Airbus 380 loses engine, goes 5000 miles
 

Cue the "they must be ex-BA" comments.

I suppose it might have been easier to turn-around and get a manufacturer's warranty repair. :p

They must be ex BA doing it correctly as per SOPs ;)

Just wondering.....
Of course the flight was operated with an augmented crew. Were there two captains on board or does it work differently with EK?
So what if captain A elects to press on, and is relieved by captain B because of the flight duty time. Could there be a problem if this captain B does not agree with continuing towards Kuwait?
Is there any regulation in place as to who calls the shots in such cases as this?

The biggest and ugliest Captain makes the decisions :cool:

I do wish people would stop fussing about this. On a four engine aircraft, if the engine failure is 'benign' and there are no other problems, it is no big deal. Of course one has to consider en-route alternates differently and calculate the various options in case of a further failure but, if done correctly, the whole operation is perfectly safe.

Newspaper "shock, horror" headlines sell "shock horror" newspapers.

People have been flying across the Atlantic on only TWO engines for years now. Some even do it on one.

Bergerie1
 

If I remember correctly, BA landed short of LHR (Stansted?) with just 9,000# of fuel. I wonder how much fuel the 380 had when it had to land at Kuwait, just up the Gulf from Dubai?

And some brave entrepreneurs have been known to fly across the Atlantic without even a single engine.......:cool:

I can't pedal that fast.... :p

Well done boys! Exactly what any pilot with a four engine aircrft would do!!:ok:

There is only one legal commander and that is the operating captain. The captain who is part of the augmented crew is a subordinate. Having said that any decent captain would, of course, discuss, listen to and take into account the opinions of all his flight crew before making a decision on how to proceed.

Manchester actually and they landed there despite having sufficient fuel to make LHR.

They didn't think that when they upgraded the pan to a mayday!
Nor did they understand the fuel system....

Aah, the hysterical chattering of the ignorant masses.

This is why aircraft are built with four engines. There is absolutely nothing unsafe about continuing on three engines. The big twins are certified to 207 minutes and more on ONE engine.

Consider the practicalities of a diversion at the time of the engine failure which, I believe, occurred about two hours after take-off:

1. A significant amount of fuel would have to be jettisoned
2. Hotel accommodation for 20+ crew and 450-500 passengers
3. Nothing less than a 24 -36 hour delay before replacement components could be sourced, shipped and installed

By continuing the flight, the company has 12 hours to formulate a recovery plan and position a replacement aircraft at the en-route alternate (in this case Kuwait).

The A380 completes a dramatic three-engine approach, lands and pax and crew transfer to the waiting aircraft and the mission is completed with minimum delay.

And in absolute safely.

Well done to the four professionals up front.

Perhaps but the report on BA stated that an undamaged windmilling engine is certified for three hours...so who gives a "professional" pilot the authority to be a test pilot with pax on board?

Shock horror - only three engines !!!
 

Over the years, on more than one occasion, managed to log quite a bit of single engine jet time ...... with over 300 people down the back :8

Ignorance on which side?

Reminds me of the EK 777 that suffered engine damage shortly after t/o from Moscow to DXB. No Warning, or Caution message, only two or three Advisory messages. The crew continued the flight, only to discover "more than just cosmetic damage" on the right (?) engine. Luckily, it didn't cause more harm.

Statements like these make me nervous, it is like the three monkeys that see, hear and speak no evil. No abnormal indications up front on the flight deck, nothing mentioned per SOPs, so life must be good...

Are we really just becoming robots?

Because, my dear blind chap, there is NO limitation for the 380 with the 7270 engines with regards to windmilling. Just note the 'windmill' time in the tech log... So our 'professional' pilots are indeed being professional.

Bl00dy drama queens here:hmm::hmm:

Squawk7777

Do you think we just have a quick look at the EICAS and decide whether to continue or not? Part of the fault diagnosis will be to discuss the failure with MAINTROL, determine if there's a history with the engine, ensure the continued viability of the remaining engines etc etc. I guess you've never flown a four-engined Boeing or read the Flight Continuation Policy associated with such aircraft?