Another Qatar Airways A330 Engine Flameout
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Middle Earth (Middle East)
Age: 54
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another Qatar Airways A330 Engine Flameout
heard there's another case of engine flame out on one of Qatar Airways A330. can someone confirm?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dohacity
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Happend in Severe turbulence at FL330. Was a single engine flame out, not on the same aircraft!
Auto relight was initiated as per Airbus manual. As a matter of fact, the crew barely noticed they had a flame out at the moment. ( remember: no ECAM warning for a flame out, the first warning you get is when the Gen goes off line)
Engine relit within 45secs.
Flight continued to KIX uneventfull.
Investigation still going on.
Auto relight was initiated as per Airbus manual. As a matter of fact, the crew barely noticed they had a flame out at the moment. ( remember: no ECAM warning for a flame out, the first warning you get is when the Gen goes off line)
Engine relit within 45secs.
Flight continued to KIX uneventfull.
Investigation still going on.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey guys,
I see all the time people selecting continuous ignition during cruise. That's not gonna protect you on the contrary its slower than auto relight function. there's a very useful file from airbus on the www.wingfiles.com called selecting the continuous ignition. Have a look at that!!
Fly safely!!
I see all the time people selecting continuous ignition during cruise. That's not gonna protect you on the contrary its slower than auto relight function. there's a very useful file from airbus on the www.wingfiles.com called selecting the continuous ignition. Have a look at that!!
Fly safely!!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dohacity
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats correct, in both QR incidents the auto ignition was working just fine and the selection of continous ignition would not have prevented anything....
In the case of the dual flame out, the actual failure was caused due to the fact that there still is a certain amount of ice build up on the blades when descending in idle with anti ice on...
Upon spool up, this ice brakes loose and enters the combustion chamber, hereby disrupting the correct fuel/air ratio in the mixture. The ECU is unable to detect this in time hence a flame out...Even with ignition continously on, the flame out would have happend ( water plus fuel is not combustible....)
In the KIX case, the flame out probably ( remember, still ongoing investigation) by a disruption in airflow. Again the fuel/ar ration would have been changed causing the flame to go out....Ignition would not have prevented this.
Only thing to do, follow the airbus OEB when descending in icing conditions and for turbulence....just keep an eye on the thrust settings...
Keep it safe
In the case of the dual flame out, the actual failure was caused due to the fact that there still is a certain amount of ice build up on the blades when descending in idle with anti ice on...
Upon spool up, this ice brakes loose and enters the combustion chamber, hereby disrupting the correct fuel/air ratio in the mixture. The ECU is unable to detect this in time hence a flame out...Even with ignition continously on, the flame out would have happend ( water plus fuel is not combustible....)
In the KIX case, the flame out probably ( remember, still ongoing investigation) by a disruption in airflow. Again the fuel/ar ration would have been changed causing the flame to go out....Ignition would not have prevented this.
Only thing to do, follow the airbus OEB when descending in icing conditions and for turbulence....just keep an eye on the thrust settings...
Keep it safe
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Europe trying to enjoy retirement “YES”
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pardon me for asking, but I was under the impression that modern engine design and the so called stringent certification requirements would identify what seems to be a serious failing in the engine design. The comment earlier in the thread enquiring if it was both engines reinforces the idea that possibly all is not well with the engines fitted to this type of aircraft. I understand that Qatar Airways have experienced a double engine failure and that this has happened on a number of occasions world wide, instances of single engine failures have reached double figures. Fortunately the auto start system seems to have worked. However one must ask, what about the occasion when a gremlin prevents the restart? Also if one has the two engine failure option, I presume that the Auto Start sequence and the response from the crew is a little more complicated than selecting a switch position, I also suspect some pressurized air is required to turn the starter? Possibly a RAT. So my question must be what are the odds of this happening and what is being done to prevent it happening.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Building Site
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
outhouse, don't have a lot of time to answer.. pub calls!!
Anyhow, briefly, autostart does just what it says, start automatically, no fiddling with switches needed... (actually it's an autorelight function)
A RAT would never produce pressurized air. The RAT will only pressurize the GREEN hyrdaulic system, which in turn could run the Emergence GEN. So the RAT can produce Hydraulics or Electricity, No AIR.
The windmilling of the engine would be sufficient to try the initial restart, and at lower levels you could try the APU for APU bleed pressure.
Airbus aknowledges the problem with icing on fan blades, hence the OEB. And it's not an airbus problem, it's a common engine problem. Don't forget that only the cowling of the engine is heated, and the spinner has some kind of a rubber that vibrates to knock of ice in early stages. If you leave the blades turning at a constant (low) RPM, EVERY engine will build up blade ice in moderate or heavy icing conditions.
Hope this answers a few of your questions.
Of to the pub now...
MR8
Anyhow, briefly, autostart does just what it says, start automatically, no fiddling with switches needed... (actually it's an autorelight function)
A RAT would never produce pressurized air. The RAT will only pressurize the GREEN hyrdaulic system, which in turn could run the Emergence GEN. So the RAT can produce Hydraulics or Electricity, No AIR.
The windmilling of the engine would be sufficient to try the initial restart, and at lower levels you could try the APU for APU bleed pressure.
Airbus aknowledges the problem with icing on fan blades, hence the OEB. And it's not an airbus problem, it's a common engine problem. Don't forget that only the cowling of the engine is heated, and the spinner has some kind of a rubber that vibrates to knock of ice in early stages. If you leave the blades turning at a constant (low) RPM, EVERY engine will build up blade ice in moderate or heavy icing conditions.
Hope this answers a few of your questions.
Of to the pub now...
MR8
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Europe trying to enjoy retirement “YES”
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MR8, many thanks for your reply and hope the beer was cool, I don’t know how much a pint is now but one from the pump would be very welcome at almost any price just now.
The automatic relight is assuring and thanks for information regarding the RAT, engage brain before writing springs to mind on that one. However I am still a little concerned about the engines ability to flame out in these conditions, and the historical evidence of double engine failures occurring. Has this affected the ETOPS certification and the flight envelope of A/C types fitted with this engine. I assume that the OEB modifies the operating parameters to take the engine out of this area thus reducing the chances of similar failures.
Thanks again MR8, should the in-flight movie screen go blank the cabin lights go out and the engine noise stop on my QA flight to PCD next month I will know that the chaps in the pointy end are well prepared.
outhouse
The automatic relight is assuring and thanks for information regarding the RAT, engage brain before writing springs to mind on that one. However I am still a little concerned about the engines ability to flame out in these conditions, and the historical evidence of double engine failures occurring. Has this affected the ETOPS certification and the flight envelope of A/C types fitted with this engine. I assume that the OEB modifies the operating parameters to take the engine out of this area thus reducing the chances of similar failures.
Thanks again MR8, should the in-flight movie screen go blank the cabin lights go out and the engine noise stop on my QA flight to PCD next month I will know that the chaps in the pointy end are well prepared.
outhouse
