EK413 engine failure..
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And...... back on topic. This is an Emirates thread, thanks
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peuce
You've clearly never flown a four engine aircraft before. An engine failure is not necessarily a requirement to divert, in fact a straight failure will usually allow continuation to destination if you are over 2/3's thru the flight.
This failure does not appear to be a time critical event. Although they clearly wouldn't have had the fuel to make destination, it still made sense to leave the aircraft pointed in the direction it was going for 12 minutes while they worked the problem and meant that navigation was one less thing to deal with. Fuel jettison would have taken a considerable period of time to achieve anyway.
Nothing worse than a rushed attempt to return or a quick/wrong decision for a particular course of action when the availability of time has not been established.
You've clearly never flown a four engine aircraft before. An engine failure is not necessarily a requirement to divert, in fact a straight failure will usually allow continuation to destination if you are over 2/3's thru the flight.
This failure does not appear to be a time critical event. Although they clearly wouldn't have had the fuel to make destination, it still made sense to leave the aircraft pointed in the direction it was going for 12 minutes while they worked the problem and meant that navigation was one less thing to deal with. Fuel jettison would have taken a considerable period of time to achieve anyway.
Nothing worse than a rushed attempt to return or a quick/wrong decision for a particular course of action when the availability of time has not been established.
Reminds me of the Irish joke, where the captain reports a succession of engine failures in the 747, meaning the arrival time becoming more and more delayed. After hearing of the 3rd engine failure Paddy says to his mate: "If dat last engine fails, we'll be up here all day!"
Aaaand, back to the serious discussion...
Aaaand, back to the serious discussion...
Got to love the comments from pax that FA's looking out the window = panicking. Errr, how do they think the flight crew are going to get an accurate report without 'eyes in the back'? (yes yes I know there are cameras etc but I don't think they are clear enough or positioned correctly for this sort of thing)
As for engine change, I don't think Sydney on ground in springtime will be an issue... recall an article awhile back about someone in EK engineering creating a custom 'tent' to cover the area so they could work in adverse conditions and get urgent maintenance completed. Guess they can do the same here if needed.
QF equipment is different and not the right sort required for engine issues, about a year back a flight out of Sydney needed a component replaced and while QF had the spare the equipment required to fit it was not compatible, or so their engineer told us.
As for engine change, I don't think Sydney on ground in springtime will be an issue... recall an article awhile back about someone in EK engineering creating a custom 'tent' to cover the area so they could work in adverse conditions and get urgent maintenance completed. Guess they can do the same here if needed.
QF equipment is different and not the right sort required for engine issues, about a year back a flight out of Sydney needed a component replaced and while QF had the spare the equipment required to fit it was not compatible, or so their engineer told us.
Guys, no I've never flown a 4 engined aircraft and never likely to. Hell, I have enough trouble pushing one engine around the sky.
I'm equally aware that, technically, an A380 could easily drag its backside to Dubai with 3 donks ... provided it had enough go juice.
Yes, settle things down, do the checks, do the sums and take a deep breath.
However, considering the un-seen collateral damage an engine failure caused to an A380 in Singapore, albeit an uncontained failure, which this doesn't appear to be, and considering the bad publicity received by another carrier when they recently completed a long haul leg with 1 down, out of LAX I think, is it really a philosophical or public relations option ... to continue on?
Would you really want a bus full of 400 edgy passengers down the back for 14 hours?
I'm equally aware that, technically, an A380 could easily drag its backside to Dubai with 3 donks ... provided it had enough go juice.
Yes, settle things down, do the checks, do the sums and take a deep breath.
However, considering the un-seen collateral damage an engine failure caused to an A380 in Singapore, albeit an uncontained failure, which this doesn't appear to be, and considering the bad publicity received by another carrier when they recently completed a long haul leg with 1 down, out of LAX I think, is it really a philosophical or public relations option ... to continue on?
Would you really want a bus full of 400 edgy passengers down the back for 14 hours?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sand and dust, I hate the dust and I hate the sand
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
????
EX A380/ Atiuta
Are you serious?
I can understand if they were somewhere enroute, but continue on three engines just after departing??
"They may have wanted to continue and land further down route once the fuel allowed landing at below max landing weight."
They had just taken off from SYD heading for DBX, so maybe the Alice or DRW was a consideration? Plenty of A380 spares there as opposed to returning to SYD
Are you serious?
I can understand if they were somewhere enroute, but continue on three engines just after departing??
"They may have wanted to continue and land further down route once the fuel allowed landing at below max landing weight."
They had just taken off from SYD heading for DBX, so maybe the Alice or DRW was a consideration? Plenty of A380 spares there as opposed to returning to SYD
From the radar tracks it looks like they didn't need to dump fuel, unless they did it over land. After the incident they turned due east to the coast, but before they were over the ocean they returned to near Mudgee where it happened and then tracked for a south approach to R34.
They landed shortly after 11.30 pm. I'm surprised they were allowed to land so long after the curfew, I mean what's the point in having a curfew if aircraft can bust it willy nilly any time they like just because an engine was underperforming? I can see this will open a can of worms, with airlines scheduling engine failures when approaching Sydney out of hours. Turn them back, like the boats I say. (you there Alan, c'mon, back me up here)
They landed shortly after 11.30 pm. I'm surprised they were allowed to land so long after the curfew, I mean what's the point in having a curfew if aircraft can bust it willy nilly any time they like just because an engine was underperforming? I can see this will open a can of worms, with airlines scheduling engine failures when approaching Sydney out of hours. Turn them back, like the boats I say. (you there Alan, c'mon, back me up here)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: under a rock
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They landed shortly after 11.30 pm. I'm surprised they were allowed to land so long after the curfew, I mean what's the point in having a curfew if aircraft can bust it willy nilly any time they like just because an engine was underperforming? I can see this will open a can of worms, with airlines scheduling engine failures when approaching Sydney out of hours. Turn them back, like the boats I say. (you there Alan, c'mon, back me up here)
nah, he started strong but over did it. barely a pass, sorry.
There is a 3 engine ferry flight procedure in the AMM they should use that option to get it home.
Thai used this on a 744 a few weeks ago out of Sydney as well.
Thai used this on a 744 a few weeks ago out of Sydney as well.
"New"...over 5 years now, SQs first flight with them was in Oct 2007
Even if this was birdstrike the A380 is having alot of problems.
There is absolutely no requirement to return or divert following the loss of one engine.
Diverting an hour or so away (ie BNE or MEL) is one thing but to fly on for 8 hours is going to be hard to justify if you then had another problem on arrival or almost ran out of fuel like BA did a few years ago.
I mean what's the point in having a curfew if aircraft can bust it willy nilly any time they like just because an engine was underperforming?
Last edited by neville_nobody; 13th Nov 2012 at 04:25.