Can someone confirm or deny this really happened? To summarize, apparently an airliner had a bad engine and they just "deferred" the engine and strapped the fan so it would not windmill. Then the airline launched the plane full of passengers on only three engines. I just find it hard to believe.
Cloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 1 hour ago) and read 4437 times:
In this story, the crew decides to START a takeoff on 3 engines with passengers. That is indeed unusual, indeed, I believe it is unheard of in first world airlines.
However, there are many incidents in which a pilot will CONTINUE a takeoff when an engine fails after the takeoff begins. In fact, there is a point in the takeoff role after which this is standard procedure. This is because sometimes there is not enough runway left to stop the plane, but there is enough to take off even when short one engine. The FAA requires that there never be a point in the takeoff when the pilot can neither stop the plane nor takeoff safely, even if an engine fails.
PhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 1 hour ago) and read 4392 times:
Not quite true. In addition to regulatory approval for the ferry flight, which prohibits all but the basic flight crew, you would also need approval from the aircraft manufacturer. I certainly doubt if Boeing or Airbus would even think of allowing a 3 engine ferry.
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17185 posts, RR: 66
Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months ago) and read 4375 times:
Quoting Cloudy (Reply 3): However, there are many incidents in which a pilot will CONTINUE a takeoff when an engine fails after the takeoff begins. In fact, there is a point in the takeoff role after which this is standard procedure. This is because sometimes there is not enough runway left to stop the plane, but there is enough to take off even when short one engine. The FAA requires that there never be a point in the takeoff when the pilot can neither stop the plane nor takeoff safely, even if an engine fails.
The point (actually it's a speed) you are tallking about is referred to as V1. Beyond this point the pilots are committed to take off. Attempting to stop beyond V1 will normally result in a runway overrun.
Reasons for stopping before 80 knots:
- Pretty much any problem.
Reasons for stopping beyond 80 knots but before V1:
- Engine failure.
- Flight control surfaces not responding.
- Other serious problem.
Beyond V1, it's up, up and away regardless. If there is a problem serious enough to warrant landing, you either dump fuel (if you are heavy enough) and land or land directly.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3766 times:
Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 1): I don't doubt the account of the aircraft depicted in the photos, as there are parts of the world where regulatory compliance isn't a high priority.
The pressure is on here as well in the cut throat aviation market. I know instances in Europe and the US, where mechanics had to stand their ground when they condidered an aircraft not to be airworthy, but the management insisted on sending the plane out because of the revenue. The refusal to sign off the log book was in many cases detriminial to the mechanic´s career. The management will do anything which keeps their statistics and bottom line look good, as long as theydon´t have to take personal responsibility for it (like the mechanic, who can face jail if he knowingly signs off and unairworthy aircraft).
Se210 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 112 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3721 times:
On March 19, 1979, I was booked on DL #930 from MIA-TPA. This was a DL DC-8-61 (N1302L #46029). Although not advised at the gate, once we boarded the aircraft in MIA the Captain said we'd be flying on 3 out of 4 engines and we would have to change planes in PBI (West Palm Beach). I sat in the window seat near the "dead" engine and I remember there being an orange non-ops sticker on it! We flew at a lower altitude but aside from that the flight was routine. It was also a pretty light load, about 30% full. The flight from MIA-PBI was only 18 minutes according to my log. Once in PBI, we switched over to a DL B727-232 (FL#362 N484DA #20864) for the PBI-TPA leg (32 minutes).