PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   Engine failure in Tyumen (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/626831-engine-failure-tyumen.html)

Charles. 1st Nov 2019 22:22

Engine failure in Tyumen
 
Six hours ago. Landed safely after burning enough fuel. Any other informations ?



PropPiedmont 2nd Nov 2019 00:02

Why were they circling and burning fuel single engine?

golfyankeesierra 2nd Nov 2019 00:16

Practicing flying its holding pattern? Slight room for improvement..

Dave Therhino 2nd Nov 2019 05:52


Originally Posted by PropPiedmont (Post 10608642)
Why were they circling and burning fuel single engine?

To get down to max landing weight?

PropPiedmont 2nd Nov 2019 07:05


Originally Posted by Dave Therhino (Post 10608780)
To get down to max landing weight?

With fingers crossed the whole time, I guess.

MarkerInbound 2nd Nov 2019 07:51


Originally Posted by Dave Therhino (Post 10608780)
To get down to max landing weight?

If you took off from a runway you can land on it. If you are under the accelerate/stop weight and the second segment climb weight you’ll be good for landing distance and approach climb limits. Don’t know if the Russians have the “in an emergency the pilot in command may deviate from any rule” to meet the emergency rule.

Australopithecus 2nd Nov 2019 08:02


Originally Posted by Dave Therhino (Post 10608780)
To get down to max landing weight?

Max landing weight is a normal dispatch and operating limit that typically does not apply in certain non-normals. Loss of thrust would be one of those cases. You don’t fly around on one engine just to save someone some additional maintenance tasks post-landing. FFS.

Good Business Sense 2nd Nov 2019 08:12

Not holding per se - just securing the engine etc before returning to land in an orderly fashion.

Dave Therhino 2nd Nov 2019 16:42


Originally Posted by Australopithecus (Post 10608821)


Max landing weight is a normal dispatch and operating limit that typically does not apply in certain non-normals. Loss of thrust would be one of those cases. You don’t fly around on one engine just to save someone some additional maintenance tasks post-landing. FFS.

I understand the performance capabilities and regulations, and the fact that you can land above max landing weight back at the departure runway - just with inspections required and possible brake/wheel/tire damage. However we commonly see reports of crews burning off and/or jettisoning fuel to get below or near max landing weight to minimize damage on landing after an engine failure on takeoff or climb.

FlightDetent 2nd Nov 2019 18:36


Originally Posted by Dave Therhino (Post 10609122)
However we commonly see reports of crews burning off and/or jettisoning fuel to get below or near max landing weight to minimize damage on landing after an engine failure on takeoff or climb.

Discussed multiple times. I have no data to dispute the statement, so at face value: Though we may commonly see that, we really should not be. One of the threads linked a cover-all article by Boeing 777 expert, which went a really long way not to openly say "reducing weight to MLW after a failure resulting to an expedited landing is stupid." Kind of eating a pie.

Livesinafield 3rd Nov 2019 01:54

Dont really see the issue here, engine fails you go to the hold work checklists and prepare for landing on one engine, if that needs burning off fuel to prevent an overweight landing then fine why is it an issue to burn fuel off on one engine?? We are allowed 1 hour flight time on one engine so whats the problem?

Makes me laugh damed if you do and damed if you dont, love to see the comments if someone landing over MLW single engine and had a gear collapse/ overrun.

pattern_is_full 3rd Nov 2019 01:04

Some people have short memories.

It's only been 6 months since another SSJ-100 (Aeroflot) made an immediate return for an overweight landing, bounced, broke the main gear, punctured the fuel tanks, and killed 41 in the ensuing fire.

One month ago today (Sat.) criminal charges were filed against the captain of that flight.

Who thinks (or doesn't think) that factored into the Yamal crew's decision?

Some engine-outs are immediate "MAYDAY" situations - and some are not. Gotta take them as they happen.

gearlever 3rd Nov 2019 01:11


Originally Posted by pattern_is_full (Post 10609479)
Some people have short memories.

It's only been 6 months since another SSJ-100 (Aeroflot) made an immediate return for an overweight landing, bounced, broke the main gear, punctured the fuel tanks, and killed 41 in the ensuing fire.

One month ago today (Sat.) criminal charges were filed against the captain of that flight.

Who thinks (or doesn't think) that factored into the Yamal crew's decision?

Some engine-outs are immediate "MAYDAY" situations - and some are not. Gotta take them as they happen.

Are you suggesting the accident was due to exceedance of MLW?

misd-agin 3rd Nov 2019 01:29


Originally Posted by Dave Therhino (Post 10608780)
To get down to max landing weight?

Saves the mechanics from having to do an overweight inspection so that they can 'quick turn' (relaunch ASAP). :-/ <sarcasm
If it's an ETOPS airplane shouldn't they just go 'round and 'round in circles until they reach their ETOPS certification time limit?

pattern_is_full 3rd Nov 2019 01:49


Originally Posted by gearlever (Post 10609482)
Are you suggesting the accident was due to exceedance of MLW?

No, but it is a factor that can't be ignored. Force = mass x acceleration. 10% additional mass = 10% additional force on the gear - whatever other factors were involved. Think "straw that broke the camel's back."

Tha majority of accidents are not "due to" any single factor.

PropPiedmont 3rd Nov 2019 19:38

Hypothetically, let’s say the first engine failed due to contaminated fuel.

Dave Therhino 3rd Nov 2019 21:09


Originally Posted by DaveReidUK (Post 10610042)
So what, in your view, would be valid reasons for the many instances we see of aircraft flying prolonged holds to burn off fuel ?

I was simply offering information that burning off or jettisoning fuel beyond the amount required to meet approach climb requirements after an engine failure is done quite a bit. I'm not defending or criticizing the practice.

FlightDetent 3rd Nov 2019 21:35

That is a knowledgeable angle. The weight to meet approach climb gradient (or landing) will be quite higher than the mostly (?) structural MLW. Let alone the reduced operational one. Am I mistaken?

Dave Therhino 4th Nov 2019 01:26

You are correct that will almost always be the case. For medium and long range airplanes there is typically a significant difference between the max takeoff weight and the max landing weight. For such airplanes, the weight at which the engine out approach climb gradient requirement can be met is quite a bit higher than the max landing weight, and in fact fairly close to the max takeoff weight. The design regulations require the airplane to be able to meet those climb requirements within 15 minutes after takeoff. (Note that the landing climb requirement is an all-engines operative case.)

I only mentioned getting below the performance limited weight to point out that I've seen quite a few reports where the crew chose to burn or jettison fuel off to get well below that weight.

yanrair 4th Nov 2019 08:47


Originally Posted by Livesinafield (Post 10609475)
Dont really see the issue here, engine fails you go to the hold work checklists and prepare for landing on one engine, if that needs burning off fuel to prevent an overweight landing then fine why is it an issue to burn fuel off on one engine?? We are allowed 1 hour flight time on one engine so whats the problem?

Makes me laugh damed if you do and damed if you dont, love to see the comments if someone landing over MLW single engine and had a gear collapse/ overrun.

Hi field dweller
burning off fuel to get down to MLW is frequently futile. I watch” aero inside “ magazine every day online and at least once per day someone does this. We are talking aircraft with no fuel dump here. “ Held for 45/minutes to reduce landing weight “ is topical comment.
1 tonne = 1 knot approach speed. So holding for an hour reduces speed by one knot. The plane is certified to land at Max TOW
So landing a bit over MLW is going to be totally safe.
You wont overrun because you calculate landing distance +30% typically prior to landing as normal
cheers
Yan


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:15.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.