View Full Version : Ryanair Engine Failure (again!)

26th Jul 2002, 09:20
Ryanair B737-200 EI-COB landed at Dublin last night with an engine failure of the No2 engine.
Whilst the crew did everything right, hence the aircraft landed safely i was told that the engine failure occured 1 hour into the flight to France and the crew decided to bring the aircraft back to Dublin.
This in my opinion is a descision based on economics and not for the safety of the passenger and think steps should be put in place to prevent this type of operator putting economics before passenger safety.

26th Jul 2002, 09:39
This isn't about Ryanair bashing its about passenger safety and rules being bent to suit airline intrests.

26th Jul 2002, 10:02
I totally disagree if an engine failure occurs we are taught to land ASAP at a suitable airfield and i dont think turning around into a HEAD WIND! as it was last night is a descision based on this. Quite simply the crew last night read between the lines of a suitable airfield, instead of choosing an airfield which was close,open,runway length,emergency services,weather etc etc they decided that a suitable airfield would be one that had all the above BUT also would be less of an inconvenience to the airline which in my view was the main reason for returning back to Dublin.
Everyone who flys for an airline has to draw the line between commercial preassures and safety and i think last night economics played a major part in the Captains descision which in my view is wrong!

26th Jul 2002, 10:02

There is a valid point here. It is drummed into us in my company that if you have a failure of one engine on a twin then you land at the nearest suitable airport. A colleague was critisised for returning to base even though the failure occurred only a short time after take-off. Management thought he should have landed at an airport which was below at the time.

As news of this Ryanair incident comes out it will be interesting to see exactly where the failure happened and if in returning to DUB a long overwater crossing was involved.......

26th Jul 2002, 10:24
Where did you get the information that they where 1 hour into the flight. Where you flying at that moment, so you know what wind was on their route. How do you know that they landed in Dub. because not to inconvenience the airl. Have you any idea how Ryanair trains their pilots. It seems that everybody thinks that management is allways on pilots backs, to keep every thing easy, at no cost, or not to inconvenience ryanair with anything. Doo are you stupid. Since I started here, all I have been thaught is keep safety no 1,2 and 3. It isnīt even mentioned in any training to try and do whats best for the company. Guyīs dont write about things you donīt know anything about.

26th Jul 2002, 10:30
MindtheGap In answer to your question Yes i was flying last night out of Dublin and the upper winds were about 300/40.
I heard the aircraft on approach, he was ahead of me and once on the ground the ground handler told me that the a/c had turned back after 1 hours flying.

26th Jul 2002, 10:48
And of course the GROUNDHANDLER knows...... EVERYTHING.
Could it maby be that after 10 min taxi-ing and t.off. 15 min climb departure that they had this problem which needed to look at. got into a hold or something, talked to engineers on the radio to try and sort things out, did all the relevant checks and came back, and there was an hour that went into all this?? I mean I donīt know what happened but there could be alot of reasons for this. It could also have been only 45 min instead of an hour??
Like I said donīt write about things you donīt know about, especially if you are slagging airlines off, get you facts straight. Otherwise it only makes you look stupid.

26th Jul 2002, 11:15
SkyGuy - Before you start mouthing off with innuendo try establishing a few facts rather than relying on what "the ground handler told me". How the hell would the ground handler know that it was one hour into the flight? on that basis you might ask him when the current depression in world equity markets will bottom out, or who is going to win the 3 o'clock at Doncaster this afternoon.

The facts are - The captain turned back at less than 10,000 ft, that's about 10 mins out of Dublin not one hour, secondly there was no engine failure - not even again as you put it

The only drama at Dublin Airport last night was the Airport Fire Tender whose brakes went on fire when they attended the FR aircraft - maybe the handler has an opinion on that one as well!

26th Jul 2002, 13:17
So what about the BA flight which had a failure over Montivideo (enroute EZE-LHR) and elected to continue overnight, and across the Atlantic to LIS??

Shall we all start bashing BA for not landing back at EZE ASAP? Never.....

26th Jul 2002, 14:23
I was en route to DUB last night. The winds aloft were unexceptional, so I can't see that was a factor.

A handful of airfields that we checked weather for in NE France were not all that nice as I recall.

The wx in DUB:

260/15 on landing
16 degrees
1015 QNH

Landing runway 16, with a healthy x wind and stealthy tail wind (not described on the ATIS!) dying sub 100 feet made for an interesting ride, but I can't see that any of the conditions at DUB would have affected the FR flight.

I am sure tha A/C commander weighed up the options. He made the right choice in my opinion, because everyone walked away.

We landed at 2305z, so there you have some info as to DUB last night....may the debate continue!

26th Jul 2002, 15:50
breaking.examiner.ie says 20 minutes out from EIDW

Mini mums
26th Jul 2002, 19:12

Mindthegap suggested we don't write about things we don't know about.

Your suggestion that a BA flight continued after an inflight shutdown may be completely correct, but if they did continue, then I think you'll find it was a 744, not a 777 on ETOPS. That's why it's handy to have 3 or 4 engines.

I really don't think your comments contribute much to this thread. Why not heed the advice . . . and refrain from writing about things when you're not in posession of the facts.

26th Jul 2002, 19:58
I landed 2 ahead of the FR 73/200 last night.
He was working 124.65 when he elected to return.
I would think he was half way between Vatry & STU when he turned back.
As I taxied on P2 he landed with a pitch up attitude as if he was either flapless or F15.
Sorry to disappoint the stirrers there was no panic, screaming, smoke, flames, blood or death.

Just 2 guys doing the job.:cool: :cool:

Plastic Cockpit
27th Jul 2002, 07:37
I hour into the flight. Holy cow that would have put them over the English channel somewhere. Me thinks more would have been said by now if they turned back through London airspace with an engine emergency.
I think there could be a fair amount of porkies being told here (but hey, doesn't the indudtry thrive on that).

27th Jul 2002, 11:08
I suppose Ryan Air and the operators of this aircraft will be getting an apology from SkyGuy then?

Capt PPRuNe
27th Jul 2002, 18:30
I too am getting a bit fed up with the continual bashing of fellow flight crew from Ryanair every time there is some sort of incident. As has been shown in this thread, the 'Chinese whisper' effect is rapid and there is no shortage of detractors who are quick to put the boot in without knowing even a fraction of the relevant facts which, as has been shown, are nowhere near as dramatic as some would have us believe.

Please, just stop and engage brain and add a modicum of logic before jumping in with the 'shock, horror, outrage, shrieking and wailing' that so many of you are guilty of. You accuse the press of exactly that kind of behaviour. Which bit of 'hypocrisy' don't you understand? :rolleyes: :mad:

Edited by Hamrah for small spelling error (I know I've worked him too hard :))

27th Jul 2002, 19:28
Hear Hear Danny.
eg, 'tother day an[other] Irish Airline had an "engine surge" and div'd to EGCC.
Nowt in't "Media":eek:
have I let the cat out of the bag?:rolleyes:
Fact. Engines [sometimes] go wrong:(
Fact. 99.999999999999999999999999999pc DO NOT CAUSE PROBS;) OK
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

28th Jul 2002, 00:12
The fact is, Danny, you are talkin about pilots and pilots are a**eh*les when it comes to making intelligent comments about their colleagues or the company they work for, or anything else for that matter, I know 'cos I was one for long enough.

So you just have to put up with it. It does'nt matter that the problem in this case was dealt with professionally, there will always be some gobshi*e who knows better, and an open internet forum is just an extension of the bar and we all know how many pilot "experts" live there. :p

28th Jul 2002, 00:38
Pancho - as they are all in bed in the UK now, rather than leave your potentially damaging post unchallenged for twelve hours or so, I'll just point out to you that if you search the forums you will find numerous instances where Danny has made it very clear that it is his BB and he will decide what does and does not stay on the board.

The last thing PPRuNe needs is a letter from a lawyer claiming that postings about, say, Ryanair by irresponsible posters, pilots or otherwise, could adversely effect Ryanair's customer base etc. etc. and threatening to sue for damages.

So, "just going to have to put up with it" ? - I don't think so!

28th Jul 2002, 13:19
The point is that if you are going to invite pilots to make comments, especially about their colleagues, you can be sure that 90% of them will be erroneous. It is a notorious fact that as a professional body pilots just love to bitch and gossip BEFORE finding the facts and getting upset by what they say is a waste of time because they will not change.

By all means warn them, use a disclaimer and watch that no direct attacks are made (this is unacceptable) but the comments on this thread, for example, are no more damaging than the average pub gossip that goes on around the pilot world. Wheather you like it or not dumb ass comments will be made.

The Ryanair Commander and Crew in question made a perfectly professional decision, the fact that so many of their so called colleagues are ready to have a go at them proves my point.

29th Jul 2002, 22:58
Hello All

I was there and a saw a bit of the goings on and also heard some of the R/T.

Now EI-COB was operating the Ryanair 28J, which makes its a Dublin-Stansted flight. Also was only a short time after T/O when cabin crew reported to the flightdeck , oily smell in aft cabin then shortly after that , No2 engine low oil pressure warning light can on, at that stage the engine was shut down and COB came back to Dublin. Landed on 28 and seemed to take ages to stop, went all the way to the end with the fire trucks following. Taxing under its own half power to stand 74 after visual inspection by the fire crew, (oil leak evident)


3rd Aug 2002, 17:32
What happened is rumoured to be as follows:
1. 737 pushed back from stand at Dublin. No 2 engine wouldn't start. Decided to go anyway as chances of another engine failure have to be slim, and besides the reduction in fuel burn would save the company money.
2. About and hour into flight it was realised that kgs had been confused with lbs when ordering fuel, and there was insufficient to reach destination.
3. Captain did the maths on speed/distance/wind (no 1st Officer to cross check as the airline was operating its new single pilot policy on this flight which further cuts costs in terms of salary and weight carried in the aircraft, offering yet lower fares for no great drop in safety), but forgot that 300/40 means the wind is from 300 at 40, not blowing 300 at 40.
4. A/C glided into Dublin from around Liffy and taxied on stand. The "1 hour" the engineer was talking about was the amount of time of the pilot had had off so far this year.

Much tosh on this post, song and dance about nothing. Had this been a full cost carrier, say Aer Lingus no doubt must posts would be "well done to the boys on the flight deck". Because its a low cost it must be due to a f*&Ģ up.

3rd Aug 2002, 18:50
What a player Timzsta, I like your style, you've got the hang of how to deal with this crap!

3rd Aug 2002, 21:23
I'm sure someone with more knowledge will correct me, but isn't the reliability target for safety-critical items like engines one failure per 100,000 cycles ? Ryanair have some 45 aircraft, or if you like, 90 engines, flying an average of say six sectors a day. 540 cycles per day,3,780 per week, 195,560 cycles per year. So statistically they should expect two failures per year, say three to allow for statistical spread. Seems to me they aren't getting any more. A lot of us may not like Ryanair very much, but we can't argue with their safety record.

4th Aug 2002, 00:44
>I'm sure someone with more knowledge will correct me, but isn't the reliability target for safety-critical items like engines one failure per 100,000 cycles ? Ryanair have some 45 aircraft, or if you like, 90 engines, flying an average of say six sectors a day. 540 cycles per day,3,780 per week, 195,560 cycles per year. So statistically they should expect two failures per year, say three to allow for statistical spread. Seems to me they aren't getting any more. A lot of us may not like Ryanair very much, but we can't argue with their safety record.

What's a failure in you assumptions?
If it is a minor failure like a single engine shutdown it would be more like ten times your number. For a failure that affects the safe return of the aircraft it would be more like your number.

Their safety record is well within reasonable reliability so far.

4th Aug 2002, 19:05
A single engine shutdown a minor failure ? Not in my world it isn't. But then again, I plan to live long enough to collect my pension.

7th Aug 2002, 01:26
I drove the lovely (and I DO mean lovely to fly) COB to France and Italy this evening. She behaved impecably all day. I thought it somewhat ironic though, when a pax brought to our attention the strem of oil down the side of the engine cowl. The usual "don't worry, that just means there's oil in the engine" and "that'll be a JT8" explanations didn't stop this guy from coming to the flight deck after we landed in STN.
When he saw the oil quantity (3.9 gallons ) he seemed happy enough.
Anyway I've watched this thread with interest since it's inception and I'd just like to say; although it generally makes for good gossip and interesting reading (sometimes), I'm sick of all the FR bashing. So many people say that, so many people say "you might not like 'em" etc...... So many people think it's terrible, but so many people keep on slingin the Sh#t.
Ryanair crews work bloody hard. They also work safely and efficiently (as efficiently as G spot let them i suppose).
Please let this be the last post on this inane topic.
This thread shouldn't even have been here.
In fact I've had enough, bye...