Delta emergency @ LAX, dumps fuel on school playground.
0 and you know why. That doesn’t mean I don’t understand the thought processes behind choosing to dump fuel vs an immediate return and landing overweight in a 2 engine aircraft that has lost an engine... are you implying it is trained that with a secured engine it’s ok to dump fuel below 2800 ft AGL? I’d see dumping over the ocean for 20 minutes single engine (although probably not what the QRH says in a 777 so hands are probably tied there) or just returning and doing the overweight landing (which I HAVE done) and just writing it up for the inspection, after all they are likely going to be changing an engine anyway... the plane isn’t going anywhere.
0 and you know why. That doesn’t mean I don’t understand the thought processes behind choosing to dump fuel vs an immediate return and landing overweight in a 2 engine aircraft that has lost an engine... are you implying it is trained that with a secured engine it’s ok to dump fuel below 2800 ft AGL? I’d see dumping over the ocean for 20 minutes single engine (although probably not what the QRH says in a 777 so hands are probably tied there) or just returning and doing the overweight landing (which I HAVE done) and just writing it up for the inspection, after all they are likely going to be changing an engine anyway... the plane isn’t going anywhere.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: MSP
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Apple Maggot Quarantine Area
Age: 47
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
0 and you know why. That doesn’t mean I don’t understand the thought processes behind choosing to dump fuel vs an immediate return and landing overweight in a 2 engine aircraft that has lost an engine... are you implying it is trained that with a secured engine it’s ok to dump fuel below 2800 ft AGL? I’d see dumping over the ocean for 20 minutes single engine (although probably not what the QRH says in a 777 so hands are probably tied there) or just returning and doing the overweight landing (which I HAVE done) and just writing it up for the inspection, after all they are likely going to be changing an engine anyway... the plane isn’t going anywhere.
I don't think you understand at all. If you need to dump it is desirabl, if it can be done, to be at or above 4000AGL, but I don't believe there any regulation that requires any altitude should the need arise. The 777 has a pretty sophisticated fuel dump sytem to cover many of the nuances discussed in this thread so far. in addition there should have been 4 pilots on the flight deck st this point in time.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unless a greater emergency occurred which prevented them either landing safely overweight or discontinuing the approach then this should not have happened. If you can accelerate to V1 and stop on a runway then you can land overweight on it. Ideally if you have time you go and dump fuel over the sea or above 10000ft, which also gives you time to plan a single engine approach. If you must land immediately then you can safely do so having actioned the overweight landing checklist which determines flap setting to ensure adequate go-around performance. If you land overweight then it requires an overweight maintenance check but as the aircraft had a faulty engine then not going to cause any delays to getting it back in service!
Spending more time problem solving rather than rushing into an approach would have prevented this (unless getting on the ground immediately was imperative).
The min height to jettison fuel to ensure it evaporates before hitting the ground is 7000ft in winter and 4000ft in summer.
Spending more time problem solving rather than rushing into an approach would have prevented this (unless getting on the ground immediately was imperative).
The min height to jettison fuel to ensure it evaporates before hitting the ground is 7000ft in winter and 4000ft in summer.
Last edited by Propellerhead; 16th Jan 2020 at 06:32.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ex Non-pilot aircrew here.
I have experienced compressor stalls on B727 climb outs after which our erstwhile flight engineer would explain this away as being attributed to the fuselage creating a shadow during high angle climb outs. It certainly felt like we launching a rocket at times from some short fields and this was then sometimes followed by a 'boom boom' in quick succession.Indications on the flight deck always found No 2 was the culprit.
But what causes a compressor to stall on a T7? Is it a function of heavy TO weight and high alpha on climb out and if so, would not both engines suffer in that case? Or is it related to steep climbing turns where the engine turning in might suffer some airflow shadow affect?
I have experienced compressor stalls on B727 climb outs after which our erstwhile flight engineer would explain this away as being attributed to the fuselage creating a shadow during high angle climb outs. It certainly felt like we launching a rocket at times from some short fields and this was then sometimes followed by a 'boom boom' in quick succession.Indications on the flight deck always found No 2 was the culprit.
But what causes a compressor to stall on a T7? Is it a function of heavy TO weight and high alpha on climb out and if so, would not both engines suffer in that case? Or is it related to steep climbing turns where the engine turning in might suffer some airflow shadow affect?
I don't think you understand at all. If you need to dump it is desirabl, if it can be done, to be at or above 4000AGL, but I don't believe there any regulation that requires any altitude should the need arise. The 777 has a pretty sophisticated fuel dump sytem to cover many of the nuances discussed in this thread so far. in addition there should have been 4 pilots on the flight deck st this point in time.
No
Ex Non-pilot aircrew here.
I have experienced compressor stalls on B727 climb outs after which our erstwhile flight engineer would explain this away as being attributed to the fuselage creating a shadow during high angle climb outs. It certainly felt like we launching a rocket at times from some short fields and this was then sometimes followed by a 'boom boom' in quick succession.Indications on the flight deck always found No 2 was the culprit.
But what causes a compressor to stall on a T7? Is it a function of heavy TO weight and high alpha on climb out and if so, would not both engines suffer in that case? Or is it related to steep climbing turns where the engine turning in might suffer some airflow shadow affect?
I have experienced compressor stalls on B727 climb outs after which our erstwhile flight engineer would explain this away as being attributed to the fuselage creating a shadow during high angle climb outs. It certainly felt like we launching a rocket at times from some short fields and this was then sometimes followed by a 'boom boom' in quick succession.Indications on the flight deck always found No 2 was the culprit.
But what causes a compressor to stall on a T7? Is it a function of heavy TO weight and high alpha on climb out and if so, would not both engines suffer in that case? Or is it related to steep climbing turns where the engine turning in might suffer some airflow shadow affect?
Never heard of dumping starting automatically...
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the video looks like the left valve stops dumping at 0:35, and the right at 0:38. (And as reference, I reckon the plane passes directly overhead the camera at 0:12). I'll leave you to work out where it was when it stopped dumping.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The type of engine noises being described are consistent with fuel contamination. So, in my mind, there is already sufficient cause to consider the situation urgent.
Clearly the pilot should have dumped when he was at a higher altitude, but given that he didn't, dumping low seems reasonable - else he could have found himself landing heavy with engines out.
Clearly the pilot should have dumped when he was at a higher altitude, but given that he didn't, dumping low seems reasonable - else he could have found himself landing heavy with engines out.
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, it does look like that. It will be interesting to learn whether it stopped because max weight was reached -- in which case they must have dumped a lot of fuel -- or because someone upfront finally noticed.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems like by now the pilots have been debriefed and the Feds at least must know what really happened in the cockpit
FWIW as a very rough ballpark/back of the envelope figure you can work on dumping at 2 tonnes a minute (it’s a different rate Centre tank vs. Wings but 2/min will do as a first approximation)..
Now all we need is to continue the Monday A.M quarterbacking is the Take off weight and the Zero Fuel Weight.....
Now all we need is to continue the Monday A.M quarterbacking is the Take off weight and the Zero Fuel Weight.....
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A 270 heading would put just about over Malibu and the homes of the rich and famous. Oh the horrors that would ensue. A 250 heading would work better IMO,
Last edited by Spooky 2; 16th Jan 2020 at 18:13.