A321 AAIB Report: Mayday/emergency landing due to fuel additive error
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A321 AAIB Report: Mayday/emergency landing due to fuel additive error
As reported on the BBC: Plane engine stalled and caught fire after 'engineer's fuel error' (there's a link to the AAIB bulletin).
An A321 taking off from LGW on 26th Feb had engine problems at 500ft, leading to a Mayday call and emergency landing. Fortunately not a bad outcome, but it must have been an exciting few minutes.
An A321 taking off from LGW on 26th Feb had engine problems at 500ft, leading to a Mayday call and emergency landing. Fortunately not a bad outcome, but it must have been an exciting few minutes.
The bit that surprises me is that an aircraft engineer did not know what PPM meant and apparently Googled it without finding out its proper meaning.
As usual with the press there is no recognition, and probably no understanding, of the difference between a flame as result of a surge and "caught fire".
Fortunately, as it happened just after midnight, there were no schools occupied.
As usual with the press there is no recognition, and probably no understanding, of the difference between a flame as result of a surge and "caught fire".
Fortunately, as it happened just after midnight, there were no schools occupied.
So what "comedian" of an engineer did it then? Which company and who/where was the supervisor? Talk about basic error! Should not be working on aircraft, take their licence away, if they had one!
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bit that surprises me is that an aircraft engineer did not know what PPM meant and apparently Googled it without finding out its proper meaning.
As usual with the press there is no recognition, and probably no understanding, of the difference between a flame as result of a surge and "caught fire".
Fortunately, as it happened just after midnight, there were no schools occupied.
As usual with the press there is no recognition, and probably no understanding, of the difference between a flame as result of a surge and "caught fire".
Fortunately, as it happened just after midnight, there were no schools occupied.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By my reading of the AAIB Bulletin the guy who made the mistake on the concentration was not the one who had trouble using Airnav. Seemingly two different organisations. But you are right there are other things in there potentially of larger concern than the additive concentration error.
It was two different guys from two different maintenance organisations involved in this.
I'm surprised that a B1 Engineer wouldn't know what ppm meant, but it's really scary that the engineer at LGW was unable to use Airnav, pretty much everyone I know and have worked with can happily switch between Airnav and AirnavX. (personally I'm not a fan of AirnavX).
It's quite easy to screw up the effectivity in the A330 & A340 manuals in Airnav but this is due to the different weight variants, the A320 should be fairly straightforward so I've no idea how he ended up using a manual for a NEO.
I'm surprised that a B1 Engineer wouldn't know what ppm meant, but it's really scary that the engineer at LGW was unable to use Airnav, pretty much everyone I know and have worked with can happily switch between Airnav and AirnavX. (personally I'm not a fan of AirnavX).
It's quite easy to screw up the effectivity in the A330 & A340 manuals in Airnav but this is due to the different weight variants, the A320 should be fairly straightforward so I've no idea how he ended up using a manual for a NEO.
Although the report does not explicitly say so, it does say at the start that it is circulated to the Cyprus authorities, otherwise seemingly uninvolved. Later it states the aircraft went to an un-named AMO in late January for a major check.
G-POWN is shown on FlightRadar as positioning Stansted to Larnaca on 20 January, no information until returning same route on 24 February. The incident flights occurred the following day, 25 February.
G-POWN is shown on FlightRadar as positioning Stansted to Larnaca on 20 January, no information until returning same route on 24 February. The incident flights occurred the following day, 25 February.
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: London
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys - on re-reading I see now that the Fuel additive procedure was done at an AMO in Europe and only the troubleshooting was done at LGW. So 2 basic errors on the same snag by 2 different engineers - what are the odds on that?.
"Plane engine stalled and caught fire"
No fire.
Titan A321 at London on Feb 26th 2020, left engine surged, engine stall indications for right engine
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: cardiff
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the answer is yes to both your points, you might want to go back to the spotters balcony now and leave further discussions to grown ups
"The excessive level of Kathon in the aircraft’s fuel system is suspected to have caused the subsequent problems with the aircraft’s engines, including those experienced during the incident flight. The AAIB is also aware of other events where engine performance was affected by over-dosing of fuel with biocide. Visual inspection confirmed the presence of abnormal deposits within both engines downstream of the fuel spray nozzles. The influence of the over-dosed fuel on the engines’ HMUs and other fuel system components is subject to the ongoing AAIB investigation."
https://assets.publishing.service.go...020_G-POWN.pdf
The reverend. I initially thought the same about the stall thing, but the interim report does state an engine stall warning was displayed. A new one on my, any 'Bus driver out there that could elaborate please?
Ivor, you just embarrassed yourself. Lomapaseo is far from a spectator - I suspect he's forgotten more about big turbofan engines than you'll ever know. At the risk of putting words in loma's mouth, like me, he's rather surprised that excessive much additive in the fuel could cause an engine malfunction/stall so quickly (long term effects - as residue builds up the fuel metering unit - is different). So we're hoping that the investigation would include testing with high levels of the anti-fungal additive - rig testing and full scale engine tests - to determine the exact effects and if the additive was in fact the root cause.
2planks and the reverend
Google ECAM Warnings for Airbus
Basically EVERYTHING is monitored by FADEC/SDAC ( Google is your friend 😃 )
The lower central tv screen will show a warning and identify Eng 1 2 3 or 4 as in a stalled/reversed airflow condition and this is a pilot memory item to clear the stall in the engine ( thrust levers to idle/ as appropriate )
It is possible to aerodynamically stall a modern Airbus but that is not what happened here and would require a PowerPoint Presentation to explain🤓🤓
So basically engine airflow was disrupted and this can cause airflow reversal which causes the flame. Imagine your Lamborghini Aventador spitting flames out of its exhaust 🤣🤣🤣
Google ECAM Warnings for Airbus
Basically EVERYTHING is monitored by FADEC/SDAC ( Google is your friend 😃 )
The lower central tv screen will show a warning and identify Eng 1 2 3 or 4 as in a stalled/reversed airflow condition and this is a pilot memory item to clear the stall in the engine ( thrust levers to idle/ as appropriate )
It is possible to aerodynamically stall a modern Airbus but that is not what happened here and would require a PowerPoint Presentation to explain🤓🤓
So basically engine airflow was disrupted and this can cause airflow reversal which causes the flame. Imagine your Lamborghini Aventador spitting flames out of its exhaust 🤣🤣🤣
FAA SAIB issued on the subject. https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G..._Corrected.pdf
