PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Wall Street Journal: Airline Regulators Grapple With Engine-Shutdown Peril
Old 9th Apr 2008, 17:37
  #23 (permalink)  
safetypee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
These additional icing hazards near Cbs have been known for some time; several major incidents occurred in the late 1990’s. I am surprised that Mr Hooky did not search the NTSB records for at least two events which they investigated circa 2000.
There are many manifestations of weather related engine malfunctions near Cbs.
At lower altitude there have been events of flameout due to high water content ‘flooding’. Most of the engine types affected have been modified and/or restrictions applied including the use of cont ignition.
At higher altitudes, there have been problems with ice crystals or soft hail leading to ‘mixed phase’ icing. Here, the supercooled water / ice might quickly dissipate the airbleed heating or the liquid water content acts as glue for the ice crystals resulting in a build up. These effects might exceed the engine de-icing capability, or accumulate ice which progressively blocks the compressor resulting in a slow loss of power (overtemp) as opposed to a complete flame out. Modifications to the airbleed increased the anti icing heat flow; it does not suck the ice out as in the report.

The industry has learnt a lot about these unusual conditions, which are normally associated with the larger CBs (but all Cbs are hazardous).
Many of the ice crystal events occurred at the edge or outside of the icing certification boundary (Appx C to CS 25); these conditions are extremely difficult to recreate, thus tanker testing has not been a viable option. A significant amount of research was undertaken by BAE SYSTEMS in the late 1990s in conjunction with the University of Manchester (UMIST) and Lycoming / Honeywell; the information was shared with industry for use in certification guidance and engine modification. However it appears that the information has not reached all of the operating community.

The WSJ report appear to be based on dated information, or the NTSB are revisiting an old problem, or an old problem is resurfacing as pilots forget about the conditions, or new ‘high’ tech engines are not as robust as previous ones. Whatever the reason there is still good cause to avoid Cbs by a large margin and select engine anti icing on early, particularly if descending into icing conditions.

RR engines? Perhaps they are slightly more tolerant; they may not stop, but in ‘coughing’ and ‘spitting’ out ice they may not give full power (not BA038 related … yet).
safetypee is offline