Engine Failure Procedure route
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine Failure Procedure route
For each runway at every airport my company operates out of there is a published Engine Failure Procedure.
Most of these, taking Manchester as an example, go along the lines of 'Climb ahead to 1700' then turn right to hold at MCT' for 23R. For 05L it gets slightly more complicated; 'Climb ahead to 5D MCT, turn left head West, at 10D MCT turn left back to MCT to hold.'
The primary aim with an EFP, logically, is to keep the aircraft within a safe terrain corridor, and obviously, all of this takes into account that said aircraft has declared a mayday and other aircraft would be vectored out of the way as much as possible.
However, are Air Traffic aware of the route we might take? I asked this of a Manchester controller once who was surprised at the route that we'd take. Both of the procedures I've noted above would appear to take the aircraft, and bird remains, towards a stream of Manchester inbounds.
The other point of note is the stop altitude. In a briefing, most people tend to suggest that they would either stop at a minimum hold altitude, somewhere around 3000', perhaps the MSA, 3500' or the SID stop altitude, 5000'.
Which, if any, of these stop levels would be best for ATC bearing in mind that this aircraft would most likely be heading back to hold overhead the airfield - right in the path of any subsequent go arounds.
Most of these, taking Manchester as an example, go along the lines of 'Climb ahead to 1700' then turn right to hold at MCT' for 23R. For 05L it gets slightly more complicated; 'Climb ahead to 5D MCT, turn left head West, at 10D MCT turn left back to MCT to hold.'
The primary aim with an EFP, logically, is to keep the aircraft within a safe terrain corridor, and obviously, all of this takes into account that said aircraft has declared a mayday and other aircraft would be vectored out of the way as much as possible.
However, are Air Traffic aware of the route we might take? I asked this of a Manchester controller once who was surprised at the route that we'd take. Both of the procedures I've noted above would appear to take the aircraft, and bird remains, towards a stream of Manchester inbounds.
The other point of note is the stop altitude. In a briefing, most people tend to suggest that they would either stop at a minimum hold altitude, somewhere around 3000', perhaps the MSA, 3500' or the SID stop altitude, 5000'.
Which, if any, of these stop levels would be best for ATC bearing in mind that this aircraft would most likely be heading back to hold overhead the airfield - right in the path of any subsequent go arounds.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Colchester
Age: 40
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine Failure Procedure route
Similar question comes up now and then on my outfit. It genuinely seems that these routes are not pre-arranged with air traffic (just imagine the file a Tower would need to keep for every type/airline/weather condition...)
As for conflicting with inbounds, sure, you're going that way but as soon as you call mayday then they are going to be scattered like pins at a championship bowling tournament.
Intermediate level-offs...basically comes down to you and your captain. Anything you climb to has to be lost again at some point, but air below your wings gives you a bit more margin from the ground. Eg an uncontrollable engine fire? If it's VMC and nothing to conflict then traffic pattern height might suffice. Gear stuck down? Might as well climb up and burn off some fuel...just as two examples.
The important thing is that you are asking and thinking about it!
As for conflicting with inbounds, sure, you're going that way but as soon as you call mayday then they are going to be scattered like pins at a championship bowling tournament.
Intermediate level-offs...basically comes down to you and your captain. Anything you climb to has to be lost again at some point, but air below your wings gives you a bit more margin from the ground. Eg an uncontrollable engine fire? If it's VMC and nothing to conflict then traffic pattern height might suffice. Gear stuck down? Might as well climb up and burn off some fuel...just as two examples.
The important thing is that you are asking and thinking about it!
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Similar question comes up now and then on my outfit.
I have been retired for 7 years now, so procedures might have changed, but ATC were never aware of engine failure routes at EGPD & 'JJ.
We just complied with the Captain's requirements & got the a/c in ASAP.
We just complied with the Captain's requirements & got the a/c in ASAP.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditto
Same at my unit. ATC don't know individual airline procedures. Mayday/pan pan when you can...select 7700...the airspace around you will soon clear...and again, when you can, let us know problem & intentions 
We're not here just for the good times...
We're not here just for the good times...
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Toronto
Age: 57
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had this conversation with crew on a fam out of MAN 15 years ago. We were due to depart 06L (as it was then) on a HON SID and in the pre-briefing the engine out procedure was discussed with its left turn to 300°. We discussed how ATC was not aware of this procedure and how separation might initially be compromised if we were following a preceding departure on a WAL/NOKIN SID but we would figure it all out pretty quickly once the Mayday call was made stating that we had "engine failure and we're turning left to 300°."
SLF asking here.
Why would the procedure not be determined by airframe/engine mfgr or the local ATC? Mfgr knows the capabilities of the hardware and ATC knows used approaches and plane locations.
Engine out is a dynamic situation in a dynamic situation. I don't see how procedures written way before the event suffice.
Why would the procedure not be determined by airframe/engine mfgr or the local ATC? Mfgr knows the capabilities of the hardware and ATC knows used approaches and plane locations.
Engine out is a dynamic situation in a dynamic situation. I don't see how procedures written way before the event suffice.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever someone will pay me to do fun stuff
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question answered, and not for the first time. But just in case you missed it, no, ATC don't know the specific procedures for each airline...or aircraft...or engine. Or for any of a multitude of other things where a standard procedure cannot be followed for some reason. Yes, some of the options that may be followed by a crew might surprise the odd controller but tell ATC what you need to do and the controller will sort it all out - that's what they're there for and paid for.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To expand on LFAJ - even if you cannot tell ATC due to workload, they will sort it out. Always remember "Aviate-Navigate-Communicate". While 'silence' will raise ATC stress levels more than somewhat, your chances of hitting another a/c in the big sky are very small.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HANTS
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silence is always a wake up for us....it might be just a missed call(twice) but it gets the cogs grinding as to what else might be going on and we'll already be loosely planning for an unexpected scenario.
