Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Article: NTSB: Emirates 777 continued flight after loud bang, messages

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Article: NTSB: Emirates 777 continued flight after loud bang, messages

Old 1st Sep 2011, 01:41
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post Article: NTSB: Emirates 777 continued flight after loud bang, messages

source

By John Croft

The US National Transportation Safety Board revealed in a preliminary report issued 30 August that an Emirates Boeing 777-200ER crew continued a 5h flight from Moscow's Domodedovo airport to Dubai on 5 March after hearing a "loud bang" and receiving several error messages on departure.

Pilots of Flight 132 (A6-EMH) reported the incident after landing at Dubai, according to the General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) of the United Arab Emirates, the authority handling the investigation.

"Following the bang a number of status messages were annunciated, these messages occurred over a 16 minute time as per the Boeing AHM (airplane health management) data," the report stated.

Messages indicated a problem with the right Rolls-Royce Trent 800 engine, and included a thrust asymmetry compensation message that is issued when the flight control computer automatically uses rudder input counter the yaw effects of a failed engine.

Four additional messages were received on departure, followed by two AHM messages after landing.

Flightglobal's ACAS database shows that the 14-year-old aircraft is owned by Veling and has Trent 884-17 engines, members of the Trent 800 family. As of 31 June, the aircraft had accumulated 61,581 cycles and 12,945h, according to ACAS.

Inspection of the aircraft in Dubai revealed "a large section" of the right engine's inboard fan duct and thrust reverser were missing, starting at the trailing edge and ripping forward.

Overall, officials estimated that 2.8-3.7m2 (30-40m2) section of engine covering to be missing, along with the primary exhaust nozzle outer skin. The primary nozzle inner skin had been "holed in several locations at the 12 to 1 o'clock position," the report stated.

External to the engine, the one tyre on the main landing gear "was observed to have a large cut to the sideway" of approximately 36cm (14in), officials said. Examination of the aircraft and engine was to continue but the results have not yet been posted.

The report does not discuss what procedures the Emirates crew followed after hearing the bang and receiving the AHM annunciations or whether the aircraft should have been returned to Domodedovo.
Squawk7777 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 01:52
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I note it says "status" messages. It could very well be that none of these had an associated abnormal procedure, so the implication in the article that the crew ignored something they shouldn't have is a bit naughty.

Sounds like something happened, the aircraft systems noted it, but it never was determined (by those systems) to be serious enough to post a message requiring crew action. And since the flight completed uneventfully, its hard to argue with that determination.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 01:55
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question

Sounds like something happened, the aircraft systems noted it, but it never was determined (by those systems) to be serious enough to post a message requiring crew action. And since the flight completed uneventfully, its hard to argue with that determination.
Messages indicated a problem with the right Rolls-Royce Trent 800 engine, and included a thrust asymmetry compensation message that is issued when the flight control computer automatically uses rudder input counter the yaw effects of a failed engine.

What does the QRH procedure say?
Squawk7777 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 01:59
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: sydney
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Unusual utilisation?

As of 31 June, the aircraft had accumulated 61,581 cycles and 12,945h, according to ACAS.
Average of 13-minute flight time. Or maybe it's block time, in which case DXB is amazingly efficient.

A lot of training flights? Sim broken?
Groaner is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 02:01
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Squawk7777
What does the QRH procedure say?
If Boeing uses the term "status message" in a manner consistent with us (or is that vice versa) I'd guess "nothing at all" - status messages don't require crew action.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 02:24
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Average of 13-minute flight time. Or maybe it's block time, in which case DXB is amazingly efficient.

A lot of training flights? Sim broken?
61K cycles as quoted is highly suspect. Aside from it being well beyond the base DSO of 40K, that figure is well out of the ball park for a 14 year old long-haul aircraft.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 02:28
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think its the FH number that is bogus too.

14 years is 122 640 calendar hours. 12 945 FH implies the plane is being used only 10% of the time. Unless its a hangar queen, that seems impossible.

Bets on it being 61k hours and 13k cycles? That'd be 50% utilization and 2.5 cycles/day which sounds more credible.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 02:33
  #8 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 2,171
Received 24 Likes on 13 Posts
It would be 61k hours, and 13k cycles, sounds about right for an aircraft that also does short hops around the ME and into Europe.

That works out to be an average utilisation of around 12 hrs a day, which also sounds about right.
swh is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 04:57
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Since when journalists knows how to assess a 777 Non-Normal situation better than a trained crew!
Status Messages = no actions required and no troubleshooting either. Only maintenance on ground can take care of a Status messages.
Cycles are important, but maintenance in ME is probably one of the best in the world!
This episode won't affect the almost clean T7 record!
Non Zero is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 05:05
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As of 31 June
What date? That'll be the 1st of July then
TopBunk is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 06:55
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 827
Received 76 Likes on 12 Posts
According to Aviation Herald, here are some of the status messages received:

...the crew received a number of status messages in the following 16 minutes including: "THRUST ASYM COMP", "ENG EEC1 C1 R", "ENG EEC MODE R", "ENG R EPR BLANKING", "TURB OVHT SNSR ENG R". The flight was continued to Dubai where the aircraft landed safely with a delay of 40 minutes (departure with a delay of 10 minutes). After landing more status message occurred including "FIRE LOOP 1 ENG R" and "OVERHEAT CIRCUIT R1".
You be the judge....

Last edited by grizzled; 1st Sep 2011 at 09:25.
grizzled is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 07:38
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Boldly going where no split infinitive has gone before..
Posts: 4,783
Received 44 Likes on 20 Posts
...Gladly.

There is no checklist or remedial action required for status messages. They are for information and maintenance action.

What are you suggesting should have been done? Shutdown an engine in defiance of the Boeing Bulletin specifically recommending against it? Divert when there was no actual non-normal situation?

I'm judging they did exactly as they were supposed to....
Wizofoz is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 08:07
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Boldly going where no split infinitive has gone before..
Posts: 4,783
Received 44 Likes on 20 Posts
Well, I AM a 777 pilot and....

Consider? Certainly. I believe MCC was contacted by SAT PHONE, the situation assesed, and the decision that it was safe to continue made, resulting in a safe landing at destination.

No, the situation was not typical and thus required management, which was done. Are you suggesting anytime ANYTHING unusual happens, a return to origin is required?

Where exactley is anyone (and grizzled, you are doing so by implication) getting the idea that anything other than a professtional job was done?

ETA, for some reason this post keeps appearing before Check Aiormans post, even though it was written in response to it!!

Last edited by Wizofoz; 5th Sep 2011 at 04:48.
Wizofoz is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 08:07
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am not typed on the 777, thus cannot (and will not) judge the crew. However, for the experienced 777 crews, even though no action is required for status messages, wouldn't the appearance of multiple messages connected to the engine cause you to consider returning to the airport?

My rationale would be that it wouldn't be the first time a computer system generated seemingly innocuous messages when a more serious problem existed.

Is it typical of the plane to generated multiple status messages during flight?
Check Airman is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 08:26
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for that reply.

I'm not saying that any fault requires a return, but I would certainly let the PIC know that I'd have reservations about continuing the flight. If he elected to continue, I'd be paying extra attention to possible en-route alternates just in case.

And to be clear- not saying the crew did not act professionally. I'm just trying to get a deeper understanding of how these situations are dealt with.
Check Airman is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 08:50
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On a Wing!
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wizofoz,
You sound like a decent EK trainer, who is appropriately rated on the T7, unlike some of the armchair pilots we see here on this forum.
Pray tell me then, what EICAS messages do you get on this airplane between 80kts and 400 ft AGL...??!!
I think the answer to my question should answer your query WRT the lack of eicas msgs and the presence of status msgs only.
Why then was the airplane dragged thru 5 hours of a trip.
Who was trying so desperately trying to get the plane 'back to base'. Which one of the 2 morons on the FD was trying to brown nose him/herself into the managments pants to enable a promotion...
And at what cost.
Last but not least, what was 'managment's' advice on ACARS when the AHM msgs hit home...
All wonderful questions, with dubious answers, I am sure..
King on a Wing is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 08:53
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On a Wing!
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some posts missing.....this one written before post #13.
Still doesn't answer my question.
King on a Wing is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 09:03
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After take off a bang is heard and several status messages (all related to the engine) pop up...
The identification phase surely tells you that the bang is related to the engine as the status messages confirm, so why continue the flight knowing there is something wrong with the engine?!
Maintenance will always want the aircraft back home... its the crew in the end who decide..
euroflyer is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 09:18
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 827
Received 76 Likes on 12 Posts
Wizofoz...

Re:
(and grizzled, you are doing so by implication)
Huh??? All I did was provide some clarity to the discussion by showing what some of the actual status messages were (at least according to Av Herald). Your response suggests you are a tad sensitive re this particular event. FWIW, I certainly am not hung up on it one way or the other.

When I have something to say (on pprune or elsewhere) I say it. I don't imply. Sheeeesh....
grizzled is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2011, 09:41
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
loud bang

As a RATED Pilot on the 777, any "loud bang" followed by any status msg(s) would have resulted in a return to the departure airfield. Irregular status messages could have been managed and continued to destination, however these coupled with a "loud bang" is just waiting for the swiss cheese model to unfold!
629bus is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.