Originally Posted by Microburst2002
Was there ENG FAIL ecam warnings or there was just a loss of thrust?
Not too much info on the ECAM they got, if they had any … but it probably felt like an obvious deficit of thrust, which made the PF call for the
LOSS OF THRUST ON BOTH ENG procedure.
However both engines were still alive, one engine was very weak but the other one was still at 36% N1 and 2000pph FF up to the time both thrust levers were retarded, as per QRH.
That action may have reduced their options as Cpt Sullenberger was evaluating runway 01 in Teterboro … ?
But wait a minute ... Is it possible the QRH procedure has been renamed
ALL ENG FLAMEOUT since ?