Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AF B777 Emergency Landing At LED  
User currently offlineAirGabon From Switzerland, joined Dec 2003, 878 posts, RR: 2
Posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 16733 times:

Now on french TV an AF B777 from Beijing to Paris CDG landed at St Petersburg.

Any other news?

27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirGabon From Switzerland, joined Dec 2003, 878 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 16679 times:

Apparently in-flight engine failure. Landed with 1 engine. I think it was a B777-300ER with 304 pax.

But not such a big event... those journalists always want burning issues to scare the public...


User currently offlineFlipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 16647 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

How many in flight shutdowns has their been for the GE-90-11xb? unintentional ones of course. journalists love making things sound bad, nothing like a good plane incident for the Sunday night news.

Fred


User currently offlineRaggi From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 998 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 16579 times:



Quoting Flipdewaf (Reply 2):
How many in flight shutdowns has their been for the GE-90-11xb

AFAIK, the GE90-115B fleet has not had an IFSD while in commercial service until this one now; if the ac in question is confirmed to be a 77W it'll be the first.


raggi



Stick & Rudder
User currently offlineFlipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 16514 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Raggi (Reply 3):
AFAIK, the GE90-115B fleet has not had an IFSD while in commercial service until this one now; if the ac in question is confirmed to be a 77W it'll be the first.


raggi

I thought as much. Any clue how many hours those engines have done so far? Even if it is a 77W the record for GE is very good.

Fred


User currently offlineRaggi From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 998 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 16407 times:



Quoting Flipdewaf (Reply 4):

I just read on geae.com that the GE90-115B celebrated one million flight hours in March 07. Go to the press release archive to see it.

Very good record for GE indeed. The -115B has proven itself, no doubt!


raggi



Stick & Rudder
User currently offlineSashA From Russia, joined May 1999, 861 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 14073 times:

Does that make a second emergency landing for AF B 777 in a Russian airport? As I recall in Dec 2005 an AF B777 had to land in Irkutsk, also coz of an engine shutdown (or the crew had to shut it down..?). That time it was reported the replacement engine had to be shipped and fitted right there at Irkutsk.


An2/24/28,Yak42,Tu154/134,IL18/62/96,B737/757/767,A310/320/319,F100,BAe146,EMB-145,CRJ,A340-600,B747-400,A-330-300,A-340
User currently offlineACDC8 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 7642 posts, RR: 36
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 13870 times:

A 777 enroute from PEK to CDG had to land in LED due to an inflight shutdown/engine failure


A Grumpy German Is A Sauerkraut
User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4681 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 13660 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

AF had a 772ER IFSD diverted to Siberia last year, how does this latest affect their Etops ops.

User currently offlineA380BWI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13191 times:



Quoting AirGabon (Reply 1):
Apparently in-flight engine failure. Landed with 1 engine. I think it was a B777-300ER with 304 pax.


MOSCOW: A Boeing 777 flying from Beijing to Paris was forced to make an emergency landing in the Russian city of Saint Petersburg on Sunday, Russian news agencies reported.

The aircraft had to land after the failure of its left engine, the three main Russian news agencies reported. News agencies said 304 people were aboard and that there were no casualties.

The twin-engine Boeing was operated by Air France, ITAR-TASS quoted an unidentified representative at Saint Petersburg’s Pulkovo Airport as saying. Airport officials and the city’s Emergency Situations Ministry could not be immediately reached for comment.—AFP

Its great to read that everyone onboard was safe and sound.


User currently offline797 From Venezuela, joined Aug 2005, 1891 posts, RR: 27
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13110 times:

Being an aircraft completely able to fly with one engine, is this considered an emergency landing?

Good nothing else happened but far from an emergency landing I would tend to see it differently.

Cheers



Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
User currently offlineSpacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3606 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13031 times:



Quoting 797 (Reply 10):
Being an aircraft completely able to fly with one engine, is this considered an emergency landing?

If the pilot declared an emergency, then yes. That's what an emergency landing is.

If not, then no.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineJawed From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 12437 times:

The first response here, of course, is always "Oh, it's just those journalists who don't know anything about aviation, trying to create a sensational story". But if you ask me, in-flight engine failure of a 777 is a big event. I don't think it has happened very often, and when it does, it's pretty significant.

User currently offlineWowpeter From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2006, 151 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 12253 times:

I think for a 2 Engine aircraft losing 1 Engine, it is a requirements to declare emergency. But for a 4 engine aircraft losing 1 engine, only a PANPAN call is required (although, the pilot could declear emergency if they feels the need to do so). It never hurts to declear MAYDAY if you have a problem (like engine failure and you've got all the support team on the ground ready if it is a MAYDAY call but not necessary for a PANPAN call) and downgrade it later after everything is under control (ie: no fire, etc).

User currently offlineFrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3733 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 11975 times:



Quoting Jawed (Reply 12):
But if you ask me, in-flight engine failure of a 777 is a big event.

It is a 'big event', but only for the airline and concerned manufacturers as they'll need to investigate what happened.

Safety-wise, it's pretty benign, and yes, journalist always overemphasize these incident into near-catastrophic events because: 1/ they don't know anything about aviation (most people don't) and to them, 'emergency' means life threatening situation, even though it often is not, and 2/ It sells, as this excerpt A380BWI used shows:

Quoting A380BWI (Reply 9):
News agencies said 304 people were aboard and that there were no casualties.



Quoting A380BWI (Reply 9):
Emergency Situations Ministry could not be immediately reached for comment

No casualties? Emergency Situation Ministry? For an enroute engine failure? Now if that's not exaggeration, I don't know what is. A road bus that blows a tire on the highway is a much more dangerous scenario for passengers than that, yet you never hear about it on the news.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently onlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 1 day ago) and read 9111 times:

Aircraft involved was F-GSQE and the flight arrived back in Paris at 3am, or almost 10 hours behind schedule.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jerome Mervelet
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Weimeng



User currently offlineMilan320 From Canada, joined Jan 2005, 869 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 23 hours ago) and read 8754 times:



Quoting Raggi (Reply 3):
AFAIK, the GE90-115B fleet has not had an IFSD while in commercial service until this one now; if the ac in question is confirmed to be a 77W it'll be the first.

So what type was on the B777 during IFSD and subsequent landing last year in Irkutsk, Russia?'
Cheers.
/Milan



I accept bribes ... :-)
User currently offlineJMO-777 From Germany, joined Apr 2002, 501 posts, RR: 17
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 22 hours ago) and read 7745 times:



Quoting Milan320 (Reply 16):
Quoting Raggi (Reply 3):
AFAIK, the GE90-115B fleet has not had an IFSD while in commercial service until this one now; if the ac in question is confirmed to be a 77W it'll be the first.

So what type was on the B777 during IFSD and subsequent landing last year in Irkutsk, Russia?'
Cheers.
/Milan

That was an AF B777-200ER (GE90-94B) which was stuck in Irkutsk.

GreetZ,
Jan



~~~ Fly with a Triple Seven and you feel like in heaven ~~~
User currently offlineCatdaddy63 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 295 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 18 hours ago) and read 5132 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 15):
Aircraft involved was F-GSQE and the flight arrived back in Paris at 3am, or almost 10 hours behind schedule.

Did this aircraft continue the flight or was a subtitute flown in? If it was the same aircraft it would likely have been a faulty indication requiring the crew to shut down or reduce power wouldn't it?


User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2176 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 18 hours ago) and read 5043 times:



Quoting A380BWI (Reply 9):
Its great to read that everyone onboard was safe and sound.

Twins with ETOPS are engineered to land safely with one engine, as long as they land within the ETOPS time restrictions, which is always the case if the routes are planned appropriately. So there is virtually no reason why anyone could have been hurt (besides pax freaking out...).



When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlinePYP757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 18 hours ago) and read 4929 times:



Quoting 797 (Reply 10):
Being an aircraft completely able to fly with one engine, is this considered an emergency landing?



Quoting Francoflier (Reply 14):
Safety-wise, it's pretty benign, and yes, journalist always overemphasize these incident into near-catastrophic events because: 1/ they don't know anything about aviation (most people don't) and to them, 'emergency' means life threatening situation, even though it often is not, and 2/ It sells, as this excerpt A380BWI used shows:

Yes, the 777 is designed to fly with one engine only, but in order to survive engine failure it needs to have 2 running engines to start with! Failure of the second engine would turn it into a glider, which I don't think the 777 was designed to be! And yes, before you tell me that statistically a dual flame-out is statistically virtually impossible, accident and incident databases show that this has happened quite a few times in the past, whether due to volcanic ash, water or ice ingestion, or fuel deprivation. So unless the pilots here could be absolutely certain that the cause of the engine failure was not one that could affect both engines simultaneously, surely this situation had to be considered an emergency. Anyway, I find it too easy to dismiss this kind of incidents as minor, while seating safely on the ground! I have never experienced an engine failure in the air, but I know that if it were to happen I would be quite scared, even with all the knowledge about aviation I have acquired over the years.


User currently offlineJetMech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2684 posts, RR: 53
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 18 hours ago) and read 4823 times:



Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 19):
Twins with ETOPS are engineered to land safely with one engine, as long as they land within the ETOPS time restrictions,

The ability for a twin to land safely on one engine is not exclusive to twins that are ETOP's certified. The ability to land on one engine is a certification requirement from the beginning, and is separate from ETOP's certification. Even if a twin loses one engine, the maximum distance it can fly depends on the remaining fuel load. The ETOP's time restriction is merely the maximum flying time the aircraft can be away from a suitable diversion airport. The remaining engine will continue to run as long as there is fuel, even if this time limit is exceeded.

Regards, JetMech

[Edited 2007-11-26 10:48:43]


JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlineBeaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4125 times:

http://lx-photos.livejournal.com/23827.html

impressive pictures...



Please respect animals - don't eat them...
User currently offlineTu154m From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 678 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4038 times:

Looks like one of those famous stray high altitude geese?????? Anyone with details?????


CEOs should swim with cement flippers!
User currently offlinePYP757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4008 times:



Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 22):
impressive pictures...

Clearly not just a simple engine shut down. With debris hitting the horizontal stabilizer and maybe other parts of the plane, this shows that this kind of incident has the potential of developping into an real emergency. One reason why I cannot understand that people are so dismissive of this kind of events and accuse everyone of overreacting. I for one would rather be in a car blowing a tyre on the highway (happened to me before) than in a plane suffering this kind of engine failure at 35,000 feet in the air.


25 Beaucaire : It would probably take some double failure of twins on 207minute ETOPS somewhere in the Pacific to voice the call for tri-engine design... Lets face i
26 AM744 : I would think so. IIRC ETOPS regulations require that the plane be landed ASAP.
27 Addd : Any news on what is happening with this bird? Still stuck at Pulkovo?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Today! LY007 TLV To JFK Emergency Landing At CDG posted Sun Oct 28 2007 11:55:56 by Stevens91
Pinnacle Emergency Landing At Selfridge ANG posted Sun Oct 21 2007 14:19:23 by Falstaff
Iberworld Makes Emergency Landing At ARN. posted Sat Oct 13 2007 09:36:43 by Alessandro
AA Emergency Landing At CMH posted Thu Sep 27 2007 18:32:13 by Flyingjeep
Virgin America: Emergency Landing At SFO 9/3 posted Mon Sep 3 2007 16:07:11 by AS739X
Thomson Fly Jet Makes Emergency Landing At EMA posted Fri Aug 31 2007 19:35:04 by NEMA
Air Comet Emergency Landing At SJO (8-30-07) posted Thu Aug 30 2007 23:33:14 by LTU932
ASA Emergency Landing At AVL posted Sat Aug 25 2007 15:33:38 by DeltaAVL
Austrian Airlines Emergency Landing At ORD posted Sat Aug 11 2007 03:14:17 by AADC10137
Delta 767 Makes Emergency Landing At ABQ posted Sun Aug 5 2007 01:22:53 by ABQ747