SAS MD82 at Copenhagen on Feb 5th 2012, rejected takeoff and evacuation
Last Update: January 18, 2013 / 21:55:13 GMT/Zulu time
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Feb 5, 2012
Classification
Incident
Cause
Rejected takeoff
Airline
SAS Scandinavian Airlines
Aircraft Type
McDonnell Douglas MD-82
ICAO Type Designator
MD82
Fatigue cracking initiated at the sharp edges at the run-out area of the FAD support lugs. The FAD support lugs fractured and the Nose Dome liberated from the front of the engine leading to this serious incident.
A contributing factor to the cracking was probably insufficient blending of the sharp edges according to accomplishment instructions in SB 5680.
The HCL reported the engine had accumulated 41,695 hours in 33,590 flight cycles since new and 2510 flight hours in 1973 flight cycles since last overhaul and inspection. The front accessory drive (FAD) was part of the engine when delivered by the company performing the last overhaul. The nuts, that held the remains of the lugs, were removed from the engine, neither one had been over- or undertorqued.
Following a number of nose dome liberations the engine manufacturer had amended the aircraft maintenance manual in 1995 warning that the front access drive assembly should not be pulled into position with the bolts or damage to parts may result. In 2001 the engine manufacturer came to the conclusion the nose dome liberations may be the result of overtorque, mishandling of tools or incorrect installation of the attach nut and released recommendations to minimize the possibility of accessory support lug fractures. The engine manufacturer also introduced a new version of the FADs featuring lugs with blended edges and increased thickness, the installation of these new FADs was recommended to all operators.
The investigation found no rubbing or wear on the FAD and no sign of incorrect use of tools.
Laboratory examination revealed "all the fatigue cracks initiated at the sharp edge in the transition from the lug surface to the FAD cover". No material defects or deficiencies contributed to the fracture initiation or propagation. The HCL thus concluded that the overhaul performed by the maintenance organisation was not a contributing factor to the serious incident.
The HCL analysed: "It is the opinion of the AIB DK (HCL) that installation of these versions with blended edges and increased thickness lugs could prevent FAD support lug cracking and therefore Nose Dome liberations. The AIB DK would like to point out the importance of following recommendations issued by the engine manufacturer."
No safety recommendations were released as result of the investigation, one safety action was taken by the airline.
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Feb 5, 2012
Classification
Incident
Cause
Rejected takeoff
Airline
SAS Scandinavian Airlines
Aircraft Type
McDonnell Douglas MD-82
ICAO Type Designator
MD82
This article is published under license from Avherald.com. © of text by Avherald.com.
Article source
You can read 2 more free articles without a subscription.
Subscribe now and continue reading without any limits!
Read unlimited articles and receive our daily update briefing. Gain better insights into what is happening in commercial aviation safety.
Send tip
Support AeroInside by sending a small tip amount.
Related articles
Redundancy, Reserves, and Margins: Lessons From the Flight Deck
Pilots spend their careers thinking in layers. Nothing critical is allowed to depend on one component, fuel is carried beyond what the trip requires,…
Ground Vehicles Are an Overlooked Aviation Safety Risk: What Airport Operators Can Learn From Past Incidents
The Danger Hiding in Plain Sight on the Tarmac Most people picture aviation risk as something that happens in the sky. Turbulence. Mechanical…
AeroInside Monthly Aviation Safety Review August 2026
August 2026 was a busy month in aviation safety. Please find our summary below.All in all, 92 new articles have been published during last month. 5…
Why Most Airline Businesses Underestimate Their Data Security Risk
Airline companies invest heavily in reservation systems, operational technology, and digital passenger services. However, they often forget to…
How Airline Compensation Payouts Shrink Before They Reach a Foreign Account
A flight goes wrong. You file a claim, wait, follow up, and eventually get the email confirming an amount. That number feels settled. It is written…
Newest articles
Fleet type match
United B763 at Newark on Sep 12th 2026, loud squeal on flight deck
A United Boeing 767-300, registration N677UA performing flight UA-16 from Newark,NJ (USA) to London Heathrow,EN (UK), was climbing out of Newark when…
Envoy E170 at Chicago on Sep 10th 2026, control yoke loose
An Envoy Embraer ERJ-170 on behalf of American Airlines, registration N781EJ performing flight AA-3551 from Chicago O'Hare,IL to Minneapolis,MN (USA)…
Subscribe today
Are you researching aviation incidents? Get access to AeroInside Insights, unlimited read access and receive the daily newsletter.
Pick your plan and subscribePartner
ELITE Simulation Solutions is a leading global provider of Flight Simulation Training Devices, IFR training software as well as flight controls and related services. Find out more.
SafetyScan Pro provides streamlined access to thousands of aviation accident reports. Tailored for your safety management efforts. Book your demo today
AeroInside Blog
Popular aircraft
Airbus A320Boeing 737-800
Boeing 737-800 MAX
Popular airlines
American AirlinesUnited
Delta
Air Canada
Lufthansa
British Airways