With the type of a/c concerned and the available runway length left I'd say that this was a good call by the Captain. SOPs are all very well but there are (occasional)times when common sense has to take precedence.
Land as soon as practicable..when you have lots of runway to spare right in front of you, why not?
As a helicopter pilot (V/STOL ) when taking of from runways, we do it all the time; why struggle with an aircraf with problems if you can simply land safely on what happens to be the same runway you departed from?
These guys obviously knew their machine and its performance, so well done.
...The HS-748 was cleared for take-off with full dry power; At an airspeed of 111 kt the aircraft became airborne. Less than five seconds after the 'rotate' call, at an airspeed of 115 kt and a height of between 30 feet and 100 feet agl, the no. 2 engine suffered a catastrophic failure resulting in a sudden loss of power and an immediate substantial nacelle fire. The aircraft yawed 11deg to the right of the runway heading, the crew were told by the senior cabin attendant that the right engine was on fire. The aircraft was in the air for a total period of 27 seconds before it touched down. The aircraft ran off the end of the runway at 62 kt...
This was an identical engine failure to the HS748 at Stansted
The Transportation Safety Board of Canada report number H90001, Quebec Air F27B Rolls Royce Dart engines, CF-QBL Flight No 255 Quebec City Airport, 29 March 1979
The flight lasted 1min 12secs after lift off. Fourteen passengers and three crew died in the crash.
"At time 36 seconds after brake release there was a loud bang from the right engine as it disintegrated and a severe fire developed. The aircraft was at approximately 103 kts and 40 feet above the runway.
At time 42 seconds, The captain started the engine failure/fire emergency drill.
At time 45 seconds, the tower controller who had noticed flames from the right engine advised flight 255 that the right engine was on fire and authorised them to land on any runway.
From time 50 seconds to 1 minute 05 seconds the crew attempted to raise the landing gear which never came up.
The aircraft climbed to about 120 feet above the runway elevation and started a right turn, apparently in an attempt to complete a short circuit, remain visual and execute an emergency on the airport.
At time 1 minute 14 seconds the captain called for the propeller to be feathered. Up to this point the crew did not know that the right engine had separated at the first stage impeller and the forward section of the engine along with the forward section of the engine along with the propeller and some cowling had fallen onto the runway
At time 1minute 24 seconds the No 1 fire bottle was fired and the aircraft continued in a right turn at about 100 feet above the terrain at a very low airspeed. The engine fire continued.
As the aircraft approached the College de Sacre Coeur, the angle of bank increased and the aircraft started to descend until impact.
Impact occured in a nose down, right wing low attitude at approximately 80 kts.
A fierce fire broke out and most of the fuselage forward of the wing was consumed by fire."
The Rolls Royce Dart engine had suffered an uncontained failure.
A little different from flying a spam can from a big runway. At Prestwick I normally take off from Mike which is half way along 13/31 (9800 Feet long) and in doing practice EFATOs I can get back down onto the same runway or cross over to 21 most times if I'm still below 300 Feet. Mind you - that has assumed that my "donkey" has "stopped" fairly soon after leaving the ground...
I don't see the releveance of your post to this thread, I think we are talking about landing straight back on here, not doing a circuit to land.
I am pretty sure the LoganAir Twotter pilots using long runways such as Campbeltown have a "committed" call on their take off checklists where they will commit to a circuit in the event of an EFATO, however if the EFATO is before the "committed" call and they are airborne they will attempt to land straight back on the remaining runway.
Please refer to the HS748 post above, Do you continue with the take off after a catastrophic uncontained engine failure or, do you continue with the take off having suffered the catstrophic failure, aware that there was still some runway available ahead.
The F27 captain chose to continue with the take off with disastrous fatal results. The HS748 captain decided to land back on the same runway with no casualties. Same situation, but different decisions.
I knew the guy flying the QB F-27, he was in the class at QB behind me. They took off on R06, at the time 6500 feet long, and attempted a visual return to R30. The accident occurred at night in conditions of low ceiling and visibility. Debris from the disintegrating compressor had entered the DC electrical panel behind the co-pilot's seat and the electrical connection between the gear selector and the panel had been severed, thus the gear would have never come up anyway. The lower engine cowling had come unlatched and air loads had jammed it against the MLG drag strut creating even more aerodynamic drag. The final nail in the coffin came when the stewardess moved the passengers from the right front of the cabin to the left rear, putting the C of G of the airplane outside of limits. While I can see where Fangio is coming from there is very little comparison between the two.