RYAN AIR ENG FAILURE

[NOODY]

any truth in the rumour that ryanair recently had an eng failure overhead manc and continued on to dublin?

heard this from a reliable source and apparently this is well known within BMI... yeah baby!

taking cover in the North!

[MachBuffet]

single engine drift down from overhead Manchester shouldn't preclude Dublin so what point are you making Baby

[ 18 January 2002: Message edited by: MachBuffet ]</p>

[bagpuss lives]

I think not

[NOODY]

my point is .

a. did it really happen?

got no axe to grind but want to know if it is true. if it's true it's been kept very quiet. if it's not then i'll know why it's a rumour and not in the TIMES.

b. as i don't know what stage of flight the "possible" failure occured so i have no idea about driftdown profile!

[NOODY]

hey mach buffet,

just a thought....since you've worked out the driftdown plan.....what hgt were they/you at?

[Posh boy]

spsoilt tom you sound like blood thirsty journalist. As mach b said it's not a big deal, perhaps that's why they don't boast about it. <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

[skymonkee]

It was me and i couldnt be arsed landing at manc as my car was in the carpark at dublin, anyway its cheaper not to move the pax from manc , not that we would have bothered anyway.
it wasnt in the paper as its none of you business.
as forcalculatin the drift down , dont have to mate its the 21st century, ever heard of an fmc, and ps i have a validation from a non jaa state and didnt do any of your silly exams either.

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: skymonkee ]</p>

[GearUp CheerUp]

In my company, if you have an engine failiure in a 2 engine aeroplane (thus becoming a single engine aeroplane) you land at the nearest suitable airfield (not continue 100 miles to destination when over head a place like Manch)

(Edited to add)

On the other hand from FL310 you could probably glide from overhead Manch to Dublin

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: GearUp CheerUp ]</p>

[NOODY]

skymonkee.........you rule dude. did i know you in the airforce!

i wish i was a journalist, i'd cover footie and page 3 birds and spend my life in the pub.

i didn't know the 200 had an fmc. aint it called pcds? i realy don't know...enlighten me

boasting about an eng failure...... i thought you just followed the qrh mate.

i am mainly intersted to find out if it was a crappy 200 or a nice new 800. i fly the 436 so i was interested because you don't hear of failures often.

as for the continuing on comment.... please don't get over excited. 2 eng fails in 10 years. put them both on the nearest sensible runway. if thats what dublin was then great, as i said since i have know idea if or where this happened i just looking for some gen.

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: spoilt tom ]</p>

[nzer]

"Nearest suitable airport - "IN POINT OF TIME" is the requirement in my part of the world - if at normal crz trype altitudes seems to me time to descent and set up for an IAP into an a/port below you = same as normal profile descent and landing @ an a/port 100 nm away - in time - what's the problem, technically speaking? No data given on weather etc @ the respective airports - sounds like "bashing the opposition" to me.

[janpieter]

In my opinion, even on 2 engines, an enroute diversion always gives a lot of suplementary workload, find the charts, get the MET, RWY lenght
notams, elevation, MSA...If you are in a single engine emergency in a acceptable distance from your home base, where you can fly the approach with eyes shut, why not continue and give full attention to the emergency?
I agree that in CAVOK condition, you have no option and land asap.
I flew 1200 hrs on C-150, and C-172, so I was 1200 hrs in an single engine emergency?

[Davey Clark]

In my opinion!

If overhead EGCC when the poo slapped the fan, best to roll inverted, pull a few "G", and go for EGCC. Absolutely no point in staying wings level, ball in the puddle, and "slipping" onwards to EIDW...or is there?

Wings level, Ball in the puddle!

[Sir Kitt Braker]

Some people call Mayday for an engine failure on a two engined jet- why is that? Does it mean that all aircraft with one engine are in a permanent state of Mayday from take-off?

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: Sir Kitt Braker ]</p>

[Hamrah]

Sir Kit,

I think the correct policy is to call a "Mayday" for an engine failure on takeoff because at that critical stage of flight you want everyone to know you have a serious problem and everything out of your way. It is usually best downgraded down to a "PAN", once the situation is under control but you still need to "land as soon as possible", (rather than spend 25 minutes holding for Traffic!)

[LRdriver]

If I recall correctly, there is a patch of water between Manc and Dublin.

Could this be why people have such a difference in opinion?
I am not trying to be rude, just trying to see what arguments are pro and con this scenario. We are talking about an engine failure(assumption is not an engine fire as,hey, Manc it is then ASAP..)

I vote this thread go to the Tech forum to discuss and lets avoid mudslinging.)

[Sir Kitt Braker]

Hamrah - are all single engined aircraft in a permanent state of "Pan" then??

[B.Navez]

Another factor in this case that can affect your decision making is how you manage your remaining engine. Driftdown rules call for max cont thrust to make the slope flat, but is that really a good idea to push your remaining one quite hard when its the only one you've got left?
Apart from that, I quite agree with the fact that, if the source of the failure can be determined precisely enough to make sure that it doesn't endanger the aircraft (like a fire or severe damage), then why not go to the destination if so close? And here, Dublin is the homebase, so, how could there be a better place to put in the aircraft? Only bear in mind that its handling will somewhat be crappier..., but like someone said here, a single engine aircraft should not fly in a permanent distress situation!

BTW, anyone knows if a restart was attempted?

[King Chile]

A wise old sage (howdy Figment) once suggested that the best place to go to with an engine failure is to your home base - the reason being that this is where you parked your car and as such you'll be able to drive home, via the pub, because you might enjoy a beer after an engine failure !

[Few Cloudy]

Good post from Hamrah.

As regards single engine aircraft think a bit further - a twin or multi is constructed with its systems based on all engines. You lose more than thrust when the donk fails. A single has everything working on its one engine.

As to being in a permanent state of Pan, I once flew across the Alps and back in IMC in a Cessna and it sure felt like Pan to me.

[mjenkinsblackdog]

If engine failure occurs Mr Boeing Says Land at nearest suitable airport.
That does not mean flying over water to get home to base when there is a Suitable airport right under you.
Check Out QRH . <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[christian_MD80]

I would let everybody on the frequency know, that I have some serious problems. Best done by using the magic word, MAYDAY. In my case the aircraft wants to change about half of the air below to be above, even more if heavy and in icing conditions.

Drift down might be considered, as we fly around the Alps, or even better to Georgia with its caucasian mountains getting up to 5.000 m.

Homebase is always a good idea, if you don`t get yourself into deeper troubles because of a large distance. 100 NM is not that far, but why flying away from a perfectly usable airport? Decisions have to be made, thats all. After that, discuss it, learn from it, agree or disagree with the actions but keep a profesionell level throughout the discussion.

chris

[gingernutter]

Since Kegworth, general policy of most airlines would be to land at nearest suitable airport. But, in any event, we don't no the full story. It is quite likely that what was done on the day was perfectly acceptable, so let's wait to hear the facts.

[mjenkinsblackdog]

Soddit ,you cannot spell ,plus the QRH item is the same for B737/B757/B767.
Stop splitting hairs. <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[OzDude Fan Club]

mjenkinsblackdog, the QRH says NEAREST SUITABLE AIRPORT. There is no mention of below, ahead, behind or to either side.

If you were an experienced jet pilot you wouldn't be stirring the cr@p here. You wouldn't question a crews decision to carry on to DUB if they had an engine failure overhead MAN whilst in the cruise. The ONLY time a crew would drop down from overhead in the cruise to an airport directly below is if there were NO OTHER SUITABLE airport within 100nm. It looks like you are just trying to stir the pot because you would know that there are plenty of suitable airports within gliding distance from overhead MAN.

A jet cruising at or above FL310 and experiencing an engine shutdown would need at least 100nm to lose the altitide whether it was in a straight line to an airport ahead, behind or underneath. An engine shutdown is not a mayday situation unless there are additional problems such as a fire or anything that is immediately endangering lives. A mayday may be called initially but once an engine has been shut down and provided there is no fire, severe damage or separation then the nature of the emergency can be downgraded to a PAN which will still provide priority handling by ATC.

So, a B737 suffering an engine failure overhead MAN en route to DUB would require several minutes to identify the problem, perform the recall drills, perform the QRH checklist whilst handling any driftdown if necessary due to weight. Considering the distance from MAN to DUB is approximately 130nm and also considering that the a/c still has an operating engine and is perfectly capable of flying on that single engine and considering that the operator has a maintenance base there and considering that the original destination was DUB anyway, all considered in that order, by the time a decision is made the a/c would have been requesting descent for DUB anyway!

So mjenkinsblackdog, unless you are really an experienced jet pilot leave the decisions to the real pilots who were there and are trained to make those decisions in the first place. I wouldn't advise making those kind of cut and dried statements with such authority if you are being considered for a command.

[Stan Woolley]

Just a couple of thoughts.

Assuming reasonable weather everywhere, and an engine stopping in the cruise at say FL350 overhead the MCT.

If the other engine were to stop, where would you rather be,65nm from both Man and Dub at say 20000ft or overhead Manchester(I know,go to Valley but the same principle applies halfway between Valley and Dublin at 10000ft).

As the QRH says 'land at the nearest suitable airport' for both fire and straightforward engine failure,would you continue to Dublin with a fire?

If I (as a pilot) were a passenger in that situation I would rather go to Manchester.I know, I am a coward!!

You can try and baffle everyone with 'science' but I agree with Black Dog, who last time I saw him was a jet airline Captain!

The interesting question to me is not where they went,but why?

[mjenkinsblackdog]

Nelly remind me not to fly with you.Even O leary isnt in to dead stick into DUBLIN.
P45 for you laddie. <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[DouglasDigby]

Hummmm, MCT - DUB = 145 nm. Single-engined, never mind that it's mainly over the sea?? Land at Manchester or Liverpool (weather permitting). Plenty of time to run QRH, etc.

[sky9]

I find it rather sad that all and sundry are second guessing the decision of another airline pilot. The fact that they are not in receipt of all the information makes it sadder still.

My only hope is that any decision was made on the material facts at the time and the wish to please his CEO had no influence on the the Captain's choice of destination.