B-52H loses engine

[jmjdriver1995]

A USAF B-52H BUFF dropped one of its TF-33 engines Wednesday about 25 miles from Minot AFB, North Dakota. The aircraft recovered safely at the base on the remaining 7 engines. The AWOL engine was later located by a UH-1N Huey searching the area. An accident investigation will undoubtedly be initiated to determine why this happened.

[West Coast]

The dreaded 7 engine approach...

It had to be said.

[Airbubba]

The dreaded 7 engine approach...

They've even done the five engine approach :eek::

ENGINE QUITS, 2 FALL OFF - BUT B-52 DOES FINE

Published: Aug. 9, 1995 12:00 a.m.

One engine failed and two fell off a B-52 bomber during a training mission, forcing the crew to circle for more than six hours before landing safely early Wednesday on five of its eight engines.

A pod holding two engines dropped off and landed in a soybean field near Bossier City at about 6 p.m. Tuesday, shortly after takeoff, Barksdale Air Force Base Tech Sgt. Howard Smith said.The generator in a third engine had failed shortly before that. The plane could land safely with as few as two, he said.

"Everything went off without a hitch," said Lt. Jeff Glenn, spokesman for the 2nd Bomb Wing at Barksdale, where the bomber was stationed.

The crew circled to use up fuel because the 35-year-old plane does not have a system to jettison its fuel and cannot land safely if plane and fuel weigh a total of more than 260,000 pounds, Smith said.

The plane itself weighs 185,000 pounds.

ENGINE QUITS, 2 FALL OFF - BUT B-52 DOES FINE | Deseret News (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/432530/ENGINE-QUITS-2-FALL-OFF---BUT-B-52-DOES-FINE.html)

[Rick777]

I know a guy who flew a 12 hour ORI mission with 6 running most of the time.I guess there is a good reason for all those engines.

[Kobus Dune]

Like Hillary, falling apart. Time to enjoy retirement for them.

[ORAC]

No, really.........

Engine Drops Out of B-52 During Training at Minot Air Force Base (http://www.defensenews.com/articles/engine-drops-out-of-b-52-during-training-at-minot-air-force-base)

MINOT AIR FORCE BASE, N.D. — An engine dropped out of a B-52 bomber during a training flight on Wednesday, the Air Force has confirmed following questions from Defense News.

Because the B-52 runs on eight Pratt & Whitney TF33-P-3/103 turbofan engines, pilots were able to land the aircraft safely without any injury to the five personnel on board. The Air Force has since dispatched a UH-1N Huey helicopter to recover engine debris, which was found located in an unpopulated area about 25 nautical miles northeast of Minot Air Force Base, an Air Force spokesman said in a statement.

There were no weapons onboard the B-52, which belongs to Minot Air Force Base's 5th Bomb Wing and was conducting a training mission, he said.......

[ATC Watcher]

The plane could land safely with as few as two, he said.

Maintain altitude on 2 engines i.e. 25% of its max power ? that's impressive .
Question for those in the know here :Could you maintain altitude on one engine on a A340 or a 747 ?

[Bergerie1]

ATC Watcher, NO

[Airclues]

Could you maintain altitude on one engine on a A340 or a 747 ?

On 2nd May 1988 United Airlines 747-100 Flight 97 landed at Tokyo on one engine. However, the third engine failed on the approach, so it's unlikely that it would have been able to maintain altitude.

[ORAC]

He said it could land safely on 2 - not maintain altitude. A modulated descent to ensure the point at which you reach the ground is a runway is not he same as flying straight and level..

[Red Line Entry]

Ah, the dreaded 7-engine recovery...

[DaveReidUK]

He said it could land safely on 2 - not maintain altitude.

Sounds reasonable, given that we've seen an A330 and a 767 landing on zero engines, though that trick's probably not a good idea in a BUFF. :O

[Pontius Navigator]

"Standby your score Sir"

[ATC Watcher]

ORAC He said it could land safely on 2 - not maintain altitude. A modulated descent to ensure the point at which you reach the ground is a runway is not he same as flying straight and level..

Well what is the point of saying that then? , any aircraft can glide and land without any power. But to make a normal IFR approach you would need to be able to maintain altitude at some point(s) . That is what I understand by " landing safely " but probably just PR words.

[Sidestick_n_Rudder]

"Losing an engine" now has a completely new meaning...:}

[DaveReidUK]

Well what is the point of saying that then?

I have no idea.

Given that it's a quote from more than 20 years ago, he's probably forgotten why he said it by now.

[Kulverstukas]

Like Hillary, falling apart. Time to enjoy retirement for them.

Is it yet confirmed that Putin hacked engine mount? :hmm:

[ORAC]

I am reminded of the C-141 out of Mildenhall which declared an emergency out over the Atlantic north of Ireland and turned back for Mildenhall requesting a decent to FL310, then FL280, then FL 220....

The controller eventually asked politely what level he wished to descend to.

"I don't know sir", replied the pilot, "we've lost 2 engines and I'll let you know when we stop".

[NutLoose]

As it "fell" free, bearing in mind it would still have a fair amount of fuel in its fuel system and would be burning and turning, I bet it out accelerated the B52 it was hauling along once freed from that onerous burden.

Surprised the crew never saw it shoot past like some demented pod racer from Star Wars.:E

[Pontius Navigator]

After Nutty's post I had a little brain spark then remembered:

"Captain - Radar, ASV has gone off"

This after the radar was knocked off flying very low over the Med.

[Wycombe]

Is the BUFF made of tin foil or something?

I remember once seeing a picture of one where the wing had snapped in half on the ground (I think between the engine pods) due to misfuelling.

[His dudeness]

Is it yet confirmed that Putin hacked engine mount?


Hahahahaha, good one, you made my day ! :ok:

[Fly3]

Many years ago I remember a sim detail where we were given three engine failure in a B744, albeit at quite light weights, and stabilised at around 4000ft and made a successful approach and landing at Changi.

[DaveReidUK]

I remember once seeing a picture of one where the wing had snapped in half on the ground (I think between the engine pods) due to misfuelling.

It was a combination of a maintenance error (leaving a blanking plate in a vent duct) and then failing to recognise the issue when subsequently fuelling the aircraft, with the result that air pressure building up in the tanks literally blew the wing apart. Fortunately there was no fire and nobody was injured. The maintenance crew were court-marshalled, but acquitted.

The B-52G in question flew on for a further seven years following the 1983 incident, courtesy of a replacement wing sourced from another scrapped BUFF.

[9 lives]

Well what is the point of saying that then? , any aircraft can glide and land without any power.

Any type certified aircraft can glide to a landing. As a B-52 is not required to be type certified, it might not have this capability. Though I do not know the B-52 systems, I can imagine that it was not designed to include some of the non engine powered back up systems which certified aircraft must have. And, if all else fails, the B-52 crew can exit in flight. So it is possible that a safe gliding landing may not be possible in a B-52, as it is not in some other military aircraft.

Is the BUFF made of tin foil or something?

I remember once seeing a picture of one where the wing had snapped in half on the ground (I think between the engine pods) due to misfuelling.

The B-52 is probably structurally optimized to carry flight loads, but not so over built, and heavy to carry loads which could not be encountered in flight, like misfuelling loads. Again, military aircraft may not necessarily be designed with the excess structural capacity we are used to with certified aircraft. They are saving weight and systems so they can complete their role with greater efficiency, at the expense of perhaps not withstanding uncommon or preventable events as well.

[cooperplace]

is an engine failure on takeoff almost a non-event in the B52?

[Kulverstukas]

is an engine failure on takeoff almost a non-event in the B52?


1/8 event?

[beamender99]

"Losing an engine" now has a completely new meaning...
Sadly not.
1968 BOAC 712 at LHR.

[MarkD]

B-52 has been around so long that the Rolls proposal to stick 4 x RB211-535E4s on them is now over 20 years old and the TF33s are still turning away...

[glad rag]

thought it was going to be a variation of the F4 joke...

[Pontius Navigator]

IIRC from 40 years ago we were taught Nimrod performance to Cat A.
In the event of loss of an engine we would drift down from our maximum cruising height (depending on weight between 290 and 390) until we reached a stable level. The trick was to ensure that level was above terrain level.
Above 142,000 lb we could not maintain level flight on one engine. Once below 142,000 we could operate on 2 engines while flying below 7,000 feet. In the event of loss of one engine we could maintain a positive rate of climb of 100 ft per minute.
I imagine there would be similar drift down rules for other civil aircraft where level flight could only be achieved at a particular weight/engine state .

[ORAC]

B-52 made of tinfoil?

It can manage things an Airbus can't....

pjayDit2bHw

[NutLoose]

Except they calculated the fin would have failed even earlier if it was made of tin.

Remember this one, the eng was trying to sort out the engine problems when the co looked out of the window and saw it wasn't there

https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19920331-0

http://www.pprune.org/questions/228271-engine-fell-off-failed.html

[lomapaseo]

As it "fell" free, bearing in mind it would still have a fair amount of fuel in its fuel system and would be burning and turning, I bet it out accelerated the B52 it was hauling along once freed from that onerous burden.

That only works if it's aerodynamicaly stable. Any pitch or yaw forces on the inlet will result in a bicycle wheel effect and a snap turn following gyro forces, the resulting drag should put it behind the aircraft petty quick.

Of course if the cause of the release was a massive engine failure YMMV

[aterpster]

I was on a 707 training flight in 1965. Although it wasn't part of the company's procedure the instructor pilot demonstrated an approach and landing with only one inboard engine producing power. He was quick to add that it couldn't be done with only one outboard engine

[DirtyProp]

Well it is a bomber, after all.
"Bombs awa......ooops!"

[cliver029]

aterpster

I seem to remember there was a slightly B*tchy saying at the time when there was still potential for competition that the Comet buried its engines in its wing roots while 707 buried them in the countryside.......So it was said Im told

[Concours77]

The first B727 to land at SFO was on a long approach (28L). The Captain called the Tower:
Tower we have three engines....Tower: "Braniff, hold short for United landing with engine out".

It really happened...

[Flingwing47]

1991
Jeddah

Enroute between JED and RUH early evening with lots of turbulence around we heard a USAF aircraft, I think it was a KC135, declare an emergency.
When ATC asked the reason a very calm voice stated

" we have lost two engines"

ATC asked them to confirm - back came the cool reply:

"Yes sir, two engines have departed the airframe".

Tough aircraft.....

[bnt]

From Defense News (http://www.defensenews.com/articles/air-force-secretary-catastrophic-engine-failure-likely-to-blame-for-minot-b-52-mishap):
In a separate interview at Minot Air Force Base that morning, head of Air Force Global Strike Command Gen. Robin Rand offered a similar assessment.“The engine didn’t just fall off. The engine had a failure inside the engine, and it shelled itself,” he said. Now that we know everyone's safe, I can't help wishing there had been a camera around to catch that happening. An engine shelling itself like an extremely angry peanut ... :ooh:

[tdracer]

I don't know about the B-52 specifically, but it's common design practice to design the strut such that if a turbine engine seizes at high rpm, the strut will fail and allow the engine to depart the airframe (otherwise the stresses could literally break the wing). There was a case back in the 1960s on a 727 where it's suspected that a large chunk of 'blue ice' was ingested by one of the engines, seizing the LP spool - the strut failed as designed and the engine departed the aircraft. Apparently the flight crew had no idea the engine had departed until a rather alarmed passenger alerted a flight attendant that the engine inlet that had previously been obscuring the view out his window was no longer there :}.



I seem to remember there was a slightly B*tchy saying at the time when there was still potential for competition that the Comet buried its engines in its wing roots while 707 buried them in the countryside.......So it was said Im told

A 707 crashed north of Seattle in 1959 during a pre-delivery test flight - apparently they were testing a new yaw damper and in the process performed such a radical maneuver that three of the four engines departed the aircraft. They were too heavy to make it back to an airport and set it down in Stillaguamish River, killing the four people in the flight deck (four others in the back survived)

[West Coast]

A 707 crashed north of Seattle in 1959 during a pre-delivery test flight - apparently they were testing a new yaw damper and in the process performed such a radical maneuver that three of the four engines departed the aircraft. They were too heavy to make it back to an airport and set it down in Stillaguamish River, killing the four people in the flight deck (four others in the back survived)



https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19591019-0

[Rwy in Sight]

Since we are in the discussion of departing engines should we include the American Airlines DC-10 in Chicago where the ATC stated American you lost one engine but the crew couldn't understand they meant it literally?

[lomapaseo]

Since we are in the discussion of departing engines should we include the American Airlines DC-10 in Chicago where the ATC stated American you lost one engine but the crew couldn't understand they meant it literally?

Same has happened many other times (lavatory ice events, fuse pins etc.)

The crew simply fly how the aircraft behaves, often lower drag than with a dead engine. What consequential damage occurs to the aircraft has been the key link to a successful landing.

[PersonFromPorlock]

I recall that during the Linebacker 2 bombing campaign against North Vietnam (which were 'press on' missions), only one B-52 was allowed to turn back. It had four engines out on one side and landed successfully.

[Tallman]

In 1992 an El Al cargo 747 lost 2 engines on one side after departing AMS, the resulting damage to the leading edge and inability to extend the flaps on one side caused the aircraft to crash into a block of flats. Apparently the pins on nr 3 broke due to fatigue, the engine surged forward and upward, damaging the leading edge and then took out nr 4

[lomapaseo]

In 1992 an El Al cargo 747 lost 2 engines on one side after departing AMS, the resulting damage to the leading edge and inability to extend the flaps on one side caused the aircraft to crash into a block of flats. Apparently the pins on nr 3 broke due to fatigue, the engine surged forward and upward, damaging the leading edge and then took out nr 4

You left out the word "outward" :) (right hand rule in gyroscopic action)

The same cause/movement occurred to the China B747 freighter as well as the B707 freighters cited in the report earlier in the thread.

[riff_raff]

The B-52H is a bit different than most commercial aircraft in that it has two engines mounted to each underwing pylon rather than just one. In both cases the engines are attached to the pylon with "fuse pins". When an engine experiences something like a "blade-off" failure that produces a significant dynamic imbalance vibration condition which can cause structural failure of the wing, the fuse pins are designed to shear and allow the engine to drop away from the pylon, limiting structural damage to the wing.

[warbirdfinder]

My neighbor was in the Braniff B-7-7 that crashed on the test flight. He told me was standing in the cockpit when the pilot turned and yelled for he and the other three to run for the tail. That was what saved their lives.

[tdracer]

The same cause/movement occurred to the China B747 freighterThe really sad part was that the China 747F had crashed in the Pacific ocean - with most of the wreckage under thousands of feet of water not enough was recovered to figure out what had happened (I was involved, and remember sitting in a meeting brainstorming ways we could physically loose two engine at the same time). When El Al went down into the apartment building the wreckage was readily recoverable and Boeing determined relatively quickly the fuse pin issue (BTW, technically it was not "fatigue", it was stress corrosion, and it was significant that both accident aircraft were freighters - 747 freighters fly more cycles at/near MTOW than the passenger versions).
That was a dark time at Boeing - the Lauda 767 had gone down in that same time period due to the T/R deployment in flight - meaning three major Boeing crashes due to mechanical failures of the aircraft in a relatively short period :eek:. That resulted in a major overhaul of the Safety Review processes (I was drafted into the Propulsion Safety Review Board early during that overhaul) - we were told in no uncertain terms that it was quite simply unacceptable for Boeing to loose another aircraft due to a design/build error.


BTW warbirdfinder, that's consistent with the story I heard as well - they knew they were going to crash so the people not involved it flying the aircraft were sent to the rear of the aircraft prior to impact - which most likely saved their lives.

[jmjdriver1995]

This is supposedly photo of the B-52H that lost an engine near Minot AFB back on the 4th of January.http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b209/yardbird78/1%20to%201%20aircraft/B-52H%20107%20Minot_zps3xl2tntc.jpg (http://s20.photobucket.com/user/yardbird78/media/1%20to%201%20aircraft/B-52H%20107%20Minot_zps3xl2tntc.jpg.html)

[Pugilistic Animus]

Please forgive me if I'm asking a classified questions. For a long time I've been pondering Donk failures in the Buff here are my questions as follows.

1. How many Donks can she lose on takeoff and still fly?
2. Enroute how many Donks can she lose and still do a drift down to a reasonable altitude?
3. Does it matter much if it's an inner Donk failure or outer Donks?
​​​​​​

Thank you all in advance

I also ponder similar questions about the AN225
​​​​​​

[Timelord]

I don’t know much about the B52 apart from one trip many years ago but since it came into service with 8 x 10000 lb thrust engines and now has 8 x 17000lb thrust engines with a proposal to re-engine with 20000lb I’d guess it’s pretty tolerant of engine failures.

[Just This Once...]

Aside from a trip in one my perf knowledge is limited to a brief by a TP who had the B-52 as one of his project aircraft. The cruise performance is akin to an older generation 4x civilian jet but when laden the T/O performance eats runway length for breakfast. Taking off laden with weapons and refuelling in the air is the preferred and sometimes only option.

Net takeoff flight path (or the USAF bespoke version of it) does honour the loss of an outboard engine. Loosing both engines on an outboard pylon is another matter, with some significant gaps in performance. Vmca with the loss of thrust from an outboard pylon didn't look funny at all. I can only presume that it was this that parked any of the fanciful ideas of swapping from 4 pairs of engines to 4 bigger engines.

[megan]

Flight manual for the C and D model here, mention is made of 7 and 6 engine take offs, also operations with four out on one side. Doesn't include performance charts.

https://www.docdroid.net/psiRPHX/boeing-b-52cd-flight-manual.pdf

[SASless]

Perhaps some of you RAF guys can remind folks of the dangers of podded engines when one pukes bits forward and then get ingested by its partner.

Which raises the question of if that has been an issue for the BUFF.

[Timelord]

“Donks ” . Now there is a word for the RAF terminology thread!

[Pugilistic Animus]

Thank you all for your help, very enlightening. I did forget about midair refueling as a factor:)

[meleagertoo]

"Losing an engine" now has a completely new meaning...

And just for once the inexcusable but too often seen 'loosing' an engine becomes correct.

[eckhard]

Maintain altitude on 2 engines i.e. 25% of its max power ? that's impressive .
Question for those in the know here :Could you maintain altitude on one engine on a A340 or a 747 ?

The 747-400 with RR engines could take off on one engine!

I did it once in the sim.
Empty aircraft, 8T of fuel (fuel freeze on).
DOH old airport, RW34, ISA and 10kt headwind.
Flaps 10 and only engine number 2 running.
Used about 1/2 of the runway to get to 80kts, against full rudder, whereupon I could gradually open up to full power.
Staggered into the air at the end of the 15,000ft runway and flew to BAH.

Not very realistic but an interesting exercise.

[NutLoose]

Perhaps some of you RAF guys can remind folks of the dangers of podded engines when one pukes bits forward and then get ingested by its partner.

Which raises the question of if that has been an issue for the BUFF.

Or in an non-dual podded aircraft engines where it spits the turbine disc through the fuselage and beds it nicely into the engine on the other side.
AA 767 High Pressure Turbine Failure (http://www.dauntless-soft.com/PRODUCTS/Freebies/AAEngine/)

[NutLoose]

Lucky

https://www.tailstrike.com/310392.htm

https://mutleyshangar.com/forum/index.php?/topic/13925-one-doesnt-get-closer-to-crashing-than-this-a-true-story/

In French but a lot of photos

https://www.bea.aero/docspa/1992/5n-s920331/htm/5n-s920331.html




.. (https://mutleyshangar.com/forum/index.php?/topic/13925-one-doesnt-get-closer-to-crashing-than-this-a-true-story/)

[Union Jack]

The really sad part was that the China 747F had crashed in the Pacific ocean - with most of the wreckage under thousands of feet of water not enough was recovered to figure out what had happened (I was involved, and remember sitting in a meeting brainstorming ways we could physically loose two engine at the same time). When El Al went down into the apartment building the wreckage was readily recoverable and Boeing determined relatively quickly the fuse pin issue (BTW, technically it was not "fatigue", it was stress corrosion, and it was significant that both accident aircraft were freighters - 747 freighters fly more cycles at/near MTOW than the passenger versions).
That was a dark time at Boeing - the Lauda 767 had gone down in that same time period due to the T/R deployment in flight - meaning three major Boeing crashes due to mechanical failures of the aircraft in a relatively short period :eek:. That resulted in a major overhaul of the Safety Review processes (I was drafted into the Propulsion Safety Review Board early during that overhaul) - we were told in no uncertain terms that it was quite simply unacceptable for Boeing to loose (sic) another aircraft due to a design/build error.

BTW warbirdfinder, that's consistent with the story I heard as well - they knew they were going to crash so the people not involved it flying the aircraft were sent to the rear of the aircraft prior to impact - which most likely saved their lives.

An interesting observation, given the different situation described.

Huge credit too to the pilot in the circumstances initially described by Warbirdfinder.

Jack

[Tay Cough]

Maintain altitude on 2 engines i.e. 25% of its max power ? that's impressive .
Question for those in the know here :Could you maintain altitude on one engine on a A340 or a 747 ?

In the case of the 747-400, yes. The achievable altitude is weight dependent of course but high teens is realistic on two. It is also capable of flying a missed approach (two failed on the same side) with a bit of thought. On one at moderate weights, it can certainly maintain altitude in thicker air. I reckon you’d be lucky to get more than about 7000ft out of it having drifted down though.