Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
TAM A330 - Inflight Shutdown Engine # 1  
User currently offlineJava6673 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 76 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11029 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yesterday night, FLight JJ8091 (Pt_MVE) after 25 minutes of flight, A/C returned back to MIA due to a failure in engine # 1, pilot report Stall/Eng # ! EGT overlimit, Engine shut down, Fadec A fault.
A/C is in MIA waiting for a replacement engine

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2679 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10997 times:

There are so many IFSD lately, that's weird and scary!


אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7411 posts, RR: 57
Reply 2, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10938 times:



Quoting LY777 (Reply 1):
There are so many IFSD lately, that's weird and scary!

I don't think there is "so many IFSD lately" ... It's just that by now, each and every incident such as IFSD are systematically reported by the Media, and especially on the web, while there were not until a recent past.


User currently offlineFruitbat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 549 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10895 times:



Quoting LY777 (Reply 1):
There are so many IFSD lately, that's weird and scary!

No more than usual, I'd suggest - but perhaps they are getting more attention at the moment, due to the BA incident at LHR.

Unless anyone knows any different and we're going through a probability blip  Smile



Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel.
User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2679 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 10782 times:



Quoting Fruitbat (Reply 3):
No more than usual, I'd suggest - but perhaps they are getting more attention at the moment, due to the BA incident at LHR.

talking about BA incident at LHR, what were the cause, finally?



אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineFruitbat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 549 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 10757 times:



Quoting LY777 (Reply 4):
talking about BA incident at LHR, what were the cause, finally?

no idea - heard lots of speculation but nothing i'm prepared to say on this forum.

suggest we wait for the official report............

cheers



Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel.
User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3192 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 10623 times:



Quoting LY777 (Reply 1):
There are so many IFSD lately, that's weird and scary!

The important thing to remember with all these IFSD is that the aircraft in question are designed to carry on quite a ways on just one engine. This includes the 330, 777, 767 and eventually 787 and 350. So while not a good thing, having an engine go offline on you is not nearly as bad as the media would like to make it sound.

As for the volume of such things... I would suggest you consider the number of twin engine flights that happened since the last IFSD and then do the math (i.e. 1/all those flights)..

You're probably seeing the result of their being more and more twins in the air and fewer and fewer quads/tris.



I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8959 posts, RR: 40
Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 10578 times:



Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 6):

You're probably seeing the result of their being more and more twins in the air and fewer and fewer quads/tris.

I would imagine there to be less IFSDs because of twins. . .



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9031 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 10546 times:



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 7):
I would imagine there to be less IFSDs because of twins. . .

I think the newer the engine design, the more reliable it is (better materials, better engineering).

I would expect the 787/748/A380 to be better than the A330/777 because the technology in the engines are newer.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineGkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24928 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 10530 times:

There's also an EK A330 overnighting at Newcastle (NCL) tonight due to some problems with the engines....these problems only occurred after arrival at NCL from DXB.


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineNZA320 From New Zealand, joined May 2007, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 10499 times:



Quoting LY777 (Reply 4):

talking about BA incident at LHR, what were the cause, finally?

Theres some good information on this blog if you haven't already read it.
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...ked-detailed-ba-777-acciden-1.html



Hovering is for pilots who love to fly but have no place to go.
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8959 posts, RR: 40
Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10493 times:



Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):

That, of course, and since we are dealing with half the number of engines the probability of an IFSD is lower. But we also have a lot more flights and planes nowadays.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9031 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10388 times:



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 11):
That, of course, and since we are dealing with half the number of engines the probability of an IFSD is lower. But we also have a lot more flights and planes nowadays.

IFSD rates are independent of the number of engines installed on an airframe, it is a statistic taken over the whole population of engines of a particular type which could be installed on more than one airframe, e.g. the CF6 is found on the 744, A330, and 767. Statistically speaking a CF6 engine installed on a A330 would have the same IFSD rate as a CF6 installed on a 747, they come from the same population/pool of engines.

Airframes like the 767/777/A330 could not have "one" IFSD rate, they have 3 engine choices available.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8959 posts, RR: 40
Reply 13, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 10329 times:



Quoting Zeke (Reply 12):

Assuming the number of 747s and 767s with CF6s are equal, the 747 should be expected to have 2/3 of all CF6s IFSDs. Not the airframe's fault or the engine's, just that they use most engines.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9031 posts, RR: 75
Reply 14, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 10280 times:



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 13):

Assuming the number of 747s and 767s with CF6s are equal, the 747 should be expected to have 2/3 of all CF6s IFSDs. Not the airframe's fault or the engine's, just that they use most engines.

Not at all, the CF6 is found on A300/A310/A330, Boeing 767/747/MD-11/DC-10 and military derivatives like the A310MRTT/KC-30, E-4/KC-10/KC-767

Along with that is that generally quads do not work their engines as hard as twins, BA for example put their new RB211s on the 767s and then place them as inboard engines on the 744 once they age as they get more life out of the engine by doing this.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11437 posts, RR: 58
Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 10222 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting Java6673 (Thread starter):
Yesterday night, FLight JJ8091 (Pt_MVE) after 25 minutes of flight, A/C returned back to MIA due to a failure in engine # 1, pilot report Stall/Eng # ! EGT overlimit, Engine shut down, Fadec A fault.
A/C is in MIA waiting for a replacement engine

Aircraft was in fact PT-MVC. Flights JJ8098 (02/10) to CDG and JJ8055 (02/11) to GIG cancelled.

Aircraft will fly ferry as JJ9378 tomorrow. Probably will be back to the network in two days.

Seems to be small a bird strike.

Felipe



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3192 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 10201 times:



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 7):
I would imagine there to be less IFSDs because of twins. . .

My point was: No one reports IFSD on a quad.. (or very very rarely reported, even though they happen). In fact I've been on two quad flights in the last 20 years with IFSD.. but no one said boo about it. But with twins the media likes to make a big deal out of it, without realizing (or at least admitting) the plane is still quite safe.



I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlineJava6673 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10101 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

LipeGIG,

There was a A330, and right now is in MIami on one of the remote, and can't be ferry to nowhere right now, I heard the engine had 3 blade from the second stage broken, also all chip detector are completly full of metals scraps


User currently offlineDonzilasse From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 244 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 9899 times:

Felipe.

I just checked the MIA departures and found that flight JJ9378 took off at 8:52AM today. If this is the ferry flight it should already be back at GRU, It also looks like JJ8095 left MIA about 5:30PM about 505 minutes late. JJ8091 shows cancelled tonight. Considering always almost full flights I would guess that JJ might have some stranded passengers at MIA.

I hope I will have better luck on February 29th when I will go back on 8095/8011.

Lasse


User currently offlineDonzilasse From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 244 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 9828 times:

Looks like they had (2) JJ8095 today. One this morning and another tonight.

Lasse


User currently offlineDonzilasse From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 244 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 9788 times:

Sorry, the first one never left and the second left MIA at 7:34PM.

User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6892 posts, RR: 63
Reply 21, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 9759 times:



Quoting Java6673 (Thread starter):
FLight JJ8091 (Pt_MVE)



Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 15):
Aircraft was in fact PT-MVC.

Either way, that makes it a PW4000.

(TAM have both the PW4000 and CF6 in their A330 fleet.)


User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11437 posts, RR: 58
Reply 22, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9037 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting Java6673 (Reply 17):
There was a A330, and right now is in MIami on one of the remote, and can't be ferry to nowhere right now, I heard the engine had 3 blade from the second stage broken, also all chip detector are completly full of metals scraps

Yes, just updated from TAM, seems that the plane will be waiting for spare parts in MIA instead of the previous plan to fly this Sunday back to Brazil.

Expectation now is that JJ9374 departs MIA at 12:00 on 02/12.

Quoting PM (Reply 21):
Either way, that makes it a PW4000.

Correct.

Quoting Donzilasse (Reply 18):
I just checked the MIA departures and found that flight JJ9378 took off at 8:52AM today. If this is the ferry flight it should already be back at GRU, It also looks like JJ8095 left MIA about 5:30PM about 505 minutes late. JJ8091 shows cancelled tonight. Considering always almost full flights I would guess that JJ might have some stranded passengers at MIA.

One plane missing still creates a huge problem for the entire JJ network. I hope they can manage this better in the near future with almost 30 widebodies. More than time to have 1 reserve plane. Now they will cancel GRU-CDG / CDG-GRU / GRU-CDG / CDG-GRU for the next two days (instead of the previous plans to cancel a CDG-GIG leg)

Felipe



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9031 posts, RR: 75
Reply 23, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 7592 times:

from http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/politics/28.html?id_issue=11963664

A310 airbus makes emergency landing at Novosibirsk airport

MOSCOW. Feb 10 (Interfax) - An A310 airbus, owned by Sibir Airlines, made an emergency landing with 237 passengers aboard at the Novosibirsk airport. No one was hurt, sources in aviation circles told Interfax.

The crew of the A310, on a flight from Novosibirsk to Bangkok, reported a drop in oil pressure in the right engine after it took off from Novosibirsk at 11:48 p.m. on February 9.

The commander made the decision to fly back to the airport.

The airport's emergency and rescue services were alerted and were in standby readiness by the time the liner made an emergency landing at 1:03 a.m. on Sunday. No one was hurt.

A commission of experts will investigate the incident.

No official confirmation of this report is available to Interfax. sd



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineMD80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 7027 times:



Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 16):
But with twins the media likes to make a big deal out of it, without realizing (or at least admitting) the plane is still quite safe.

Quite safe? If this were the case, wouldn't we see planes dispatched with one engine INOP? It's not safe at all.....only option is to get down immediately (unless theses nowhere to get down to, as in being over open water).


25 Post contains images David L : Yes, but modern twins are capable of diverting "quite safely" on one engine. It's not as safe as having two functioning engines but I wouldn't say it
26 MD80fanatic : The problem, as you are aware David, is that the odds of the remaining engine failing once the first is down rises quite quickly. Even though they can
27 David L : I don't think anyone's suggesting that a twin should continue on one engine, just that the media makes a bigger drama out of a single engined diversi
28 Post contains images MD80fanatic : Agree completely. (Still prefer tris and quads though )
29 Post contains images David L : I'm less discriminating - I prefer any aircraft I haven't flown in before.
30 Post contains images IDISA : Uhmm, my colleagues at GRU and GIG will not like that Yeah, perfectly agree Felipe, let's hope these 777 and 350 to be delivered as soon as possible.
31 Osiris30 : The aircraft is still capable of a controlled landing, normal approach, etc. on one engine. The loss of an engine doesn't mean you're going to die. H
32 JJMNGR : PT-MVD is flying JJ8054 of yesterday. The previous information about PT-MVE having the problem is correct. Initially the only flight affected is JJ809
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...
China Airlines A330 Both GE Engine Shut Down posted Thu Jun 28 2007 10:02:27 by Celestar
TAM's A330 Fleet... posted Sun Jul 30 2006 03:16:00 by Thering
What's A TAM A330 Doing At AUH? posted Sun Jul 16 2006 13:52:12 by KLMcedric
TAM A330 Biz Class posted Mon Jun 26 2006 22:33:26 by Tonytifao
Tonight A 2nd TAM A330 At CDG - Why? posted Thu Jul 15 2004 01:30:41 by Mozart
TAM A330 At Gothenburg. Why? posted Sun Apr 18 2004 22:44:09 by Jan Mogren
SAA Leases 2 TAM A330-200's posted Fri Nov 28 2003 21:54:38 by SAA201
TAM A330 At Schiphol Amsterdam .. posted Fri Jul 4 2003 14:52:05 by Keesje
MH A330-300 Emergency - Engine Fire posted Mon May 12 2003 02:42:58 by Airbus Lover
China Airlines/TAM A330 Deal Off posted Thu May 1 2003 09:22:47 by Airmale
TAM A330 At Gothenburg. Why? posted Sun Apr 18 2004 22:44:09 by Jan Mogren
SAA Leases 2 TAM A330-200's posted Fri Nov 28 2003 21:54:38 by SAA201
TAM A330 At Schiphol Amsterdam .. posted Fri Jul 4 2003 14:52:05 by Keesje
MH A330-300 Emergency - Engine Fire posted Mon May 12 2003 02:42:58 by Airbus Lover
What's A TAM A330 Doing At AUH? posted Sun Jul 16 2006 13:52:12 by KLMcedric
TAM A330 Biz Class posted Mon Jun 26 2006 22:33:26 by Tonytifao
Tonight A 2nd TAM A330 At CDG - Why? posted Thu Jul 15 2004 01:30:41 by Mozart
TAM A330 At Gothenburg. Why? posted Sun Apr 18 2004 22:44:09 by Jan Mogren
SAA Leases 2 TAM A330-200's posted Fri Nov 28 2003 21:54:38 by SAA201
TAM A330 At Schiphol Amsterdam .. posted Fri Jul 4 2003 14:52:05 by Keesje
MH A330-300 Emergency - Engine Fire posted Mon May 12 2003 02:42:58 by Airbus Lover