Manaus is a fine place to bring an airplane back with an engine out.
And enjoy cold Brahma Lagers at the Tropical Resort Hotel in the discotheque.
Great food, congenial people. Visit the famous "Opera"...
One of the best places to visit in Brasil.
xxx
Sorry - I dont know if they have McDonald's there for US crews.
But with an engine out, Manaus is a good deal, rather than Bogota.
You can even dump fuel anywhere for landing, piranha fishes dont mind...
And I checked with the crocodiles' union, it's ok for them too.
xxx
:}
Happy contrails

Whats the fuss about?

The guys had a big set of balls :E

Leo

The following quote comes from a BBC report.

BBC NEWS | Americas | US aircraft parts fall on Brazil

So perhaps they didn't go to Bogota after all. Still amazes me that they elected to continue. :eek:

The average age of the Arrow Air´s DC-10s are 31,4 years,
Fleet age Arrow Air - Airfleets
So is this age related?

balls?
 

Oh yeah, these guys have balls allright.
Tower reporting bangs, vibrations (I imagine) and abnormal engine indications,
checklists calling for "land at nearest suitable airport", flight characteristics all shot to hell.
Next time it won't just be an engine you see falling from the air.
Oh yeah, these guys have balls allright. :}

Absolutely not!

Engine fail would be ok maybe , depending weight etc. but having structural damage ! ( if able to determine ) would make me turn around asap !:=

It's not only "balls"
 

The flight was registered as a non-revenue / no-cargo, but they were loaded alright. So it seems returning to Manaus would raise some inconvenient questions. :hmm:

They were loaded alright
 

Diver-BR Fairly 'loaded' accusation to make, even if you are in the 'know'. As for the decision to continue, if the aircraft handling was not impaired and the crew felt that continuing was the safe and the best commercial step to take, they have every right to do so. All the throwing of crap at them by those who were not there to make any assessment is premature and unfair. If as the company claimed the aircraft was a non-revenue/non cargo flight then the aircraft would be more than capable of continuing on two engines.

Old Fella
 

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, and confirmed by the local manager of the company, with told the press that she was unable at the moment to inform the nature or weight of the cargo (but didn't denied that it was a revenue flight).

I take back my comment and will not judge the decision of continuing the flight, I'm in no way qualified to do that. But, based on information available at the brazilian air force site and several newspapers that:

1. The crew, contacted by the tower regarding a loud bang, informed them that everything was normal with the AC, and only informed about a problem with one of the engines after being contacted a second time and told that pieces of the engine were found on the ground.
2. They weren't authorized to transport revenue cargo in that flight, but they did it anyway, as confirmed by the company.

I am questioning is the professionalism of that operation - crew, company, and of course local authorities which most probably knew about the nature of the flight. I'll be the first to revise my opinion and apologise if new facts arise that may explain such curious event.

Regards.

<edited, removed the reference to engine shutdown, it is not known when they shut it down, before or after the first contact>

From the 2nd pic in post 19, it looks like it may be a shaft failure, similar to the 747 out of Guyaquil a few years back, rather than a turbine disk failure. There's a known failure mode in the CF6-50 series that was the cause of that one.

Looks like the most rearward LP turbine disc has come away and cut 360 degrees through the exhaust case, cutting the engine in 2, with the LPT bearing housing and jet pipe falling away. I'm not that familiar with the CF-6, but does the rear engine mount fit to the exhaust case?

If so the remains of the engine could have been hanging on the forward mount only!

I'd love to see some pictures of the remains of the engine on wing! Nasty failure, and glad to see that the aircraft landed OK.

RBT

Maybe they failed to notice it was the major part of the engine dropping off, and decided to go their merry way on what they had left.

Anyway, hitting 11 houses, there must have quite a bit of debris scattering around.

Manaus/Bogotá is a two and a half hour flight and part of it is over (very)high ground requiring contingency procedures for loss of pressurizaton/engine-out conditions. Besides the mountains there are always many thunderstorms making it even more complicate to be leveled at FL250-280 (what's the 1 engine out altitude capability?) Let's assume that such situation occurs during a take-off from an american field. Continuing ahead would probably be considered a violation and the pilots would have to face FAA/NTSB enforcement action. It appears that sometimes there are pilots that underestimate flying in this part of the world...:(

denkraai - you said the checklist calls for landing at the nearest suitable. Is that your opinion, or do you have a copy of the Arrows DC-10 ops specs?

Engine failure on a 3 or 4 engine a/c can leave the decision to divert up to the crew. If often depends upon the ops specs....and the Captain's emergency authority, but you guys know that.

Some CF6 models do, some do not. I think this was a CF6-50, which has its aft mounts FW of the LPT rotor assembly.

Quick!!! call Joe and his little dog Carlos. Arrow wants them back!:}:yuk:

Pboto of plane after landing in Medellín can be seen here:
26/03: Motor del DC-10 cayo sobre MANAUS

Shutdown when?
 

In earlier posts, which seem to have been either edited or removed, just when the engine was shutdown was questioned. By the look of the photographs I have seen I am sure the engine would have been shutdown immediately after the failure. It should have been obvious that a major failure had occurred and, given that the crew made the decision to continue and landed safely at Medellin, how can anyone reasonably question their actions when the engine failure occurred?

So is this the last complete engine failure of the central engine after Sioux City?
How many upgrades has been done to avoid the hydraulic pipes to be cut?
N526MD is 30 years old, first flight 31/1-1979.