[juanse]

I would expect that those windows be more resistant to heat considering the distance they have from the engines, in case something went wrong.

[JumpCrisscross]

> more resistant to heat considering the distance they have from the engines, in case something went wrong

For the engine to melt a window, something has gone wrong enough that this tolerance isn't material. (You'd need a lot of heat. Plus enough turbulence to blow it laterally inward, but not so much that it's allowed to cool. That combination suggests a loss of power and a low-speed, i.e. low-altitude, stall.)

[trelane]

Even more than that.

From the article: "They located the source of the noise as a dislodged window pane aft of the over wing exit."

The engines are under the wing; the affected seals were over it.

If you're melting the window panes in this scenario from the engines, you're having a really, really bad day. Plus, the noise increase from a missing window pant would likely be the smallest of the warning signs.

[MadnessASAP]

Failures, particularly fires, around the engines and wings are either dealt with in minutes[1] or the state of the window becomes no longer relevant.

[1] The complete list of options are typically starvation, suppression, evacuation. Apply in that order and do so quickly.

[Terr_]

> or else the state of the window becomes no longer relevant.

I appreciate this, er, implicit understatement.

[jacquesm]

Shouldn't there be an emergency landing somewhere in the middle there?

[whalesalad]

the engines don't put out a lot of radiant heat, especially at altitude where it is -50 outside. the lights on the other hand are putting out a metric fuck ton of heat directly at the illuminated area.

heat from an engine is directed straight out the back by nature of the turbines.

modern engines are also what are called "high bypass ratio" engines, where the outer ring of the engine (closest to the cladding) is really just air flowing by. the combustion area is smaller, in the center.

[nomel]

With an engine fire, at speed, the vast majority of the heat will be from the flame, in the air, traveling backwards at hundreds of miles per hour. This leaves the radiant heat. At speed, the radiant heat, from a fuel fire, has no hope of overcoming the many hundred mph wind that is scrubbing along the window, cooling it off.

[strangattractor]

I as thinking how hot it gets sitting on a tarmac in Saudi Arabia or Tucson in the summer. A nice BLACK painted fuselage seems like a really bad idea. Just a thought.

[kayfox]

> considering the distance they have from the engines

The engines are under the wing, the windows are above the wing, they are not very close to the windows at all.

[ssnistfajen]

The primary objective would be to prevent engines from creating those unexpected excessive heat events in the first place.

[SketchySeaBeast]

I imagine if the engine bursts into flames they are probably going to want to land the plane anyways.

[jacquesm]

Assuming you're over land, which definitely isn't always the case. You better hope the integral fire suppression system works. If it doesn't you're about to have your day - and possibly much more - ruined solidly.

[chankstein38]

I was thinking this too... What if something caught fire in the aircraft during flight? I assume they land regardless but it goes from "Get the fire extinguisher and put it out" to "DO IT BEFORE THE WINDOWS MELT OFF!"