Arrow Air DC-10 loses part of engine on t/o Manaus

[alexmcfire]

Gas path, explain why a 30year old plane can´t have age issues?

[lomapaseo]

explain why a 30year old plane can´t have age issues?

could it be because the engine is what failed and the engine and the plane have only been together for a few months.

OTOH, give us a hint of what you mean by an age issue

The design itself has been around for a long enough time to have numerous Service Bulletins and maintenance updates applied to it. If the engine carcass (original data plate) is old I bet the parts are not.

To me the issue is the last maintenance and what Service Bulletins were complied at that time.

[Old Fella]

Age related?

Alexmcfire. This is probably not the only No 2 Engine failure since Sioux City, nor is it the same type of failure. The Sioux City aircraft had suffered a FAN disc failure, a completely different and more catastrophic failure than that which befell the Arrow aircraft. Whether the age of the engine has any part in the failure is yet to be determined, but can reasonably be guessed is that a material failure occurred, probably due to a stress fracture or metal fatigue. At least give the crew the benefit of their demonstrated ability to assess the flying characteristics of the aircraft and the integrity of the hydraulic systems. They seemed to do alright to me.

[act700]

"It's not my accusation, it's from a statement of the regional accident prevention and investigation service (SERIPA), the air force branch responsible for investigating this incident"



Case solved!

[angelorange]

Flight's report here:

PICTURE: Arrow Cargo DC-10 sheds large engine parts over Manaus

[fleigle]

Given the Brazilian tendency to jail or hold crew by seizing passports after something goes wrong I could see why the crew would NOT want to land back there.

f

[Jofm5]

Picture of the damaged aricraft at The Aviation Herald

[alexmcfire]

OF, can you give us some examples inbetween Sioux City and Manuas where
parts have fallen from the middle engine during flight?
Thanks in advance.

[free at last]

DC10 Age

If maintained DC10 will be around a lot longer than most of US. Great airplane from one who has flown, it.

[Old Fella]

Number 2 Engine failures on DC10

alexmcfire I do not know how many failures of the the Number 2 engine have occurred with the DC10 between the Sioux City and Manuas events, nor does it matter. By the way, engine failure does not necessarily always mean disintegration. Engine failure can take many forms from catastrophic to relatively minor component failure leading to engine shutdown. In any event, all failures are assessed individually by the operating crew who have the responsibility to determine the subsequent actions. My point is that it is easy to throw crap at the decision made by a crew. It is equally as useless to prejudge them when you are thousands of miles from the event. As I said before, this crew handled the failure in a manner which led to the safe recovery of the aircraft. They should be given credit for that. I have been part of the crew on any number of flights where we continued on less than all engines because that was considered the prudent thing to do. Fortunately, I never had to handle such a failure as happened with either the Sioux City aircraft or the Arrow Air aircraft. I have, however, had contained turbine failures and other failures leading to a shut-down. I guess we made the correct decisions and are still here to remember them.

[barit1]

If you think about what symptoms the Arrow Air crew saw, they probably made an appropriate decision:

Loud bang
N1 spooling down
Nosedown trim required
N2 may or may not be good
high vibs
low fuel flow
low (or loss of) EGT
Low oil pressure, oil quantity dropping

I don't think they knew instinctively that they'd lost a big chunk of engine - they certainly couldn't see it.

So they shut down #2 and kept going. This is BY NO MEANS the longest OEI flight by DC-10; a SR DC-10 flew KHI-ATH on two in Sept. 1978.

At some point Arrow Air made the wise decision not to head toward the very high terrain of Bogota, and diverted to Medellin.

And as fleigel and others have pointed out, there was probably considerable incentive not to remain in Brazil, where they may have been presumed guilty before proven innocent. This presumption ADDED an element of risk that may come back to bite the Brazilians some day; the sooner they overcome this, the better for everyone.

[lomapaseo]

Loud bang
N1 spooling down
Nosedown trim required
N2 may or may not be good
high vibs
low fuel flow
low (or loss of) EGT
Low oil pressure, oil quantity dropping

both N1 and N2 spool down (the N2 ain't gonna work with the N1 not working).

EGT typically goes way up since the combustor no longer can hold the flame without pressure from the compressors. I'm not sure what the gage will show if the EGT probes went with the rear end of the engine.

Impossible to miss those symptoms, but the crew may have been working on it and hadn't sorted it out when they got the radio call. Of course there is no way for the crew to tell about the missing bits and I doubt that the symptoms match what some call "severe engine failure" in a simulator.

[SouthpawSLF]

It will be interesting to see the 'decision tree' that the crew used to continue. Upon hearing and/or feeling the event and seeing the #2 paramters (EGT, N1, Oil Pressure, etc.) nose dive, no doubt they cut the fuel supply via switches or fire handle. An apparent assesment of the situation revealed no anomolous conditions (hydraulic fluid or pressure loss, cabin still climbing at normal rate, airplane still behaving normally, no fire warning, etc.). The long term would include, I would think, the potential loss of either #1 or #3 (for unrelated reasons) over pretty much nothing but jungle between Manaus and Bogota - not to mention the fact of a high altitude landing attempt at BOG. Go around could get tricky...

I wonder if the decision included a thrust increase on #1 and #3 or just a slower climb rate. It would depend, of course, on the weight and balance, but I wonder if they bumped 'em a little or to the firewall. I understand that case in point procedures differ between operators.

This 'bump' would be the issue raised above about the age thing. Even older engines just out of overhaul will respond differently from those that are factory fresh. Overboost - even for a short while - could spell trouble. If memory serves, the BA 744 crew that lost one on takeoff out of LAX a couple of years back, leveled at FL03 for about 20 minutes, THEN made the decision to continue knowing, in part, that there are lots of good diversion points prior to going over the pond if necessary.

I understand that the US NTSB is weighing in on this one given the 'N' status of the airplane and its Miami - based operator. So, hopefully there will be good info from this one....

[GlueBall]

SouthpawSLF . . ."but I wonder if they bumped 'em a little or to the firewall."

Wonder no more. It is not necessary to "bump 'em up" [beyond MCT] or to "firewall" the remaining operative engines. Airplanes are certified to climb and cruise with one engine inoperative. And there is no limitation or time limit to fly with MCT [Max Continuous Thrust] settings if necessary. The only constraint would be a lower cruising altitude and higher fuel burn with one engine inoperative.

[barit1]

I think it quite possible N2 kept running.

In the CF6 the N2 mainshaft bearings are independent of the N1 shaft, and in development testing of a new core the factory might run a "core only" test. The fan & LPT (N1 system) is not a requisite for this kind of test.

With no LPT to provide back pressure on the core, the N2 will still run at its governed value, but all air pressures will be very low - thus not much fuel is required or used. The fuel control N2 governor will take care of that. That's why I say that N2 could have kept running - until voluntary shutdown, or oil starvation, anyway.

Of course, if the LPT departure damaged the aft core bearing, then N2 probably seized up quickly.

[alexmcfire]

OF, doesn´t matter? Strange attitude...

[Old Fella]

Strange attitude

alexmcfire I don't know what your motives are, or what your background is. My "it doesn't matter" comment was in relation to your question. The point is the crew of the Arrow Air were the ones best able to assess their situation based on what indications they saw and how the aircraft handled after the failure. Of course the number of failures matters in relation to known trends but that info is not all that helpful at the moment the engine fails. I know, I've been involved in two turbine failures at very low levels, both below 500' AGL. In both instances we were over 340000kgs and rather than recalling previous failures at that time you are too busy sorting out the problem and dealing with it. The decision as to whether to return or continue depends on many factors, the most important of all being the safety of the aircraft and its occupants. Nothing wrong with my attitude, just unsure about yours.

[muduckace]

At some point Arrow Air made the wise decision not to head toward the very high terrain of Bogota, and diverted to Medellin.

Medallin is roughly 7,200 feet, Bogata is at 8,300. The approach into Medellin is more difficult because of terrain. I remember getting EGT lights on T/O regularly out of medellin as a result of the temperature/altitude there. Bogata has a longer runway and allthough at a higher altitude the temperature is cooler.

[dc10fr8k9]

I agree, Manaus is a grand place for a layover, though I don't know if I would worry about being put behind pipes in Brazil for having #2 disintegrate on me. Maybe the Mechanic might, but not the flight crew. You can't even pre-flight that one without a cherry picker, you just gotta cross your fingers and hope the MX department did their job with conscience. Also, their "payload" might have just consisted of empty pallets. I know that was always a technicality, since if the airline doesn't own the pallets, then technically they are "Payload". Even if it was real payload, then hopefully the competent load master made for an aft CG. That means with less aft weight after shedding most of #2, the plane would have a more forward CG so being out of trim range would be the least of my worries.

And I also agree with the previous post, Medellin is a lot more work to land and take off out of than Bogota, and I can say that with certainty because I have loads of experience flying in and out of Manaus, Bogota, Medellin in DC-10 freighters working for a similar "Miami operation". And there are not a lot of emergency landing fields between Manaus and Bogota (like none), and Medellin is even further away than Bogota. It's not like taking off from New York and heading onwards to Houston or something like that on two.

I personally had #2 die on me (lost oil pressure, not catastrophic) somewhere north of Ouagadougou (yes Ouagadougou, those who know the area understand why I didn't decide to land anywhere there). Because yes, on a 3 holer, depending on the circumstances, it may indeed be better to continue. I decided to venture onward on 2 engines toward "civilization". But it was daylight, and severe clear all the way so my decision was easy. Though because of single engine drift down thoughts and wx/fuel, I decided on diverting to MXP rather than going on to BRU straight over Mt Blanc. Some have said that the ENAC (Italian CAA) also shoot first and ask questions later, but fortunately I never heard a word.

No one mentioned the wx conditions at Manaus for a return after dump, so I don't know all the facts. All I know is I would be a bit puckered flying over impassable swamp and some of the highest terrain in the hemisphere all with liberal CB's topping 50,000 feet, and with no en route alternates to speak of, with that much damage. I am sure those jockeys needed a cold beer and a good shot of aguardiente after they settled down. Glad they made it, and the rest, the experts will sort out.

[sussex2]

DC10 engine failure..

I remember a similar, but less drastic, failure on a Bcal series 30 way back when..