Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
T/O On One Engine?  
User currently offlineCricri From France, joined Oct 1999, 581 posts, RR: 7
Posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3596 times:

Taking the example of an A330 (or equivalent) with an engine inop, is it technically possible to take-off with only one engine working? We are debating the question here, some say they know of recent examples but it looks more like urban legends, and others say it's not possible.
Thanks for your answers.

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3561 times:

after v1 yes, before v1 you'd stop it. this is also why quads arent as overpowered as twins, since a twin has 50% of its potential after engine out while a quad still has 75%.
taking off with a twin on just one engine should be a problem since the front gear doesnt really help with runway alignment and the rudder needs speed to operate. therefore i'd stick to the afterv1 yes below v1 practically not.



10=2
User currently offlineFritzi From United Arab Emirates, joined Jun 2001, 2762 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3488 times:

I dont think that you are allowed to take off with only one engine on a twin(Highly doubt it is possible either). The differential thrust would be TOO high. On a GE powered 777-200ER, It would be 90,000:1. During takeoff this would lead you straight off the rwy. Big grin


User currently onlineAJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2396 posts, RR: 24
Reply 3, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3480 times:

I've successfully taken off in a B767-300 simulator with one engine shutdown, it's a great handling exercise.

User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3468 times:

"I've successfully taken off in a B767-300 simulator with one engine shutdown"

AJ,

Wow - what was the TOW and how much runway did you use? Wouldn't mind trying that (in the sim..!).

Regards,

Rick.



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineBroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3462 times:

Multiengine aircraft, except those where the engines are in line (i.e. Cessna 336/337) have a critical speed called Vmc. This is the minimum speed that the airplane can be flown with the critical engine inoperative. On some airplanes, there are actually 3 Vmc's.
One (the lowest) with the wing, on which the inoperative engine is, is up or banking in the opposite direction of the tendency of the airplane to turn, the next Vmc is wings level, and lastly the Vmc with the airplane banked in the direction of the inoperative engine (the highest). If I remember correctly, on the L-188, the first Vmc is 145 kts, the second is 154, and the last is 165.
If you are trying to take off with a twin and one engine is inoperative, then you would have to use nose wheel steering to keep it straight until you had enough airspeed for the rudder and ailerons to counter the tendency to yaw into the bad engine.
You could literally scrub away the nose wheel before you get to that speed.
For take-offs on very long runways, Vmc can be the determining factor for setting V1.


User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3453 times:

The question is: Is it theoretically possible to make a single engine takeoff? The answer is: Yes, BUT...
You'd have to have basically a runway of undetermined length. There are no charts published for such a manuever. You'd basically have to start from a high-speed taxi and slowly and gradually add power. If you simply set takeoff power you would be unable to maintain control in most aircraft. Once you achieved the "V1 du jour" it would become just another "engine failure on takeoff" scenario. In other words, not a very big deal - this is something that you practice ad nausium in the simulators.

FWIW, engine-out ferry flights are "routine" in most 3 and 4-engine transport category aircraft.

Jetguy


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3415 times:

The key for trying any attempted t/o with less than all engines operating is not to use max power until you get above VMCG. Less thrust differential means you have a lower VMC_.

Not that I have tried a 100% single engine t/o outside the sim, but I have taxied a number of aircraft on one engine.

For the 777 or A330, I'd say the answer is definitely yes. And any other twin, it is probably, assuming you are able to taxi on one engine. The first catch is that you can't apply full power until reaching VMCG (minimum control speed on the ground). Below that, you have to add power slowly, keeping yourself just under the thrust level that will send you veering.

It's like the 747's that do 3 engine ferry takeoffs: Full power on the two symmetric operating engines and add power on the remaining engine until you start to feel squeamish.

On most piston twins this is impossible because they do not have enough nosewheel authority; but you can't really taxi them on a single engine either. If you land on one engine, you can keep the taxi going (with a little skill), but once you slow below ~15 knots you won't be able to do anything but coast to a stop, no matter how much power you add. The differential braking (nosewheel is already pegged) required to go anywhere near your desired heading is more drag than your prop is producing. I tried to do spirals to pick up speed once, but I ran out of ramp (and balls) before I could get the thing to go straight. Maybe at Edwards AFB...

Of course for any airplane, a one engine inop T/O is going to use up a lot of runway. I think at least 3 times the normal takeoff distance would be required for a twin. You have to more than double the T/O distance just because of the greater than 50% loss of excess thrust. Then you have to account for all the runway you ate up while you were slowly building up thrust on your way to VMCG. It's probably closer to 4 times your original t/o distance.

it would be fun I'm sure... Maybe at Edwards AFB...


good times,
aaron


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3398 times:

well, I guess I said the same thing as jetguy... oh well.

that, and brevity is not one of my attributes. my apologies.


aaron


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3385 times:

This exercise was tried at Portland some years ago in an Corvette business jet...the aircraft ran off the end in the runway, into the weeds.
Total write off.

Not too smart.


User currently offlineGordonsmall From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2001, 2162 posts, RR: 21
Reply 10, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3374 times:

On most piston twins this is impossible because they do not have enough nosewheel authority; but you can't really taxi them on a single engine either.

I was speaking to a pilot a few weeks ago (who now captains BAe ATP's BTW) who claims that when he was hour buiding back in the 80's he used to taxi twins on the left engine only becuase the Hobbs meter ran off the right engine, and he also said that he would often "practice" engine out flight for the same reason....I don't know whether he was winding me up or not but it sounds plausible to my inexperienced mind.

Regards,
Gordon.



Statistically, people who have had the most birthdays tend to live the longest.
User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3364 times:

Back in the 50's Aero Commander flew one of their light twins from Oklahoma to Washington D.C. with one of the propellers in the baggage compartment. It was done to promote the "single-engine safety" of their airplane.

I met the "airman" who tried the single-engine takeoff in the Corvette in Portland. Needless to say, I wasn't impressed. The airplane was on a trailer for quite a while at Redmond, Oregon.

Jetguy



User currently offlineBMAbound From Sweden, joined Nov 2003, 660 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3344 times:

I managed a T/O on only the #3 engine in the 747 in FS 2002 (with minimal fuel load), however, I'm pretty sure that can't be done... unless you have access to a 100.000 ft runway...

johan



Altitude is Insurance - Get Insured
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6896 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3334 times:

"Back in the 50's Aero Commander flew one of their light twins from Oklahoma to Washington D.C. with one of the propellers in the baggage compartment. It was done to promote the "single-engine safety" of their airplane."

A guy flew a Commander back to Texas from-- the Yucatan? Or was it Central America? on one engine. Aero had nothing to do with that one. But I think Piper may have had some connection to the 1000+ mile (?) 1-prop flight of an Apache.


User currently offlineAvt007 From Canada, joined Jul 2000, 2132 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3322 times:

There was a guy who tried a single engine t/o in his Cessna 337 after engine problems. After that he had engine problems, airframe problems, legal problems, financial problems...........
This was on the West Coast of Canada.


User currently offlineOkie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3151 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3273 times:

Aero Commander took off from Wiley Post Airport, Oklahoma City single engine with propeller in baggage compartment. The plane was parked in front of the Aero Commander facility in the 70's & 80's with a big plaque depicting the accomplishment, I am not sure where the plane is now.
Wiley Post OKC
KPWA
17L/35R
7198 ft X 150 ft
2194 m X 46 m
Bob Hoover used to do it all the time with the "Shrike" Commander as well as single engine loops. The only modification was a huge hydraulic accumulator to get the gear up or down in about 2 or 3 seconds.
Absolutely Amazing !!!!


User currently offlineOkie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3151 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3252 times:

I believe this is a zero engine landing after a zero engine loop, hence the need for the large hydraulic accumlator.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Patrick Weeden



label this: do not try at home.


User currently offlinePilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3152 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3238 times:

Take off is perfectly possible on 1 engine. As long as you have enough airflow over the wings to create lift the aircraft will fly. If an engine failure occurs after V1 in most aircraft you are supposed to take off and fly.

One thing that was not noted correctly is that you loose 50% of your performance. You loose 50% of your power in a twin but it's more like 75-80% of your original performace because of added drag from the engine nacelle, and control surface position required to achieve the 2-3 degrees of bank and slipping position required to get optimal single engine performance and overcome the roll and yaw created by the operative engine.



DMI
User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3217 times:

Pilotpip...
I think that you might have a slight misconception as to the cause of reduced performance during single engine operations of multi-engine aircrat. As you mentioned, loss of power is the primary culprit. Normally aspirated and turbine powered aircraft lose power with altitude. (Approxiamately 2% per each 1,000' MSL.) An aircraft's climb ability is directly proportional to the amount of "excess" power that it has available vs. what is needed to maintain level flight. Let's use a simple example, say a normally aspirated 200 HP Piper Arrow. If an Arrow requires 100 HP to maintain level flight it would (at SL, ISA day) have 100 "excess" HP to use for climb. At 10,000' MSL, the engine might only be able to produce 160 HP, leaving it with a 60 HP surplus. This same aircraft at 15,000' would only have 40 surplus horsepower. This is the reason why turbocharged aircraft perform so well - you would be able to maintain SL power up until you reached the "critical altitude" for the particular engine. In some cases, this can be as high as 18,000' MSL.

This is also why twin-engine aircraft propeller driven (piston or turboprop) aircraft typically perform so poorly on one engine. Take, as an example, a Twin Comanche with two 160 HP engines. If that airplane required, say, 150 HP to maintain level flight it would have 170 "excess" HP to climb with. If it lost an engine, it would have lost 50% of its available power, but with just 10 "excess" HP, it may have lost 95% of its ability to climb. Granted, there is some additional drag because of the nacelle, etc., but this is minimal. I've seen Bob Hoover's performance in his Commander. It was a fantastic show, but it must be understood that it was due to Hoover's use of proper energy management techniques - light twins have two engines because they need two engines.

Transport category turbine-powered aircraft (airline & corporate jets) performance is guaranteed IF the aircraft is operated according to the FARs AND within the AFM parameters. In other words, you can fly around all day long in a twin-engine jet, loose an engine at V1 and shoot approaches to your heart's content and go missed on each and every one of them and do it safely and routinely. Pilot's practice these very manuvers ad-nausium in the simulators during recurrent training. It's easy in the simulators and even easier in the airplanes. (For some funny reason the "real" airplanes seem to fly much better and easier than the simulators do.)

On "Part 23" aircraft (light piston twins and turboprops) there is no such performance requirement and/or guarantee. In fact, most if not all of their POHs contain only rudimentary (at best) takeoff and landing performance data. At best, the single-engine performance of these aircraft types is anemic - at worst, non-existant.

Jetguy


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6896 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3210 times:

From the 6/59 issue of Flight (the US monthly, not the British weekly):

Aero flew the prototype Commander OKC-DCA in 7 hr 55 min on 9 May 1951. TO weight 4853 lb; the aircraft had non-standard hydraulic steering.

Victor Stadter flew a 680 from Belize to Brownsville in 7 hr 15 min on 6 April 1959. The left prop, cylinders and pistons were in the cabin, so no hydraulic power for gear, flaps or steering. Full tanks, supposedly 223 gallons, so gross around 6000 lb. 4000-ft runway; climbed to 12,500 ft looking for better cooling.


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3207 times:

I dont think that you are allowed to take off with only one engine on a twin(Highly doubt it is possible either). The differential thrust would be TOO high. On a GE powered 777-200ER, It would be 90,000:1. During takeoff this would lead you straight off the rwy.

This is 100% incorrect.

No twinjet model would be given certification for passenger service if it could not successfully (not beautifully/efficiently/etc) complete all 5 phases of flight on a maximum of 50% power.


User currently onlineAJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2396 posts, RR: 24
Reply 21, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3183 times:

Rick, it's a great exercise, ask at your next Sim.

We used runway 18 at Avalon. Full rudder applied with the thrust advanced to keep straight (no tiller necessary). Full power was reached at about 80 knots. The rest was just like any asymmetric session. At 120,000kg about 2500m was used (Flap 5).

We then immediately entered a turn for a return to land, flown at 300', with the turn to final to be completed within the HIALS. Great stuff.


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 22, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3181 times:

Possible yes. In theory, and if done correctly. But I'm reminded of a report I read about a guy who was sideswiped by a train while standing on the platform. He told the paramedics and the police that he was leaning in to see how close he could get his face to the fast-moving express train.

An obvious question occurs.

Why?



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic T/O 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...
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
Can A 747 Survive On One Engine? posted Mon Sep 22 2003 04:33:24 by Tarzanboy
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
Can They Fly On One Outboard Engine? posted Fri Mar 7 2003 08:36:36 by Mhsieh
Taking Off With Just One Engine posted Wed Jul 5 2006 00:05:22 by Hagic
Brake Failure On One Side - Know Before? posted Mon Jun 26 2006 21:24:59 by Julianuk
Jet Engine Start Attempt On Running Engine posted Tue Apr 11 2006 01:06:55 by Taguilo
Could A 777 Take Off With One Engine Only? posted Tue Dec 27 2005 13:36:00 by LeDragon

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format