Originally Posted by
By George
I am currently working as a 737 Sim Instructor. We teach no rotation equals severe damage. On the instructors panel, selecting this function simulates no N1 and no N2 with no vibration. The only difference to a straight failure being a distinct 'pop' during the actual failure itself. If the candidates treat it as a simple failure to be tackled at the end of the fourth segment, it programs a fire before they reach this point. The Civil Aviation authority we work under treat no rotation as severe damage and expect shutdown in the second segment.
I have had a failure of this nature in real life, although it was a JT8D. It sounded like a bucket of bolts spinning around with initial vibration but once it seized, no vibration at all. There are limitations to even modern simulators and despite the, 'Just like the real thing' sing song they are not and never will be.
I’m posting from a decaying memory here (and I know someone will correct me if wrong!) but I recall that there is a difference with approach/attitude from the airframe manufacturers (and hence data providers and these days often the source of the software model) with issues such as “Severe Engine Malfunctions” and “Engine response to Volcanic Ash encounters”.
Whilst Airbus and others suppliers support these types of malfunctions with vibrations, sometimes quite severe or erratic engine indications and or shutdowns being experienced, Boeing tends to take a different approach and has stated that there is no or insufficient data for them to provide the model.
The TDMs of course are obligated to only meet approved data.