PDA

View Full Version : Belfast emergency landing under investigation


Marko Ramius
8th Oct 2005, 09:43
"Belfast emergency landing under investigation

An investigation is underway into what caused a passenger aircraft to make an emergency landing in Belfast last night.

The Flybe plane, with 55 passengers and crew on board, had just left Belfast City Airport when the pilot identified a possible technical problem.


The jet was en route to Liverpool.

Minutes into the flight, the plane was forced to divert to Belfast International Airport, where it landed safely.

The airline is understood to have made alternative travel arrangements for those affected."

Article can be found here (http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaking/story.asp?j=83933828&p=83934zxz&n=83934299&x=)

Groping for a story I think.

Mouser
8th Oct 2005, 10:45
A jet? it's normally a Dash 8 400 used on this route.

Kestrel_909
8th Oct 2005, 10:56
T'was a Dash8 as far as I know.
The BHD-LPL route must be jinxed:(

Tower Ranger
8th Oct 2005, 11:05
It was a dash 400 with 67 pob. One engine was shut down and it diverted to AA rwy17 due to the crosswind at the City.

sennen
9th Oct 2005, 21:10
THIS A/C WAS A DASH 8 Q400 IT DIVERTED FOR OTHER REASONS
AND IS NOT UNDER INVESTIGATION.

Kestrel_909
9th Oct 2005, 21:12
Though it did remain at BFS until Saturday afternoon/evening before positioning back to City I believe.

Tower Ranger
9th Oct 2005, 21:20
sennen

Now you have got us interested. If it didn`t divert to AA rather than land back at AC why would it take rwy17 at AA which has a similar lda to rwy22 at AC?
Here`s hoping you`re second post will be as informative as your first! Are you saying that the a/c hadn`t shut down one engine?

eastern wiseguy
10th Oct 2005, 00:52
THIS A/C WAS A DASH 8 Q400 IT DIVERTED FOR OTHER REASONS


Nope ...it had an engine out ..and then it diverted to BFS ...NOW .......over to sennen......




ps ....tr ..YOUR spelling MUST be better if you are to join us!!

RAFAT
10th Oct 2005, 04:25
I don't yet know the actual reason why the crew diverted, but one possibility is that, because Belfast City has LDAs on 04 & 22 of less than 1800m, SOPs dictate that a flap setting of 35 is mandatory. An engine out means landing at flap 15 or less, so going strictly by the book one cannot land single-engine on the DHC8 at Belfast City.

I think 17 at Aldergrove is just a smidge over 1800m.

Flying Dispatcher
10th Oct 2005, 11:38
RAFAT,

That is not strictly true. The flap 35 SOP that Flybe operate is for normal operations only. With one engine inop, a flap 15 landing is required according to the manual.

In the event of non-normal ops, the landing Distance Required is taken for the aircraft Emergency Checklist performance section. Dependant on which engine has failed will depend on the distance required.

Maude Charlee
10th Oct 2005, 14:12
FD

That is exactly what he has said if you would like to read the post thoroughly.

Cloud Chaser
10th Oct 2005, 20:03
YOU'RE only half right.
To quote from the B4:

The aircraft has a good margin of excess power when flying on one engine and is able to conform to a normal procedure with the exception of the go-around with Flap 35. The approach and landing is therefore made at Flap 15 (unless WAT limits reqire a lower setting). If Performane requires a Flap 35 landing this is permitted but diversion should be considered first.

So Flap 35 OEI landings are allowed but should be avoided if another option is available.

RAFAT
11th Oct 2005, 04:06
The 1800m rule is not based on any actual performance figures, ie. landing distance required, it's just that somebody thought it was a good idea at the time (cutting a long story short) and wrote into the SOPs. There is absolutely no flexibility in its application, if a flap 15 landing is required due to a non-normal situation, then one cannot land on a runway with an LDA of 1800m or less.

Flying Dispatcher
11th Oct 2005, 20:28
do oppologise.....misread the post!:8

However the 1800m rule has no relevance in a non-normal situation. If the book says that you can land flap 15 with 1675m (figure plucked from air) then it is possible to land at BHD.

Flap 5
12th Oct 2005, 08:43
Can't understand why some of you would be querying why a crew would divert to a longer runway which is just next door. It's common sense. Why land on a shorter runway when there is a longer one available?

Flying Fiona
12th Oct 2005, 10:25
Why do you need a longer runway on one engine? Or is it peculiar to a Dash?

Send Clowns
12th Oct 2005, 11:21
It is not required directly due to the operating one-engine inoperative (OEI). The go-around performance OEI requires that the approach is made with 15 of flap or less. The flap setting requires a higher approach speed, and thus a longer runway.

Flying Fiona
12th Oct 2005, 11:43
Seems strange a turbo prop can't stop in 1700 metres with a Flap 15 setting.

ltn and beyond
12th Oct 2005, 14:00
Fiona, You must have forgotten how over complex opperating the Q400 is when faced with engine shutdown performance, stopping distances and flap settings etc.

If i was still in the sharp end and faced with the same issue then BHD would not be my choice of airfeild to land at as the asymetric
thrust in reverse on 1 eng is a thing to be avoided ( i think that is in the AFM somewhere !!).

Hows life on the hair dryer ??

L & B

Flying Fiona
12th Oct 2005, 19:00
Can a Dash not stop without reverse in 1700 metres?

rigpiggy
13th Oct 2005, 01:06
most a/c require a longer distance OEI regardless of the flap setting. given the choice go long, at least you won't overrun unless you really screw the pooch

RAFAT
13th Oct 2005, 22:47
FF - there would be absolutely no problem landing with an engine out at BHD, but the recommended flap setting for landing under such circumstances would be 15 to satisfy go-around performance, and the B4 states that flap 35 is mandatory on runways of less than 1800m. What this means, as I said before, is that operating in accordance with the B4 (and not reality) means that with an engine out you could not land at BHD. As I also said before, the 1800m ruling is nothing to do with actual performance, it's just that someone senior on the fleet thought it was a good idea at the time, so it was written into the B4.

Cloud Chaser
16th Oct 2005, 19:49
A Q400 returned to BHD on one engine quite recently. The management described it as a "textbook recovery". Would seem an odd comment if this wasn't permitted.:confused:

RAFAT
22nd Oct 2005, 02:50
Quite correct. The aircraft Commander is of course allowed to deviate from the B4 if he/she considers non-standard procedures appropriate. Thankfully common sense prevailed in this instance.