737 fire handle - reset in flight?
 

If an engine fire handle in a 737-400 is pulled (but not turned), can it be reset in flight to attempt a restart, or is it strictly a one-way system?

Thanks,

Dave.

Hi Dave,

it is possible to push in the Fire Handle. Nothing is latched.
All the Shutoff Valves (Fuel, Hydraulic, Bleed) move to open.
Restart of the Engine is Possible.

so long
Frank

Hola David -
xxx
Typical Boeing fire handle - shut down fuel, hydraulic, bleed air, electrical...
As a matter of fact think of this. In flight, your CFM-56 windmills.
Not too good for that engine driven hydraulic pump. They are expensive.
Maybe a good idea, to let some fluid "lubricate the pump" from time to time.
All that depends on the reason why you pulled the handle.
On the ground, in 747, we occasionally shut down the engines with these.
To see... if they work. Sometimes maintenance requests us to check them.
Some fuel valves sometimes fail to close, and engine runs on, and on, and on.
xxx
Brgds/
:ok:
Happy contrails

Often an excellent idea - With the mob I used to work for, that was tried on one of the 747's on engine #1. After twenty seconds or so at idle power (most people don't know it takes that long at idle after you pull the handle to get shutdown) the #2 engine quietly shut-down, with #1 still running away nicely.
Oh joy ..... :)

the #2 engine quietly shut-down, with #1 still running away nicely.

(a) which is why some of us mandate independent inspections for critical engine mx

(b) didn't the operator do operational acceptance checks after significant mx ?

.. red faces.

Not with that 'airline' they didn't..

That incident is but one of several 'they' have been caught out with.

Plus the usual things for these types of operators -

- co-signing independent inspections by the same person.

- doing phantom maintenance at the last moment on items that are about to expire their MEL time limit.

I guess that's a reason for me not going back there after my 'vacation' a couple of years ago!

BTW - Hi 18-Wheeler, how you doin' these days, long time...

Cheers...FD...:)

Having pulled the fire handle, why would you want to push it in again?
Is it a new procedure you have found somewhere?

Maybe it was the wrong one......

If you did pull the wrong one, it would be a fair call to reset it, and quick-smart before the boss finds out. Next action would probably be the CVR 'erase' followed by free beers to the co-pilot for the rest of his career.

But if you ever pull one in anger, DO NOT reset it at intervals in the interests of lubricating fuel pumps etc. unless you have a QRH that tells you to do that. I have yet to see one that does. If the problem was serious enough to shut the engine down, don't even think about a relight unless the other one develops a worse problem. Attempting to relight a cold-soaked engine could be a lot more costly than a seized fuel pump. Don't get creative.

On the B777, the fire handle closes the HP valve as well, so its like a normal shutdown.

On the BA Tristar there was a MEL item that had you pulling the fire handle on every shutdown. I believe it was with APU Bleed air inop. You shut down Nbr 3 eng on the fire handle, and maint then chkd that the HPSOV was closed when you reset it. Yes it took about a minute to shut down on the fire handle.

Attn - gas chamber...
 

Blind execution of procedures published in QRH...
xxx
The Q in QRH means "quick" (and dirty) solving of emergencies or malfunctions which require later reading and following further notes found in expanded check-lists in AOMs. Then, there is what is taught (or used to be taught before the days of modern worthless CBT programs) in classrooms.
xxx
Such attitude "I follow QRH - that is it - no more - check list completed" lead into the disaster of ELAL 747 cargo in Amsterdam by stalling the airplane because of extension of leading edge flaps on one side of the airraft, the other wing's leading edge being disabled, "as per QRH"... which Boeing quickly corrected after the accident.
xxx
I will give you gentlemen an example. You are familiar with the Boeing engine fire procedure. The tune of the procedure is silence the bell, pull the handle, shutting down the engine, then activate a fire extinguisher. If the "red light" goes out - you stop there. If the "red light" does not go out, 30 seconds later, discharge the second fire extinguisher. Agreed...? That is the end of the QRH procedure.
xxx
The crews I trained and briefed in my classroom and simulators learned a further step, not published on any QRH. After "red light" is out 30 seconds later, test your fire detection system, light and bell, again for that engine. There is a slight possibility that your detection system burned out and got disabled by the engine fire and resulting severe damage. There might still be a raging fire there on your engine, despite the red light being "out"...
xxx
You see, in Pprune, there are student pilots, and (highly) qualified line captains, some of which are/were TRE/TRI or training managers. So "stick to your QRH" and do not use your brains. This old dog can still teach tricks you would be surprised to learn.
xxx
:E
Happy contrails

Testing the fire system after a fire drill is one I teach as well. I have practical experience of just the very situation where the fire loop got taken out when a combustion can on a RR Dart blew and caused the fire warning to go away before the fire was out.
But like GC, I would not condone 'creative' departures from the QRH just for the sake of it. Not all pilots are particularly knowledgeable of systems and so the QRH is written for the lowest common denominator for good reason. It is when the situation is NOT covered by the QRH that one must use common sense and airmanship and whatever other resources are at hand. But in today's litigious society it would be a brave pilot that stepped outside SOPs and QRHs etc without compelling reason.

Both BelArgUSA and Mach E Avelli ( great name btw:ok::ok::ok:) speak lots of common sense.
I am a late 30's FO, aviation is my second career, fast learning about the 737, I get to fly Classic and NG, I always read with interst what BelArg USA, has to say, you should write a book!!!!

Reset cb's ?
 

I believe the fire handle will trip the generator cb and gene control relay cb.

Common sense vs QRH
 

The QRH is a tool that should be used in non-normal situations. Going against the QRH is a bad idea unless you are absolutely sure that you know what you are doing. It is written in blood.... Testing the fire system sounds like a good idea but I wouldn't do it myself since I don't have suffiicient technical knowledge about the fire system. As far as I'm concerned the fire test could just as well be disabled after turning the handle for that particular engine.

Being creative can be a good idea but there are plenty of more accidents when people have been creative than when they haven't. Furthermore, you need to be able to back up your actions in a court of law...

Naturally, the QRH doesn't cover all possible problems and it says clearly in the beginning of it. But being creative in an already serious situation that is uncalled for can prove devistating...

Some of you here do not have "sufficient technical knowledge". Well, thanks.
Confirms poor opinion I have of XXIst Century training product of graduates of 14 ATPL exams.
No wonder I rather take trains or rent cars in your part of the world.
xxx
In the good old days, we had 120 hours of initial classroom type training.
Systems knowledge, manuals study, procedures, performance.
Then simulator training, two weeks, then line training...
And many of us spent a few years as flight engineer before being pilot.
And often, many "this is not in the books" - "how would you troubleshoot this"...?
xxx
What do you do in initial and recurrent training...? Country club style...?
Cup of tea with biscuits, Earl Grey, certainly, in a cute little cup.
And AOM replaced by the Daily Mirror, with Flight Int'l to seek better jobs...?
Suggest improving your knowledge of airplane systems by reading Pprune.
It is available on the net - www.pprune.org - for free.
xxx
:(
Happy contrails

I quite agree, BelArgUSA.
For example recently I started a course on the A330 and much to my surprise there was hardly any information on the engines.
They were treated as a 'thing' that hung off the wings, and either they worked or they didn't - With checklists to suit both states.

I like everything I can about every part of the aeroplane.

18-Wheeler -
xxx
At times, I do not know if I should cry or laugh at what I read here...
I recall my purgatory (or inferno) of my first F/E 727 oral exam. - 1969.
Started day 1, at 09:00, lunch break 12:30-13:30. Finished evening at 17:00.
Day 2 was 09:00 again, completed oral at 12:30, was "lunch time".
Typical question - how many cycles per minute toilet flush operates...?
xxx
Did they tell you how many engines are installed on the A-330...?
Your exam question will be "how do they operate...?
Answer "B" - Good...
xxx
Brgds -
:eek:
Happy contrails

I have read this thread with great interest and I totally understand and respect where BelArgUSA is coming from...

BUT... it is a VERY dangerous area that you go into regarding 'Troubleshooting and being creative'. (I'm not specifically talking about the fire test post engine fire for the B737 I'm just talking in general).

I cant but help think you are a very experienced pilot but there are many pilots with far less experience than yourself here reading these posts. Troubleshooting is one thing but not sticking to the 'Emergency Checklist' is something totally different and if for whatever reason right or wrong, you will have to explain your actions... I would not recommend it to anyone!

Granted many pilots don't have the greatest technical knowledge of their aeroplanes but the emergency checklist/aircraft procedures have been thought through by many people (designers, engineers, pilots etc) and there are reasons why you do certain actions and particularly why you do them in a specific order.

Doing things out of order or getting creative without the 'approval' of the airline and manufacturers procedures, well your asking for trouble which may ultimately get you fired or worse case lead to an accident.

At the end of the day the pilot is not there to trouble shoot (I say this with a pinch of salt) like a flight engineer would per say. Back in the day aircraft and there systems were different and had different levels of reliability... there were many cases of what you speak of 'Not in the books tips and tricks' to solve a situation/problem and thats why many of us always preferred having 3 pilots and having the experience and technical knowledge of the flight engineer with us.

Times have changed with the improved reliability of a/c, 2 man flight deck, better systems and maintenance along with better crm practices, pilot training. The whole industry is learning and getting better hence why air travel is so safe. We do as we are trained because we are trained well and thats why our industry is the safest.

To finish given a serious situation DO what your trained to do!! This does not mean you stop THINKING! Common sense is always good practice along with airmanship. The time to think about doing things differently to what you were trained or actions not in checklist or against them is ON THE GROUND outside of the aircraft, not in the air.


Happy and safe flying!


Aka.




--------------------------------------

Experience is something you gain 3 seconds after you needed it!

I teach the 737 for a US Major Airline. Our QRH procedure for Fire/Severe Damage has Immediate Action Items (not memory items) that end with the second bottle discharge, if required. Then the crew is directed to the expanded QRH procedure, where the first step is to test the fire detection system.