PPRuNe Forums - single engine immediate return, large jet transports

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Tech Log (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log-15/)

- - single engine immediate return, large jet transports (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/301102-single-engine-immediate-return-large-jet-transports.html)

When I explained it was 1:28 seconds

Sorry! thats meant to be 1min 28sec's:
Chr's
H/Snort:ugh:

Quite. But what's a Kane?

Yeah, whats a Kane?

I totally agree Hogsnort BTW......although, mayby the Ops department could produce a CFP with a couple of ETP's on it...:E

"plan to land at the NEAREST suitable airport" is what mr Boeing says....whats so hard about that?

What's "hard" is:

An airport that is "nearest" in straight-line distance may not be "nearest" in time.

An airport that may be "suitable" may be marginally so.

A "diversion" at TOD may cause significant additional safety risk to many other airplanes and people as ATC tries to reshuffle traffic to accommodate your emergency. Priority handling on the anticipated arrival to your original destination will cause much less disruption. Fuel contamination (the other major cause of multiple engine failure besides fuel starvation) is unlikely near the end of the flight if there are no indications (e.g., Filter Bypass warning) prior to the first engine failure.

An interruption to normal routine always carries additional risk. It is up to the Captain to decide how much additional risk is appropriate for the situation, and to balance offsetting risks.

Quote:

I think the problem with the decision was that a normal 2 engine TOD would have been say 3 x Alt in thousands. Once on one engine, that TOD pulls forward when you consider a second failure, to something like 2 x Alt in thousands. So a 2 eng TOD becomes a long drag on one engine, then the destination becomes unachievable if at any time the second engine fails from TOD, even single engine TOD, and that was what hung the pilot involved. The difference could be 40 miles or more. It is accepted practice in simulator training that on one engine, you do not rush, but you do try and get it on the ground without undue delay.

The simulator scenario MAY be appropriate if you know or suspect the cause of the first failure to be something that may also affect the second engine (fuel contamination, volcanic ash...). However, 40 miles at cruise speed equates to about 5 minutes. It might take that much longer to find all the appropriate approach plates and get the ATC coordination for the diversion!
Again, the Captain must assess the situation and make a reasoned decision. It's not quite as simple as haughtney seems to think.

Some years back a SAA B747 took off out of Frankfurt close to MTOW. They lost 3 & 4 engines and came straight back to land. No problem. as a previous post said melted fuse plugs a lot less serious than a hull loss.

Yeah, whats a Kane?
I totally agree Hogsnort BTW......although, mayby the Ops department could produce a CFP with a couple of ETP's on it...

Yes we ended up getting Co Fp's, but as for getting ETP's on this route, or its parent one Nadi Rotuma, was deemed to be pointless????
Note that "I" did try to get it so!
Don't know what they do now 12 yr's later.
A "Kane: It a type of bamboo, shaped like a sheep crook" commonly called a "walking stick" its an aid to walking for those that need it!:}
For those of you surrounded with PFM thingy's!:ooh:
A Kane or is it Cane! :)
A Little circular plastic thing, fits in your breast pocket, has numbers on it! very useful, especially when the power goes "off" due to "double Generator failure" ( but thats another war storey) helps keep the "Grey Matter" fuctioning.:}
The other thing I recently got upset about was the relience of "CREW" upon the ships flash lite? :hmm:I carry my "own", always have, Maglite & Kane go every where with me! have done for 25 years.:ok::ok:
Chr's
H/Snort

Quote:

What's "hard" is:

An airport that is "nearest" in straight-line distance may not be "nearest" in time.

An airport that may be "suitable" may be marginally so.

Intruder.....and?

The points you make are part and parcel with operating a medium/heavy twin either ETOP's or over some of the more remote area's of the globe in every sense of the word.....like I said...its not THAT hard.
Its why at the route planning stage an airline is required to produce detailed and specific area and aerodrome briefs to enable its operating crews to become familiar with the various suitable/adequate/nearest alternate airfields.

I'm sure you are well aware of this, but perhaps its important to enlighten those who aren't aware.