TPAnx
Topic Author
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 4:53 am

AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:21 pm

An AA 777 LAX-LHR landed at JFK after an engine failed...all are well..
details here:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/26/D8J3LN406.html
TPAnx
I read the news today..oh boy
 
tonytifao
Posts: 788
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 10:22 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:22 am

I wonder what engine? GE? PW? or RR? Which engines do AA 777s have?
 
PM
Posts: 4819
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:26 am

Quoting Tonytifao (Reply 1):
I wonder what engine? GE? PW? or RR? Which engines do AA 777s have?

RR Trent 800s.
 
tepidhalibut
Posts: 182
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:19 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:27 am

Quoting Tonytifao (Reply 1):
Which engines do AA 777s have?

I believe they have Trent 800's on their 50-ish B777s.

(I await a snide comment from "certain quarters" at this point...)
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:33 am

Darn those RR Trent engines, lol.

I'm glad everything ended safely. Congrats to the flight crew on putting it down - and keeping the 777 safety record spotless.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
contrails
Posts: 1310
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 11:53 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:43 am

The first thing I though of was how often this happens to an ETOP engine. This must be extremely rare.

Second, I wondered why the Captain selected JFK. I can understand wanting to go to an AA city, but it looks to me like BOS would have been closer. Of course, I wasn't in the cockpit at the time so I don't know what all went into that decision. I'm sure the skipper considered all the options.

I'm glad everyone's ok. At least it happened over the Atlantic, where land is a lot closer than over the Pacific, where land could, in some cases, be hours away.
Flying Colors Forever!
 
willyj
Posts: 410
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 3:04 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:00 am

AA has many more flights to LHR from JFK than BOS - as does their Oneworld partner BA. Perhaps they thought they could reaccomodate their passengers more quickly at JFK as opposed to BOS? Also, it said the plane landed within 1/2 an hour, so the plane must have been quite close to JFK.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12361
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:14 am

AA itself has major ops at JFK, better options for transfer of pax to other possible flights (including partner BA), a long runway and timing probably all played into it.
Any idea of what caused this problem? Is it a major (like a component failure) or small like a minor oil leak or a false reading?
At least everyone is safe on the ground.
 
LY4XELD
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 5:14 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:19 am

Quoting Contrails (Reply 6):
Second, I wondered why the Captain selected JFK. I can understand wanting to go to an AA city, but it looks to me like BOS would have been closer. Of course, I wasn't in the cockpit at the time so I don't know what all went into that decision. I'm sure the skipper considered all the options.

AA's JFK Maintenance ops have more capability than BOS. Especially with engine changes, etc.
That's why we're here.
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:30 am

Quoting Contrails (Reply 6):
I can understand wanting to go to an AA city, but it looks to me like BOS would have been closer.

In addition to the reasons mentioned above, AA could probably roll out another 777 to bring the passengers to London. I assume that is what happened--In that case, is it the same crew?

**It appears that AA134 departed JFK at 10:49 AM, about six hours after the diversion into JFK**

[Edited 2006-07-26 18:32:22]
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
AirbusBoeing
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:14 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:34 am

flying over the ocean with one engine left....that's scary.
 
MCOflyer
Posts: 7068
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:51 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:34 am

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 10):
is it the same crew?

Depends on Duty time

Im glad he chose JFK over BOS. I heard JFK has a major AA mx facility there.

MCOflyer
Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:48 am

Well, my general opinion remains that the GE90 is the engine of choice for the 777, but the Trent 800 is a solid engine with a very good service history. Engine failures on 777s are rare, I wonder if the cause of the engine will be attributed to maintanance, or a flaw of the engine itself.

We'll have to wait and see.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
FLY2LIM
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 6:01 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:44 am

Quoting Willyj (Reply 7):
Perhaps they thought they could reaccomodate their passengers more quickly at JFK as opposed to BOS?

Call me silly, but isn't the first thought on an emergency to find the nearest airport suitable for the aircraft, and worry about the logistics later?

FLY2LIM
Faucett. La primera linea aerea del Peru.
 
eatmybologna
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:21 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:50 am

Quoting FLY2LIM (Reply 25):
Call me silly, but isn't the first thought on an emergency to find the nearest airport suitable for the aircraft, and worry about the logistics later?

Sometimes that comes after cash expenses unfortunately.

E-M-B

[Edited 2006-07-26 19:50:58]
Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:58 am

Quoting FLY2LIM (Reply 25):
Call me silly, but isn't the first thought on an emergency to find the nearest airport suitable for the aircraft, and worry about the logistics later?

In a medical emergency sure, but with something that must not have been threatning to the safety of the pax it was ok to continue to JFK.

Last summer I was on a 747 flying across the Atlantic that had an engine fire; we were about 2 hours out of JFK but still returned there.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
YULYMX
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:00 am

i'm pretty suprise that the plane would have been 30 minutes form JFK because LAX-LHR normaly pass way up north in Québec province... and Yul which is south of the provnce is 45 minutes flight to JFK???
 
tonytifao
Posts: 788
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 10:22 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:17 am

Might be a dumb question. If both engines fail over the water, what is the probability of a safe landing in the water?
 
YULYMX
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:51 am

to my initial question from LAX-LHR what was it doing so close of either JFK or BOS was suppose to fly alot northern route...

the Engine probably failed a lot sooner than they deviate to JFK, but 30 minutes from JFK when the engine fail is almost impossible, because normal route would take LAX-LHR in middle to upper Québec province???
 
Pilot3033
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 4:39 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:07 am

Quoting YULYMX (Reply 44):
to my initial question from LAX-LHR what was it doing so close of either JFK or BOS was suppose to fly alot northern route...

the Engine probably failed a lot sooner than they deviate to JFK, but 30 minutes from JFK when the engine fail is almost impossible, because normal route would take LAX-LHR in middle to upper Québec province???

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...4/history/20060726/0352Z/KLAX/KJFK
You seem to be correct.
I recall seeing a documentary where a Boeing test pilot flew a 777 simulator from taxi to takeoff to landing on one engine. The purpose they stated (IIRC) for that ability was for this type of situation, or if you were to say lose one over the mid Atlantic of Pacific.

My guess is that the pilots said, "Ok, we don't want to go all the way to LHR...too far and our speed and economy are greatly reduced. Where can we go? Canada? Nah...too much hassel and we can make it further. BOS? Not a good MX base, and bad for the pax. JFK? Looks good, large MX, good runways, easy for the PAX, let's call the company and see what they think?"

Glad all ended well.
-Matt
-Matt
 
YULYMX
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:10 am

Quoting Pilot3033 (Reply 49):

Totally agree with you but form where they were... it took more than 30 minutes... From AA it was very good to JFK... but if PAX would have been in any sort of emergency/danger they would have land at either YUL or YQB

Thank you for the info and the map
 
FlyMeToTheMoon
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 9:01 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:16 am

Quoting AirbusBoeing (Reply 11):
flying over the ocean with one engine left....that's scary.

Some people flew above the water without any engines - Air Transat 330 comes to mind. Or the Gander glider - Air Canada 767.

Regardless, this is what ETOPS is for and it appears that both the 777 and the crew performed well.

Happy Flying (on 1,2,3,4 or no engines at all)
Fly me to the moon... but not through LHR!
 
F14D4ever
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:20 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:59 am

Quoting FlyMeToTheMoon (Reply 50):
Or the Gander glider - Air Canada 767.

I think it is known as the Gimli Glider.
"He is risen, as He said."
 
RyDawg82
Posts: 833
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 8:30 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:36 am

Quoting YULYMX (Reply 42):
to my initial question from LAX-LHR what was it doing so close of either JFK or BOS was suppose to fly alot northern route...

the Engine probably failed a lot sooner than they deviate to JFK, but 30 minutes from JFK when the engine fail is almost impossible, because normal route would take LAX-LHR in middle to upper Québec province???

Yah, convenient for AA to land at JFK, but a little awkward it was flying such a southerly course...


Route Flown:


Figuring it was 1 hour out of JFK with the failure, here's a Great Circle Route showing a 500 nm radius of JFK :


[Edited 2006-07-27 00:42:55]
You can take the pup out of Alaska, but you can't take the Alaska out of the pup.
 
flight7e7
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 7:26 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:12 am

2AA134/25JUL«
AA0134/25JUL
‡DTE CHNG FLT‡ ORIG 25JUL
LAX 835P T4 43
JFK ‡ 8 8B 552A 900A
LHR T3 318 840P
4LAX/OUT2035 OFF2051 *2251
2JFK/IN0552 *0454
3JFK/ETD1020 DIV LHR *0902
4JFK/OUT1015 OFF1048 *0949
1LHR/OVR LHR TO JFK ETA0510 REMARKS MECH
FTWDP COPELAND *0307
2LHR/IN2200 *1609

INTO LHR AT 2200 hours...all is well. congrats to the crew....first I have heard of a long haul divert for 777 in a long time. Gotta love her!

Cheers.
 
brilondon
Posts: 3012
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:26 am

Quoting Tonytifao (Reply 28):
Might be a dumb question. If both engines fail over the water, what is the probability of a safe landing in the water?

This is not a dumb question as many people believe that water would be a softer landing than on land. Unfortunately at the speed that the T7 would be traveling at, it would be have much the same result as landing on land. A number of years back there was a news video showing an 767 trying to do the same thing and there were a number of casualties on that one. I don't remember what the airline was or the circumstances were. If someone could refresh my memory on it I would be grateful.

[Edited 2006-07-27 01:38:25]
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
texasaggie
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:43 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:30 am

Quoting Brilondon (Reply 58):
A number of years back there was a news video showing an 767 trying to do the same thing and there were a number of casualties on that one. I don't remember what the airline was or the circumstances were. If someone could refresh my memory on ti I would be grateful.

Are you referring to Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961? It landed on water after being hijacked and running out of fuel. 123 of the 175 passengers on board died.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_961
 
YULYMX
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:31 am

Quoting Brilondon (Reply 58):

somewhere in south america a 767 the wing it first than broke some die and some survive
 
Pilot3033
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 4:39 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:39 am

Quoting YULYMX (Reply 60):

somewhere in south america a 767 the wing it first than broke some die and some survive



Quoting Texasaggie (Reply 59):

Are you referring to Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961? It landed on water after being hijacked and running out of fuel. 123 of the 175 passengers on board died.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopi...t_961
-Matt
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 1849
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:42 am

Quoting Texasaggie (Reply 59):
Are you referring to Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961? It landed on water after being hijacked and running out of fuel. 123 of the 175 passengers on board died.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopi...t_961

It's very, very important to note that the Ethiopian 767 was not a controlled ditching ... There have been a few cases of airliners successfully ditching (nothing the size of a 777/747, Airport movies excepted) but this is not one of them.

In this case, the 767 was hijacked, out of fuel, and the hijackers were fighting with the pilot as he attempted to ditch the aircraft. It came down rolling slightly to the left, the left wingtip hit submerged rocks, which essentially tore the airplane apart. The fuselage and right wing then cartwheeled across the water.

The fact that anyone survived is pure luck : it crashed literally yards offshore from a failrly prominent seaside resort, so there were lots of people (and boats) on-hand for the rescue effort.

In theory a large airliner like a 767, 777, 747, etc is supposed to be able to land on smooth water ... if the engines provide too much drag, they are designed to break away and not damage the wing or fuselage.

The one 767 is the closest anyone's ever gotten to actually trying it, though.

- litz
 
Revo1059
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:14 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:57 am

It would be interesting to see a test done with some old plane that is on it's way out, and to see how 'smooth' it could land on the water........
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:01 pm

Quoting Tonytifao (Reply 17):
Might be a dumb question. If both engines fail over the water, what is the probability of a safe landing in the water?

Only planes which make water landings are sea planes. All other planes crash on the water or "ditch". I guess they just say water landing to try to make people feel better. If conditions are right speed is low people can survive.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
comorin
Posts: 3857
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 5:52 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:21 pm

Quoting Litz (Reply 29):
The one 767 is the closest anyone's ever gotten to actually trying it, though.

Not true. Jack Lemmon lands a 747 in the Bermuda Triangle in Airport '77 and lotsa passengers survived... Smile

Source:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075648/
 
N174UA
Posts: 860
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:18 pm

Quoting F14D4ever (Reply 22):
I think it is known as the Gimli Glider.

 checkmark 

Quoting Comorin (Reply 32):
Not true. Jack Lemmon lands a 747 in the Bermuda Triangle in Airport '77 and lotsa passengers survived

Ummm...no. Remember, F/O Chambers hijacked the plane, and Jack Lemmon and F/E and the pax were knocked out. Chambers took it below radar and flew right over the ocean (dumb move) and the right wingtip hit an oil derrick or something, and #4 caught fire. Plane "safely landed" on the water, and sank.
 
ComeAndGo
Posts: 810
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:58 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:23 pm

Quoting RyDawg82 (Reply 23):
Yah, convenient for AA to land at JFK, but a little awkward it was flying such a southerly course...

It's not awkward. Many airlines fly that same southerly route on LAX - LHR flights. The jetstream determines the flight route.
 
Carfield
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:49 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:27 pm

THanks for the information... that explained why my friend's flight, AA 167, from JFK to NRT, was slightly delayed and had to wait for the morning inbound flight from Heathrow... the original a/c was used to cover this LAX-LHR flight.

Well his flight made it to NRT only twenty three minutes behind schedule... so not bad...

Good job, AA crew!

Carfield

PS. I wonder if AA provides any compensation to the passengers, like food voucher, travel voucher for future travels, and phone cards for them to call home.
 
ADXMatt
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:07 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:18 pm

Several of you mentioned that it was strange that they were so close to JFK due to the route. .....

You are all assuming the engine failed/shut down without any warning.
That rarely happens.

How do you know that that the crew wasn't on the airfone with dispatch and MX for a while trouble shooting and heading towards JFK for MX to look at it. Then decided to shut it down or it failed shortly before landing due to deteriorating engine indications.

Just a thought...
ADXMatt
 
ua777222
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:23 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:14 pm

Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 36):
How do you know that that the crew wasn't on the airfone with dispatch and MX for a while trouble shooting and heading towards JFK for MX to look at it. Then decided to shut it down or it failed shortly before landing due to deteriorating engine indications.

This makes a lot of sense. The 777 has something like 180 min of ETOPs time so even if they were that far north, they would have been alright. United had a few engine failures on their P&Ws. FRA-SFO comes to mind. There was also one that quick over the Pacific and almost maxed out it's ETOPs limits.

The aircraft can function with normal operations on one engine. Because of this, I don't think the crew is pressed to put the aircraft down on the first open airport. If it is logistical to run it longer (within limits) then outside of a cash factor, it is convenient and easy on the passengers.



Matt

[Edited 2006-07-27 10:15:32]
"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
 
ua777222
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:23 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:18 pm

Oh, if the FAA or Aircraft Man. decide to take into LROPS for their aircraft, will it allow for longer one-engine operations? Mind you, I was told this will be on all aircraft, not just twin engine. I know it's a long shot but would the same MX standards for ETOPs be required for LROPS on 4 engine aircraft? ($$$).

Matt
"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
 
ADXMatt
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:07 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:59 pm

Hi Matt UA777222....

The 777 is certified for longer then 180 min not sure to what number. (CO is 207 min on their 777's)

What I was suggesting is that the AA crew may have been getting abnormal indications on the engine and decided to go to a heavy MX base prior to making the decision to shut it down/failure. You may have abnormal readings but still have an operating engine. At the begining diverting to JFK may have been a precaution.

Once the engine fails or is shut down you MUST land at the nearest SUITABLE airport in point of time. (i.e. Runway able to handle the weight/ runway length. CFR, WX, types of available and operatable approaches etc.) It goes by time it takes to get there not necessarily in distance. An airport that is further in distance may be closer in time due to winds.


Isn't fun to be monday morning quarterbacks and speculate on other peoples decisions?
 
Eddie757
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:07 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:45 pm

There are so many facts to consider in the cockpit when you're involved in this kind of situations...
Fortunately, everything went OK. Nowadays, having one engine left on a T7, you can think in facts like where will the passengers be better accomodated, where the mainteinance will suit your problem... Not only where are you gonna land with an engine out. That's really interesting...
 
pilot21
Posts: 983
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 1999 8:28 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:02 pm

Quoting TPAnx (Thread starter):
An AA 777 LAX-LHR landed at JFK after an engine failed...all are well..
details here:

Hey

If it had been a BA B744, then the PAX would have made it to Manchester before the plane would have had to divert due to low fuel indications!!

Remember that one about 2yrs ago!
Aircraft I've flown: A300/A310/A320/A321/A330/A340/B727/B732/B733/B734/B735/B738/B741/B742/B744/DC10/MD80/IL62/Bae146/AR
 
comorin
Posts: 3857
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 5:52 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:07 pm

Quoting N174UA (Reply 33):
Ummm...no. Remember, F/O Chambers hijacked the plane, and Jack Lemmon and F/E and the pax were knocked out. Chambers took it below radar and flew right over the ocean (dumb move) and the right wingtip hit an oil derrick or something, and #4 caught fire. Plane "safely landed" on the water, and sank.

Oops, I stand corrected. Serves me right for trying to be clever  Smile
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17053
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:28 pm

Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 39):
The 777 is certified for longer then 180 min not sure to what number. (CO is 207 min on their 777's)

The specific 777 is only certified for 180 minutes if the airline keeps it maintained, equipped and operated to the same certification. I don't know if AA needs 180 minute ETOPS given their routes.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
flyingbronco05
Posts: 3484
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 11:43 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:04 pm

There was a topic on this that came out 2 hours before this one, yet that one was deleted.

Anybody know why?
Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
 
markusburkhard
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 9:18 am

RE: AA 777 With An Engine Problem

Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:43 pm

Quoting Contrails (Reply 5):
At least it happened over the Atlantic, where land is a lot closer than over the Pacific, where land could, in some cases, be hours away.

Also on the Atlantic the next Airport can be hours away... Remember the LX A332 that diverted to YHZ on one engine in February?

We departed in MIA and heading more or less straight east to Europe. At the time the oil leak became critical and the decision to divert was made the plane was about 400nm south of the US/Canadian coast.
Initially the idea was to divert to YUL for maintenance reasons. However very strong winds made it impossible to reach that airport within the ETOPS limit of 180 minutes. Even at FL200 we had still more than 100kts headwind component resulting in a groundspeed of around 240 kts! And although YHZ was finaly chosen we still ended up two and a half hours on one engine.

So you see even the Atlantic can max out your ETOPS limits easily.

Regards,
Markus