Another Emergency Landing

[A320 Driver]

All the same - JT8D's - although at least one of the 727 re-engining mods left the center engine alone and put MD-80 engines in the 1 & 3 position.

Asymetrical thrust was minor compared to the 737 or 320. As someone mentioned, the #3 didn't have a hydraulic pump so losing that one left the A system (IIRC) at 100% capacity.

Jim

One thing I always thought was amazing was that the B-727 was as fast in cruise with an engine out as the B-737-200 was normally.

B-727...my favorite airplane of all time.

A320 Driver (former B-727 Driver )

 

[BeenThereDoneThat]

Lost an engine?

Where did it go?

Did they lose power or did the engine fall off?

You need to clarify.

You need to get real. Anybody in aivation knows that "lost an engine" refers to losing power to an engine, such as an inflight shutdown. Had the engine fallen off the aircraft they would have said that. The engine actually auto-shut down in flight; twice from what I heard, but have no proof. Big deal, that is why they have two engines to begin with.

 

[Dog Wonder]

You need to get real. Anybody in aivation knows that "lost an engine" refers to losing power to an engine, such as an inflight shutdown. Had the engine fallen off the aircraft they would have said that. The engine actually auto-shut down in flight; twice from what I heard, but have no proof. Big deal, that is why they have two engines to begin with.

Thank you for your humble opinion.

 

[TravelGirl21]

Thanks for the Kudos from Bofie,
Even though we are a small station, I think we handle this situation with professionalism and pride, I had a great team at this station to make this bad situation a little easier on the passengers. Hope they enjoyed their short stay in our fair city,,

Kudos "SDF TEAM" for a job well done!!!!!

 

[phasersonstun2]

Then they need to take the pages out of the manual dealing with overweight landings and replace them with "Controlled Sink Rate" landing. 😀

In any case, I'm not sure I would hold single engine just to burn off fuel because of an overweight landing. It's just a maintenance inspection.

Must be more to the story.

A320 Driver B)

I agree. I brought a A-321 back that was 12K over max landing weight and all we had to do was record the sink rate and speed at touchdown along with using the longest runway available. I will not second guess a pilot ever, but holding on one engine for weight purposes does not exist in my personal ops specs. ECAM says land ASAP.

 

[oldcrow]

I will not second guess a pilot ever

But you can sure bet the FAA will.

So Capt. **** & F/O ****, will you please explain to the FAA why you elected to hold and burn fuel to reduce landing weight and ignore the ECAM message to "Land ASAP".

Maybe they had a good explanation, but it had better be a good one.

 

[N924PS]

Lost the engine over AZ and continued to SAN? Sounds like some urban legend mixed with truth to make for a good narrative.

It's true. On a three or more engine airplane landing at the nearest suitable airport is NOT required.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

My question is, they lost the engine and they didn't realize that they were 5000 pounds lighter all of a sudden? And being on the side there should have been a balance issue, am I right on that? What about the fuel gauges did they shut off the fuel for that engine or when it fell off did it keep spraying fuel out?

 

[LD3]

One thing I always thought was amazing was that the B-727 was as fast in cruise with an engine out as the B-737-200 was normally.

B-727...my favorite airplane of all time.

A320 Driver (former B-727 Driver )

IMO probably one of the best freighters to load...

 

[TravelGirl21]

Did the plane land safely? YES

Where there any injuries? NO

Did the paxs get on their way
to their destinations the next day YES


End of story...... 😛

 

[oldcrow]

Did the plane land safely? YES

Where there any injuries? NO

Did the paxs get on their way
to their destinations the next day YES
End of story...... 😛

The FAA doesn't care about that. They want to know if all the regs and procedures were followed and if not why.

Several years ago a prop commuter had an engine fail enroute to Denver from Wyoming. The crew elected to continue to Denver because the closest airport had low ceiling and visibility due to snow and Denver weather was good. They landed safely in Denver but were later violated by the FAA for not landing at the nearest suitible airport, they argued the nearest airport was not suitible due to weather.

FAA said they were trained to land in low ceiling and vis and the matter went to court. In the end the pilots were exonerated but not after months of stress, anxiety and a lot of lawyer fees with a violation hanging over their head.

 

[ussnark]

Compressor stall, and no, there is no such thing as an overweight landing on the a-320 with controlled sink rate.

Wrong! No wonder Tempe breaks so many airplanes. I don't trust Tempe for anything.

Overweight landing. Any landing accomplished when the weight of the aircraft exceeds the placarded maximum gross operating weight is deemed an "overweight landing" and will be written up, to include.....

 

[ussnark]

Did the plane land safely? YES

Where there any injuries? NO

Did the paxs get on their way
to their destinations the next day YES
End of story...... 😛

Could the plane have more safely gone somewhere else? YES

Could the passengers have gotten to their destinations
that same evening? LIKELY

Story not over, ever.

 

[TravelGirl21]

Yes they could have sent that plane to IND..Did they NO....
Hey and believe me I tried to get them to do that...IND handles 320's we don't

Could they have gotten to there destinations that evening Mostly likey NO
considering the time of night it was when the plane laned in SDF
Did my staff ( that was very limited due to the time of nite it was complain about this)
NO
And did I complain that I was at a work until 430 am making sure that all those paxs were taking care with boarding passes so that their experience in SDF was a bit less worrisome.
NO

We are and express station,,(used to be a Mainline station ) but hey gotta roll with the punches, and they are lucky that one of us is qualified to pull the jetway up to the plane without do any damage
thank you.. and did the job of reaccomaodating all those pax not get done... My YES it did... Thank you>>>>

 

[ussnark]

Yes they could have sent that plane to IND..Did they NO....
Hey and believe me I tried to get them to do that...IND handles 320's we don't

I cannot think of a better station to handle such an unusual request. You all are to be commended. Well done.

But,

my comments are directed to the "managers" who made the decision. Diverting to PIT or CLT (at most, 40 minutes away) would have given the passengers a chance to hop another plane to their eventual destination(s). A reserve crew with aircraft, with minimal transfer difficulties, could have minimized the inconvenience.

Instead the a/c held for 30 to 40 minutes. Long time but it seems PIT/CLT was about 45 minutes wheels up to wheels down.

Either land now or the "nearest suitable" gets expanded widely to include the holding time.

BTW, when did this happen? The only record I have is the flight operating on 01Jun07.