2 Engine failure emergencies on heavy jets
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: earth
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 Engine failure emergencies on heavy jets
Hi everyone,
Im a Commercial Pilot and a very young one ... barely 250 hours TT
.
Please pardon me if this topic or question does not belong here.
Im curious about pilot training related to jets like the B737, B777, B747 etc.
Are "2 engine failures" a part of the training curriculum in a B737/777 etc type rating course ? Is there anything like a "4 engine failure" emergency, that a candidate needs to demonstrate proficiency in ??
I was curious about this "4 engine failure" situation on the B747 as I happened to recall the famous British Airways Flight 9 incident !
Cheers !
Im a Commercial Pilot and a very young one ... barely 250 hours TT
.Please pardon me if this topic or question does not belong here.
Im curious about pilot training related to jets like the B737, B777, B747 etc.
Are "2 engine failures" a part of the training curriculum in a B737/777 etc type rating course ? Is there anything like a "4 engine failure" emergency, that a candidate needs to demonstrate proficiency in ??
I was curious about this "4 engine failure" situation on the B747 as I happened to recall the famous British Airways Flight 9 incident !
Cheers !
Welcome, Shanx
The FAA standard is for loss of 50% of the aircraft's powerplants, i.e 1 on twin, 2 on tri-jet, 2 on four-engine. Can't speak for JAR or CAA, but I'm confident that applies there, too. OTOH, some training programs go deeper, if the chief pilot likes gliding.
GF
The FAA standard is for loss of 50% of the aircraft's powerplants, i.e 1 on twin, 2 on tri-jet, 2 on four-engine. Can't speak for JAR or CAA, but I'm confident that applies there, too. OTOH, some training programs go deeper, if the chief pilot likes gliding.
GF
Over here you are required to show proficiency in dealing with the loss of an engine on takeoff. In addition you must show a missed approach with one engine inop. You must also complete a landing with 50% of the powerplants inop. And there is no partial credit, if it is a three engine plane you do a single engine landing. On a 747 or DC-8 you do a two engine landing.
During training you might cover the loss of all engines but it's not a checkride event.
During training you might cover the loss of all engines but it's not a checkride event.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over here you are required to show proficiency in dealing with the loss of an engine on takeoff. In addition you must show a missed approach with one engine inop. You must also complete a landing with 50% of the powerplants inop. And there is no partial credit, if it is a three engine plane you do a single engine landing. On a 747 or DC-8 you do a two engine landing.
During training you might cover the loss of all engines but it's not a checkride event.
During training you might cover the loss of all engines but it's not a checkride event.
Precisely as described above.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,096
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just the same in Europe, Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore etc. One of the training exercises on the B747 is a four engine flameout due volcanic ash and then follow the checklist, normally three out of four will re-light so continue to a three engine landing etc.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Kerikeri, New Zealand or Noosa Queensland. Depending on the time of year!
Age: 84
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Shanx,
On the Boeing 747 pilots are trained and regularly practice both single engine failure, usually occurring at or close to V1 during T/Off followed by the loss of a second engine during the detail. They have to be able to demonstrate proficiency in carrying out an ILS approach to minima usually followed by a go around with one engine inop. The second engine is then failed leading to a two engine inop approach and landing. On the B747 once the landing gear is extended one is committed to landing - so you have to get it right the first time. As a result of the two incidents of flight into volcanic ash (BA & SIA) pilots also practice dealing with a total, all engines failure with partial engine re-start.
On the Boeing 747 pilots are trained and regularly practice both single engine failure, usually occurring at or close to V1 during T/Off followed by the loss of a second engine during the detail. They have to be able to demonstrate proficiency in carrying out an ILS approach to minima usually followed by a go around with one engine inop. The second engine is then failed leading to a two engine inop approach and landing. On the B747 once the landing gear is extended one is committed to landing - so you have to get it right the first time. As a result of the two incidents of flight into volcanic ash (BA & SIA) pilots also practice dealing with a total, all engines failure with partial engine re-start.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 76
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are "2 engine failures" a part of the training curriculum in a B737/777 etc type rating course ?
The exercise may end after relighting one/all engines or continue to a landing with one or two engines inop - but in some cases (my A320 course) in addition an all engine out landing is practised as well, depending on the airline.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Kerikeri, New Zealand or Noosa Queensland. Depending on the time of year!
Age: 84
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to set the record right the following is what transpired.
On 24 June 1982, a BA flight enroute to Australia flew into a cloud of volcanic ash thrown up by the eruption of Mt Galunnang, Indonesia resulting in the failure of all four engines, although the reason for the failure was not then apparent to the crew or ground control. The aircraft was diverted to Jakarta in the hope that enough engines could be restarted to allow it to land there. The aircraft was able to glide far enough to exit the ash cloud, and all engines were restarted (although one failed again soon after), allowing the aircraft to land safely.
Three weeks later on July 13th an SIA B-747 (9V-SQD) enroute from Singapore to Melbourne flying the same route suffered the same fate and much the same outcome. Both flights were at night time.
In spite of the time frame between the two incidents the Indonesian Aviation Authority had not issued any Notams and knowledge of the first incedent had not been diseminated.
On 24 June 1982, a BA flight enroute to Australia flew into a cloud of volcanic ash thrown up by the eruption of Mt Galunnang, Indonesia resulting in the failure of all four engines, although the reason for the failure was not then apparent to the crew or ground control. The aircraft was diverted to Jakarta in the hope that enough engines could be restarted to allow it to land there. The aircraft was able to glide far enough to exit the ash cloud, and all engines were restarted (although one failed again soon after), allowing the aircraft to land safely.
Three weeks later on July 13th an SIA B-747 (9V-SQD) enroute from Singapore to Melbourne flying the same route suffered the same fate and much the same outcome. Both flights were at night time.
In spite of the time frame between the two incidents the Indonesian Aviation Authority had not issued any Notams and knowledge of the first incedent had not been diseminated.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Welcome shanx, and refreshingly welcome is a young person's correct use of capitalisation and grammar.
Upon re-reading your initial post I see that your query pertains to the issue of a Type Rating, so I will respond along those lines.
As stated by others here, training for One Engine Inoperative (OEI) is common and mandatory for all types. Training for Two Engines Inoperative is also mandatory for 3 and 4 engined aircraft.
It is common to many conversion syllabi that exercises such that Depressurisation, All Engines Inoperative etc., are included in the conversion syllabus.
For type rating RENEWALS, OEI is mandatory, and the examiner has a choice of many other abnormalities to put your way, typically Instrument Failure, Flight Control abnormality etc., but in my experience, rarely the All Engines Inoperative case.
Having said that, our airline (which was one of those mentioned in the preceding post) regularly trains for the All Engine Inoperative case during Recurrent Training exercises which occur between Check flights. Typically, at least 1 engine is regained for twin engined aircraft, and 2 or 3 for 4 engined aircraft. That is reflective of history, where (as stated in preceding posts) the crew always succeeded in regaining "most" or all of their engines. Thus far, we do not train for nil engine recovery leading to a forced landing / ditching.
Some instructors (like the nasty one writing this post) do give an all engines failure with no recovery possible in the vicinity of the aerodrome, it's an eye opener!
Regards,
Old Smokey
Upon re-reading your initial post I see that your query pertains to the issue of a Type Rating, so I will respond along those lines.
As stated by others here, training for One Engine Inoperative (OEI) is common and mandatory for all types. Training for Two Engines Inoperative is also mandatory for 3 and 4 engined aircraft.
It is common to many conversion syllabi that exercises such that Depressurisation, All Engines Inoperative etc., are included in the conversion syllabus.
For type rating RENEWALS, OEI is mandatory, and the examiner has a choice of many other abnormalities to put your way, typically Instrument Failure, Flight Control abnormality etc., but in my experience, rarely the All Engines Inoperative case.
Having said that, our airline (which was one of those mentioned in the preceding post) regularly trains for the All Engine Inoperative case during Recurrent Training exercises which occur between Check flights. Typically, at least 1 engine is regained for twin engined aircraft, and 2 or 3 for 4 engined aircraft. That is reflective of history, where (as stated in preceding posts) the crew always succeeded in regaining "most" or all of their engines. Thus far, we do not train for nil engine recovery leading to a forced landing / ditching.
Some instructors (like the nasty one writing this post) do give an all engines failure with no recovery possible in the vicinity of the aerodrome, it's an eye opener!
Regards,
Old Smokey
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Worcester
Age: 59
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shanx,
In my training over the last 20 years whether it was on the Tristar (L1011), DC10 or a more modern twin; all engine flame out scenarios have been given in a training event leading to relight of one or more engines, with the outcome of a 'normal landing' on whatever engines are recovered.
Certainly on my present type I have practiced double engine failures in the holding pattern at and above 7000' and made glide approaches. I have to add though that these were never part of a training detail, only a personal request to practice. I am glad I practiced these approaches in light of a recent incident though! I am told that giving pilots a loss of all power in the later stages of an approach during a training detail is futile and negative training, as this will only result in a sim crash and not be benificial to the pilot.
I would like to say though Shanx that if you're concerned about this aspect of the training, don't be; engine failures are not big events normally and if handled correctly are a non-entity, just more paper work.
ATB
In my training over the last 20 years whether it was on the Tristar (L1011), DC10 or a more modern twin; all engine flame out scenarios have been given in a training event leading to relight of one or more engines, with the outcome of a 'normal landing' on whatever engines are recovered.
Certainly on my present type I have practiced double engine failures in the holding pattern at and above 7000' and made glide approaches. I have to add though that these were never part of a training detail, only a personal request to practice. I am glad I practiced these approaches in light of a recent incident though! I am told that giving pilots a loss of all power in the later stages of an approach during a training detail is futile and negative training, as this will only result in a sim crash and not be benificial to the pilot.
I would like to say though Shanx that if you're concerned about this aspect of the training, don't be; engine failures are not big events normally and if handled correctly are a non-entity, just more paper work.
ATB
