Stabilized APP
 

Hi....
we are on Ils, VMC, at 700 AGL...bird stike, eng stall o damage.....What do you think is the safest course of action? Going around or continue to land in single engine? Woould you change configuration? or not?

Hi,

I'd land. Flaps? It depends on the engine out configuration for your aircraft type. My present aircraft allows E.O. landing in normal config. Power on the remaining engine will need to be increased. If a different landing config is required then accelerate to new VAPP and set new land flaps.

Stop on the runway, and do the appropriate check list.

continue and land it's the safest thing you can do, about the flaps conf at 700 ft no changes need to do it so just continue land and call for asistance and do appropiate check list.
:ok:

VMC, bellow 1000 if the rnw is in sight -landing is the better decision.About conf change depends of the present conditions as LGW,GA limmits and so on.Flaps 3 can be considered.

Depends on your aircraft and company policy. If your company policy allows you to continue you can just keep it straight, keep current landing flap on a 320 and land. On a 737 you need to go to Flap 15 for single-engine landing due to drag from 30/40 Flap. Some companies take the view that it's best to get it on the ground without delay. You usually don't know what caused the failure (fuel problems??). Others want you to go-around enter the hold and sort it all out for a single-engine approach because they're afaid you might miss something important in the rush to get it on the ground immediately. Both views have some validity in my opinion.

In the case of the B737 isn't the Flaps 15 for SE a GA requirement? If you are visual and the RW is clear then why not maintain present flap, increase power on the Live engine and land? (Haven't flown the B737 since 1987!).

For the love of God man,! you're at 2.5 miles approx VMC, what do you think is the safe course of action? The critera is you must be stable by 500 or execute a missed approach, is the 30 seconds you have between 700 and 500 feet really going to give you time to change the config and reset the Vref and stabilise the approach? I think you may have answered your own question. Keep it simple:ugh:

Kirks.

Ok. Do what FR did in Rome.

Only try and keep your sole remaining engine running...........like they did.:ooh:

If you think you've only got 1 good engine I don't think the 500ft gate would be relevant.

my company sop is if you get an engine failure on an approach, if above 1000' then select flap 15 accelerate to vref + 15 (b737 btw) and if visual by minima and more importantly STABLE then continue. If not go around, sort yourself out go through the QRH and make another approach. Lets be honest an engine failure and resulting G/A is easier to deal with than accelerating down the slope and sorting yourslf out in 20 secs. we practice the g/a procedure from 50' atleast every year in the sim. But in real life lets be honest its a judgement call. if the the poopoo hits the fan its up to the captain to decide there and then what happens. granted that conversation has to take place in 5 seconds or less but it's a decision that has to be made.

Also in this situation (and i expect to get some flack for this but hey) i would expect my captain to say 'i have control ' and deal with the situation. that isn't saying i'd let go and cower in the corner. if i were a captain (which i won't be for a few years yet) i'd take over and we'd discuss it in the pub afterwards ( my round obviously)

IMC/VMC, Check thrust, adequate performance and able to control maintain tolerances then land with existing flaps, if not select flap 15.
A go-around with flap 30/40 single engine is no big issue, same as normal go-around as there is ample performance.

That's a bit too black and white for me. Unless you know exactly why the engine has stopped, you'd be a brave man to, in all cases, go round just because you might need to make one flap selection and bug up a tad. After all, you should be ready for exactly that on all approaches. If you are already stable at 700ft, it is highly unlikely that you will become so unstable that you're going to prang. I had a situation in the SIM some time ago with a cabin fire which required an immediate reland. The FO turned base too early and we were high. He started mumbling about high sink rates - I said stuff the nose down, we're landing! No problems. The rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the blind obedience of fools. That said, have a good excuse.

No disrespect, are you really a pilot?

First of all stability criteria are different with different airlines. We have the gate at 1000' both in VMC and IMC, so at 700' we would be below it allready. Second, the 737 is certified for flaps 30 OEI landings including CAT IIIa depending on variant so a change of configuration would not be required to begin with, even less so in VMC with a clear runway in front and a landing clearance received.

120110 - I see you are 'qualified' on a few types. Did any of them ever come with a company ops manual or are you operating privately?

NV Pilot, The title of this Tread was Stabilized approach, the answers are given in that context and based on the scenario set by the author, " Bird Strike, engine stall, O Damage.. (unlikely with a strike), the implication here is there is no fire, the engine has been identified. Most SOPs direct the crews to continue in the existing config below 1000AGL, unless there are performance considerations. By the time you've changed the config and re-bugged, completed the checks you would not achieve the criteria for a " Stabilized approach" which was the original thread. Apart from the quip, what is your contribution or thoughts on this debate?

Captain Bloggs, I don't agree with your thoughts most approaches become unstable in the last 300 ft, we see it frequently in the sim, more so in VMC conditions. In this scenario if the engine has been identified there is no need for a gash approach, and if it's a flame out for no apparent reason, we are landing not going around and risking another unexplained flame out.


The Rules are to encourage high standards and protect us all, but if you want to fly to your own rules.. Hmm

May not be necessary depending on several factors. See 737 FCTM page 5.20 under heading "Engine Failure on Final Approach". Basically, it says if the approach is continued and sufficient thrust is available continue the approach with landing flaps.

What sort of "assistance" exactly? You already have three pilots including the automatic one. How much more help do you need to cope with a single engine landing?

His point was that anyone who thinks they must go around just because they changed the flap configuration below 700ft in response to an engine failure isn't exhibiting the flexibility required of us pilots. You'd look like a bit of a dill if you took birds and only one donk stopped initially, requiring a flap position change, followed by the other stopping during the go-around that was executed just because the Stab App config criteria was "not complied-with". The BA 777 at Heathrow would have been a good example had the engines rolled back say 60 seconds apart.

Well then, you need to give your pilots more stick-and-rudder time so they have the skills to look in (at the GS and speed) and out at the same time. Flying visually from 300ft in a stable fashion, even if using the GS as the slope reference, really should be a no-brainer.

Isn't that basically what I said? Why would you change the flaps and risk de stabilizing the approach, there is no requirement to do so, Basic airmaship should prevail in these circumstances.

Has anyone suggested they must go around due to a change of flap setting? Er..No

I agree with the concept of more manual flying and scan improvement, however, I don't want to see any professional pilots pushing rudders at 700' on medium jets in normal circumstances!

Perhaps we should raise the standards of these debates and use correct terminology for those whom might be viewing and less experienced.


Edited for clarity

That is how Post 7 reads.

True, additional to that is the 737 (at least the NG) certified for flaps 30 single engine approaches and landings including CAT IIIa so there is no real performance problem to begin with, at 700 you are a tad late but at 800 you still could do a normal one engine out autoland if you are afraid of your own performance, which of course should never happen in the first place, but that is another topic.

Bloggs, In fairness to the Gusset, post 7 doesn't read as you suggest, the implication is that you do not need to change flap.

I agree you would be wise to remain in the current config in the circumstances outlined, IF you did change flap, AND could not stabilize, the proper action is to execute a missed.

Gusset.. how long has the 737 been a "heavy jet"?

Birds tend to fly in flocks - I would land.

Must be a company specific operation because we are limited to single engine Flaps 15 landing (for a prepared single enigine approach) and Cat 1 only,no autoland.

In this case our policy is to land without config changes.

Ok I see wher you are comming from now, as I indicated no disrespect. :)

Our SE landing configuration here is no different than when both are running, so I would continue with the landing.

@Track, not company specific, just an option you probably have to pay for. The flaps 30 OEI performance data should be available for all models, the OEI autoland is part of the fail operational package which includes approach, landing, rollout and go-around with full rudder authority for the autoflight system.

Many moons ago, we used to do the old 'dive and drive'.

No issues, that I recall.

Had to be able to fly the plane tho. And believe me, that is a big ask these days.

You are not wrong. Almost Air Force Cross (AFC) material with some nervous nellies..