Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
B733 Engine Out - By Wind!  
User currently offlineLMML 14/32 From Malta, joined Jan 2001, 2565 posts, RR: 6
Posted (10 years 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2693 times:

Recently I heard that one of our B733's aborted a take-off because one of the engines flamed out during the run. The story goes that inspection revealed nothing wrong and it was put down to a gust of wind!

This is all new to me. Is this possible?

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17035 posts, RR: 67
Reply 1, posted (10 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2581 times:

If you get sudden crosswind at low speeds to such a degree that airflow into the engine is severely disrupted this is possible. No air into the engine results in oxygen starved combustion.


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineMr.BA From Singapore, joined Sep 2000, 3423 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2573 times:

Just wondering about that little bit of chemistry here, what do you actually mean by "oxygen starved combustion"? Lack of oxygen for combustion?

Thanks  Smile



Boeing747 万岁!
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17035 posts, RR: 67
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2566 times:

Sorry, yes. No air, no combustion. I assume that some air is present, but so little that the ratio of air to fuel becomes too low, and the flames go out.


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3079 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2538 times:

I am gonna have to go with a dissenting opinion here and say it is not possible. Yes wind can cause a compressor stall but it will not cause a flame out. One thing about a engine is it is really good about drawing air in.

Plus on your A/C it was on the T/O run so there engine was at high power therefore drawing in enough air. You would also need so much wind it would damage the A/C by moving it around.

If that was ever to happen you would also be changing the engine as the air volume decreased you would have EGT's shoot sky high and you would over temp the engine.


I will not say it is impossible because nothing is impossible but from a engine shop perspective I would say nope that was not the problem.

Greasespot



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 offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17035 posts, RR: 67
Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2530 times:

Maybe the explanation given to LMML 14/32 was unclear. They may have meant stall or surge instead of flameout. Still, if the ignitors are off air starvation could stop combustion no? At least in theory.

EDIT: This thread goes into stalls in detail: http://www.airliners.net/discussions/tech_ops/read.main/95407/.

[Edited 2004-08-29 15:14:21]


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3079 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2517 times:

Yes in theory but you would need to change the engine as the EGT's would over temp. I thought of that after.

Maybe the captain shut it down due to stalls and now at the airline it has gotten around that the wind blew out the engine.

 Smile

Greasespot



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 offlineAir2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2509 times:

You know, I was looking at this thread and wondered about it and decided that the engine probably did not flame-out from air-starvation. As greasespot put it: jet engines are really good about drawing in air.

I'm not sure what the fuel management system is like on a 737-300, but could fuel starvation have been the problem?

We had a DC8 (same base engine) flame out because the flight crew failed to properly configure the fuel system prior to take-off. Fairly easy to do on an 8, don't know about a -300.

We wound up changing that engine because of the thermal shock of going from TO to not running without cool down. He was well into the take-off roll when it flamed-out. Was also rather cold out as I remember.


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2486 times:

If this was possible it would be standard practice to select ignition to continuous during turbulence. Oh, that's right! We do!

Yes some kind of abormal airflow across the intakes might cause a momentary disruption of air supply through the compressors that would allow the flame to die - momentarily. That is actually called an "unstart" but it is pretty rare in routine ops. The igniters should have been on for takeoff and it should have relit almost without being noticed.

Rare? I'd say so. I've never had it happen. No one of my friends has had it happen that I know of. But the people who devise our procedures and write our manuals say it can.

After all that, I doubt that it was the real and complete explanation for this event.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17035 posts, RR: 67
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2476 times:

If this was possible it would be standard practice to select ignition to continuous during turbulence. Oh, that's right! We do!

LOL Slamclick.

BTW in an arena not entirely unrelated to this one, military aviation, engines can and do "unstart" due to strange attitudes. You may have seen the Su-27/35/37 or the MiG-29 do the "Cobra", a very high angle of attack maneuver. Most military jets (and commercial jets assuming they could perform the maneuver, which they can't) would find their engines being starved at this point, and stopping, since the airflow over the intakes is essentially perpendicular to the direction of the intake (across instead of into) and at a later stage the plane is going slightly backwards.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31679 posts, RR: 56
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2468 times:

Isn't it S.O.P. to select Ignition to Continous during T/o,Landings & Turbulence.
regds
HAWK



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineTripleDelta From Croatia, joined Jul 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2463 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Unstarts were quite a problem for the Olympus engines used on the Concorde, before the Rolls-Royce found a way to shutdown and restart the engines in flight. As I remember from watching Wings Over The World, this was due to the high-speed of the air entering the engine (above M0.3-0.5). An unstart usually, when it occurs, shuts down the engine due to the shock wave it produces and can even blow off a couple of engine parts.

However, I haven't heard of any unstarts on sub-sonic jets. This may be a bit naive, but can it be possible that instead of being starved of oxygen, the engine was "oversaturated" with it? Say, a sudden gust of wind hits the intake and from the shock and sudden speed change, an unstart, or a similar disruption of airflow, occurs. Or maybe even a shock to the fuel system as well. But then again, what would happen in turbulence in that case?



No plane, no gain.
User currently offlineAir2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2402 times:

A sudden gust of wind wouldn't not lean the mixture out enough to flame-out. The air going down the core is basically controlled by the variable stator vanes (VSV's), which are wide open at TO power, and the variable bleed valves (VBV's), which are closed at TO power. Tubo-fan engines take a lot more air into the inlet than they can use. Most of that air goes into the by-pass duct. The air that goes down the core is regulated by the VSV/VBV system. A huge slug of air may cause a slight disturbance at the intake but certainly would not cause a flame-out. Remember, there is all kinds of air going down the inlet in-flight (low altitudes). Much more than on the ground.

User currently offlineLMML 14/32 From Malta, joined Jan 2001, 2565 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2372 times:

Wow !!

Thanks for the mature and sensible discussion. Someone mentioned Concorde and I have a question about this too: Why the delay in lighting the #4 burner during the takeoff roll? If I am not mistaken this is also due to an airflow issue. Can someone please elaborate?


User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (10 years 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2383 times:

I don't think that there's a delay in lighting Concorde's #4 engine afterburner on takeoff (it is weaker initially, though), but #4 is certainly a 'limited' engine in another way. Wingtip vortices around the right wing rotate in the opposite direction to the engine's/fan's rotation, which can cause all sorts of vibration and problems at low speeds (namely takeoff). As a result, #4 is limited to 88% N1 at speeds below 60 kts. Read more here, at the very bottom of the page.

Cheers,
QantasA332


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic B733 Engine Out - By Wind!
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...
Engine-out CAT 3B Approach/Go-Around posted Wed Sep 24 2003 14:27:56 by Gordonsmall
Aircraft Engine-out Performance. posted Tue Jul 8 2003 22:48:35 by Gordonsmall
Engine-out Climb Procedure posted Sun Jun 29 2003 01:28:53 by Mb339
B733 Engine Noise posted Sat Jun 21 2003 18:48:13 by LMML 14/32
DC-10 Engine Out Procedures posted Tue Dec 3 2002 17:33:21 by B1C17L1011
B733 Engine Whine On Take-off posted Fri Nov 1 2002 10:32:12 by LMML 14/32
Egpws Warning In An Engine Out posted Fri May 10 2002 21:41:20 by MD11Nut
Airbus 330-Both Engine Out posted Thu Aug 30 2001 06:05:31 by MD11Nut
Kathmandu Engine-out Takeoff posted Mon Mar 12 2001 04:59:18 by Cruising
Engine-Out posted Tue Dec 12 2000 05:25:23 by Luvflng

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format