Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Jetstar low speed rejected takeoff - FOD

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Jetstar low speed rejected takeoff - FOD

Old 16th Aug 2021, 21:55
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Canberra
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jetstar low speed rejected takeoff - FOD

Searched but couldn’t find a thread on this.

Brisbane VH-VFF 23 October 2020

25 mm screwdriver bit damages engine after being there for around 100 flights

ATSB report
https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...r/ao-2020-058/

No injuries. ‘Only’ damage to an engine.

Thought it interesting the pilots mentioned the ‘startle’ factor - real world being both louder and with more vibration, than a sim. Also they had never practiced a low-speed rejected takeoff - needing a different technique to high-speed rejected takeoffs.
layman is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2021, 23:31
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by layman View Post
Searched but couldn’t find a thread on this.

Brisbane VH-VFF 23 October 2020

25 mm screwdriver bit damages engine after being there for around 100 flights

ATSB report
https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...r/ao-2020-058/

No injuries. ‘Only’ damage to an engine.

Thought it interesting the pilots mentioned the ‘startle’ factor - real world being both louder and with more vibration, than a sim. Also they had never practiced a low-speed rejected takeoff - needing a different technique to high-speed rejected takeoffs.
Would the screwdriver bit be magnetic, and could this have been stuck somewhere because of that?
Anti Skid On is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2021, 00:06
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: shoe box
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would have thought low speed RTO would be part of the recurrent training matrix?
Sue Ridgepipe is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2021, 00:08
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: in denial
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I recall a QF767 losing an engine on takeoff out of SYD due an Apex Bit finding its way into bleed ducting. Sneaky little things.
Veruka Salt is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2021, 00:51
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 49
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did the Capt just say screw it, don’t want to work today.
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2021, 05:57
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: England
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I recall reading an AAIB report about a 737 (possibly, I forget) out of Gatwick suffering a similar problem after someone left a spanner in the engine.
I think on that occasion the aircraft got airborne.
munnst is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2021, 07:01
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is from the Safety First magazine about low speed aborts. Airbus recommendation? Practice in the sim.

5. Conclusion
This in-service incident illustrates the challenges associated with containing the sudden asymmetry resulting from engine failure during the first seconds of a take-off acceleration. However it is possible to maintain directional control by reacting immediately and in a coordinated manner:
q Thrust levers are closed
q All reversers are selected (even if designated as an MMEL item)
q Apply up to full opposite rudder pedals until directional control is regained
q Braking may be symmetrical or differential as needed to complement steering
q Steering hand-wheels may be used when taxi speed is reached.
Being in a position to effectively respond implies that both pilots have adjusted their seat such as to be in a position to simultaneously apply
full rudder and full brakes on the same side if required. Effective response also relies on crew training. Therefore Airbus supports Operators including RTO’s
scenarios in the recurrent training. The engine failure should be unexpected and introduced at speed well below V1. Such scenarios would address simultaneously the seat adjustment and the coordinated response
to the sudden asymmetry.
The problem apparently is harder braking gets applied in the direction of the divergence.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2021, 16:12
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In a van down by the river
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought that tool inventory control for aircraft maintenance had expectations on a par with surgical instruments in an operating theater. Everything is checked out and inventoried back in before any work can be signed off.
Fonsini is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2021, 23:39
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lookleft View Post
This is from the Safety First magazine about low speed aborts. Airbus recommendation? Practice in the sim.



The problem apparently is harder braking gets applied in the direction of the divergence.
Below 72kts the autobrake doesn't activate in a reject. If you're used to doing RTO's above that speed (and they are), then the fact the thing isn't braking probably would catch you out for a second.
das Uber Soldat is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2021, 03:03
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Low speed reject is much harder, depending on the nature of failure, speed of occurrence and reaction time, you might be lucky to keep it on the runway.

https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/...m_Sweden,_2010
krismiler is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2021, 05:59
  #11 (permalink)  
Rug
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Lounge
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Uber, your point is correct and the startle effect caused will only serve to exacerbate the more fundamental technical issue that Lookleft refers to.

A low speed RTO caused by engine failure or asymmetric setting of takeoff thrust causes significant yaw surprisingly quickly. It's very difficult to steer out of it while applying effective differential braking at the same time.

Having trained for both of these scenarios in the sim on a slush covered runway with medium/poor braking action I can say it's very difficult to prevent a runway excursion. Extremely valuable training, the exposure to it will hopefully stand in good stead if ever required.
Rug is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2021, 07:07
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Sydney
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fonsini View Post
I thought that tool inventory control for aircraft maintenance had expectations on a par with surgical instruments in an operating theater. Everything is checked out and inventoried back in before any work can be signed off.
Yes, and errors occur in the medical world as well.
MJA Chaser is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.