A320 One engine out
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Canada
A320 One engine out
Hello;
Today we responded to our stand-by positions (ARFF) for a A320 with one engine out (#1) because of oil pressure loss. The aircraft landed with one engine out and the thrust reversers were used on #2.
The pilot demonstrated outstanding airmanship since the landing was very smooth and no hot brakes situation ensued.
When an A320 lands in that type of situation, does the use of the thrust reverser on one side of the aircraft creates an assymetric thrust or is it standard procedures? What is the recommended landing speed when one engine is out and how much runway one can expect the aircraft to use?
Sincerely;
Today we responded to our stand-by positions (ARFF) for a A320 with one engine out (#1) because of oil pressure loss. The aircraft landed with one engine out and the thrust reversers were used on #2.
The pilot demonstrated outstanding airmanship since the landing was very smooth and no hot brakes situation ensued.
When an A320 lands in that type of situation, does the use of the thrust reverser on one side of the aircraft creates an assymetric thrust or is it standard procedures? What is the recommended landing speed when one engine is out and how much runway one can expect the aircraft to use?
Sincerely;
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
Assymetric reverse produces no more assymetry than normal engine out conditions if you think about it. It's not uncommon to fly the aircraft with two engines operating but one reverser locked out and use the servicable reverser on landing. The recommended landing speed with one engine out is the same as with both engines operating as is the landing distance, which is largely predicated on wheel braking and not thrust reverse. A hot brakes problem would only occur if you absolutely hammered the brakes on landing. In 1000+ sectors on the 320 I never came close to a genuine hot brakes (+500C) situation with fully servicable brakes, even with heavy braking
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 11
From: Down south, USA.
On a smaller jet, landing single-engine with flaps 25 instead of 40 means an approach speed 5 knots faster.
The book says that each extra 5 knots means an extra 7% landing distance.
Beware that tail-mounted engines (MD-80s etc) on a normal landing can reduce rudder availablity on a slippery, gusty runway, so that directional control can be lost, up to about 70%! You must quickly stow the reverers if steering control is reduced and try reverse thrust again at a slower speed.
Let's hope that you refuse to accept any aircraft with inop. anti-skid for a wet destination, and the MEL requires you to refuse it.
The book says that each extra 5 knots means an extra 7% landing distance.
Beware that tail-mounted engines (MD-80s etc) on a normal landing can reduce rudder availablity on a slippery, gusty runway, so that directional control can be lost, up to about 70%! You must quickly stow the reverers if steering control is reduced and try reverse thrust again at a slower speed.
Let's hope that you refuse to accept any aircraft with inop. anti-skid for a wet destination, and the MEL requires you to refuse it.
Last edited by Ignition Override; 15th November 2005 at 06:25.
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
From: Europe
On a smaller jet, landing single-engine with flaps 25 instead of 40 means an approach speed 5 knots faster.
The book says that each extra 5 knots means an extra 7% landing distance.
The book says that each extra 5 knots means an extra 7% landing distance.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: Auckland
arff,
2 eng or single engine, at max landing weight of 66.000kg and full flaps, the A320 will use about 900m landing distance from 50ft above the treshold to the stop on a dry runway. That is, if almost no flare is used and immediate full brakes - test pilot stuff.
A sort of "normal" landing distance would be in the region of 1500m with medium autobrakes.
At max landing weight a speed of 136 kts should be flown to touchdown, an additional 5 kts would increase the land dist by 8%, a 10 kts tailwind adds another 18%.
Thrust reverse on both engines would reduce the land dist by about 5% but is not required for performance calculation on dry runways.
If no reverse is used there should be absolutely no reason for hot brakes and the approach landing is quite similar to a 2 eng app and landing except for the higher thrust setting required and rudder trim. The autopilot/auto thrust system will handle single eng flight without problems.
2 eng or single engine, at max landing weight of 66.000kg and full flaps, the A320 will use about 900m landing distance from 50ft above the treshold to the stop on a dry runway. That is, if almost no flare is used and immediate full brakes - test pilot stuff.
A sort of "normal" landing distance would be in the region of 1500m with medium autobrakes.
At max landing weight a speed of 136 kts should be flown to touchdown, an additional 5 kts would increase the land dist by 8%, a 10 kts tailwind adds another 18%.
Thrust reverse on both engines would reduce the land dist by about 5% but is not required for performance calculation on dry runways.
If no reverse is used there should be absolutely no reason for hot brakes and the approach landing is quite similar to a 2 eng app and landing except for the higher thrust setting required and rudder trim. The autopilot/auto thrust system will handle single eng flight without problems.
