Man on the Runway, an Aborted Takeoff and an Engine Fire: A horror unsaid at Denver?

By Jacob K Philip

A Frontier Airlines plane en route from Denver, Colorado, to Los Angeles, California, struck a pedestrian on the runway at Denver International Airport Friday night, forcing the aircraft to suddenly abort takeoff, triggering a small fire and the evacuation of passengers.

The Airbus A321-271NX, an A321neo with registration N646FR, was departing from Runway 35R at 11:15 p.m. when it reportedly struck a ‘pedestrian’ crossing the runway about 30 seconds after beginning its takeoff roll.

During the takeoff run, the A321neo was approaching its decision speed — commonly known as V1 — the maximum speed at which a takeoff can still be safely aborted. The aircraft was traveling at around 235 km/h when the crew initiated a rejected takeoff.

After realizing the aircraft may have struck someone, the pilots immediately applied maximum braking and reverse thrust to stop the plane. At the time, the aircraft had 231 passengers and crew on board and was carrying about 9,525 kilograms of fuel for the 1,387-kilometer flight to Los Angeles.

The aircraft, weighing roughly 80 tonnes including passengers, fuel, and cargo, came to a sudden stop at high speed. Under such circumstances, enormous friction builds up in the braking system, often generating enough heat to cause smoke or even tire and brake fires.

However, airport authorities and several news reports specifically stated that the fire occurred in one of the aircraft’s engines and was later extinguished.

That unusual detail raises further questions about the accident and highlights gaps in the information released so far.

How did the person reportedly struck by the aircraft gain access to the active runway area inside a major international airport? How could someone cross a runway while an aircraft was accelerating for takeoff?

Who exactly was the “pedestrian” mentioned in the reports — the individual whom the pilot reportedly told air traffic control he had seen walking across the runway?

Was the person an airport employee, a passenger, a maintenance worker, or a trespasser? So far, none of the reports have clarified this.

Now, let us return to the reported engine fire.

As noted earlier, when a large aircraft aborts takeoff at high speed, it is not unusual for the landing gear, brakes, or tires to overheat and even catch fire.

But an engine fire points toward another possible scenario — that foreign objects may have entered the engine during the incident. Such an event can disrupt airflow inside the engine and trigger a compressor stall or engine surge, often accompanied by loud bangs, smoke, sparks, and, in some cases, fire.

That raises another disturbing question: what exactly entered the engine?

It is worth noting that, apart from the pilot reportedly saying he saw someone on the runway and believed the aircraft had struck the person, there has been little mention in news reports about the individual’s condition or what ultimately happened to him.

Another important factor is the height of the Airbus A321neo’s engines above the ground. Depending on aircraft weight and tire pressure, the Pratt & Whitney PW1100G or CFM LEAP-1A engines fitted on the A321neo sit only about 80 to 120 centimeters above ground level. The engine fan diameter itself is approximately 198 to 206 centimeters.

And the average adult human height ranges between 167 and 182 centimeters.

During takeoff, the engines of an A321neo ingest 500-700 kilograms of air every second. That means, the aircraft’s two engines pull in air at a rate 10,000 times more powerful than a typical household vacuum cleaner.

Given those forces, and with the aircraft moving at 235 km/h during the rejected takeoff, one cannot help but imagine — with horror — what might happen to a person caught in front of the engines.

  • jacob@indianaviationnews.net
Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Two Aviation Disasters, One Dark Question Hanging Over

By Jacob K Philip

Eleven months after an Air India Boeing 787 crashed seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad while operating a flight to London, attention has now turned to a similar tragedy in China four years ago — after a newly released US report suggested that the crash may have been deliberate.

A document released by the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) says the fatal crash of a China Eastern Airlines Boeing 737-800 in March 2022 could have been caused by the deliberate shutdown of both engines in flight.

The aircraft had taken off from Kunming Changshui International Airport at 2:23 pm on March 21, 2022, bound for Guangzhou Baiyun International Airport. All 132 people on board were killed.

Search and rescue team at China Eastern Airlines crash site.

The NTSB document, released under the US Freedom of Information Act, has intensified global debate because of its striking similarities to revelations contained in the preliminary report into the recent Air India crash.

The US agency participated in the China Eastern investigation because the aircraft was US-made. According to the report, data extracted from the aircraft’s black boxes showed that both engine fuel control switches had been moved from RUN to CUTOFF while the aircraft was cruising at 29,100 feet.

“The only explanation” for the switches being moved, the NTSB noted, was that someone intentionally changed their position, as there had been no indication of any mechanical or system malfunction before the event.

Roughly an hour after departure, the aircraft suddenly entered a steep descent. In just over two minutes, it plunged from 29,100 feet to 9,075 feet before disappearing from radar near Wuzhou in southern China.

Air India crash debris

Air traffic controllers repeatedly attempted to contact the cockpit during the descent, but there was no response.

Investigators noted that the switches were never returned to the RUN position, strengthening suspicions that the act may have been intentional.

The report also casts doubt on suggestions that the aircraft simply became uncontrollable after engine failure. Aviation experts point out that even with total loss of thrust at cruising altitude, the aircraft should have been capable of gliding forward for a considerable distance and potentially making an emergency landing.

The NTSB further revealed that the flight data recorder stopped functioning as the aircraft descended through 26,000 feet after electrical power was lost. However, the cockpit voice recorder continued operating on battery power until impact.

According to the report, the cockpit voice recorder suffered catastrophic damage in the crash, and no backup copy of the audio had been created. China has also not handed the original recording to US investigators.

Investigators believe it is unlikely that the pilots intentionally shut down both engines and then immediately forced the aircraft into a near-vertical dive. One theory under consideration is that a third person may have entered the cockpit and incapacitated the crew.

The report notes that if one pilot had deliberately cut off the engines, the other would almost certainly have attempted to restart them. The absence of any restart attempt has therefore become a key focus of the investigation.

The renewed attention on the China Eastern crash comes as controversy continues over the preliminary findings into the Air India Boeing 787 disaster.

That report revealed that both fuel control switches on the Air India aircraft had also moved to the cutoff position seconds before the crash.

While several pilots’ organisations in India have called for further investigation into the possibility of electrical or battery-related failures, many aviation analysts believe the evidence increasingly points toward deliberate human action.

The Federation of Indian Pilots has nevertheless demanded a more detailed technical probe, arguing that all possible system failures must be ruled out before any conclusion is reached.

The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau is expected to release its final report into the Air India crash before June 12, — one year after the disaster.

-jacob@indianaviationnews.net
Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter