Would you abort after V1?

[Pace]

>>I'm afraid I'm not that up on the 748 accident although I am aware of it. On the face of it the Captain made the right decision in my view and is to be applauded.<<

Ashling

I did post it but here it is again :-) but it does show your point of a Captain acting quickly and thinking outside the box In the text the AAIB referred the accident as not being a classic scenario and commended him for not following post V1 Engine fire procedures. Many here argued the fact that with an engine fire you continue the takeoff. But how do you know the severity of the fire, whether it will damage controls or systems and whether you can extinguish it. Its a Hard call .My arguement throughout this thread has been totally directed at " NOT CLASSIC SCENARIOS". and especially at a STOL Citation which I could quite happily plonk back down again at somewhere like Heathrow.

Pace


>>A pilot's unorthodox handling of an engine-fire emergency on a plane carrying the Leeds United football team has been backed by air investigators.
They ruled that the captain made the right decision immediately to re-land the aircraft rather than climb away and land later.

The Leeds United team was returning from a match at West Ham on 30 March 1998 when they were caught up in the drama on the flight from Stansted Airport.

The Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) report concluded it had been sensible for the captain to take over the controls from his less-experienced co-pilot.

Evacuation drills

The captain managed to get the Hawker Siddeley 748 turbo-prop aircraft back down on the runway after a fire broke out in the right-hand engine.

All 40 passengers and four crew on the flight escaped safely.

The AAIB report said the crew's actions in getting everyone out of the aircraft without fully completing the evacuation drills were "understandable in view of the severity of the fire".

The accident happened at 2330 GMT when the engine failed just after take-off for Leeds Bradford airport.



The co-pilot was at the controls when he and the captain heard a sharp bang.

The chief stewardess told passengers to sit down and advised the pilots that the right engine was on fire.

The AAIB report said that in a situation of this kind normal procedure would be for the pilot at the controls to take the plane into a climb while the other pilot went through an emergency check list.

Then the plane could be positioned to land at the departure airport or at an alternate spot.

But the report added that the sequence of events involving the Leeds plane was not "a classic scenario" and that the captain had decided to take control and re-land.

Engine fatigue

The AAIB went on: "The decision to re-land had to be made rapidly with the information available to him at that instant.

"This decision was sensible in the circumstances, as was his decision to take control from the competent but far less experienced first officer"

Making 19 safety recommendations, the report said the Dart engine had failed because of fatigue-cracking of the high pressure turbine disc.

Dramatic event

There had been four similar failures of Rolls-Royce Dart engines over 26 years, and one since - in June 2001, said the report.

The captain had said at the April 1998 news conference: "It was a split-second decision. Normal procedure would have been to do a complete circuit, but our judgment was that we did not have the time.

"We landed on the available runway. Unfortunately it was a little too short.

"The plane ran on to the soft ground and the nose wheel detached, making the event seem more dramatic than it probably was."<<