Aer Arann return to Dublin 02MAR10
 

Hi Everyone,

While flying in the Dublin area today I heard an Aer Arann returning to Dublin due to a flame out of the no.2. He declared a pan and I presume he landed ok (we were handed over to a different frequency when he was 2nm out)

My passenger made an interesting point as to weather the failure would be related to the fact that RE taxi on one engine(no.1) and he wondered if the second engine would have sufficient time to warm up before takeoff. He might be way off I dont know, but anyone on hear that can enlighted us?

Hi EI-CON,

A minor point but they taxi on #2 not #1, the reason being they often start this engine first to provide aircraft services (e.g. electrical power) in hotel mode.

As for an IFSD event being related to the time start time prior to take-off, I believe it's quite unlikely. The PW100 uses CF compressors so there's no much risk of having a rotor rub in the compressor and equally a turbine blade rub would result in a loss of turbine efficiency over time. Based on my own experiences, IFSD's a generally related to accessory probelms rather than core engine failures and accessory failures are generally not related to running time prior to takeoff.

Either way I'm sure Aer Arann tech services and PWC will check this one out.

All the best,

P2C

P2C,

Thanks, sorry I mistakenly thought they taxied on the no.1.

Hopefully they will get to the bottom of why it failed not the first time one has failed on them. I was talking to an instructor based in the Dublin area about it and his response ws not another one for them! :eek:

:confused:

News to me that gas turbines need to, but I'm prepared to be shot down.

Consider yourself shot down. :p Only a concern usually if taxi for take off is made with an engine shut down.

Capot...

I'm assuming you are a professional airline pilot, probably from your comment....

"I have been to over 200 airports in my career, spanning 30 years, mostly in the Middle East, Africa and various ex-USSR Republics,...."

But your comment...

"News to me that gas turbines need to, (..be warmed up) but I'm prepared to be shot down."

I find that absolutely amazing!! (unless you are a flight attendant!)

FD...:confused:

Electrical fuel pumps being off has caused more than a few incidences like this.

Two square green buttons above the skipper's head. Press them in, and the engines will probably continue running during the climb-out. Do not press them in, and the engines will probably continue running during the climb-out . . . but not as probably as with them in.:}


That a manufacturer could make a system that allowed full power with these off - and no kind of config warning - is beyond credulity.


That a manufacturer could publish their book of words and not have these turned off in the Engine Fire checklist, is also beyond credulity.

N.B. If it is a requirement now, it might be because I, and no doubt many others, proved that one other failure might allow boosted fuel into a fire.

Just to set the records straight, it wasn't an eng failure. Following an abnormal engine parameter, the crew decided to shut down the engine and return to Dublin. They were on a training flight with no pax.

@ Loose rivets:your knowledge about the ATR is amazing.can you pls provide more details ?!

rgds
alex

Hey Flight Deck Man,

Any idea which engine parameter was unusual? My curiosity is getting the better of me.

Cheers,

P2C

Sorry Flight Detent...Your point is?
I am confused by your post, please explain...

On the radio they said it was a flameout of the no.2. Flameout sounds like more than an abnormal engine parameter to me then again I dont fly the bus!

Sadly not that amazing. Too long ago and an aging brain prohibits remembering the exact point in the fuel line, but I did 'prove' that if a fuel pipeline fatigued at a certain point, the signal to stop boosted fuel would not be generated. An unlikely scenario, but not impossible. My argument was, that it was bad airmanship to leave the pumps selected on, even if they were supposed to be powered down.