw stuff out the side or front that could damage the rest of the aircraft or injure it's occupants.

      Quill MaurerQuill Maurer3 kun oldin
  • Thanks for spreading the truth!

    Dave ShepherdDave Shepherd3 kun oldin
  • I worked at Rolls-Royce Canada and I knew right away it was missing fan blades from that wobble. Engine design did its job of Containing the failure. Kevlar ring did its job. Worse case engine mounting bolts would have sheared and engine would have detached.

    HuckThis1971HuckThis19713 kun oldin
  • The reason I ignore the MSM at all times, they are worthless clickbait whores not worthy of the title journalists.

    Dennis SalisburyDennis Salisbury3 kun oldin
    • @lysippus We live in a world of compromises.

      Dennis SalisburyDennis Salisbury2 kun oldin
    • and youtube and youtube recco. is not? haaha.

      lysippuslysippus2 kun oldin
  • I believe what they meant by "not an emergency landing" is that they won't have to brace during the landings

    viperdriver82viperdriver823 kun oldin
    • It would have been considered an emergency landing in that the pilots declared a mayday, but once actually landing it was a normal landing, and at that point I would imagine they wouldn't have asked passengers to brace.

      Quill MaurerQuill Maurer3 kun oldin
  • To be fair, some blade fragments made a hole in the wing-body fairing on that side.

    Calvin DodgeCalvin Dodge3 kun oldin
    • @Calvin Dodge Geeze now that’s a real head scratcher huh? The response is made under your posted response. Ok to be more clear, AgentJayZ went thru great lengths to explain everything and patiently had to explain it all over again. In particular he clearly explained the quick use of wrong terms and inflation of such contradicting those made by officials involved in the investigation. One in question was parts whose nomenclature describes them as part of the engine or part of the aircraft airframe. At the time of your response the cause of damage at the wing fairing was unknown, to be fair. I hope I explained my simple response a little more so that you may understand it now. Oh your more than welcome.

      D. GeoD. Geo11 soat oldin
    • @D. Geo Huh? Who or what are you referring to?

      Calvin DodgeCalvin Dodge14 soat oldin
    • I think we have a media infiltrated here

      D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
    • @AgentJayZ Thanks for the info.

      Calvin DodgeCalvin Dodge3 kun oldin
    • We don't know they were blade fragments, to be fair...

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ3 kun oldin
  • Thanks, Jay! I'm 4 days behind on this. Glad there's no injuries. Passengers will need laundry services;)

    Joe DanayJoe Danay3 kun oldin
  • You are the guy who exactly knows what you are talking about. The total control over the subject. Love it.

    Dr. Qaiser HaiderDr. Qaiser Haider3 kun oldin
  • L.p. shaft would break it's designed to fail in blade out event.

    Star TrooperStar Trooper3 kun oldin
    • what the crap? no definitely not

      L ML M3 kun oldin
    • No.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ3 kun oldin
  • I've seen Juan Brown's latest video clip, which he posted outside the Albert Hall in London, after a ten-hour flight with tons of Californian asparagus in the back. I'm sorry (not really), but he got a black mark from me for being thoroughly irresponsible, and doing walkabout when we're in lockdown and being told to "stay at home"

    grahamj9101grahamj91013 kun oldin
    • @John Watkin We are in lockdown and we are being told to stay home, unless we have a "reasonable excuse" - and that incudes him. That's the law: he broke the law. I've visited the States a few times and I'm sure that I was exected to obey the law in the USA.

      grahamj9101grahamj9101Kun oldin
    • @Jesse W right with all of southern FL rotting away with the mess.

      D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
    • Huh! Now how do you suppose he’s to do his job as a pilot at home plus he was out in the open and around no one in close proximity. He also started out wearing a mask that was removed by the London breeze. Come on we have enough agitators don’t need anymore.

      D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
    • I'm in Florida we don't even wear masks and been open for months. We have the lowest transmission rates btw

      Jesse WJesse W2 kun oldin
    • You're nuts

      Jesse WJesse W2 kun oldin
  • just found your channel. I agree with you on everything. I subcribed to the blanco channel and what you said about him is spot on, but he tell it in a normal way so other people can understand. I dont like the Media just jumping in and say it is this or that, I knew even before the picture was uploaded it was caused by a blade the let go. I guess the media has never seen pictures on a normal engine change that the Nacell's are still attached to the plane.. You are right it is part of the plane. I am an A&P but have not been working on planes for a very long time.

    Yogib37Yogib373 kun oldin
  • Very true that it was very lucky!

    abcd60528abcd605283 kun oldin
  • For the media, this is an entertainment event. The more drama the higher the ratings. Facts are not relevant.

    David SullivanDavid Sullivan3 kun oldin
    • Man that’s the truth!

      thomas mcdonaldthomas mcdonald2 kun oldin
    • People personally involved in something the media reports about knows that the media usually gets the facts wrong. Then we go on to the next story and believe it? LOL.

      Mikeydude001Mikeydude0013 kun oldin
  • Thanks for the break-down and info. Good stuff, well presented!

    Ron AdamsRon Adams3 kun oldin
  • I think that the fan blades failed due to metal fatigue and 1.5 fan blades exited out the front taking the engine inlet cowling and the main cowling mounting bracket with it. In addition, it appeared from the video that the engine lost all of it covers when the main cowling support bracket was severed by parts of the fan. That 8 foot long heavy chunk of metal that hit the street next to an SUV, heard audibly, falling from 14,000 feet, gaining speed every second until impact could have cause catastrophic damage had it hit a home. I bet when they examine the broken blades, they discover that they failed due to loss of stiffness. The same thing that happens to steel ships on the ocean. They are forced to be retired do to metal fatigue. Metal that flexes looses stiffness and after a period of time, it breaks! Why are they ignoring the facts????

    Herbert LaughlinHerbert Laughlin3 kun oldin
    • Until it reaches terminal velocity, BTW what news paper do you write for?

      D. GeoD. GeoKun oldin
    • It's certainly possible it was a fatigue failure, and this wouldn't be the first undetected fatigue failure on one of these. aerossurance.com/safety-management/ndi-failures-b777-pw4077-fbo/ I've also heard some speculation that it's possibly a bird strike, but we'll probably need to wait for the incident report to know for sure.

      clapanseclapanse3 kun oldin
    • @Herbert Laughlin Dude, you are explaining the abc's to rocket scientists..

      azonicrider32azonicrider323 kun oldin
    • @grahamj9101 Thanks for your comment and I agree. I suggest that hollow blades on larger applications may have increased stresses not previously determined?

      Herbert LaughlinHerbert Laughlin3 kun oldin
    • The industry knows far more about metal fatigue than you do - obviously. Components such as blades are designed to avoid excessive excitation that will result in them having unacceptably low fatigue lives, and they are rigorously inspected at repair and overhaul for any signs of fatigue. Major components, such as discs and shafts are designed to a 'predicted safe cyclic life' (PSCL), but are cleared for only a small proportion of their PSCL at entry into service, with lives being extended progressively, by means of sampling and inspection. It is probable that there is some internal non-conforming feature, relative to design intent, in those blades that have failed, which cannot be inspected easily. The vast majority of blades have, after all, run perfectly safely for tens of thousands of hours. If they hadn't done so, then there would have been the risk of engine and/or cowling debris being scattered around the world years ago, and PW 4000 engines would have been grounded years ago.

      grahamj9101grahamj91013 kun oldin
  • So the giant hole in the fuselage was already there?? It IS an uncontainned failure engine...

    Almerinda RomeiraAlmerinda Romeira3 kun oldin
    • @Almerinda Romeira re: "you shouldn't rate it for how bad it was, but how bad it could have been." Just have to say, this is NUTS. I'll bet you're for outcome based equality too, and not for equal opportunity to SUCCEED!

      uploadJuploadJKun oldin
    • @Yogib37 you shouldn't rate it for how bad it was, but how bad it could have been. I know its non critical but if it broke it, it could easily also have ruptured a line or cable behind it. After all composites have sharp edges. I'll wait for the final report, as I'm not so convinced it was just a cowling piece.

      Almerinda RomeiraAlmerinda Romeira3 kun oldin
    • @Almerinda Romeira that is an aerodynamic fairing.. It is nothing but just a thin piece of composite. Nothing under that was damage and it was not caused by the fan blade, It most likely was part of the Nacell that broke off and hit it. It is still a contain engine failure. The engine was in tack and not scatter all over the place

      Yogib37Yogib373 kun oldin
    • Sorry, I corrected my original response. I'm not sure why, but I typed "uncontained", when he actually said they did "not consider it to be uncontained". Regardless, I understand the liability issue. uzworld.info/player/video/Zo_Lf62plrSTZZo

      Ron AdamsRon Adams3 kun oldin
    • Ron. It is a very important detail. Who gets blamed for the millions of dollars in damage... the aircraft maker or the engine maker? The NTSB has decided this was a contained engine failure. The blame game is complicated, but crucial.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ3 kun oldin
  • 11:18 "I gotta say, the journalists know nothing. They don't know anything." Yep, that about sums up today's media.

    SIE44TARSIE44TAR3 kun oldin
    • That sums up about today's politicians.

      lysippuslysippus2 kun oldin
  • Great analysis JayZ. Good Job. I agree with everything you said. Retired airline pilot here. This was a textbook simulator event. We would train for this type of event every year. The weather was good. It was daylight. Great airport, Aircraft, ATC and well trained pilots.

    yankmyfingeryankmyfinger3 kun oldin
  • Where did the missing 1½ fan blades go after leaving that cut in the front air inlet ring..

    Nicholas PrattNicholas Pratt3 kun oldin
    • @grahamj9101 Yes, I saw that, but portion is pretty non-specific. I am guessing that it is smaller than "chunk." ;-) I did once work in a lab where smidge, tad, little, and lot had specific numerical values assigned to them.

      Robert SluggRobert Slugg3 kun oldin
    • @Robert Slugg Juan Brown, in his latest Blancolirio video, reports that a portion of one fan blade was found stuck somewhere in the casing, "at the one o'clock position", while another portion of a fan blade was found on the sports field where other debris fell. Which portion is from the blade that suffered the primary failure, and which is from the blade that is assumed (for the moment) to have been brought off by the primary failure, we'll have to wait for the NTSB.

      grahamj9101grahamj91013 kun oldin
    • My question too. Thanks Dude!!!

      Herbert LaughlinHerbert Laughlin3 kun oldin
    • Speculation is that one blade cut through the front cowling (large diagonal slash) which then accelerated that separation as an intact piece. Will be interesting to see where and when the blade fragments are found. 99.9% contained is probably the more accurate assessment if 34lbs of carbon and/or titanium exited the front on the way down. If blade is rotating at 600 mph and plane is flying 200 mph then the odds are higher that the blade will go forward at that point in time. But what do I know?

      Robert SluggRobert Slugg3 kun oldin
  • Excellent commentary and analysis, Agent JZ! Nice to hear some logic after all the nonsense expressed by the fake news media and other so- called aviation experts!

    supercat380supercat3803 kun oldin
    • @lysippus you are absolutely correct, Sir!!

      supercat380supercat3802 kun oldin
    • Excellent commentary by you as well. I wish more people would cancel media, who cares anymore? NYT? lol. WaPo? These people should be put in jail for false things. I watched a show on fox that aviation expert David Johannson (he flew dc-10's for 40 years) explained how this thing happens. The federal government is always to blame. Simple as that.

      lysippuslysippus2 kun oldin
  • BRAVO, this is why I follow you and Blancollrio. Keep up the GREAT work!

    paulsautocmpaulsautocm3 kun oldin
  • Excellent video, keep up the good work. So nice to hear cool calm engineering facts. Ive been an engineer working on PT6 TPE-331 and CFM56 for the last 33 years. This is a bit similar to the Southwest Airlines 737 incident in which the tremendous energy from the contained engine failure caused the cowl hinges or cowl latches to fail, thus causing the cowl to break up and separate from the airplane. Most people don't appreciate the amount of energy involved in a broken fan blade. In both the Southwest incident and United 328 incident the engine failures were contained. Well done to the boys who designed the debris containment shield-it worked as advertised.

    Rocco SoundRocco Sound3 kun oldin
  • How many engine hours on this engine or the fan would be more important because that seems to be the actual failure. More importantly probably landing takeoffs would give more insight I’m sure the experts will figure this out and make a correction. I am a mechanic as well, think about the load on that blade when the engine is nearly full thus going down the runway.

    Brian WhippenBrian Whippen3 kun oldin
    • Ya they should check the mileage on that puppy, probably way past its oil change!

      azonicrider32azonicrider323 kun oldin
  • Is that Moldovan flag?? Surprising to say the least!

    a4ystera4yster3 kun oldin
  • According to Blancolirio, the 1/2 blade was found inside the compressor stage. The complete blade is still MIA.

    Armorer 94Armorer 943 kun oldin
  • Calm , lucid , sensible facts .. thanks :)

    android emulatorandroid emulator3 kun oldin
  • Was that a JT-8 C-2 Fan disk that you had leaning their on your right

    William PickettWilliam Pickett3 kun oldin
    • RR Spey

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ3 kun oldin
  • Jayz ... what engine behind you ... very interesting ... does it P&W J75 ... (just guest)

    yxvpjsyxvpjs3 kun oldin
    • Orenda 14 out of an F-86F Sabre / Canadair Sabre 6

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ3 kun oldin
  • I would NOT like to be the guy who signed off on the last fan inspection when the FAA comes knocking.

    Android811Android8113 kun oldin
    • Hopefully he works at a shop that has equipment to record all their inspections in detail for just such an event.

      thomas mcdonaldthomas mcdonald2 kun oldin
  • Thank you for putting the truth out, I just wish people or the human condition would allow people to believe it. I've seen you stand up for what is right over the years and I think you for it. People really need to question everything and not believe the first person who opens their mouth or speaks the loudest. Truly an unbelievable job you do to disseminate knowledge. 👍 Juan Browne or, blancolirio is great at the other part of aviation just as you said.

    mer8771mer87713 kun oldin
  • One blade or part of coming off the fan disk and causing the damage that it did is by all technical definitions, an uncontained engine failure. It's not drama, it's a simple fact.

    First LastFirst Last3 kun oldin
    • The strict definition of an uncontained engine failure is that any debris or engine parts that fail penetrate the protections and exit through those protections. Simply put, the engine's cowling cannot hold the parts inside, does not contain them. A part that exits through the back of the engine for example, but didn't manage to open the protective rings is still considered a contained engine failure. Same if the part got stuck on that protection but didn't exit through it. The engine covers you see from outside don't count for that definition, they're mostly there for aerodynamics reasons. If it does whoever open up a hole through it, that in turn is uncontained. The definition itself can only be properly applied after inspecting the engine tho, from the angle seen it could very well have been uncontained if there was a hole open on the side not seen by the passengers, tho there wasn't thankfully. AgentJayZ could have been far more helpful on the reply tho no doubt. just that whole lot of "ignorant" there helped literally no one. If it was well defined on the the video, a time stamp would be enough. Otherwise, just copy and paste the definition also works.

      KalvinjjKalvinjj3 kun oldin
    • You are completely incorrect. That is forgivable because there is a very strict definition of uncontained, of which you are completely ignorant. FYI : on Feb 23 , the NTSB described the failure as contained. So you are doubly ignorant. Put that on a sticker, and have a grown up stick it on your back. Then go away. Thank you.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ3 kun oldin
  • “The engine exploded” direct words from news outlet.

    TransitBikerTransitBiker3 kun oldin
  • Wanted to share this as a pilot spoke on the same incident from his perspective. uzworld.info/player/video/qm68pMioaJjSqYw

    Brother MalachaiBrother Malachai3 kun oldin
  • I love it how boeing's stock took a hit yet Boeing doesnt make engines,.... Stupid public!!!

    mikoyanfulcrum1mikoyanfulcrum13 kun oldin
    • That's a buying opportunity!

      Android811Android8113 kun oldin
  • When the investigation report inevitably comes out, can you come back and comment more on this incident from an insider's perspective?

    Brother MalachaiBrother Malachai4 kun oldin
  • Journalists over reaction is so sad. Love you guys always!

    Mark GrantMark Grant4 kun oldin
    • Journalists are going to muckrake. "If it bleeds it leads."

      Brother MalachaiBrother Malachai4 kun oldin
  • Thanks AgentJayZ, always glad to learn from you. Can you do a followup on this once they have the whole story?

    BMachine2BMachine24 kun oldin
  • Thanks AgentJayZ for posting this!

    fzj801996fzj8019964 kun oldin
  • I'm an aerospace technician with approximately 7 hours of experience watching turbine engine videos and I have conducted my own investigation of the incident and I have concluded that the engine went "kaboom", not the "Big Badda Boom" as reported in the media as there were no burn marks on the wing and apparently no holes in the fuselage as the passengers were able to video the wobbly smoldering engine. I also believe the engine is not shaking due to imbalance but it is in fact shivering due to it's clothes being ripped off in midair in subzero temperatures.

    Cheezy DeeCheezy Dee4 kun oldin
    • That's pretty weezy, Cheezy Dee, but I like it! We could use someone like you, to translate between shop talk that the people working on the engines use, and whatever flavor of double-speak garble that management uses this year. "moving forward" I'm barfing now...

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ4 kun oldin
  • Really glad you got that off your chest Jay :D

    Steve RobertsSteve Roberts4 kun oldin
  • This is not the first time these engines has failed . Next time it can be worst . I believe the FAA put a service warning out on these engines.

    Jaja JajaJaja Jaja4 kun oldin
  • Love the engine vids thanks for explaining.

    Luk SLuk S4 kun oldin
  • With this much sensationalism, imagine what would happen if there was a pandemic!

    theonlyaritheonlyari4 kun oldin
    • They have contained themselves to only be off by an order of magnitude on that one, so far, IMHO. There is a lot of difference between dying "with" something and dying "from" something, which got lost a long time ago.

      Robert SluggRobert Slugg3 kun oldin
  • Like you said: could have been much worse. Sometimes things work. 👍🏼🤠

    A MasciaA Mascia4 kun oldin
  • Vibration causing the cowl separation is more credible than the intake cowl being sliced off by a bent blade. Should the engine have been shut down earlier when excess vibration noticed as this would have saved the cowls.

    DJDJ4 kun oldin
    • @Robert Slugg Either way gents, that still looks like a nice slice into that cowling ...

      uploadJuploadJKun oldin
    • @Curt Austin (Disclaimer, PhD brain scientist and I took mechanics 45 years ago.) A thought came to me last night when I of course didn't have internet access. In the vector model, we are probably assuming that the blade snapped instantaneously (microseconds) and thus all outward momentum went outward and as you say, into the kevlar belt. But, what if the separation was not instantaneous along the bottom of the blade, but say started at the back and progressed to the front over the course of some small number of milliseconds. This might then enable the blade to angle forward (tilt) due to the thrust component induced by compressing the air behind it. Lets say that it tilts forward by 6 or 12 inches at the blade end before being completely let go by the hub. This might then put parts of the blade beyond the containment capabilities of the kevlar belt, perhaps allowing it to slide forward within the nacelle until it sheared sheared through the cowling. We all agree it broke, but I think the jury is still out as to how, and also "how," it broke. Snap or shear?

      Robert SluggRobert SluggKun oldin
    • @Curt Austin I watched one and a bunch of stuff did end up forward of the extended nacelle housing they were using. Maybe not blades, but certainly "stuff." Of course, this was stationary so a significant force component was absent from the test scenario. uzworld.info/player/video/bmadl6qkktGUfHQ So if the vectors are taking it laterally, what are the possibilities of the blade then sticking and rotating forwards. I am assuming that the mass in the blade is concentrated closer to the hub, so if there is a forward directed moment, could it lead to a rotation of the blade (cartwheel) which could then explain the angled slice perforation that we see in the otherwise intact cowling on the ground. I am almost certain that the blade and the cowling were intimate at some point based on the visual evidence, the big questions being when, and what part of the blade. This will be a learning experience for all, of that I am certain

      Robert SluggRobert Slugg2 kun oldin
    • @Robert Slugg I'm saying the vectors of the aero force and the centrifugal force - just before liberation - sum to nearly entirely in the radial direction, because 34 lbs spinning at around 2000 rpm at a radius of about three feet works out to a lot more than thrust/number of blades. I vaguely recall that that the disk of a CF6-80C2. (a smaller engine) must withstand about a million lbs of outward force from the blades, which can be compared to about 60,000 lbs of thrust. In any case, I can assure you that the engineers put the kevlar in the right place. You don't have to believe me (PhD engineer, 20 years at GE Aircraft Engines) - just watch some UZworlds of blade-out testing. Nacelles are not part of that testing, incidentally.

      Curt AustinCurt Austin2 kun oldin
    • @Curt Austin Thing is, blade fragments are at an angle and pushing against air which causes them to act as a wing foil and thus move forward as well as outward. Grab a pen and paper and do the vector diagram. In addition to the 600mph tip speed, that whole blade is also moving forward at 200 mph. It is intuitively obvious to anyone who has thrown a snowball from a speeding car. The snowball at 45mph does not somehow end up behind the car moving at 60mph.

      Robert SluggRobert Slugg3 kun oldin
  • Nice report, very interesting. I love your delivery. We all do!

    MrSwimfinz123MrSwimfinz1234 kun oldin
  • One news reporter I listened to, based on some ATC exchanges, reported the pilot saying “... heavy engine failure...” Of course this was the pilot identifying himself as “328 heavy.”

    Earth Wisdom ProductionsEarth Wisdom Productions4 kun oldin
  • AgentJayZ: What is your take on the photos of damage to the fuselage adjacent to failed engine? Caused by broken fan or turbine blades?

    Darcy HildebrandDarcy Hildebrand4 kun oldin
  • I saw photos of a large hole in the wing root area underwing section right up against the fuselage. It looked to be about a foot by 2 feet in length. Also, the flight crew can make the Mayday call to ATC and later downgrade the emergency claim. So the pilots telling passengers that they are not in an emergency..I.e. not expecting aircraft loss/further damage or passenger loss..may very well have occurred

    Master WarningMaster Warning4 kun oldin
    • My bet for that hole is likely that engine cover being torn off and ripping through that part. Thankfully no hydraulic/electric lines ruptured that affected enough on the flight controls.

      KalvinjjKalvinjj3 kun oldin
  • It is amazing to me that engine pylon DID NOT fail. And, it was able to withstand the immense torque generated by the inbalance.

    Steve FlorSteve Flor4 kun oldin
  • Looked like the fan blade may have cut the forward cowling/shroud detaching it and the fan blade went out forwards (perhaps a combination of pressure and momentum from the collision.. Doesn't that make it an uncontained failure even if not a whole disk? If all the fan blades are generating pressure aft doe it mean that one blade can be blown forward by the pressure generated by all of the others?

    Mike MMike M4 kun oldin
    • the thrust from the blade itself would just turn it sideways to the position it encounters equilibrium, and then the air around (and suction from the rest of the engine) would just push it back. An entire fan disk failing without losing it's round shape, still rotating (let's say, it detaches from the shaft clear) might propel itself some amount, but if that is enough to maintain it going forward after no torque is applied to the shaft (if it fails of course there won't be any), I would say is unlikely on flight conditions, on ground tests it probably can propel itself some amount but not with the airspeed they have up in the sky.

      KalvinjjKalvinjj3 kun oldin
    • @Njål Nilssen Have done. But with one and a bit blades floating around at high speed they could hit the wall and at that speed with leverage I could still see bits going forward. The witness marks on the cowling will be interesting.

      Mike MMike M4 kun oldin
    • Angular momentum force trying to pull the blades out radially are ten-folds higher than any foreward momentum provided by thrust. If in doubt watch videos from "blade-out" test done during engine trials.

      Njål NilssenNjål Nilssen4 kun oldin
  • I learned more from your video in three minutes then anywhere else. Also you are very funny which helps.

    Justin SimonsenJustin Simonsen4 kun oldin
  • Looks like some parts did get through ..........

    Craig TripneyCraig Tripney4 kun oldin
  • uzworld.info/player/video/n2-vp62gj9ebdaY

    Craig TripneyCraig Tripney4 kun oldin
  • how much does a jet engine overhaul cost?

    that guythat guy4 kun oldin
    • Depends on the engine. One of these commercial airliner engines will cost many thousands of worker hours and likely a couple million in parts.

      AgentJayZAgentJayZ4 kun oldin
  • Why do people listen to the media at all anymore? Has the media done anything you useful for like the past 20 or 30 years? We need new media, old media is dead.

    T4L0N57T4L0N574 kun oldin
    • When ratings, clicks and views are what generates revenue, the truth is the first casualty. What passes as “truth” now has more to do with who is paying for it than any actual facts or reality.

      James GrayJames Gray4 kun oldin
  • seems like there have been several "lost shroud" exposed engine failures in the past few years

    None NoneNone None4 kun oldin
  • Understand that there was another failure in the Netherlands Same type Go figure

    Karl GoebelerKarl Goebeler4 kun oldin
UZworld