one engine out trap situation
 

Hi guys..

You are in a SID which has an high climb gradient, in IMC, just passed the One Eng Out procedure track chance, and the engine fails, the airplane is heavy, and cannot comply the SID gradient, no radar control and no radar vectors option available, the MSA is not so low.

Turning back to rejoin the engine out track perhaps could not garantee obstacle clearance.. :confused:

How do you manage the situation?

You don't. You're screwed. But look at it rationally, just how likely is that situation to occur?? The aircraft probably has a higher chance of being struck by a meteorite. There isn't an "out" for all potential situations, and it's what the subject of risk analysis/management is all about.

"Use your airmanship! What do you think you're being paid a small fortune for?" ;)

More realistically: to decide if you have a fighting chance we would need more information on the SID and the engine-out SID. How many seconds, miles or minutes from airborne is the emergency turn? Is there manoeuvering room to turn back? The late engine failure should mean you are above the profile at that point. How much further have you got to go to MSA? And so on...

Private jet is right. For example, think of the all-engines-failure situation.

yeah you're screwed BUT on the assumption you'll do something rather than nothing seems to depend where you think the best "fat" may be:

- in the SID even though you cannot meet the requirement you MAY be able to miss the hills by 1 foot rather than hit them by 1 foot;
- the EFATO procedure, even though off the exact track the lateral margin built into the procedure.

Of course local knowledge may assist in any decision, if you're in IMC an interesting period until the point of impact (or hopefully not!)

Personally reckon I'd go second option, max thrust, best climb and no cleanup until MSA - hopefully then head to the hotel and write the report.

And like Sully - only a "couple of seconds" to make a decision that the armchair warriors can pick to pieces in the days and month afterwards!

Cheers. :ok:

This is exactly why reputable RPT operations will have an obstacle clearance procedure or OCP and a procedure to follow in the event that you've already commenced the turn on a SID. In any case it might well be different to the SID.

Unless conducting certain types of RNP approaches, it is also what you would follow in the event of a OEI go around from below the minima in IMC.

My current airline and the previous published both an OCP and a 'post procedure'

For example. EFATO from YSSY 34r, if you've already started the turn then track 090 and climb to the MSA. If you haven't yet stared the turn then track straight ahead till 10nm then turn right and track 090 climbing to the MSA.

It's written our TO card and checked during the pre flight.

In short, if one engine keeps going, then you've always got an option.

Remember, usually but not in the case of some airlines, the engine failure is "planned" to have occurred at Vef (just short of V1 depending the cert standard), so you should have built up some excess energy, either height or speed, preferably height. Any climb out if a mountainous airport should be, AEO, at something a bit above V2, say near V2+20 to ensure the most height gain.

Can you not display Terrain on your Nav display to enhance your SA?

I think too many are missing the question asked, maybe simplified:

- solid IMC
- sea level airport, MSA 5000ft within 25nm
- predicated SID and company EFATO procedure
- just after the commencement point of EFATO procedure THEN you lose an engine (being fair a simple failure).

Watch ya gonna do, decisions ya gonna make, Sully, in the next 15-30 seconds regards your tracking??

Bear in mind few companies - probably most - will not provide crew with anything more than an EFATO procedure and only that because the insurance (apologies, regulators - silly me!) require it.

Cheers.

Depends but. You should have been way above the climb gradient prior to the engine failure, so infact continuing the Sid would in most cases be safe. But being aware of where the high ground is paramount.

Our OM states that if you're on the SID above 1500ft and within 30nm, the procedures are designed so that you can turn the shortest way to the EO HP.

Seriously?

Willy hit the nail on the head. If you could get caught out as described, then your company should provide you with an escape plan.

GF and Icepack also raises a good point: depending on how far away from the airfield the first turn is, you will be well above the Engine out profile at that point so will have either excess speed to trade for height or if as GF suggests, you maintain V2 until you're in the clear.

Or... get a new SID designed. There must be others in your position.

thanks very much guys, I felt like in a real and very exhaustive take-off briefing.. any of you has given me an interesting point of view.

I deeply agree with any of you who suggests to exit the trap using our airmanship which has always to be brought with us as our best resource in the cockpit..

I took note of any pilot's resources you mentioned useful to to plan the exit of the trick even before take-off, as...
observing the obstacle enviroment on the chart, check for MSA for a safe altitude, use the terrain mode on the NAV display, retard the clean-up, ecc..

but I'm also pointing to focus, with your help, on any technical tool which an airline navigation and performance staff can produce to make available more resources to their pilots for tuning the best strategy before take-off.

The problem arises, as I explained, when we have a diversion between the two track, our EFATO goes strait while the SID turns left at 400' AGL. In that situation, the cockpit has to make the best analisys as they can to reduce the potential screwed situation, which is rare but anyway possible, if you have already turned left for the SID passing for example 1.000'AGL with a discrete obstacle enviroment around. MSA is not even so high but is of course well higher. Where should i fly during while climbing to the MSA. My terrain is on but are you shure I can really face an ostacle avoidance using my MAP mode?.. Which is the turn radius I expect when I decide to avoid that ostacle to the right or to the left?

I resumed my doubts just to say that, any situation can be planned before take-off using the best of any consideration but, as many of you said, there can be some situations that cannot be solved and that can turns as like screwed ones.

so..

I'm aware that WE pilots have to face any risk and we are fair well paid and trained to do that. I can use my airmaship often even when I cook a good plate of spaghetti.. but..
If I'll take a good decision I will be probably clapped and sign some authographs to my fans but if I wrong it I will be asked why if I can still be alive to give my version to the court.

What I want to say is that our airlines can add much to have the situation much more comfortable for WE pilots. In this case we can ask for a deeper study of any critical airport we fly to give us someting more than saying..."if you have an engine fail at V1 fly to XXX and make an hold there".

I will assume any risk which is unprobable and absurd that could happen, I'm maybe able to face that in the best manner, but I would be glad to not be left alone and without any other resource than my sound decision making.

That doesn't mean that I don't want to take my responsabilities or that I don't thrust in my abilities but that if there is any chance to improve to solve or reduce my risky situation before I have to use my skills as the last and unique solution, than.. I SHOULD have!
This is not a complain.

As you have already understood, my company doesn't give any other tool to face an engine failure more than the the engine out procedure, described in our runway take-off tables, which guarantees for ostacle clearance as for the regulation but not more.

I know that some airlines has made deeper study then the EFATO at V1 considering more variable situations as the one I depicted so...
I'm looking for this kind of solutions.

Willy Nelson has reported that he has a "post procedure" and I'll be glad he could describe it's theory with more details, tnks.. :)

Airbus addresses some suggestions to the airlines navigation performance teams which describe how to build-up a so called "DECISION POINT" along the take-off path which define the phisical point situated before the "DIVERSION POINT" where pilots can take the decision to continue flying the SID or the engine out flight track.

Boeing says that some airlines publish a so called "SID DEVIATION POINT"; when the engine fails on the SID before reaching this point, the pilots should rejoin the engine out flight track.

I don't have much more than rumors about the existence of those tools, do you have something more to describe about that?

My quality team is asking to our navigation & performance staff to build-up anyone of this tools so we'll assume and consider valuable any of your contribution.

Look at the Jepp charts for Corfu. It shows escape routes for exactly what you are looking for.

I've red now about your post EcamSurpise..
can you please add more details about your company alternative strategy?

you mean that your company designs all the EOPs so you can rejoin them coming from any SID you are flying?.. just need 1.500' altitude..
uhm... sounds..

@ fantom..

I've checked..
both 35 & 17 rwy SIDs says to turn at 500'AGL but..
what your EOP says?

Wrong chart. Look again - there is one that shows escape routes.

uhm... I'm not used with jeppesen..
can I find what you are telling me here, perhaps?
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fssim/charts/LGKR.pdf

Unless your departure is along a valley you should be able to turn away from the high/highest ground. This might be contrary to other traffic or airways etc, but you will be operating under a "Mayday" and your priority will be to clear terrain. Having done that you can then change your trousers and sort yourself out.

If your departure is along or into a valley, e.g. Chambery, Innsbruck, Geneva etc, then there will be special procedures to follow in the event of engine failure as described.

Those are VERY old charts.

Sometimes the decision might be to turn TOWARDS the highest terrain, thereby giving yourself more maneuvering airspace if you need to turn back into the protected airspace behind you.

Sometimes little things matter -

Mountain flying 101 in low performance aircraft - get as close to the threat as possible and then turn away for a course reversal.

The slower the speed the smaller the turn radius(normal G loads).

If there really is a danger with terrain the emergency turn procedures normally cater for it. ie eng failure before 5 DME turn right hdg xxx, engine failure after 5D and before 12 DME turn left hdg xxx engine failure after 12 DME continue SID. I find time and time again that the people who try to complicate things and dissect minutiae are the same people who screw up the basics when things go wrong. Keep it simple.

It is a good question and real world. But I think a real world answer is still.....It depends on the situation. But lets make the scenario even worse by stating that you are unfamiliar with the airport as well and no ATC radar vectors available to save the day.

All you know is that there is terrain out there and the MSA is well above your altitude.

So how about after making sure that the aircraft is under control, that you select the terrain function to be displayed on your ND(if it wasn't already selected). The manual says that it is not to be used for navigation. But seeing as you could easily justify this as an emergency(even for an aircraft with more than two engines), consider using the terrain database for navigation. It may confirm that the SID route will clear the terrain as it was your lucky day and the routing goes through a valley. MSA of 5000 can sound bad but it could be just one peak that was off to one side of you and several miles away.

But if you can't clear the terrain on the SID route, it might be wise to stay slow to allow more time and tighter turn radius and avoid terrain using the terrain function(in other words. Worry about retracting flaps and accelerating later unless you really need to).

If close-in terrain is all around and is above your altitude, hopefully you have enough space to continuously circle and climb above the terrain or somehow set yourself up for a return to the airport. Remember to compensate for wind drift while doing your circling maneuver.

Are we talking about High Capacity Passenger ops here??

Hi MAAZ,

To explain the 'post procedure' I'll stick with the example of YSSY34R Marub 5 departure. Keep in mind that the Obstacle clearance procedure (OCP) and 'post' procedure are NOT published on the chart because they are aircraft dependant. In our case we use Airbus 'Flysmart' data which for each runway will show these on our iPads.

Luckily, this is not some sort of intuitive thing that you'll need to 'feel in your waters' on the day. You will do ONE of two things:

1) Should you lose an engine between V1 and 500 feet then you will follow the OCP which states that we maintain runway track of 335 and then at 10DME SY we turn right and track 090 degrees climbing to the MSA or until radar is happy to give us radar terrain vectors.

2) Should we lose an engine at anytime after 500 feet then we do not have any option but to commence the 'post' (after the first SID turn) procedure which in this case is to turn right and track 090.

The aim on this chart is to avoid bumping in the Sydney central business district including counterpoint tower. (C) marks the spot and (P) marks the post procedure or what we would do after we have already started the turn.

Prior to takeoff, all options are accounted for and understood as standard procedure. The only ambiguity will arise when you have a stalling or vibrating engine in which case once the initial startle factor subsides you will need to do what is most conservative. For my money in the above example, My clients would wish for me to do one of the two above options simply dependent on whether or not I had stared the turn. That is to say whether I am before or post the initial SID turn.

I hope that makes sense.

If there really is a danger with terrain the emergency turn procedures normally cater for it.

Perhaps ... but, then again, more likely, probably not .. beyond the normal routine OEI failure. Highly dependent on the operator's integrity and the Regulator's oversight and technical competence re OEI escape planning.

avoid terrain using the terrain function

That's fine if there's one gynormous hill in an otherwise flat landscape .. the reality is that a pilot-interpreted radar image is of considerably less use than the Eyeball Mk 1 VMC terrain avoidance .. which, likewise, is only much use for the odd significant obstacle in an otherwise benign landscape.

The problem usually is (OEI) trying to match shallow climb gradient capability to one's perception of the terrain gradient ahead .. as a rule, it doesn't work too well at all.

So how to do it properly ? Someone has to do the work ahead of time in the traditional manner (either manually .. takes forever .. or using whatever fancy electonic aids might be available to save time on the number crunching).

Probable outcomes on the day if you don't have a well-engineered pre-planned escape protocol ? .. either you get away with it, go to the pub, get plastered, and sleep like a baby (depending on how big a fright you received ... or you, and your passengers die ... simple, really.

What saves the day overall is that

(a) most runways are reasonably benign and a half-intelligent pre-takeoff plan will see you right

(b) most failures are somewhat after V1 and, providing that you have kept your AEO climb profile well above the OEI animal .. you will have a measure of fat, the measure depending on how far out the failure occurs.

If (a) and (b) don't apply, then reality is that all the buzzwords and weasel words count for naught .. if you find yourself in a nasty terrain situation, OEI and post SID turn and the escape hasn't been figured out ahead of time and isn't right there on your pad in front of you .. then you are up that well-known creek without a paddle.

EASAland:

GM1 CAT.POL.A.210 Take-off obstacle clearance

CONTINGENCY PROCEDURES FOR OBSTACLES CLEARANCES

If compliance with CAT.POL.A.210 is based on an engine failure route that differs from the all engine departure route or SID normal departure, a ‘deviation point' can be identified where the engine failure route deviates from the normal departure route. Adequate obstacle clearance along the normal departure route with failure of the critical engine at the deviation point will normally be available.
However, in certain situations the obstacle clearance along the normal departure route may be marginal and should be checked to ensure that, in case of an engine failure after the deviation point, a flight can safely proceed along the normal departure route.

:ok:@ Willie Nelson..

Tnks for the explanation.
I'll take it as an interesting imput.

I understood that your performance team has calculated and make available more than one OCP depending on "when" the engine fail happen, ok..

do you know why, if you have an engine failure after passing 500' you dont fly the SID?
climb performance versus 3,3% SID gradient?

Do you have any EO Post Procedure which states to fly the SID?

tnks

To that, there was a series of accidents in the USAF where 3 O-2s (mil Skymaster with lots of heavy ancient radios) went up a canyon with a rising floor which actually rose faster than the overweight O-2 could climb in the Nevada temps. All three, IIRC, slide onto the dirt. Terrain easily seen may be impossible to avoid, except where there is a clear opening.

A HUD is very useful here as the true horizon is superimposed on the view outside. The vast difference in AEO versus OEI performance is another factor. One gets used to AEO and its stunning what happens OEI.

GF

Our performance is checked out to MSA OEI, sometimes further. At terrain constrained airfields, there will often be a multi-part procedure, the action taken dependent on where the failure occurred, e.g. (made up example)

Engine failure before 5DME XYZ climb ahead to 1200FT QNH then right track 340DEG inform ATC.
Engine failure between 5DME XYZ and WPONT continue with SID, at WPONT turn left to UVW and enter the hold.
Engine failure after WPONT if below MSA turn left to UVW and enter the hold, otherwise continue or return.

At some places, like Islamabad, our OEI options were presented out to TOC and beyond, with escape routes coming into play once over the high ground (MSAs 27,000’+).

I’m not sure how I would feel about having a known “gap” in an OEI procedure. There are some things that are so unlikely they can be happily discounted but an engine failure in the climb out? At some airfields, it would be obvious what to do but at others, it would be easy to paint yourself into a corner and only realise this when the EGPWS starts giving input.

I am distinctly unhappy with radar departures from places where we have ETs, even though ATC should be looking after terrain clearance - unfortunately they won’t have much idea of the aircraft’s actual performance with an engine out (why should they?)

@ Gryphon..

Nice to see any colleague chewing Easa AirOps ;)

That's I'm looking for... strategies and option of an engine failure after the deviation point... what other airlines do!..
how they calculate if they actually do.

As you know the GM you posted (Guidance Material) is just a guidance and not a rule to comply with. That is the reason not many Airlines follow this useful raccomandation which could give more tools to their pilots to solve in the correct way the unsafe situation. Far away from a screwed one.

If WE pilots could know, even before take-off that, today, if the engine fails after the deviation point I can safely continue flying the SID, I will probably avoid to maneuver the airplane to rejoin the EOP track increasing the level off stress and decreasing the safety.

Why request to pilots to use airwothness, authority and sound decision making leaving them alone to take this decision if the airline can put more energies to make a deeper study of the problem and give options as the Easa GM suggests?

flight operations don't has to count on heroes.. WE Pilots must use our sound decision making as the last resource available only when facing an unforseen circumstance or, let's say, any situation that cannot be planned or calculated.

"this" can be calculated and WE pilots should ask for it!

This is not to "complicate things and dissect minutiae" as somebody wrote here.
On the contrary I think is superficial not work on obtain any tool that can be delivered to professional pilots which can be extremely useful to avoid complicating the situation inflight.
This kind of planning has just one definition: SAFETY

@FullWings..

Hell! that's how must work!
I do like.. you should be proud about your performance team!
behind all those options there is a big efford.

try to bring this to mine one..:ok:

Every body points out every thing...!! I suggest you shouldn't have been on that SID.If the SE cceiling is lower than the MEA in that cas the route cannot be planned.

SID's may or may not have minimum climb gradients.It is required to be assured that in the case of the most critical engine failing the same can be adhered to if not then reduce the weight if that doesn't help you cannot be using that SID.Similarly a Miss App may have minimum gradients as well

More than airman ship its planning

Always recollect going in to Bogota, noticing the high ground falling away into a large valley to the NW and thinking 'That could be useful.'

All SIDS and omnidirectional departures have a minimum gradient-3.3% unless specified higher. Using the SID gradients is unwise when a OEI emergency procedure can be drawn and one that uses a routing to optimize weight and provide better terrain clearance.

GF

Actually, I am not talking about using the weather radar terrain function. I am talking about using the EGPWS terrain function which paints a nice picture of the terrain around you and its altitude relative to you.

This is for the situation suggested where you had an engine failure and you are past the turning point for the engine out procedure and in high terrain.

Hi MAAZ,

I will defer to Gryphon for you local area, he knows more of the local rules than I ever will. Down in the antipodes we do things a little differently.

From the reference that Gryphon refers to it looks like EASA is placing the requirement back on the company to confirm obstacle clearance in all circumstances.

In my airline we have a performance engineering department that will do exactly that. Having said that we are not a small operator and I'm not aware of us having ever done a charter to an airfield for which we were not able to obtain the relevant obstacle and terrain data.

I am talking about using the EGPWS terrain function which paints a nice picture of the terrain around you and its altitude relative to you.

Didn't work too well, for instance, at Mt Erebus ? OK, I'm being a tad facetious. However, the EGPWS terrain databases are not worldwide and, I suspect, not of sufficient accuracy to support OEI planning. Better than nothing, certainly.

I'm not aware of us having ever done a charter to an airfield for which we were not able to obtain the relevant obstacle and terrain data

While satellite data makes a first cut much easier these days, I wouldn't discount your folk making the usual assumptions for one-off charters .. getting adequate terrain data can still entail considerable work and time. For many locations, there exists plenty of data .. can be a pain tracking it down, though, in a short timeframe.

Might be illuminating were you to have a discussion over coffee with your ops eng folks.

GF's observation re HUD is useful although (and I have never operated HUD) it probably is not in the class of an adequate preplanned escape.

What would you do in an older aircraft with no ND terrain mode ?
You would absolutely need very precise charts to know where terrain is and figure out a way to avoid it.

The idea to simply circle in a climb sounds good. It just requires to know A/C radius of turn and its performance while in that turn.
(More precisely : figure out the maximum inclination which will still allow the 1 engine-out aircraft to climb, know the diameter of turn for that inclination and figure that if terrain allows for significantly more than that diameter of turn, everything should be all right)

You would absolutely need very precise charts to know where terrain is and figure out a way to avoid it.

Crew data is of scant use for OEI clearance planning due extent and accuracy

The idea to simply circle in a climb sounds good

OEI, you need to factor in the loss of climb gradient in a turn and the very large turn radius for a small angle of bank. Good idea but generally doesn't cut the mustard.

Asbolutely. There's always one such smart @rse in the classroom or sim, but when it comes to the art of actually flying an airplane their inadequacies are a joy to (secretly) behold!