Originally Posted by
JammedStab
According to this article, "experts" recommend FADEC equipped airplanes do so in "areas of electrical activity" after some CF-34 flameouts. Are CRJ guys required to do this? Not recommended on any Boeing FADEC airplane as far as I know......
FADECs programmed with surge-protection logic can respond to flow disruption temperature spikes by automatically shutting down the engines. This aircraft configuration has proven to be vulnerable to engine flameouts as a lightning strike charge travels longitudinally down the sides of the fuselage seeking an exit point. In the case of closely spaced fuselage-mounted engines, the strike’s “aero-thermal effects” can disrupt intake flows of both powerplants. FADECs programmed with surge-protection logic can respond to such disruption temperature spikes by automatically shutting down the engines. On the other hand, hydromechanically controlled engines, as an indirect result of lightning strikes, will tend to experience transient over-temperature conditions while continuing to operate, as shutdown protocols are manually controlled by the flight crew.
In 2001, an Embraer ERJ 145 regional airliner received a lightning strike while descending for an approach to Manchester International Airport in England, followed by the left Rolls-Royce AE3007 turbofan flaming out without a cockpit annunciation. The crew was on top of the situation and immediately transitioned to a successful single-engine landing. A post-incident investigation concluded that the failure of the FADEC-equipped engine was due to the aero-thermal effects of the strike characteristic of aircraft with small-diameter fuselages and aft-mounted engines. It further considered that a risk existed for loss of both engines, but investigators were unable to quantify that.
As for GE’s CF34 turbofan, aft-mounted on the Bombardier Challenger 601 through 604 business jets and CRJ series airliners, a company spokesman said such “rollbacks” due to lightning strikes have been minimal. “Since 2014, there have been four events determined significant,” he elaborated. “In three of the four cases, the engines relit without issue. In the fourth case, the engine was struck by lightning and the crew opted to shut down the engine as a precautionary measure [and] the aircraft landed without incident.”
As a precautionary measure when entering areas of electrical activity in aircraft with FADEC-equipped engines, experts recommend that, if within operating limits, flight crews fire up the APUs so that, in the event of a double engine failure, electrical power and hydraulics will be maintained while emergency relights of the engines can be attempted. (Note that it is possible that APUs can be affected by lightning strikes, too.) It’s also a good idea for flight crews to review memory items for a dual engine relight before venturing into areas of known lightning activity.
Lightning: Risks, Detection and Avoidance Business Aviation content from Aviation Week
I work for the worlds largest operator of -900s, and we have a couple of ex Bombardier program test pilots flying the line. I have never heard it discussed here.
Our fleet manager is extremely knowledgeable and obviously has great connections to the OEM, so I'm gonna call B on this.
As an aside; we do start the APU for Cat II approaches to have an extra generator available...