Now these guys can log some more time in their gliding log book. A big glider though.
I suppose, some glider flying experience will come in handy in thse sort of situations !!!! :cool: :cool:

We don't know yet what caused the "drama" - but if it was a "software feature" dumping the liquid gold and these boys really did a GLIDE then I am standing and clapping with the rest of us...

Whatever the details - and I am sure they will be soon with us. Great job boys and girls. Great job.....

MG

According to Sky news this morning, the crew shut down one engine with an oil leak and then they started to lose fuel. No mention was made about the source of the leak.

I must say, the first thing that crossed my mind was, is it another case of uncommanded fuel dump?

Well done to all the crew. Remind me again. What page is that procedure on in the "nothing more than a system monitor" manual. ;)

[ 25 August 2001: Message edited by: max_cont ]

Re the fuel dump scenario - the A330's I fly do not have a jettison system so you can rule that one out. However not sure if it is a customer "option" - I doubt it.

Apocalypse - so what happens then when you have serious problems just after take off at MTOW? With no jettison system you're going to have to fly around a fair while to burn off all that fuel!! :D :confused: :D

I've heard that one engine flamed out, the aircraft then lost 12 tonnes of fuel over the next 20 mins, before the other Trent flamed out.

The a/c was then a glider from 34,000 ft.

Those canadian boys sure can glide! First the 767 then the A330. Well done though i'm sure the captain of that knocked back a few beers afterwards!

Heard this morning from a friend at Air Transat that the first engine was shut down - then the fuel dump problem started which made life rather interesting for the crew - and the other engine, of course!

CBC reports that Air Transat have been cited for seven maintenance infringements over the past year - including using an L1011 part on an A330. As that can mean anything from a seatbelt to a rivet, I wouldn't attach too much importance to it at this stage.

Apparently, the A330 is not much liked by anyone at Air Transat - with crews preferring by far the L1011 - apart from the accountants. Any other A330 operators feel the same?

I was in Orlando MCO last Saturday night and had a two hour start up delay due to TS over the field.An Air Transat L1011 pushed back before the ramp was closed and we thought departed.When we finally got going he was at the stop end of 36R with all the chutes deployed which meant that 36L was the only runway being used.17/35 was not being used due to the weather.I counted approx 25 aircraft waiting to go.Lightning strike causing smoke ?? Anybody know what was wrong.

This incident could have major ramifications on ETOPS. Unless there was a procedural or maintenance problem with this specific aircraft then surely A330 ETOPS will also have to be suspended pending investigation.

Also, given that all ETOPS operations are justified by the huge odds against both engines failing in flight, will this damage ETOPS credibility?

Given that virtually every airline operating on the Atlantic now relies heavily (or entirely) on big twins can the industry afford a large scale review of ETOPS?

Anderson - there was smoke in the cabin (from the airconditioning system apparently - the Captain did the right thing (in my opinion) and got everyone off asap and asked questions later.

FREDA - yes, especially if it transpires that anything similar has happened with other Airbus twins. The Hapag Lloyd A310 last year comes to mind?

I'm trying to find out more about the nature of the fuel leak on the other TS A330.

Regarding ETOPS implications - surely it doesn't matter how many engines you've got if you haven't got any fuel.

So I wonder what the rationale is for suspending Air Transat’s ETOPS certification? Could it have something to do with the fact that this incident initially involved an engine failure, or perhaps because the fuel leak may have arisen as a consequence of engine maintenance problems?

Can anyone explain?

[ 25 August 2001: Message edited by: stagger ]

Fuel dump is indeed an optional extra on the A330. I know for a fact that the bmi british midland aircraft do not have it fitted. The aircraft is certified for overweight landings right up to MTOW in an emergency.

Well done the Air Transat guys on a nice bit of flying!!! :)

I stand to be corrected FREDA, but if the aircraft dumped all it's fuel in the ocean, it doesn't matter how many engines are strapped to it-they won't be turnin'.

What a story though. Fantastic work by the crew.

Does anyone know if its true that this aircraft had a history of leaks? If so,then someone at Transat needs to provide some answers pretty quickly ! :confused:

This might give a few clues:

particularly if the C of G cruise control adjustments cut in after a precautionary shut-down.
http://203.59.230.234/images/airtransat/Fuelloss.html

If the aircraft suffered from an uncommanded fuel dump, then the implications for ETOPS aren't so severe.

However the nature of the fuel loss has yet to be explained. There were also initially rumours of large amounts of fuel on the runway which might indicate fuel starvation rather than loss. Obviously the facts aren't all in, but when a twin engined aircraft losed both engines in flight ostensibly due to different and possibly unrelated faults (i.e. inflight shut due to low oil pressure and fuel starvation) then that's enough to give me the heebies. I think it's fair to say that only accountants really liked ETOPS to begin with.

On another issue, how did they power their electrical and hydraulic systems in the descent? Would they have needed the APU? If so then there obviously was some fuel left in the airplane to run it.

If the a/c was enroute YYZ/LIS and it's only got as far as the Azores that seems like an awful lot of fuel to suddenly 'lose'.
I don't know the 'bus but an uncommanded fuel dump, if it could happen would not empty a tank, surely it would only reduce to a stack pipe level.
What with the GE90 compressor failures last week ETOPS could be going the same way as the dinosours :)

The A330 has a RAT.

If you have a serious technical emergency and return to land, is it really sensible landing with a full fuel load? Surely a big ball of flame may well result??

Amazing how much information comes out when an Airbus has a problem, and rightly so . Yet when I asked about the Continental Triple computer failure on a Boeing there was nothing, maybe they like to keep their problems in house.
Well done to the 2/3 flight deck for some great flying if it was deadstick and a good show from the cabin crew, there must have been mayhem on board.
All of this done without an FE, marvelous

[ 25 August 2001: Message edited by: fergineer ]

Was on the news that Transat have been forced by Transport Canada to modify their ETOPS atlantic route. My question , what is the normal max distance from a useable field that is allowed and what is the revised distance ?.