Ek 380 Cdg-dxb

[pintofstella]

Heard from engineers that the 380 flt Paris-Dubai yesterday had a severe engine stall(engineers words) in the cruise and returned to Paris and during the landing a few tyres burst. No fuel dumping occcured.
Aircraft needed an engine change.
Sure will be more info to folllow

[puff m'call]

Interesting!

[troff]

Which airframe was it? Anyone know?

[flaphandlemover]

AvHerald reports:
all questions answered... normal ops again:ok:


Incident: Emirates A388 near Zurich on Jul 13th 2010, engine shut down in flight

By Simon Hradecky, created Thursday, Jul 15th 2010 14:34Z, last updated Thursday, Jul 15th 2010 14:34Z
An Emirates Airlines Airbus A380-800, registration A6-EDG performing flight EK-74 from Paris Charles de Gaulle (France) to Dubai (United Arab Emirates), was enroute at FL300 about 30nm northwest of Zurich (Switzerland) about 30 minutes into the flight when the crew needed to shut engine #3 (inboard right hand, GP7270) down. The airplane returned to Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport, where the airplane landed safely about 40 minutes later.

A replacement Airbus A380-800 registration A6-EDH was dispatched to Paris and reached Dubai as flight EK-74D with a delay of 20 hours.

[Mister Warning]

So much for the "four engines for long haul" theory....
Why not continue to Dubai?

[Bidalot]

So much for the "four engines for long haul" theory....
Are you really a pilot ??? Did you ever think about fuel penalty while having one ENG wind milling incl. the additional drag as well as EK fuel policy ?

[Praise Jebus]

Biddy, I take it you don't fly four engined jets.... It is possible, although no certainty, that using the EK fuel policy you could make it. Assuming no other restriction.

[Bidalot]

Praise, it is NOT possible. Recalculate pls, it was @ 280 during climb out. Fuel penalty is too big thus you will not make it back to DXB.

[Praise Jebus]

The information above indicated an a/c in cruise, however I, and I suspect Mr Warning are talking generally about 4 eng jets. The whole idea of 4 engines is to allow continuation. In this case going back would make sense (I have no facts of the flight) . The last 3000nm of a 4 eng cruise uses about the same amount of gas as with one shut down. At least it does on the 345. Re-calculate pls....

[helen-damnation]

It doesn't matter whether you have the fuel or not :hmm:

"After failure of one engine on a four engine aircraft, the Commander may continue the flight to destination or any suitable alternate, having considered the potential consequences and/or further failures en-route".

High terrain in Turkey/Syria/Iran - depressurisation/ 2 engine out level etc, etc - or - 40 mins from departure point.

IMHO - a good decision.

Here endeth the lesson :O

[Bidalot]

Dear Praise, pls refer and ask for inputs re EDE last week into SYD and you will understand. Also do not compare the drag of an 343/345 to an 388 ( size ).

[helen-damnation]

pls refer and ask for inputs re EDE last week into SYD

I'm asking, do tell :ooh:

[TWOTBAGS]

Yes Sydney last week was a nightmare.

The aircraft got in and all pax offloaded as the aircraft did not continue to NZ it left on the Saturday 3 Engine ferry back to DXB.

Well 4 engine take off and 3 for cruise, the gingerbeer described it as the aircraft endurance exceeded the engine oil capacity.

The terminal was interesting for a day and a half I must say:}

[a345xxx]

Probably just teething problems for the Engine Alliance. All new engines go through this..... If you recall the GE engines on the 777 were not given ETOPS ratings for a while due to compressor stalls and the RR on the 330 ... well who can forget their IDG mess which resulted in CX grounding the whole fleet and also the debacle of the PW's on the MD11.

They will get it right .....in the end!

[Oblaaspop]

As an A340 driver, I have often considered the 1 engine out scenario.

If I was out of Europe back to DXB, and so long as the Engine hadn't suffered major damage (ie Just a FADEC problem for instance), I would consider carrying on aiming at DXB for a while. It is HIGHLY unlikely that you would have enough fuel to make it the whole way back (lower cruise level, remaining engines at MCT etc) as fuel burn WILL be more than with all 4 donks running.

However, it is likely that you would get 'close' to home! From western Europe, I would probably plan to make t as far as IST or LCA eg 3-4 hours closer to home which would make the disruption to pax and company 7-8 hours less over all. This is of course in an A343/5 where just about every Airport en-route can handle the type.........

Herein lies the problem with the A380. I'm sure the crew DID consider the 'pointing at DXB' option, but with just about NO other Airport along that route currently being able to handle the A380 (or its 500 pax), clearly the most sensible and commercial option in this case was to return??

Food for thought chaps?

[MrMachfivepointfive]

This wasn't a split second decision. It was well thought through. For example: Where is the home base of the closest A380 operator that could borrow you a spare GP engine? CDG and AF, perhaps?? How long does it take to get on-site support from Airbus? Check the number of daily flights between TLS and CDG.

[Ketek400]

The reason for going back was that Air France had an engine for replacement. That is it!!! FACT.