scramjetter
Topic Author
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:57 am

Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:40 pm

Hello Community,

This is obviously a question regarding the quad-jet operators. In contemporary times does any airline intentionally perform one-engine inoperative takeoffs with revenue passengers onboard? As an aside, what about one-engine inoperative ferry flights?

I was reading up on this unfortunate flight, a Convair 990, that was being flown to its destination with passengers onboard but apparently crashed due to windshear and spatial disorientation.

Would this sort of activity still occur today? My instinct tells me that modern insurance underwriters would rather have the heads of management    than allow this to occur. Am I right?
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 3929
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:50 pm

I think the 747 can operate non revenue on a ferry flight permit with one engine INOP.

I vaguely remember reading something about that here in Tech/Ops
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
User avatar
tb727
Posts: 2150
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:02 pm

The DC-8 can also do engine out ferry flights and the 727 was approved for 2-engine ferries as well. It took special training and you had to be checked out to do one. My company didn't do the training so we didn't do them, which is fine with me.
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
seat1a
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:52 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:07 pm

Can the fourth engine that's INOP be started at cruise?
 
diverted
Posts: 1236
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 3:17 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:45 pm

Quoting scramjetter (Thread starter):
The DC-8 can also do engine out ferry flights and the 727 was approved for 2-engine ferries as well. It took special training and you had to be checked out to do one. My company didn't do the training so we didn't do them, which is fine with me.

We had a special crew category "One Engine Inop Ferry Authorized" for the 727s as well. Only a handful were checked out for it, as it was a pretty rare occurrence.
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:53 pm

BA just operated a B744 on a 3 engine ferry not to long ago from YVR to the UK with a stop in YYZ.
 
as739x
Posts: 5164
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:58 pm

Quoting scramjetter (Thread starter):
In contemporary times does any airline intentionally perform one-engine inoperative takeoffs with revenue passengers onboard?

No. Since no one is answering the question and talking about ferry and reposition flight. A revenue flight would not be authorized

The amount of drag and dead weight would just kill T/O performance
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:12 pm

Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 1):

I think the 747 can operate non revenue on a ferry flight permit with one engine INOP.

Yes it can. The paperwork though is challenging. There are quite a few restrictions. The regulators also tend to watch closely. It can be done with no revenue, but don't think it can be done on a revenue flight.

Another problem is that most commercial airlines don't include training for a three engine ferry flight for their pilots. I don't know many airlines that put pilots through two engine out takeoffs, which would be required if am engine was lost on takeoff. The yaw characteristics are challenging for a pilot not familiar.

Most airlines are going to want to use management pilots with recent three engine ferry training in a simulator. That is going to slow things down. Even in a remote location, most airlines can get an engine changed in 2-3 days. The manufacturers have AOG teams to quickly get a plane back in service within 24 hours of arriving anywhere in the world. The only exception is 777 engines since they are hard to transport.

[Edited 2016-01-24 15:14:44]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21562
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:52 pm

I have heard that the MD-11 can be ferried on two engines. Not sure about the DC-10, 727, or L-1011.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1939
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 12:41 am

Quoting diverted (Reply 4):
We had a special crew category "One Engine Inop Ferry Authorized" for the 727s as well. Only a handful were checked out for it, as it was a pretty rare occurrence.

Just after completing my training as a 727 first officer, I was assigned to an engine out ferry (#3 had failed). I refused the trip as I had not had the training required. Sadly, the crew scheduler tried to force me to accept the assignment, but I stood fast. Though I was threatened by the scheduler, I was never contacted by any manager in Flight Ops about my refusal.

Coincidentally, the crew that did do that ferry was reportedly disciplined for violating the Ops Specs regarding such ferry flights, but I can't confirm that (though based on the circumstances, I believe it to be true). BTW, that carrier is no longer in business.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
filejw
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2000 2:58 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:30 am

3 engine ferry flight are still done on 744. Specially trained Check Airman are used....
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:27 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
I have heard that the MD-11 can be ferried on two engines. Not sure about the DC-10, 727, or L-1011.

727 already mentioned in Reply 4. DC-10 definitely could do it and no doubt also the L-1011.

Re the 727, found this video on a 727 engine-out ferry flight EZE-VVI.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bvg4FfN4-8
 
cf6ppe
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 12:09 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 6:57 am

Eastern AL did one engine out non revenue ferry flights.

There were extensive maintenance actions that had to be accomplished incl. boroscope inspection of the other engines compressors and turbine areas, inspection of the oil filter screens and magnetic chip detectors (if fitted) for contamination by chips and other unusual/non desired material/metal, and several other maintenance actions that I don't remember anymore.

In some instances where the high speed spool was damaged, the rotor was locked by removing the engine starter and installing a locking tool. On RB.211-22B engines usually the fan rotor blades were removed (to reduce drag) and wrapped in a blanket and safety belted into a passenger seat; a folding blocking tool (it looked like a big toilet seat with attachment rods) was installed to cover the IP compressor inlet. (Each EAL L1011 carried a blocking tool in the aft bin).

Only dedicated supervisory crews flew the engine out ferry flights; they also often flew out the recovery aircraft to pick up stranded passengers (and even sometimes included a backup crew for the return flight). The supervisory crew also determined the fuel load for the engine out ferry flight.

EAL had procedures for one engine out non revenue ferry flights for B721, B722, L1011-1, and DC8s
I do not remember the DC10-30 being engine out ferried during their time at EAL.

Of course the DC9's and AB300Bs were not engine out ferried; but that question was asked numerous times.

The L1011s performed very good with one engine out and being light could climb up to approx FL300 cruise altitude.
On the other hand, the B721-B722s could climb only to approx FL180 or so and then begin a slow climb as fuel was burned off.

I know that L188Electras were one engine out ferried. I'm not sure about the DC-6s,DC-7s, L749 and L1049s.
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 1029
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:13 am

There was the infamous BA flight that lost an engine shortly after takeoff and elected to continue the flight - LAX-LHR IIRC.

The FAA was rather ticked off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_268


I don't think there is any plane certified to start a flight with one engine out in revenue service. The manufacturer would have to develop performance tables for 2 engines out since all modern multi-engine planes have to survive any one more engine failing at the critical time (typically late in the takeoff roll).

Maybe if the B-52 was put into commercial use it could be certified for a 7 engine takeoff.

Maybe a Dornier DO-X could fly with 11 engines?
 
wjcandee
Posts: 7939
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:52 am

ATI lost an aircraft and crew trying to do a 3-engine ferry on a DC8 with folks who weren't specially-trained for it. The NTSB report is sad. The incident led to new rules.
 
KLRU
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 2:07 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 9:10 am

Quoting scramjetter (Thread starter):
I was reading up on this unfortunate flight, a Convair 990, that was being flown to its destination with passengers onboard but apparently crashed due to windshear and spatial disorientation.

As far as I have understood , there were no passengers onboard on this flight. There were 10 occupants which I believe consisted of 3 flight crew and 7 cabin crew. Several sites does list 3 crew and 7 passengers which is most likely not correct. At least one C/A died and one was among the 5 survivors (together with the captain).
 
gzbja
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:47 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 9:21 am

The BA A380 which managed to hit a jetty in LAX was going to return as a 3 engine ferry flight as a last resort. Luckily the cowling was all that was needed!
 
BravoOne
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:15 am

Usually ferry flights that are caused by mechanical problems will use only the operating crew and no FA's. In the case of an engine inop situation as others have said, the respective airline may have authorized crews for this kind of ferry or they will use factory pilots for this operation. I have seen pilot contracts that do not permit seniority crew members to be utilized for these kind of flights.
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:52 am

Quoting ADent (Reply 13):
I don't think there is any plane certified to start a flight with one engine out in revenue service. The manufacturer would have to develop performance tables for 2 engines out since all modern multi-engine planes have to survive any one more engine failing at the critical time (typically late in the takeoff roll).

IIRC, the Trident 3B could do takeoffs without using the (fourth) booster engine (obviously with a takeoff performance penalty). Presumably it could have done so with the booster inoperative.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1656
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:57 am

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 7):
Most airlines are going to want to use management pilots with recent three engine ferry training in a simulator. That is going to slow things down. Even in a remote location, most airlines can get an engine changed in 2-3 days. The manufacturers have AOG teams to quickly get a plane back in service within 24 hours of arriving anywhere in the world. The only exception is 777 engines since they are hard to transport.

Yes.

And they are not going to do an engine out ferry for the 777, so whatever hardness there is, they'll have to endure it.

Although I wanted to ask a question. Are there any cases of 1-engine ferry flights of 2-engine jets? It would seem eminently stupid, but has it been done? Would it ever be done?
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 11:02 am

In 2016, any flight with less than the specified number of operative engines would require approval of the aircraft owner, engine owner and respective insurers, together with a one-off premium. As the majority of aircraft are sold with OEM engine maintenance contracts, the need for ferry flights to airline-owned maintenance bases has reduced.
 
foxxray
Posts: 455
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 5:06 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 11:38 am

On the Falcon 50/900 (and probably the 7X as well), there is a procedure for "ferrying" the aircraft with one engine INOP.
It can be usefull when you operate the aircraft "out of nowhere" with maintenance center far away.
 
User avatar
FredrikHAD
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 9:44 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 11:39 am

The accident you're referring to is known in Sweden as the Spantax-accident. When I was training for my firefighting duty, we were informed about this accident and what went wrong. Sadly, the rescue services at that time (1970) was a joke at best, and at first they had a very hard time locating the aircraft (took 4 hours I think). The nearest ambulance was located 10 km from the airport and had no radio installed! I don't know about fire engines, though. Rescue personnell was sent out to help the people on board wearing white "hospital coats" and the then so popular wooden clogs. The weather was really cols, with around -25 C the whole night. The survivors had some severe frostbite (among other injuries I assume), and when put in ambulances, the medics felt sorry for the victims and put on all the heat they had available in their vehicles, causing a too rapid and extremely painful temperature rise in the forst-bitten areas of the skin as well as causing more damage than necessary.

Temperature measurements for this night (G=confirmed measurement point, Y=may be extrapolated, temp in Celsius)

1970-01-05;22:00:00;-25.0;Y
1970-01-05;23:00:00;-25.0;Y
1970-01-06;00:00:00;-23.6;G
1970-01-06;01:00:00;-24.0;Y
1970-01-06;02:00:00;-24.0;Y
1970-01-06;03:00:00;-25.0;Y
1970-01-06;04:00:00;-25.0;Y
1970-01-06;05:00:00;-25.0;Y
1970-01-06;06:00:00;-24.2;G

Perhaps I can dig out more info on this if you like.

/Fredrik

[Edited 2016-01-25 04:28:16]
 
User avatar
tb727
Posts: 2150
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 12:39 pm

Quoting as739x (Reply 6):
No. Since no one is answering the question and talking about ferry and reposition flight. A revenue flight would not be authorized

That's why we called them ferry flights. Because they aren't revenue flights.
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
SAAFNAV
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:41 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:42 pm

Quoting scramjetter (Thread starter):


This is obviously a question regarding the quad-jet operators. In contemporary times does any airline intentionally perform one-engine inoperative takeoffs with revenue passengers onboard? As an aside, what about one-engine inoperative ferry flights?

I don't think anyone would authorize a 3-engine revenue flight, ever.

Even in the military, a 3-engine take-off is restricted to MINIMUM crew only, in order to get the aircraft out of danger in a hot zone.

Some trivia: For starter malfunctions, a C-130 can be started in 3 ways:

Buddy start, where another turboprop is parked in front of the dead engine and the engine 'airstarted' with the prop wash.
Windmill taxi start, where you can perform a high-speed taxi run. Some cargo and pax is allowed as per mass limitation.
3-Engine Take-off and airstart later. If the engine is not critical to flight, you might prep it for rapid air start but keep flying on 3. Also, starter motor or shaft must be removed.

Even there, these procedures are spelled out in detail, and Windmill taxi start as well as 3-engine take-offs are trained for in the sim.
L-382 Loadmaster; ex C-130B Navigator
 
User avatar
airmagnac
Posts: 451
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:24 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:01 pm

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 19):
Although I wanted to ask a question. Are there any cases of 1-engine ferry flights of 2-engine jets? It would seem eminently stupid, but has it been done? Would it ever be done?

A question asked before, and by Tdscanuck no less :
Single-Engine Ferry On Twin-Engine Airliners (by tdscanuck Oct 15 2010 in Tech Ops)
My goal as an engineer is to fill my soul with coffee and become immortal
 
BSRadar
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:35 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:00 pm

Quoting rwessel (Reply 18):
IIRC, the Trident 3B could do takeoffs without using the (fourth) booster engine (obviously with a takeoff performance penalty). Presumably it could have done so with the booster inoperative.

The 3B was somewhat underpowered for hot & high performance. Towards the end of its working life, most take-offs were 3-engined (for economic and noise abatement reasons). In northern Europe 4-engine t/o's became quite rare. The 3B earned the name "ground gripper" with some justification.

There is the oft-mentioned tale of the 3B operating LHR-MAD with the 4th engine inoperative which presented no problems. However it was hot in MAD, and so the return journey had to wait until the evening when the temperature cooled.

The 3-engine t/o was noisily impressive, whereas with the booster turbojet operating as well, the t/o was a cor blimey!! Both inside and out.
 
User avatar
Navigator
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 2:31 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:05 pm

Quoting scramjetter (Thread starter):
I was reading up on this unfortunate flight, a Convair 990, that was being flown to its destination with passengers onboard but apparently crashed due to windshear and spatial disorientation.

It was a Spantax CV990A. They had windshear but no spatial disorientation as far as I heard. The plane was being ferried to ZRH from ARN for an engine change.Only the crew onboard.
747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
 
scramjetter
Topic Author
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:57 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:13 pm

Thank you to everyone for contributing your answers, I've learned a lot here.

Quoting cf6ppe (Reply 12):
In some instances where the high speed spool was damaged, the rotor was locked by removing the engine starter and installing a locking tool. On RB.211-22B engines usually the fan rotor blades were removed (to reduce drag) and wrapped in a blanket and safety belted into a passenger seat; a folding blocking tool (it looked like a big toilet seat with attachment rods) was installed to cover the IP compressor inlet. (Each EAL L1011 carried a blocking tool in the aft bin).

That was quite fascinating, I had no idea such a procedure existed!

Quoting KLRU (Reply 15):
As far as I have understood , there were no passengers onboard on this flight. There were 10 occupants which I believe consisted of 3 flight crew and 7 cabin crew. Several sites does list 3 crew and 7 passengers which is most likely not correct. At least one C/A died and one was among the 5 survivors (together with the captain).

The accident reports have improved quite a bit over the years, in the amount of analysis and detail that is generated and disseminated.

Quoting FredrikHAD (Reply 22):
Sadly, the rescue services at that time (1970) was a joke at best, and at first they had a very hard time locating the aircraft (took 4 hours I think).

Accident response and preparedness have also improved drastically, it is sad to think of what could have been done for those people. At least these lessons do not go ignored!

Thanks again everyone!
 
gzm
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:52 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:50 pm

In 1997 or 1998 we had two such incidents at Olympic airways. Boeing 727 SX-CBG lost an engine on a state flight to Brussels. The prime minister was aboard along with journalists. The plane landed safely and returned to Athens ferry flight on two engines. The other incident involved Boeing 747 SX-OAB. It had an engine problem on the ground either Montreal or Toronto. During run-up the engine was rendered "unserviceable" according to the telex. After one or two days, it returned to Athens ferry flight on three engines. It seemed to me strange at first, I mean why not repair it there, but they chose to fly it to its home base instead for an engine change.
 
highflier92660
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 2:16 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 6:06 pm

Regarding two-engine Boeing 727 ferry flights: I was with my father at an airport restaurant and overheard a group of retired airline pilots talking about the "good old days" of Ed Daly and World Airways. I knew their Boeing 727-100QCs were talented but I never knew they could fly HNL-OAK on two engines. This particular ferry flight they witnessed was was sometime in the mid-seventies- just before the reef runway- with the Boeing taxing to runway 8L with jet fuel dripping out the vent surge tanks. Not surprisingly according to them, the take-off used most of the 12,300 feet and the climb gradient was less than spectacular.

Can any Boeing 727 pilots on anet tell us the two-engine takeoff procedures? I assume it's bleed-off/ packs-off and what T/O flap setting were normally used?
 
UA735WL
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 7:08 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 6:42 pm

Quoting highflier92660 (Reply 30):
I never knew they could fly HNL-OAK on two engines.

I remember seeing a post on an earlier thread by a 727 pilot (maxpower1954?) that debunked the idea that the 727 had extended range on 2 engines- something to the tune of that MCT was required to maintain altitude and the extra fuel consumption of maintaining that thrust negated the lack of a 3rd engine AND actually made the aircraft burn more fuel (per ground unit traveled) due to the slower attainable speeds of 2 engine flight.

Not sure which is more accurate.

Jonas
"One test is worth a thousand expert opinions" -Tex Johnston
 
BravoOne
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 6:48 pm

Quoting highflier92660 (Reply 30):
Can any Boeing 727 pilots on anet tell us the two-engine takeoff procedures? I assume it's bleed-off/ packs-off and what T/O flap setting were normally used?

I think you have it right regarding the packs & bleeds. I would have to imagine flaps 5 would be the best choice but not having done it I remain clueless. I really doubt that World ever ferried a 727 across the CEP on two engines FWIW.
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3595
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:20 pm

Quoting cf6ppe (Reply 12):
Eastern AL did one engine out non revenue ferry flights.

There were extensive maintenance actions that had to be accomplished incl. boroscope inspection of the other engines compressors and turbine areas, inspection of the oil filter screens and magnetic chip detectors (if fitted) for contamination by chips and other unusual/non desired material/metal, and several other maintenance actions that I don't remember anymore.

I flew on engine out ferry flights on a Gulf Air Tristar as a ground engineer twice.
As well as the above, we removed the exhaust ducts from the Air Driven Hydraulic pump, and cleaned them and refitted them. This pump ran continuosly with an engine out and the oil residue in the duct caught fire!. We also replaced the nose wheels with two new ones as the assymetric thrust on take off scrubbed the rubber off the tyres as you waited for the speed to build up so the rudder started working.
Then there was the performance. A RB211-22B aircraft could only carry fuel for about an hour. We offloaded water, catering, containers and cabin crew. Stood at the end of the runway with Nbr 2 (centre) engine at full thrust for 60secs, then released the brakes. The good wing engine was opened up slowly (or you would leave the runway edge) until you reached Vr, There was no V1 as flying speed on a single engine was not reached for a few minutes.
But did it twice and survived.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1712
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:34 pm

Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 1):
I think the 747 can operate non revenue on a ferry flight permit with one engine INOP.

I vaguely remember reading something about that here in Tech/Ops

A BA 747 did a 3 engine flight with passengers on a LAX to LHR flight in 2005 - http://articles.latimes.com/2005/mar/01/local/me-britair1
 
BravoOne
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:40 pm

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 34):
A BA 747 did a 3 engine flight with passengers on a LAX to LHR flight in 2005 - http://articles.latimes.com/2005/mar/01/local/me-britair1

This is true but the airplane was not dispatched with an engine inop nor did it takeoff with an engine inop. Huge difference between these two issues.
 
C133
Posts: 207
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:34 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:06 pm

When I was a USAF pilot in the early sixties we were crossing the North Atlantic westbound one time and caught a Constellation that was cruising on three engines, just below us. Since we hadn't heard any notice of an engine failure on the radios I called on the common frequency and asked the crew if they had a problem. Their answer: "No trouble; that one engine is almost out of time and we are saving it for takeoffs and landings." Legal? Not sure, but maybe not too uncommon back in the day, at least on cargo operations. As to revenue engine-out flights, they would never be legal, especially now.
Fine: Tax for doing wrong. Tax: Fine for doing well.
 
User avatar
FredrikHAD
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 9:44 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 9:51 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 27):
It was a Spantax CV990A. They had windshear but no spatial disorientation as far as I heard. The plane was being ferried to ZRH from ARN for an engine change.Only the crew onboard.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19700105-1

"PROBABLE CAUSE: 1) Unexpected early loss of external visual reference after take-off and loss of directional control during transition from visual to instrument flying. 2) Windshear."

Loss of external visual reference and spatial disorientation goes hand in hand, even if they are different things.

"At 22:24 hours the aircraft started its takeoff roll on runway 19. During the takeoff roll, the nose yawed to the right. This was corrected by retarding no. 1 engine power from 85% to 80-60%. The aircraft rotated at 134 knots with 27 degrees flaps. While climbing, the aircraft banked 4-6 degrees to the right and the airspeed suddenly dropped to 10 knots below V2 (145kts). The Convair contacted some treetops, banked 10-15deg and crashed 1800 m from the point of lift-off."

27 degrees flaps? Isn't that an awful lot of flaps for a takeoff with one engine out, let alone with one remaining engine at 60 % (or any T/O for that matter)?

/Fredrik
 
citationjet
Posts: 2510
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:00 pm

Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 1):
I think the 747 can operate non revenue on a ferry flight permit with one engine INOP.

Also with one engine REMOVED.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Norman Gage

Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1656
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:12 pm

Quoting airmagnac (Reply 25):
A question asked before, and by Tdscanuck no less :

Fascinating. Thank you.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1712
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:46 pm

Quoting BravoOne (Reply 35):
Huge difference between these two issues.

Does it really matter ? If an engine malfunctioned and shut down during the takeoff run you would still takeoff and climb out if the engine shutdown happened past V1. Huge difference or small difference is really a matter of individual perspective; the point is whether the aircraft went from point A (origin) to point B (destination) without making an emergency landing.
 
hivue
Posts: 1945
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:58 pm

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 40):
If an engine malfunctioned and shut down during the takeoff run you would still takeoff and climb out if the engine shutdown happened past V1. Huge difference or small difference is really a matter of individual perspective;

I suspect that pilots are not encouraged to see decisions taken before V1 vs those taken after V1 as matters of perspective.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
tb727
Posts: 2150
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: Intentional Three-Engine Takeoffs?

Tue Jan 26, 2016 7:23 pm

Quoting UA735WL (Reply 31):
I remember seeing a post on an earlier thread by a 727 pilot (maxpower1954?) that debunked the idea that the 727 had extended range on 2 engines- something to the tune of that MCT was required to maintain altitude and the extra fuel consumption of maintaining that thrust negated the lack of a 3rd engine AND actually made the aircraft burn more fuel (per ground unit traveled) due to the slower attainable speeds of 2 engine flight.

I concur. If it worked it would have been SOP by operators to do this. 2 engine cruise didn't help fuel savings at all.

Quoting highflier92660 (Reply 30):
Can any Boeing 727 pilots on anet tell us the two-engine takeoff procedures? I assume it's bleed-off/ packs-off and what T/O flap setting were normally used?
Quoting BravoOne (Reply 32):
I think you have it right regarding the packs & bleeds. I would have to imagine flaps 5 would be the best choice but not having done it I remain clueless. I really doubt that World ever ferried a 727 across the CEP on two engines FWIW.

Just ran a quick runway analysis on my old 727 program, yeah, it's quite limiting to do a 2 engine ferry. Must be VFR, avoid icing enroute.

Oakland rwy 30, 24 degrees C, 727-200 with -15 engines.
Flaps 5 you are limited by climb gradient to 136,700

Basically with a BOW weight of around 95k, you have about 2.5-3 hours of fuel.

Books says....
BEFORE TAKEOFF
Use flaps 5° for takeoff unless runway performance
is limiting.
Turn galley power off. Reduce nonessential electrical
loads.
Turn cabin pressurization bleeds off for takeoff.


TAKEOFF
The procedure described for Takeoff in the Normal
Procedures section is equally applicable to two engine
ferry takeoffs, except that 400 ft will be used
as a level off height for flap retraction (unless higher
is required for obstacle clearance). When a pod engine
is inoperative, considerable rudder pedal steering
will be required at the start of the takeoff roll.
This procedure is suitable for ferry takeoff from dry
runways for all B-727 aircraft.
Takeoff will be made with increased VR and V2
speeds, based on the Runway Limit or Climb Limit
Two-Engine Ferry Maximum Gross Takeoff Weight,
whichever is lower. This will produce the maximum
second segment climb rate.
All takeoffs will be performed from the Captain's
seat.
All thrust levers will be advanced for takeoff, to ensure
proper activation of all takeoff warnings.
If the takeoff is aborted because of to directional controllability,
DO NOT ATTEMPT ANOTHER TAKEOFF.
Do not operate gear and flaps simultaneously.

PS in the next few days I'll dig through my 747 manuals if I can find them and report what I can find....gotta go to work!

[Edited 2016-01-26 11:24:32]
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!

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