Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Can A 777/767/757 Fly Only On One Engine?  
User currently offlineSwank300 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 49 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Hey Fellow A.neters, have a question for you.

I'm a big fan of the B777 and B767 and I also often fly the B757. I know Airbus has publicly said it is safer to have four engines as opposed to two, especially overwater. I have heard that the 747 can fly on one engine if need be. But, I was wondering, in your opinions, if these two-engine planes can properly fly if one of these engines failes and also if a captain would immediately declare an emergency and immediately land or if it is normal enough that they would fly to a preferable airport and dump fuel....basically, how severe is losing an engine on a two-engine plane? Thanks in advance....

52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2405 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Nice post. I cant wait to get a.netters answers as I do not know if they can haha  Smile Thanks for posting this Swank300.


Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3768 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Swank300 (Thread starter):
Hey Fellow A.neters, have a question for you.

I'm a big fan of the B777 and B767 and I also often fly the B757. I know Airbus has publicly said it is safer to have four engines as opposed to two, especially overwater. I have heard that the 747 can fly on one engine if need be. But, I was wondering, in your opinions, if these two-engine planes can properly fly if one of these engines failes and also if a captain would immediately declare an emergency and immediately land or if it is normal enough that they would fly to a preferable airport and dump fuel....basically, how severe is losing an engine on a two-engine plane? Thanks in advance....

No they drop out of the sky, happens quite often, surprised you haven't heard about it.



PHX based
User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Yes. Read about ETOPS.


ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting 777STL (Reply 2):

No they drop out of the sky, happens quite often, surprised you haven't heard about it.

So that explains the big coke can that landed in my backyard yesterday!


User currently offlineAntskip From Australia, joined Jan 2006, 936 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Swank300 (Thread starter):
how severe is losing an engine on a two-engine plane?

The above quote is more what you are asking than your choice of topic:

Quoting Swank300 (Thread starter):
Can A 777/767/757 Fly Only On One Engine?

To me one way at looking at safety question is not: "how many engines do you have?", but rather, once an engine does fail, how many have you left before you become a glider? Once a two-engine plane has engine failure you are one engine failure away from going down.


User currently offlineSuperhub From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2006, 478 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

I believe Boeing did some testing with a B757 in Urumqi (whose airport is some thousands feet elevated). The B757 took off with one engine and flew around with only one engine before returning safely. Not sure about whether they did it with a full load though. But I am pretty sure the B757 engines are pretty powerful.

User currently offlineCRJ705 From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

I believe that a twin engine commercial aircraft will have to make a diversion if the engine is down to the nearest airport, but it will still fly and most, if not all, of the avionics and all the critical systems will work. This is governed under Extended Twin Engine OPerationS (ETOPS) and is applicable to planes that cross into areas uninhabitable by people, and twin engine aircraft may only fly a maximum of 180 minutes from a diversionary airport when flying over oceans or land masses that do not have airports. This is a precautionary measure because if an engine fails, there is only one left and therefore it is better to error on the side of caution. As such twin engine aircraft, at least for the time being, is not suitable for some routes where a plane is over water for over three hours. I hope this answers your question.

Regards
CRJ705


User currently offlineManuCH From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 3012 posts, RR: 46
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Statistically it's more likely to experience an engine failure in a 4-engine aircraft than in a twin, thus possibly causing more diversions (it's simple math). But it's also more likely to loose *both* engines in a twin than all 4 in a 4-engine plane...

Other question: how many engines does an A340-B747 need to still be able to operate safely? And does this statistical difference (4 vs 2 engines) really make a difference in real-world operations, ie. do quads have more emergency landings because of engine failures (in %) when compared to twins?



Never trust a statistic you didn't fake yourself
User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1712 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

I think they can all fly with no engines...... just not very long.

Cheers


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Swank300 (Thread starter):
I have heard that the 747 can fly on one engine if need be.

That one engine will be taking you to the airport, immediately, or to the scene of the crash. A light 747 can stay aloft with only two engines, but not a heavy one. The one engine is needed to power the hydraulics.

Quoting ManuCH (Reply 8):
But it's also more likely to loose *both* engines in a twin than all 4 in a 4-engine plane...

I don't think it's more likely to have a complete failure on a twin versus a quad. The only kinds of failures that would render all engines inop are likely to be system failures of such magnitude that they affect all engines, no matter how many you have (such as running out of fuel).


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 859 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Well, there was Air Transat A330 glided to the Azores, dont know how many miles thou w/ no engines running (fuel leak). No crash exept blown tires..

Good work

Micke//SWE Big grin



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineMurchmo From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 169 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

yes they can fly with just one. part of multi-engine training is practicing an engine failure. You must be able to handle a plane with a catostrophic engine failure, fly it and land it on one engine....pretty sure that applies for a 777/767/757 type-rating...


to strive to seek to find and not to yield
User currently offlineOryx From Germany, joined Nov 2005, 126 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Swank300 (Thread starter):
I know Airbus has publicly said it is safer to have four engines as opposed to two, especially overwater.

Thats wy they build only two engine planes for the first 20(?) yearsof theire existence. They never said that it is saver - they only said that less restrictions upply if you have more spare engines. Restrictions are: routing over remote areas and MTOW whith an imposed climb gradient due to terrain avoidence etc.


User currently offlineGearup380 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 85 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 11):
Well, there was Air Transat A330 glided to the Azores, dont know how many miles thou w/ no engines running (fuel leak). No crash exept blown tires..

Wow, any records / images / videos of this one?



Excess baggage? Oh come on...
User currently offlineAndz From South Africa, joined Feb 2004, 8466 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Gearup380 (Reply 14):
Wow, any records / images / videos of this one?

Watch Discovery or National Geographic channel, it comes up time and again.



After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
User currently offlineAntiuser From Italy, joined May 2004, 657 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Swank300 (Thread starter):
I know Airbus has publicly said it is safer to have four engines as opposed to two, especially overwater.

The whole "4 engines 4 long haul" thing was started by Sir Richard Branson and not Airbus...



Azzurri Campioni del Mondo!
User currently offlineTGV From France, joined Dec 2004, 874 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

If you have time read these topics:

http://www.airliners.net/discussions...general_aviation/read.main/2508734

http://www.airliners.net/discussions...general_aviation/read.main/2543359



Avoid 777 with 3-4-3 config in Y ! They are real sardine cans. (AF/KL for example)
User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3086 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting 777STL (Reply 2):
No they drop out of the sky, happens quite often, surprised you haven't heard about it.

We have a new member who may not know as much about airplanes as you do. The person posted a question and some how you decided to tear into them. Does that make you feel powerful and superior to tear into someone who does not know.

Peopls complain abot low quality posts in here. Please explain to me what makes the above referanced quote a high quality one?

When someone new shows up and askes a valid question why not share your knowledge with them and help them learn before you tear into them.

To the thread starter. Ignore the idiots you will learn who the quality people are soon enough.


Go http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS here if you would like to learn about etops in an easy to understand fashion.

GS



Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Yes, all twin engined airliners are certified to fly on one engine.

Reminds me of the story of the F-16 pilot who asked for a priority approach because his engine was running a little hot. He was told to slot in behind a B-52 which was landing with one engine shut down.

"Ah", replied the F-16 pilot. "The dreaded 7-engine approach"!



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Swank300 (Thread starter):
I have heard that the 747 can fly on one engine if need be.

Not true.

Quoting Antiuser (Reply 16):
The whole "4 engines 4 long haul" thing was started by Sir Richard Branson and not Airbus...

Airbus later adopted the quote.

You should probably google ETOPS..... or even check out the A.net search under ETOPS.

Quoting 777STL (Reply 2):
No they drop out of the sky, happens quite often, surprised you haven't heard about it.

Nice reply  biggrin 


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17176 posts, RR: 66
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Antskip (Reply 5):

To me one way at looking at safety question is not: "how many engines do you have?", but rather, once an engine does fail, how many have you left before you become a glider? Once a two-engine plane has engine failure you are one engine failure away from going down.

You are correct, but "one engine away from going down" is actually quite a long way. That is, engines fail extremely seldom. The likelyhood of two unrelated failures on the same flight is astronomical. You're more likely to be hit by a meteor while walking down the street. If two engines fail for the same reason, that sort of thing is just as likely to bring down a quad.

Quoting ManuCH (Reply 8):
Statistically it's more likely to experience an engine failure in a 4-engine aircraft than in a twin, thus possibly causing more diversions (it's simple math). But it's also more likely to loose *both* engines in a twin than all 4 in a 4-engine plane...

Other question: how many engines does an A340-B747 need to still be able to operate safely? And does this statistical difference (4 vs 2 engines) really make a difference in real-world operations, ie. do quads have more emergency landings because of engine failures (in %) when compared to twins?

You are correct that a failure in a quad is more likely. However a quad may in most cases continue on three while a twin needs to land ASAP on one. So no, you don't have more emergency landings.

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 11):
Well, there was Air Transat A330 glided to the Azores, dont know how many miles thou w/ no engines running (fuel leak). No crash exept blown tires..

That was not really an engine failure but a fuel system problem. If the plane had been a quad it would have have had exactly the same problem.



To answer the original poster, all commercial aircraft (with a few exceptions for singles) must be able to continue take-off after an engine failure and also climb out. On a twin, this means doing it on one. On a quad, this means doing it on three. If you do the math, this means that twins need to be about 50% more powerful than quads, all other things being equal.

ETOPS regulations may be used by certain twins to fly more than a certain number of minutes from the nearest suitable airfield.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineFr8Mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5657 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

All air transport rated twins can not only fly on one engine, but can continue a take-off passed V1 should engine failure occur.

Quoting ManuCH (Reply 8):
Statistically it's more likely to experience an engine failure in a 4-engine aircraft than in a twin, thus possibly causing more diversions (it's simple math). But it's also more likely to loose *both* engines in a twin than all 4 in a 4-engine plane...

Be careful with that mathematical assumption. ETOPS certified engines/airframes are maintained more rigorousley. Or make specifically, have more rigorous inspection and check-out procedures after maintenance is performed. Thus, it follows that an engine hanging on an ETOPS airframe may be better maintained and less likely to fail than the same type engine hanging on a non-ETOPS airframe.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 22):
But it's also more likely to loose *both* engines in a twin than all 4 in a 4-engine plane...

Not so. The most likely cause of losing all engines - in any aircraft - would be fuel starvation. Statistically, a fuel starvation incident is not more likely in a twin than in a quad.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3768 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Greasespot (Reply 18):
We have a new member who may not know as much about airplanes as you do. The person posted a question and some how you decided to tear into them. Does that make you feel powerful and superior to tear into someone who does not know.

"Tear into them"? I provided an answer! Big grin

Rest assured, if I'm "tearing into" you, you'll know it.

Anyway, grow a sense of humor....sheesh.



PHX based
25 Starlionblue : Exactly. The whole ETOPS concept is based on the fact that anything which makes both engines on a twin fail is just as likely to make all four engine
26 Viv : Which was neither meaningful nor infomative. There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers ...[Edited 2006-03-01 15:43:33]
27 777STL : I beg to differ. Again, some of you need to get a sense of humor, this is an internet forum, not a life or death situation.
28 Viv : Like being hit by a wet fish, perhaps?
29 AR385 : It was a faulty-maintenance induced leak made worst by the pilot's lack of training and unfortunate decisions regarding the information given by the
30 Post contains links Mdaigle : It has been proven that the 767 can fly with no engines when an Air Canada aircraft ran out of fuel and landed in Gimli, Manitoba. This aircraft still
31 Chris133 : I do know that twin engine planes in the US have to be able to get off the ground on one engine. That meaning, one engine must be able to get the airc
32 Post contains images Starlionblue : Any aircraft can fly with no engines, but most airliners can't get very far like that (unlike gliders). The typical descent gradient, is about 20:1,
33 Okelleynyc : Wow, I had no idea that a typical glide ratio on a commercial airliner is around 20:1! My Ozone Mojo paraglider gets about 8:1 versus 15:1 for my han
34 Viv : Yes, a good 17 metre span sailplane can do this. I have had 5-hour flights in sailplanes, having been dropped off the tow at 2000 feet altitude.
35 Starlionblue : Granted, I only have anectodal evidence of the glide ratio. But I think it stems from the fact that airliners have to fly at 30000+ feet where the ai
36 Rolfen : Yeah, unless the engine failure is paired with some catasrophic fuselage/wings damage that would modify the aerodynamic properties of the ship.
37 Starlionblue : In the days of yore, this was sometimes a scenario. An engine fire would burn through part of the wing or a blade departure would smash through a sla
38 Zeke : Fly yes, maintain altitude no. The windmilling engines will supply hydraulic pressure. Twin - straight failure -PAN come back to land, consider overw
39 Post contains images Starlionblue : Come on Zeke. I continued that with saying that while it is more likely, the odds are still so astronomical one shouldn't worry about it. Ah good poi
40 PanAm747 : An interesting side note: It has been discussed here a long time ago about why BA didn't switch its 777 service to 767 service at SAN when it pulled o
41 AIRCANL1011 : believe that Boeing did a test on the B777 and flew it for an extended period of time, I believe that it was about six or more hours on one engine. I
42 Woodreau : As others have said, transport category aircraft are required to maintain a specified positive climb gradient in the event of an engine failure at Vef
43 DarkBlue : One exception... During GE's flight test of the GE90 on the 747 FTB, they were able to climb out using the GE90 alone. Yeah, okay I know that this is
44 Post contains images Starlionblue : Thx for info. But I really think a 747 with 4x GE90 would be a mite overpowered
45 Prebennorholm : A quad will thrust wise be able to maintain level flight at very low altitude, but if it is one of the outer engines, then it will experience serious
46 Cancidas : there is one misconception in this thread though that was brought to my attention by someone outside of the industry. if an aicraft were to lose an en
47 Zeke : I have nothing in my 744 or 343/346 FCOM for driftdown on one engine. I do have two engine driftdown data and two engine landing procedure. Also the
48 Dreamflight767 : Funny how Airbus adopted this philosophy and to some extent, they demonstrated it with their own a/c (Air Transat A330 glided to the Azores).
49 SCCutler : Again, no relevance; the same circumstances would have left an A340 gliding, as well. The fuel leak vented all available fuel overboard, making the A
50 Post contains images 777WT : Tests have been done and it's proven that engines at idle makes more drag than windmilling engines A CO 737 pilot found out about that when he was as
51 MX757 : Very true. Especially when winglets are installed.
52 Post contains links TEAtheB : He doesn't really talk about regulations, but for a brief history (Boeing style) of ETOPS, open this in RealPlayer... pnm://video.boeing.com/external/
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Can A 777/767/757 Fly Only On One Engine?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Can A 747 Survive On One Engine? posted Mon Sep 22 2003 04:33:24 by Tarzanboy
Operating On One Engine?! posted Sun Jun 6 2004 10:45:49 by Soaringadi
T/O On One Engine? posted Fri Dec 12 2003 09:36:15 by Cricri
Flying On One Engine posted Thu Aug 30 2001 12:04:42 by EFG
Can A Twin Jet Go Around On One Engine? posted Wed Aug 29 2001 12:34:42 by STEINWAY
Winglets Only On One Side posted Fri Jul 6 2001 18:59:24 by Mandargb
Can They Fly On One Outboard Engine? posted Fri Mar 7 2003 08:36:36 by Mhsieh
Could A 777 Take Off With One Engine Only? posted Tue Dec 27 2005 13:36:00 by LeDragon
777...With One Engine.. posted Tue May 18 2004 18:42:12 by SolarWind
Taking Off With Just One Engine posted Wed Jul 5 2006 00:05:22 by Hagic
Flying On One Engine posted Thu Aug 30 2001 12:04:42 by EFG
Can A Twin Jet Go Around On One Engine? posted Wed Aug 29 2001 12:34:42 by STEINWAY
Winglets Only On One Side posted Fri Jul 6 2001 18:59:24 by Mandargb
Can They Fly On One Outboard Engine? posted Fri Mar 7 2003 08:36:36 by Mhsieh
Operating On One Engine?! posted Sun Jun 6 2004 10:45:49 by Soaringadi
T/O On One Engine? posted Fri Dec 12 2003 09:36:15 by Cricri
Flying On One Engine posted Thu Aug 30 2001 12:04:42 by EFG
Can A Twin Jet Go Around On One Engine? posted Wed Aug 29 2001 12:34:42 by STEINWAY
Winglets Only On One Side posted Fri Jul 6 2001 18:59:24 by Mandargb
Can They Fly On One Outboard Engine? posted Fri Mar 7 2003 08:36:36 by Mhsieh
Taking Off On One Engine... posted Fri Aug 30 2013 08:35:15 by A380900
Taxi On One Engine A Fuel Saver? posted Fri Mar 6 2009 13:59:38 by Singel09
772LR Climb Performance On One Engine posted Fri Feb 29 2008 21:47:35 by VikingA346
380 Engine...Running On One Engine Or Problems posted Tue Apr 24 2007 18:43:32 by Relic
Operating On One Engine?! posted Sun Jun 6 2004 10:45:49 by Soaringadi
T/O On One Engine? posted Fri Dec 12 2003 09:36:15 by Cricri
Flying On One Engine posted Thu Aug 30 2001 12:04:42 by EFG
Can A Twin Jet Go Around On One Engine? posted Wed Aug 29 2001 12:34:42 by STEINWAY
Winglets Only On One Side posted Fri Jul 6 2001 18:59:24 by Mandargb

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format