do we really need to retract flaps in case of an engine failure after take-off?
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blip:
That's why you're paid the big bucks for judgment. 
But, you've added "engine fire" and/or "severe engine damage."
More often than not the engine failure on takeoff is not an engine fire, but if it is aren't you trained to keep the engine running until achieving a safe altitude for the circumstances?
As to severe engine damage that isn't necessarily easy to determine.
In any case, being at a flat-land airport on a bright, sunny day is great, so why not cut the OEI profile short and return for landing? The question then becomes, how short do you cut the profile? You probably want to be in approach configuration and at least at minimum maneuvering speed. If this is at 800 feet rather than 1,500 feet, or higher, you have less margin of altitude protection and perhaps a more difficult situation for maneuvering with OEI.
But, we don't fly only on clear days, so the ability to get onto an IAP for return to the departure airport almost certainly requires not less than 1,500 feet, afe, and often higher.
Now in this case with the visibility being so low, it probably did make sense to clean up as there was no chance of returning for a landing. A diversion to "return airport" was the only option. But imagine if the weather was fine and there was an engine fire, or severe engine damage. You're going to want to return for a landing as soon as possible. Over weight landing? So be it.
How can flying 30 nm away be safer than simply accelerating to flap 5 manoeuvering speed, keeping the aircraft close to the airport, and getting the aircraft back on the ground that much more quickly?
How can flying 30 nm away be safer than simply accelerating to flap 5 manoeuvering speed, keeping the aircraft close to the airport, and getting the aircraft back on the ground that much more quickly?
But, you've added "engine fire" and/or "severe engine damage."
More often than not the engine failure on takeoff is not an engine fire, but if it is aren't you trained to keep the engine running until achieving a safe altitude for the circumstances?
As to severe engine damage that isn't necessarily easy to determine.
In any case, being at a flat-land airport on a bright, sunny day is great, so why not cut the OEI profile short and return for landing? The question then becomes, how short do you cut the profile? You probably want to be in approach configuration and at least at minimum maneuvering speed. If this is at 800 feet rather than 1,500 feet, or higher, you have less margin of altitude protection and perhaps a more difficult situation for maneuvering with OEI.
But, we don't fly only on clear days, so the ability to get onto an IAP for return to the departure airport almost certainly requires not less than 1,500 feet, afe, and often higher.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is very interesting reading comments on certification requirements and SOPs. The way I see it, is that the crew's primary objective is to achieve a safe flight, followed by an efficient flight. But the primary goal is safety. Therefore, it is beholden on the crew to de-risk the operation as much as is practically possible. To that end SOPs are a tool designed to help the crew. If for whatever reason secific SOPs aren't going to narrow the gap between now and a safe landing, then It is the crews responsibility to consider other options.
Until the other recent thread, I'd never heard of such a procedure. A safe altitude i
For a shutdown should always be 400'. If we can't fly the SID or contingency procedure after EFSD recall, then the chances are the same coud be said for a EFATO.
More often than not the engine failure on takeoff is not an engine fire, but if it is aren't you trained to keep the engine running until achieving a safe altitude for the circumstances?
For a shutdown should always be 400'. If we can't fly the SID or contingency procedure after EFSD recall, then the chances are the same coud be said for a EFATO.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until the other recent thread, I'd never heard of such a procedure. A safe altitude i
For a shutdown should always be 400'. If we can't fly the SID or contingency procedure after EFSD recall, then the chances are the same coud be said for a EFATO (Engine Failure After Take-Off).
For a shutdown should always be 400'. If we can't fly the SID or contingency procedure after EFSD recall, then the chances are the same coud be said for a EFATO (Engine Failure After Take-Off).
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think many people here are not considering the scenario where, after an engine failure, a decision has been made to remain in the circuit for an immediate return to land. (Obviously this assumes that there are no known complications like being significantly overweight, other system failures, and perhaps a very inexperienced crew member ?) The minimum flap setting for joining the (standard single engine) circuit is Flap 1 going to Flap 5 so IMHO there is very little point in retracting flaps to less than 1 and then almost immediately extending them again.
I instruct on the 737 and often see crews getting so involved with checks whilst downwind in the circuit they forget they are still at Flaps Up speed (c. 210-220) and I end up having to freeze the simulator to prevent them ending up in the next country/county! It is usually best to fly the circuit at standard speeds and this gives an average competent crew time to get the QRH OEI c/l done ,a Flap 15 bug set, and a quick brief before turning base. In the event that a decision is made to join a holding pattern then obviously the aircraft is better in the clean configuration. It all comes down to "airmanship"-- Boeing's standard patterns are for guidance but as the A380 incident showed often crews need to think a "bit outside the box"-- i.e. be a bit flexible and use common sense.
I instruct on the 737 and often see crews getting so involved with checks whilst downwind in the circuit they forget they are still at Flaps Up speed (c. 210-220) and I end up having to freeze the simulator to prevent them ending up in the next country/county! It is usually best to fly the circuit at standard speeds and this gives an average competent crew time to get the QRH OEI c/l done ,a Flap 15 bug set, and a quick brief before turning base. In the event that a decision is made to join a holding pattern then obviously the aircraft is better in the clean configuration. It all comes down to "airmanship"-- Boeing's standard patterns are for guidance but as the A380 incident showed often crews need to think a "bit outside the box"-- i.e. be a bit flexible and use common sense.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Common sense is always a good idea, however one has to take care not to invent their own SOPs just because everything from boeing or the company is seen as normal corporate bull.
Anyway, to stay in the circuit you need a rather pressing issue in which case the non normal immediate landing (formerly called immediate return) checklist applies, which indeed does not require to clean up the aircraft. For a normal engine failure there is usually no time critical problem and it's best to just fly the standard procedure, do all the checklists, FORDEC, performance calculation (OEI landing climb limit has to be checked before departure in low vis to decide if you need a take off alternate or not), and then set up for an approach back.
Anyway, to stay in the circuit you need a rather pressing issue in which case the non normal immediate landing (formerly called immediate return) checklist applies, which indeed does not require to clean up the aircraft. For a normal engine failure there is usually no time critical problem and it's best to just fly the standard procedure, do all the checklists, FORDEC, performance calculation (OEI landing climb limit has to be checked before departure in low vis to decide if you need a take off alternate or not), and then set up for an approach back.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Denti:
...and, if IMC (or perhaps night) what minimum altitude will be required before level off and set up for the IAP.
...and then set up for an approach back.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Denti said "Anyway, to stay in the circuit you need a rather pressing issue in which case the non normal immediate landing (formerly called immediate return) checklist applies, which indeed does not require to clean up the aircraft. For a normal engine failure there is usually no time critical problem and it's best to just fly the standard procedure, do all the checklists, FORDEC, performance calculation (OEI landing climb limit has to be checked before departure in low vis to decide if you need a take off alternate or not), and then set up for an approach back."
Denti- it sounds like your company has re-written the Boeing QRH? What is FORDEC? and Boeing do not have a "non normal immediate landing (formerly called immediate return)" checklist so I guess that is a company specific one? Additionally even with a 737-800 if you have taken off from a 10,000' runway there is really no need to do a performance calculation. Sometimes it is easy to overcomplicate the situation (IMHO).
Denti- it sounds like your company has re-written the Boeing QRH? What is FORDEC? and Boeing do not have a "non normal immediate landing (formerly called immediate return)" checklist so I guess that is a company specific one? Additionally even with a 737-800 if you have taken off from a 10,000' runway there is really no need to do a performance calculation. Sometimes it is easy to overcomplicate the situation (IMHO).
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, not every runway is that long, remember you can carry 79t out of around 2000m of runway. Which can be demanding to land back on in case of malfunctions.
We do have boeing supplied checklists, on back cover page 1 is an immediate land checklist. Dunno if it is tailored for our operations though as boeing of course offers that service.
FORDEC is a standard CRM procedure, back when we were part of the Nigel world we used DODAR, pretty much the same thing.
Again, a simple engine failure is no reason to hurry, only if there is a very time pressing matter you need to rush, like a fire you can't extinguish. Undue haste can lead to very nasty surprises, better to take your time and be thorough.
We do have boeing supplied checklists, on back cover page 1 is an immediate land checklist. Dunno if it is tailored for our operations though as boeing of course offers that service.
FORDEC is a standard CRM procedure, back when we were part of the Nigel world we used DODAR, pretty much the same thing.
Again, a simple engine failure is no reason to hurry, only if there is a very time pressing matter you need to rush, like a fire you can't extinguish. Undue haste can lead to very nasty surprises, better to take your time and be thorough.
