United B789 engine shut down in flight

[Ab Initio]

"A United Boeing 787-9, registration N38955 performing flight UA-839 (dep Dec 29th) from Los Angeles,CA (USA) to Sydney,NS (Australia), was enroute at FL380 about 960nm north of Pago Pago (American Samoa) when the crew needed to shut the right hand engine (GEnx) down suspecting an engine oil leak."
https://avherald.com/h?article=50313d45&opt=0

Happy New Year All

As a non-pilot I am curious to hear comments from professional types on this incident. Is this a big deal? And more specifically, just how difficult is it to fly and then land a large A/C on an unfamiliar airfield on one engine. I'm reminded of the tragic crash of an air ambulance in Sydney in 2010 which also lost one engine. Admitedly a much smaller A/C, the ATSB attributed the accident to the aircraft’s airspeed and rate of descent not being optimised for one engine inoperative flight. https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2010/aair/ao-2010-043

Welcome your comments.

[tdracer]

"A United Boeing 787-9, registration N38955 performing flight UA-839 (dep Dec 29th) from Los Angeles,CA (USA) to Sydney,NS (Australia), was enroute at FL380 about 960nm north of Pago Pago (American Samoa) when the crew needed to shut the right hand engine (GEnx) down suspecting an engine oil leak."
https://avherald.com/h?article=50313d45&opt=0

Happy New Year All

As a non-pilot I am curious to hear comments from professional types on this incident. Is this a big deal? And more specifically, just how difficult is it to fly and then land a large A/C on an unfamiliar airfield on one engine. I'm reminded of the tragic crash of an air ambulance in Sydney in 2010 which also lost one engine. Admitedly a much smaller A/C, the ATSB attributed the accident to the aircraft’s airspeed and rate of descent not being optimised for one engine inoperative flight. https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2010/aair/ao-2010-043

Welcome your comments.
Any professional pilot who cannot readily divert and land after the precautionary shutdown of an engine one a modern twin has no business in the pointy end of a modern airliner.

[Ab Initio]

Thanks tdracer - so all part of the job then. Appreciate your feedback.

[DaveReidUK]

Avherald reports one or more IFSDs (in-flight engine shutdowns) most days, and there will be many others not reported. Few are particularly newsworthy.

[Bergerie1]

Ab Initio, It's all in a day's work. Professional airline pilots practice this and are checked for proficiency flying such manoeuvres (and more) every six months in the simulator. It's no big deal.

[Ab Initio]

Thanks DaveReidUK & Bergerie1 - so engine shutdown & landing during ETOPS, no big deal and not newsworthy... that's good news! :)

[pax britanica]

I did read one report that said the plane had to 'circle' the diversion airport until daylight as there was no approach lighting. Surely any Etops diversion field has to be suitable for night operations, is this just journo stupidity /drama?

[BFSGrad]

I did read one report that said the plane had to 'circle' the diversion airport until daylight as there was no approach lighting. Surely any Etops diversion field has to be suitable for night operations, is this just journo stupidity /drama?
PPG/NSTU is listed with full runway lighting and multiple instrument approaches, with approach lighting for RW5.
Given the nature of the shutdown (precautionary), assume that engine would be available for restart and use in the event the remaining good engine failed.

[DaveReidUK]

I did read one report that said the plane had to 'circle' the diversion airport until daylight as there was no approach lighting.

The track on FR24 doesn't show any signs of a hold.

[pax britanica]

Thanks both,
I suspected that it was abit of journo elaboration , or perhaps apax not telling the difference betweena procedure turn approach to get into the wind as 'holding' and i certianly couldnt belive that there would be no approach lighting if it was an approved ETOPS diversionary airport. just shows how factual todays papers are .

[Max Angle]

It's all in a day's work.
Hardly, reasonably easy to handle it might be but the vast majority of commercial pilots won't shut an engine down in a 30 year career.

[WHBM]

Hardly, reasonably easy to handle it might be but the vast majority of commercial pilots won't shut an engine down in a 30 year career.
Surely everyone does it every six months in the sim ...

[Fly3]

tdracer (https://www.pprune.org/members/414340-tdracer)
Wholeheartedly agree.

[Good Business Sense]

Hardly, reasonably easy to handle it might be but the vast majority of commercial pilots won't shut an engine down in a 30 year career.

....... and some people shutdown a dozen plus (S**T magnets)

[slacktide]

It should be noted that the accident airplane you are referring to was a piston-engine twin, (Piper Mojave) which has barely enough power to maintain level flight with one engine inoperative. It's single engine rate of climb is only 250 FPM at sea level, about half what a Cessna 150 trainer is capable of, and a Cessna trainer is pretty anemic. Jet transport aircraft are certified to much higher single engine climb capability.