797
Topic Author
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:51 am

Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:44 pm

A Brussels Airlines Airbus A330-223, performing flight SN358 from Kinshasa to Brussels, suffered failures on both engines at different stages of its journey. As the aircraft reached its cruising altitude of 40,000ft over Algerian airspace, the number-one engine failed. The flight crew managed to re-ignite the failed engine and decided to continue its original route to Brussels. The aircraft suffered yet another engine failure as it descended towards Belgian airspace.

https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/brussel ... e-failure/

Busy day for the flight crew, to say the least.

I find this very odd. Must have been fuel contamination!
Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3882
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:48 pm

Yikes, glad it didn't happen simultaneously.
First to fly the 787-9
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3639
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:48 pm

That will require a thorough investigation. The article doesn’t give any types of clues for what caused the engines to shutdown. I am curious to know
 
migair54
Posts: 2400
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:24 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 3:15 pm

797 wrote:
A Brussels Airlines Airbus A330-223, performing flight SN358 from Kinshasa to Brussels, suffered failures on both engines at different stages of its journey. As the aircraft reached its cruising altitude of 40,000ft over Algerian airspace, the number-one engine failed. The flight crew managed to re-ignite the failed engine and decided to continue its original route to Brussels. The aircraft suffered yet another engine failure as it descended towards Belgian airspace.

https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/brussel ... e-failure/

Busy day for the flight crew, to say the least.

I find this very odd. Must have been fuel contamination!


I have to agree with you with the fuel contamination, otherwise the chances of having 2 different engines failures in a couple of hours is highly unlikely.
 
TW870
Posts: 1013
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 2:01 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:23 pm

Yep it looks like Brussels Airlines is saying that they suspect fuel contamination

http://avherald.com/h?article=4c170682
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13979
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:26 pm

A failed engine cannot be restarted, by defn it has failed, ie broken.

You do not continue on a flight after restarting a “failed” engine either.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 2188
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:31 pm

zeke wrote:
A failed engine cannot be restarted, by defn it has failed, ie broken.

You do not continue on a flight after restarting a “failed” engine either.

Not even if you are above Algeria, i.e. in the middle of the Sahara? Failed or not, once that #1 engine is up and running again, and #2 is running just fine, why would you not press on to BRU?

My question is whether other flights that uplifted fuel at FIH (Kinshasa) that day also experienced engine malfunctions?
 
BNApilot
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2017 5:27 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:38 pm

zeke wrote:
A failed engine cannot be restarted, by defn it has failed, ie broken.

You do not continue on a flight after restarting a “failed” engine either.


Certainly not true. At every operator I've ever worked for (including now flying 757/767 for one of the "Big 3"), that has never been the case. The only reason we have to not start a failed engine was if it failed because of FIRE/FOD/FROZEN (fire...obvious; FOD...ingested something that messed it up with possible imbalance; or FROZEN...engine seized). Otherwise, it's fair game (even in the Boeing checklist) to attempt a restart.

Sam
 
User avatar
Ramirez12
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:49 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:43 pm

Investigate more about the article and look at a page where the problem was caused by contaminated fuel, I hope, and the authorities will continue investigating the case.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:20 pm

BNApilot wrote:
zeke wrote:
A failed engine cannot be restarted, by defn it has failed, ie broken.

You do not continue on a flight after restarting a “failed” engine either.


Certainly not true. At every operator I've ever worked for (including now flying 757/767 for one of the "Big 3"), that has never been the case. The only reason we have to not start a failed engine was if it failed because of FIRE/FOD/FROZEN (fire...obvious; FOD...ingested something that messed it up with possible imbalance; or FROZEN...engine seized). Otherwise, it's fair game (even in the Boeing checklist) to attempt a restart.

Sam


I’m with Zeke on this one. The Boeing checklist says to attempt a restart. It does not say to foolishly continue on to a far away destination when you’ve had an engine failure on a twin for unknown reasons.

I would have considered landing at a safe suitable nearby airport if I didn’t understand what was going on with the engine and whether both engines were at further risk of failure.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:23 pm

MalevTU134 wrote:
zeke wrote:
A failed engine cannot be restarted, by defn it has failed, ie broken.

You do not continue on a flight after restarting a “failed” engine either.

Not even if you are above Algeria, i.e. in the middle of the Sahara? Failed or not, once that #1 engine is up and running again, and #2 is running just fine, why would you not press on to BRU?

My question is whether other flights that uplifted fuel at FIH (Kinshasa) that day also experienced engine malfunctions?


Failure of a jet engine is not a normal situation. Clearly something is wrong. You don’t know what caused it or whether there is a common problem that may cause both engines to fail.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1763
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:51 pm

797 wrote:
A Brussels Airlines Airbus A330-223, performing flight SN358 from Kinshasa to Brussels, suffered failures on both engines at different stages of its journey. As the aircraft reached its cruising altitude of 40,000ft over Algerian airspace, the number-one engine failed. The flight crew managed to re-ignite the failed engine and decided to continue its original route to Brussels. The aircraft suffered yet another engine failure as it descended towards Belgian airspace.

https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/brussel ... e-failure/

My immediate gut reaction was to check the exact wording of the report.
Did both engines fail at different times?
or
Did the same engine fail over Algeria, and again on descent into Brussels?

over Algerian airspace, the number-one engine failed
…….and
descending towards Brussels, at 05:37 hours, engine no. 2 failed several times.

There's the answer; both engines failed. Glad we cleared that up.

Ahem.....
The aircraft’s left one was shut down as it traveled through French airspace, descending from 40,000ft to 28,000ft to continue its journey to Belgium.

Er... isn't the engine on the left generally known as No.1 engine? The same one that failed over Algeria? :scratchchin:

https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/brussel ... e-failure/
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 2188
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:57 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
zeke wrote:
A failed engine cannot be restarted, by defn it has failed, ie broken.

You do not continue on a flight after restarting a “failed” engine either.

Not even if you are above Algeria, i.e. in the middle of the Sahara? Failed or not, once that #1 engine is up and running again, and #2 is running just fine, why would you not press on to BRU?

My question is whether other flights that uplifted fuel at FIH (Kinshasa) that day also experienced engine malfunctions?


Failure of a jet engine is not a normal situation. Clearly something is wrong. You don’t know what caused it or whether there is a common problem that may cause both engines to fail.

Sure, I appreciate that. But, if both of your engines are working (again), and the nearest airports are all strips in the World's largest sandpit (much of it terrorist-infested), and there is no lack of suitable airports on your way all the way to BRU (no ocean or arctic to cross, once you are out of the Sahara there are suitable airports at least every 100 km or so), that may tip your decision towards going to BRU. It seems 2 pilots, and the dispatch department of an airline with an excellent safety record of flying in Africa for over 8 decades, agreed.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6509
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:01 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
I would have considered landing at a safe suitable nearby airport if I didn’t understand what was going on with the engine and whether both engines were at further risk of failure.


I'm not going to pretend I know better than the crew and I'm not second-guessing them. But from my armchair:

- On the one hand, an engine flamed out for unknown reasons. Given the apparent lack of physical failure (no fire, no vibration) and the fact that fuel had last been loaded in the DRC, I'd suspect fuel contamination almost immediately. That would make me very nervous about whether the other engine would continue to run.
- On the other hand, the aircraft was over the Sahara in Algeria. No place remotely nearby is exactly friendly. The avherald report suggests that before they got the engine relit they were preparing to divert to DJE (Djerba, Tunisia). That's much safer for pax and crew than anywhere in southern Algeria, which still suffers ethnic-religious conflict, but hardly the place I'd want to be as a Belgian crew.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 7:02 pm

797 wrote:
I find this very odd. Must have been fuel contamination!

Destination likely incurs a hull and liability insurance premium surcharge, and engine maintenance surcharge too.

Aircraft operating potentially higher risk routes are often dedicated to them (quarantine exposure). And why financiers and leasors can insist on lab testing of fuel on departure and remaining on return.
 
Bradin
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:12 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 7:15 pm

<sarcasm> Ice in the gas tank again? :cold: </sarcasm> :duck:
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 10008
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 7:52 pm

MalevTU134 wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
Not even if you are above Algeria, i.e. in the middle of the Sahara? Failed or not, once that #1 engine is up and running again, and #2 is running just fine, why would you not press on to BRU?

My question is whether other flights that uplifted fuel at FIH (Kinshasa) that day also experienced engine malfunctions?


Failure of a jet engine is not a normal situation. Clearly something is wrong. You don’t know what caused it or whether there is a common problem that may cause both engines to fail.

Sure, I appreciate that. But, if both of your engines are working (again), and the nearest airports are all strips in the World's largest sandpit (much of it terrorist-infested), and there is no lack of suitable airports on your way all the way to BRU (no ocean or arctic to cross, once you are out of the Sahara there are suitable airports at least every 100 km or so), that may tip your decision towards going to BRU. It seems 2 pilots, and the dispatch department of an airline with an excellent safety record of flying in Africa for over 8 decades, agreed.


Indeed, if you are out of the Sahara with two working engines you have plenty of options to divert if necessary, so the additional risk seems minimal if the engine quits again. As others said, it was prepared to divert to Tunisia if the engine didn't restart. Much better to get to a destination where you can more easily transfer your passengers if there is no immediate danger to your craft. And passengers and crew are much safer in Europe than in Africa, but Tunisia will be ok.

So I can understand that the crew did what it did.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
vinniewinnie
Posts: 718
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:23 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:23 pm

Dutchy wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

Failure of a jet engine is not a normal situation. Clearly something is wrong. You don’t know what caused it or whether there is a common problem that may cause both engines to fail.

Sure, I appreciate that. But, if both of your engines are working (again), and the nearest airports are all strips in the World's largest sandpit (much of it terrorist-infested), and there is no lack of suitable airports on your way all the way to BRU (no ocean or arctic to cross, once you are out of the Sahara there are suitable airports at least every 100 km or so), that may tip your decision towards going to BRU. It seems 2 pilots, and the dispatch department of an airline with an excellent safety record of flying in Africa for over 8 decades, agreed.


Indeed, if you are out of the Sahara with two working engines you have plenty of options to divert if necessary, so the additional risk seems minimal if the engine quits again. As others said, it was prepared to divert to Tunisia if the engine didn't restart. Much better to get to a destination where you can more easily transfer your passengers if there is no immediate danger to your craft. And passengers and crew are much safer in Europe than in Africa, but Tunisia will be ok.

So I can understand that the crew did what it did.


These people came from Africa my friend and from Kinshasa out of all places. You think that they would feel particularly unsafe in another city in Africa? Common be serious.

As for Algeria and that terrorist BS? When did you last hear any terrorist related major issue there?

Algeria would have been a pretty ok place to divert, even in the south. This is not Mali or northern Niger. The reason they opted for Djerba in Tunisia is probably that tunisair has A330’s, thus could have been more helpful than Air Algerie.

Africa is not a crazy wild place...
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 2188
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:34 pm

vinniewinnie wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
Sure, I appreciate that. But, if both of your engines are working (again), and the nearest airports are all strips in the World's largest sandpit (much of it terrorist-infested), and there is no lack of suitable airports on your way all the way to BRU (no ocean or arctic to cross, once you are out of the Sahara there are suitable airports at least every 100 km or so), that may tip your decision towards going to BRU. It seems 2 pilots, and the dispatch department of an airline with an excellent safety record of flying in Africa for over 8 decades, agreed.


Indeed, if you are out of the Sahara with two working engines you have plenty of options to divert if necessary, so the additional risk seems minimal if the engine quits again. As others said, it was prepared to divert to Tunisia if the engine didn't restart. Much better to get to a destination where you can more easily transfer your passengers if there is no immediate danger to your craft. And passengers and crew are much safer in Europe than in Africa, but Tunisia will be ok.

So I can understand that the crew did what it did.


These people came from Africa my friend and from Kinshasa out of all places. You think that they would feel particularly unsafe in another city in Africa? Common be serious.

As for Algeria and that terrorist BS? When did you last hear any terrorist related major issue there?

Algeria would have been a pretty ok place to divert, even in the south. This is not Mali or northern Niger. The reason they opted for Djerba in Tunisia is probably that tunisair has A330’s, thus could have been more helpful than Air Algerie.

Africa is not a crazy wild place...

As for your question on Algeria: last MAJOR issue? In 2013, only 5 years ago, when an oil drilling compound was attacked and several people (among them westerners) were killed. Are you seriously denying the existence of terrorist organizations (AQIM among others) in Algeria?
Kinshasa is one thing, the Sahara is another. They are both on one continent, but so is, say, Tel Aviv and Vientiane...same, same, but different...
Out of curiosity: any airfield in particular in southern Algeria that you would fancy aiming for with both of your engines producing adequate thrust?
 
User avatar
readytotaxi
Posts: 6638
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:09 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:47 pm

MalevTU134 wrote:
zeke wrote:
A failed engine cannot be restarted, by defn it has failed, ie broken.

You do not continue on a flight after restarting a “failed” engine either.

Not even if you are above Algeria, i.e. in the middle of the Sahara? Failed or not, once that #1 engine is up and running again, and #2 is running just fine, why would you not press on to BRU?

My question is whether other flights that uplifted fuel at FIH (Kinshasa) that day also experienced engine malfunctions?

That would be one of my lines of enquiry, if contaminated you would expect other examples, no?
you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
Growing older, but not up.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:54 pm

Dutchy wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

Failure of a jet engine is not a normal situation. Clearly something is wrong. You don’t know what caused it or whether there is a common problem that may cause both engines to fail.

Sure, I appreciate that. But, if both of your engines are working (again), and the nearest airports are all strips in the World's largest sandpit (much of it terrorist-infested), and there is no lack of suitable airports on your way all the way to BRU (no ocean or arctic to cross, once you are out of the Sahara there are suitable airports at least every 100 km or so), that may tip your decision towards going to BRU. It seems 2 pilots, and the dispatch department of an airline with an excellent safety record of flying in Africa for over 8 decades, agreed.


Indeed, if you are out of the Sahara with two working engines you have plenty of options to divert if necessary, so the additional risk seems minimal if the engine quits again. As others said, it was prepared to divert to Tunisia if the engine didn't restart. Much better to get to a destination where you can more easily transfer your passengers if there is no immediate danger to your craft. And passengers and crew are much safer in Europe than in Africa, but Tunisia will be ok.

So I can understand that the crew did what it did.


If my engine quits whether I get it restarted or not I'm going to land somewhere as soon as I can. I don't care about your connections I care about your safety. Electing to continue to their destination was careless and I'm sure the European regulators will be less than impressed with their decision.

I can understand not diverting to a hostile country but they are overflying alot of friendly countries on their way to BRU.
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1737
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 11:18 pm

Bradin wrote:
<sarcasm> Ice in the gas tank again? :cold: </sarcasm> :duck:

Very early on in its career the A332 had some engine shutdowns due to frozen fuel . Can't remember might have been caused by water contamination.
Sorry have no reference just memory from many years ago.
If I recall correctly it had something to do with the routing of the fuel lines.

Seems to me ice formation would explain the current circumstance. If fuel was contaminated with "dirt" I would expect the filters once clogged would not clear themselves, but if ice its possible it could do so.
Then there is the BA 777 at LHR with duel engine failure due to ice, at a low power setting.
Ruscoe
 
vinniewinnie
Posts: 718
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:23 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 11:27 pm

MalevTU134 wrote:
vinniewinnie wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Indeed, if you are out of the Sahara with two working engines you have plenty of options to divert if necessary, so the additional risk seems minimal if the engine quits again. As others said, it was prepared to divert to Tunisia if the engine didn't restart. Much better to get to a destination where you can more easily transfer your passengers if there is no immediate danger to your craft. And passengers and crew are much safer in Europe than in Africa, but Tunisia will be ok.

So I can understand that the crew did what it did.



These people came from Africa my friend and from Kinshasa out of all places. You think that they would feel particularly unsafe in another city in Africa? Common be serious.

As for Algeria and that terrorist BS? When did you last hear any terrorist related major issue there?

Algeria would have been a pretty ok place to divert, even in the south. This is not Mali or northern Niger. The reason they opted for Djerba in Tunisia is probably that tunisair has A330’s, thus could have been more helpful than Air Algerie.

Africa is not a crazy wild place...

As for your question on Algeria: last MAJOR issue? In 2013, only 5 years ago, when an oil drilling compound was attacked and several people (among them westerners) were killed. Are you seriously denying the existence of terrorist organizations (AQIM among others) in Algeria?
Kinshasa is one thing, the Sahara is another. They are both on one continent, but so is, say, Tel Aviv and Vientiane...same, same, but different...
Out of curiosity: any airfield in particular in southern Algeria that you would fancy aiming for with both of your engines producing adequate thrust?


5 years ago... In the meantime in these 5 years Paris & Brussels have had major terrorist attacks. Do you also consider these places totally unsafe given that what happened? Perception is not reality...

Algeria controls its territory pretty well. Should a plane divert, it would have no issues ensuring passengers safety.

Not that the plane should have diverted in the first plane from my understanding...
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11837
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 11:31 pm

I think some posters are being misled by the article.

The engines flamed out/shut down unexpectedly. They didn't fail. As zeke said, a failed engine is a dead engine, there is no restarting it, by definition. Often it's the crew that will shut down a failed engine because of vibrations/fire etc. Here the engines quit on their own. Sure in that case you try to restart it, there is no harm in doing so.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 11:40 pm

Ruscoe wrote:
Bradin wrote:
<sarcasm> Ice in the gas tank again? :cold: </sarcasm> :duck:

Very early on in its career the A332 had some engine shutdowns due to frozen fuel . Can't remember might have been caused by water contamination.
Sorry have no reference just memory from many years ago.
If I recall correctly it had something to do with the routing of the fuel lines.

Seems to me ice formation would explain the current circumstance. If fuel was contaminated with "dirt" I would expect the filters once clogged would not clear themselves, but if ice its possible it could do so.
Then there is the BA 777 at LHR with duel engine failure due to ice, at a low power setting.
Ruscoe


That far south your fuel isn’t going to freeze.
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 2188
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Tue Dec 25, 2018 11:56 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
Ruscoe wrote:
Bradin wrote:
<sarcasm> Ice in the gas tank again? :cold: </sarcasm> :duck:

Very early on in its career the A332 had some engine shutdowns due to frozen fuel . Can't remember might have been caused by water contamination.
Sorry have no reference just memory from many years ago.
If I recall correctly it had something to do with the routing of the fuel lines.

Seems to me ice formation would explain the current circumstance. If fuel was contaminated with "dirt" I would expect the filters once clogged would not clear themselves, but if ice its possible it could do so.
Then there is the BA 777 at LHR with duel engine failure due to ice, at a low power setting.
Ruscoe


That far south your fuel isn’t going to freeze.

Eeeehh?? At 40000 feet it is still -55°C outside, no matter the latitude.

And if you are referring to the second flame out, it was over northern France....
 
LewisNEO
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:08 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:07 am

Dutchy wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

Failure of a jet engine is not a normal situation. Clearly something is wrong. You don’t know what caused it or whether there is a common problem that may cause both engines to fail.

Sure, I appreciate that. But, if both of your engines are working (again), and the nearest airports are all strips in the World's largest sandpit (much of it terrorist-infested), and there is no lack of suitable airports on your way all the way to BRU (no ocean or arctic to cross, once you are out of the Sahara there are suitable airports at least every 100 km or so), that may tip your decision towards going to BRU. It seems 2 pilots, and the dispatch department of an airline with an excellent safety record of flying in Africa for over 8 decades, agreed.


Indeed, if you are out of the Sahara with two working engines you have plenty of options to divert if necessary, so the additional risk seems minimal if the engine quits again. As others said, it was prepared to divert to Tunisia if the engine didn't restart. Much better to get to a destination where you can more easily transfer your passengers if there is no immediate danger to your craft. And passengers and crew are much safer in Europe than in Africa, but Tunisia will be ok.

So I can understand that the crew did what it did.


It is not the first time a trip is being continued after an engine that turned of has been restarted. I am with Dutchy here, it depends on numerous factors on what the pilots decide to divert or continue their flight. A twin or tri or quad can fly perfectly well with one engine shut. It can even take-off and land with just one (or two or three respectively) engine, that's what they are made for. Losing an engine in flight is depending in the circumstances not a particularly serious problem, pilots are trained to fly the aircraft should an engine fail. If an engine did fail in flight, they would carry out a number of checklists to ensure the engine is secure and safe, and may as a precaution land at a different site if necessary.

Actually, I found some incidents at which there was an engine failure in flight, and the flight was completed to the final destination. One of them is the Virgin Atlantic Boeing 747-400 G-VBIG performing flight VS-43 from London Gatwick to Las Vegas and continued its flight on may 5th 2016. It is not exactly the same, but it is possible.

I remain with one question: were there other incidents with other airplanes who left from Kinshasa? If the fuel is contaminated, one would assume some issues with other airplanes too who got the fuel from the same batch. N'djili Airport is a relatively small airport, but there are quite a few international flights with legacy carriers from there to the Middle East and Europe next to local airliners, and there are also airlines like KL who use it as a stopover between Amsterdam and Nairobi.
Last edited by LewisNEO on Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
You are the wind beneath my wings.

Fokker 27, Bombardier Dash 8, Embraer 175 & 195, 727-200, 737-200 & -300 & -400 & -800, 747-400, 767-300, 767-400, DC 10-30, A320-200, A330-200, A330-300, A380.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:07 am

Aesma wrote:
I think some posters are being misled by the article.

The engines flamed out/shut down unexpectedly. They didn't fail. As zeke said, a failed engine is a dead engine, there is no restarting it, by definition. Often it's the crew that will shut down a failed engine because of vibrations/fire etc. Here the engines quit on their own. Sure in that case you try to restart it, there is no harm in doing so.


That is the definition of an engine failure. By Boeing’s definition at least, an engine is failed when the fire goes out. Sounds like that happened here.

Again, there is no harm in restarting it. That decision is not in question by anyone. Better to divert to a nearby airport with two working engines. The question is whether the crew used good judgement by continuing to BRU after an engine stopped working at one point.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:10 am

LewisNEO wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
Sure, I appreciate that. But, if both of your engines are working (again), and the nearest airports are all strips in the World's largest sandpit (much of it terrorist-infested), and there is no lack of suitable airports on your way all the way to BRU (no ocean or arctic to cross, once you are out of the Sahara there are suitable airports at least every 100 km or so), that may tip your decision towards going to BRU. It seems 2 pilots, and the dispatch department of an airline with an excellent safety record of flying in Africa for over 8 decades, agreed.


Indeed, if you are out of the Sahara with two working engines you have plenty of options to divert if necessary, so the additional risk seems minimal if the engine quits again. As others said, it was prepared to divert to Tunisia if the engine didn't restart. Much better to get to a destination where you can more easily transfer your passengers if there is no immediate danger to your craft. And passengers and crew are much safer in Europe than in Africa, but Tunisia will be ok.

So I can understand that the crew did what it did.


It is not the first time a trip is being continued after an engine that turned of has been restarted. I am with Dutchy here, it depends on numerous factors on what the pilots decide to divert or continue their flight. A twin or tri or quad can fly perfectly well with one engine shut. It can even take-off and land with just one engine, that's what they are made for. Losing an engine in flight is depending in the circumstances not a particularly serious problem, pilots are trained to fly the aircraft should an engine fail. If an engine did fail in flight, they would carry out a number of checklists to ensure the engine is secure and safe, and may as a precaution land at a different site if necessary.

Actually, I found some incidents at which there was an engine failure in flight, and the flight was completed to the final destination. One of them is the Virgin Atlantic Boeing 747-400 G-VBIG performing flight VS-43 from London Gatwick to Las Vegas and continued its flight on may 5th 2016. It is not exactly the same, but it is possible.

I remain with one question: were there other incidents with other airplanes who left from Kinshasa? If the fuel is contaminated, one would assume some issues with other airplanes too who got the fuel from the same batch. N'djili Airport is a relatively small airport, but there are quite a few international flights with legacy carriers from there to the Middle East and Europe next to local airliners, and there are also airlines like KL who use it as a stopover between Amsterdam and Nairobi.


I’ll try to be polite and not condescending (too much) but there are a lot of inaccuracies and lack of understand of aviation safety in your post.

I’m guessing you are not familiar with the regulations concerning failure of an engine on a twin. Granted the crew restarted it, but they didn’t know why it failed in the first place.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:28 am

MalevTU134 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
Ruscoe wrote:
Very early on in its career the A332 had some engine shutdowns due to frozen fuel . Can't remember might have been caused by water contamination.
Sorry have no reference just memory from many years ago.
If I recall correctly it had something to do with the routing of the fuel lines.

Seems to me ice formation would explain the current circumstance. If fuel was contaminated with "dirt" I would expect the filters once clogged would not clear themselves, but if ice its possible it could do so.
Then there is the BA 777 at LHR with duel engine failure due to ice, at a low power setting.
Ruscoe


That far south your fuel isn’t going to freeze.

Eeeehh?? At 40000 feet it is still -55°C outside, no matter the latitude.

And if you are referring to the second flame out, it was over northern France....


The freezing point of jet A is -40 and it takes HOURS to drop to that level your fuel will not freeze that far south.
 
barney captain
Posts: 2221
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:45 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
Aesma wrote:
I think some posters are being misled by the article.

The engines flamed out/shut down unexpectedly. They didn't fail. As zeke said, a failed engine is a dead engine, there is no restarting it, by definition. Often it's the crew that will shut down a failed engine because of vibrations/fire etc. Here the engines quit on their own. Sure in that case you try to restart it, there is no harm in doing so.


That is the definition of an engine failure. By Boeing’s definition at least, an engine is failed when the fire goes out. Sounds like that happened here.

Again, there is no harm in restarting it. That decision is not in question by anyone. Better to divert to a nearby airport with two working engines. The question is whether the crew used good judgement by continuing to BRU after an engine stopped working at one point.


Exactly. I'm with you and Zeke on this one. Continuing on was a questionable decision at best.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
LewisNEO
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:08 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:45 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
LewisNEO wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Indeed, if you are out of the Sahara with two working engines you have plenty of options to divert if necessary, so the additional risk seems minimal if the engine quits again. As others said, it was prepared to divert to Tunisia if the engine didn't restart. Much better to get to a destination where you can more easily transfer your passengers if there is no immediate danger to your craft. And passengers and crew are much safer in Europe than in Africa, but Tunisia will be ok.

So I can understand that the crew did what it did.


It is not the first time a trip is being continued after an engine that turned of has been restarted. I am with Dutchy here, it depends on numerous factors on what the pilots decide to divert or continue their flight. A twin or tri or quad can fly perfectly well with one engine shut. It can even take-off and land with just one engine, that's what they are made for. Losing an engine in flight is depending in the circumstances not a particularly serious problem, pilots are trained to fly the aircraft should an engine fail. If an engine did fail in flight, they would carry out a number of checklists to ensure the engine is secure and safe, and may as a precaution land at a different site if necessary.

Actually, I found some incidents at which there was an engine failure in flight, and the flight was completed to the final destination. One of them is the Virgin Atlantic Boeing 747-400 G-VBIG performing flight VS-43 from London Gatwick to Las Vegas and continued its flight on may 5th 2016. It is not exactly the same, but it is possible.

I remain with one question: were there other incidents with other airplanes who left from Kinshasa? If the fuel is contaminated, one would assume some issues with other airplanes too who got the fuel from the same batch. N'djili Airport is a relatively small airport, but there are quite a few international flights with legacy carriers from there to the Middle East and Europe next to local airliners, and there are also airlines like KL who use it as a stopover between Amsterdam and Nairobi.


I’ll try to be polite and not condescending (too much) but there are a lot of inaccuracies and lack of understand of aviation safety in your post.

I’m guessing you are not familiar with the regulations concerning failure of an engine on a twin. Granted the crew restarted it, but they didn’t know why it failed in the first place.


Thanks for not being too patronizing this time. Anyway, you show in this whole discussion you know everything, please would you be so polite to explain it to us all?
Last edited by LewisNEO on Wed Dec 26, 2018 1:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
You are the wind beneath my wings.

Fokker 27, Bombardier Dash 8, Embraer 175 & 195, 727-200, 737-200 & -300 & -400 & -800, 747-400, 767-300, 767-400, DC 10-30, A320-200, A330-200, A330-300, A380.
 
mm320cap
Posts: 302
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:35 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:51 am

Aesma wrote:
I think some posters are being misled by the article.

The engines flamed out/shut down unexpectedly. They didn't fail. As zeke said, a failed engine is a dead engine, there is no restarting it, by definition. Often it's the crew that will shut down a failed engine because of vibrations/fire etc. Here the engines quit on their own. Sure in that case you try to restart it, there is no harm in doing so.


In the USA, when an engine quits, for whatever reason, we call it an “Engine Failure”. It’s even on our checklist that way. Whether you attempt a restart or not depends on whether there is severe damage etc.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13979
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:53 am

MalevTU134 wrote:
Not even if you are above Algeria, i.e. in the middle of the Sahara? Failed or not, once that #1 engine is up and running again, and #2 is running just fine, why would you not press on to BRU?


The PW engines fitted to this 330 has a relatively smart FADEC on it, it will attempt to relight the engine before the pilots know it has flamed out. If FADEC cannot relight it there is some sort of problem.

Engines like this don’t just stop, there is a reason. I would not be restarting an engine (except in an absolute emergency) without our engineers being able to log into the aircraft and look at the engine diagnostics remotely.

The 330 checklist says “consider relight”, it is not a must, you will have a LAND ASAP amber, which means a diversion.

With the engine windmilling the hydraulic pump would still generate pressure so I would not expect and reduction in flight controls and the autopilot could still be used.

If they had diverted rather than continued they probably would not have had the second rollback.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
747Whale
Posts: 725
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 1:22 am

vinniewinnie wrote:
5 years ago... In the meantime in these 5 years Paris & Brussels have had major terrorist attacks. Do you also consider these places totally unsafe given that what happened? Perception is not reality...

Algeria controls its territory pretty well. Should a plane divert, it would have no issues ensuring passengers safety.


Brussels or Paris "totally unsafe?"

Hardly.

Algeria safer than Brussels or Paris?

You realize that many of the attackers in Europe have been Algerian, right?

That's getting far afield of the issue of continuing with a relighted engine.

Given the flight at high altitude, I'd be more suspicious of fuel icing.

As others have noted, it's a lot easier to sort an issue out on the ground than to handle a dual engine failure at altitude.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 2:32 am

LewisNEO wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
LewisNEO wrote:

It is not the first time a trip is being continued after an engine that turned of has been restarted. I am with Dutchy here, it depends on numerous factors on what the pilots decide to divert or continue their flight. A twin or tri or quad can fly perfectly well with one engine shut. It can even take-off and land with just one engine, that's what they are made for. Losing an engine in flight is depending in the circumstances not a particularly serious problem, pilots are trained to fly the aircraft should an engine fail. If an engine did fail in flight, they would carry out a number of checklists to ensure the engine is secure and safe, and may as a precaution land at a different site if necessary.

Actually, I found some incidents at which there was an engine failure in flight, and the flight was completed to the final destination. One of them is the Virgin Atlantic Boeing 747-400 G-VBIG performing flight VS-43 from London Gatwick to Las Vegas and continued its flight on may 5th 2016. It is not exactly the same, but it is possible.

I remain with one question: were there other incidents with other airplanes who left from Kinshasa? If the fuel is contaminated, one would assume some issues with other airplanes too who got the fuel from the same batch. N'djili Airport is a relatively small airport, but there are quite a few international flights with legacy carriers from there to the Middle East and Europe next to local airliners, and there are also airlines like KL who use it as a stopover between Amsterdam and Nairobi.


I’ll try to be polite and not condescending (too much) but there are a lot of inaccuracies and lack of understand of aviation safety in your post.

I’m guessing you are not familiar with the regulations concerning failure of an engine on a twin. Granted the crew restarted it, but they didn’t know why it failed in the first place.


Thanks for not being too patronizing this time. Anyway, you show in this whole discussion you know everything, please would you be so polite to explain it to us all?


I’ve explained it multiple times and so have others. Read the thread. Also, you state that twin engine airplanes can even take off on one engine. Please provide an example of when that has occurred.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 2:36 am

747Whale wrote:
vinniewinnie wrote:
5 years ago... In the meantime in these 5 years Paris & Brussels have had major terrorist attacks. Do you also consider these places totally unsafe given that what happened? Perception is not reality...

Algeria controls its territory pretty well. Should a plane divert, it would have no issues ensuring passengers safety.


Brussels or Paris "totally unsafe?"

Hardly.

Algeria safer than Brussels or Paris?

You realize that many of the attackers in Europe have been Algerian, right?

That's getting far afield of the issue of continuing with a relighted engine.

Given the flight at high altitude, I'd be more suspicious of fuel icing.

As others have noted, it's a lot easier to sort an issue out on the ground than to handle a dual engine failure at altitude.


My thought was a flameout due to ice crystal icing. However, there is usually fan blade damage even if the engine is able to be restarted.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 2:41 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
747Whale wrote:
vinniewinnie wrote:
5 years ago... In the meantime in these 5 years Paris & Brussels have had major terrorist attacks. Do you also consider these places totally unsafe given that what happened? Perception is not reality...

Algeria controls its territory pretty well. Should a plane divert, it would have no issues ensuring passengers safety.


Brussels or Paris "totally unsafe?"

Hardly.

Algeria safer than Brussels or Paris?

You realize that many of the attackers in Europe have been Algerian, right?

That's getting far afield of the issue of continuing with a relighted engine.

Given the flight at high altitude, I'd be more suspicious of fuel icing.

As others have noted, it's a lot easier to sort an issue out on the ground than to handle a dual engine failure at altitude.


My thought was a flameout due to ice crystal icing. However, there is usually fan blade damage even if the engine is able to be restarted.


Now that is very possible especially if climbing. The 787 is susceptible to that too. They were close to the ITCZ and that where it’s going to happen.
 
7673mech
Posts: 522
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 10:10 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 3:16 am

Spain, Italy or Marseille France? All unsafe for diversion if you didn't want to land in Africa?
As a former flight mechanic, current HMV rep who flies up front a lot, I'm with the professionals here.
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1228
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 3:59 am

About ten years ago or more British Airways had a 747-400 that had a engine fail on climb out from LAX which the pilots decided to continue the flight to LHR after British Airways Maintenance Control approved.. Due to the drag of the failed engine the aircraft landed short due to higher fuel consumption at Manchester I think. BA caught some heat but the subject was soon forgotten. :old:
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
Varsity1
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:07 am

NWAROOSTER wrote:
About ten years ago or more British Airways had a 747-400 that had a engine fail on climb out from LAX which the pilots decided to continue the flight to LHR after British Airways Maintenance Control approved.. Due to the drag of the failed engine the aircraft landed short due to higher fuel consumption at Manchester I think. BA caught some heat but the subject was soon forgotten. :old:


The 747 is unusual in that a single engine failure doesn't even have a checklist procedure. The BA crew cited this as "No checklists required, good to go". The FAA and CAA/EASA saw it in a different light..
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3132
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:13 am

Would professionals describe a twin jet as flying 'perfectly well' on one engine? It strikes me as 'imperfectly well', almost by definition.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4991
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:48 am

Varsity1 wrote:
NWAROOSTER wrote:
About ten years ago or more British Airways had a 747-400 that had a engine fail on climb out from LAX which the pilots decided to continue the flight to LHR after British Airways Maintenance Control approved.. Due to the drag of the failed engine the aircraft landed short due to higher fuel consumption at Manchester I think. BA caught some heat but the subject was soon forgotten. :old:


The 747 is unusual in that a single engine failure doesn't even have a checklist procedure. The BA crew cited this as "No checklists required, good to go". The FAA and CAA/EASA saw it in a different light..

How quickly we forget or don't listen!
The CAA investigation found the aircraft did NOT get low on fuel, it had plenty. The problem was the fuel transfer procure was confusing [I don't recall hearing whether it was a BA or Boeing procure] and left the flight crew confused as to the amount fuel left on-board, so they rightly did the conservative and landed at MAN. AFAIK the CAA had nothing to say about the crew's or BA's decision to continue the flight, they did have some harsh things to say about the transfer procure and it was revised.
There is NO WAY to compare the action taken after the failure of one engine on a quad to such a failure on a twin.

Gemuser
 
davidjohnson6
Posts: 358
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 5:11 am

Back to the main subject, what reasons would there have been for the Brussels-bound A330 flying over Algeria having experienced an engine failure not to divert to somewhere like Palermo, Palma de Mallorca, Cagliari or even Marseille (assuming neither Algeria nor Tunisia are considered suitable)
All seem to me to be well equipped airports with ample staff that should be more than capable of handling an A330 and being able to provide safe food and shelter to the pax and crew
 
FlyHappy
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sat May 13, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 5:21 am

davidjohnson6 wrote:
Back to the main subject, what reasons would there have been for the Brussels-bound A330 flying over Algeria having experienced an engibe failure not to divert to somewhere like Palermo, Palma de Mallorca, Cagliari or even Marseille ?


I must say given the professional opinions (and frankly, my own common sense understanding of twin engine safety), the reasons they did not divert far short of Brussels (be it in Africa or Europe) might well trace back to commercial pressures on the Captain or Operations; it seems like the simplest explanation, and I'm a believer in "simple". If so, they are playing with fire; does Lufthansa run the show, or does Brussels operate independently?
 
MSJYOP28Apilot
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 6:05 am

FlyHappy wrote:
davidjohnson6 wrote:
Back to the main subject, what reasons would there have been for the Brussels-bound A330 flying over Algeria having experienced an engibe failure not to divert to somewhere like Palermo, Palma de Mallorca, Cagliari or even Marseille ?


I must say given the professional opinions (and frankly, my own common sense understanding of twin engine safety), the reasons they did not divert far short of Brussels (be it in Africa or Europe) might well trace back to commercial pressures on the Captain or Operations; it seems like the simplest explanation, and I'm a believer in "simple". If so, they are playing with fire; does Lufthansa run the show, or does Brussels operate independently?


Not just commercial pressures can be at play here. Though that could very well be it. Don't forget that pilots are people just like everyone else. If this was their "go home" leg, a diversion because of an engine failure would likely mean spending several days that would originally have been days off away from home. For all we know, the airline could be very upset that these pilots opted to continue. These things do happen. While airlines do have commercial reasons for completing a flight nonstop, there is a huge liability in continuing because continuing could end up more costly than a plane of inconvenienced passengers if an accident results or regulatory fines/sanctions occur. The only way to know for sure would be if you spoke with the crew or someone in Brussels operations/maintenance control.

If fuel contamination is determined to be the cause, this could have been far worse. What if both engines failed at the same time and couldn't be restarted?
 
FlyHappy
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sat May 13, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 6:16 am

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

Not just commercial pressures can be at play here. Though that could very well be it. Don't forget that pilots are people just like everyone else. If this was their "go home" leg, a diversion because of an engine failure would likely mean spending several days that would originally have been days off away from home. For all we know, the airline could be very upset that these pilots opted to continue. These things do happen.


Of course.
I consider pilots personal motivations in the same bucket as commercial considerations, even if not accurate (same from pax point of view, lets say).
I hope the airline does firmly disagree with this decision, because honestly, whatever the motivation, pax safety seems to have taken a secondary consideration.

forget fuel contamination - you have one engine that already failed you in flight - what about bird strike on the other at a bad time?
The plane should have been set down far sooner than Brussels.

I'm okay with debating these kinds of decision on tri's and quads - I'm not okay with it on a twin (yes, I get that fuel issues make engine count irrelevant).
 
MSJYOP28Apilot
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 6:46 am

FlyHappy wrote:
MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

Not just commercial pressures can be at play here. Though that could very well be it. Don't forget that pilots are people just like everyone else. If this was their "go home" leg, a diversion because of an engine failure would likely mean spending several days that would originally have been days off away from home. For all we know, the airline could be very upset that these pilots opted to continue. These things do happen.


Of course.
I consider pilots personal motivations in the same bucket as commercial considerations, even if not accurate (same from pax point of view, lets say).
I hope the airline does firmly disagree with this decision, because honestly, whatever the motivation, pax safety seems to have taken a secondary consideration.

forget fuel contamination - you have one engine that already failed you in flight - what about bird strike on the other at a bad time?
The plane should have been set down far sooner than Brussels.

I'm okay with debating these kinds of decision on tri's and quads - I'm not okay with it on a twin (yes, I get that fuel issues make engine count irrelevant).


It makes you wonder what kind of operational, maintenance and management set up Brussels has. When an engine fails or shuts down, It is not just the pilots that get an alert to this. Maintenance control, dispatcher, engine manufacturer, etc all usually get a notification from the aircraft of a shut down. If the aircraft doesnt send the notification automatically which it usually does for engine problems, the crew are normally required to report it. At every airline I worked for, an emergency squawk automatically sends a message to the on duty management in both operations and maintenance as well as to the dispatcher.

It is very unusual for an engine failure and/or emergency declaration to go unnoticed by the airline until after the plane lands unless the failure occurred during landing.
 
imthedreamliner
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:34 am

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 7:18 am

World wide A330 grounding coming soon
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1955
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

Re: Brussels Airlines A330 Suffers Dual Engine Failure

Wed Dec 26, 2018 7:26 am

I tell you this, those pilots may not be in trouble with their airline or EASA, but they sure have some explaining to do with us a.net folks!

It will be interesting to learn why the pilots continued on after the first engine stopped, especially if they were not certain what caused it to stop.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos