Fuel Economy

[Bizman]

British Airways 747 travels on three engines for second time
The British Airways jet that flew on three engines from Los Angeles to the U.K. lost an engine again on Friday while en route from Singapore to London. It continued flying and landed without incident in London. The airline said it was safe for the 747 to fly on three of its four engines and that it has put the plane back in service without further problems using a replacement engine. The Federal Aviation Administration and British Civil Aviation Authority are investigatin


These guys are starting to make this a habit. Better plan your travel on a US airline, at least the pilots know they have to land when they lose an engine.

 

[UAL_TECH]

Don't worry, it must be safe or they wouldn't do it :blink:

Remember a few years ago when China Air flew a revenue flight from China to Frankfort with a broken PW4000 hanging off of the left wing? When the tried to take off again (from Frankfort this time), the JAA stopped the flight and made them fix the engine.

Here's the pic:
View attachment 2645

Wonder where they got the seat belts?
Is this an FAA approved modification?

Don't worry, I'm sure they do better as an MRO :down:

B) UT

 

[casual rat]

Airlines save money when they don't do Maintenance....everyone 'knows' that!

 

[Dizel8]

"British Airways 747 travels on three engines for second time"

Do you have source for this??

 

[mweiss]

Do you have source for this??

[post="253038"][/post]​

Here.

 

[Ifly2]

Better plan your travel on a US airline, at least the pilots know they have to land when they lose an engine.

[post="252806"][/post]​

FWIW,

The idea that an aircraft must land after an engine failure/shutdown seems to be a bit of public knowledge floating around out there that is not exactly correct. Two engine airplanes must land at the "nearest suitable airport". What does that mean? Well, we all know it when we see it, but there is nevertheless some room for judgement to be exercised in the selection of a place to land.

The FAA regs are different for 3 and 4 engine airplanes. They may continue to the destinaton, or an airport other than the "nearest suitable", if to do so is deemed "as safe as" landing at the nearest suitable airport. I don't exactly how the Brits' regs are worded....

In any case, I would say no friggin' way to continuing LAX to LHR, and we would all appreciate you folks choosing to fly on American carriers...

cheers

 

[Cfm56]

The BA flight operated under BAA rules anyway, not FAA rules, and they have different regs regarding engine failure.

 

[Segue]

Don't worry, it must be safe or they wouldn't do it :blink:

Remember a few years ago when China Air flew a revenue flight from China to Frankfort with a broken PW4000 hanging off of the left wing? When the tried to take off again (from Frankfort this time), the JAA stopped the flight and made them fix the engine.

Here's the pic:
View attachment 2645

Wonder where they got the seat belts?
Is this an FAA approved modification?

Don't worry, I'm sure they do better as an MRO :down:

B) UT

[post="252822"][/post]​

Exactly how do you know that the belts were on in flight and not just on the dolley for shipment? Seems to me that the lower belt flapping in the wind would be torn to shreds in a few minutes.

 

[Borescope]

The BA flight operated under BAA rules anyway, not FAA rules, and they have different regs regarding engine failure.

[post="253295"][/post]​

This is true, however don't you think it would be prudent to land rather than continue on a 10 hr+ flight. What would happen if the other engine on the same side or the crossfeed failed while they were over somewhere like the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans? I for one would never ride on BA again if this had happened while I was on there flight.

 

[Busdrvr]

This is true, however don't you think it would be prudent to land rather than continue on a 10 hr+ flight. What would happen if the other engine on the same side or the crossfeed failed while they were over somewhere like the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans? I for one would never ride on BA again if this had happened while I was on there flight.

[post="253835"][/post]​

the same thing that would happen if you lost the one engine on either side of a 777...

 

[AA191]

Or what about a UA or AA 757 from LAX-OGG or LAX-KOA and an engine runs out. Or a CO 767-400 from IAH or EWR to HNL.

 

[Borescope]

the same thing that would happen if you lost the one engine on either side of a 777...

[post="253939"][/post]​

Actually it would be a little different Bus, in that when you lose the one engine on the other side you be swimming.

 

[Busdrvr]

Actually it would be a little different Bus, in that when you lose the one engine on the other side you be swimming.

[post="254060"][/post]​

Well you do know what "ETOPS" really stands for....Engines Turn Or People Swim

 

[Bigsky]

Why don't you guys talk about something you have some idea about. Geeez.

 

[Borescope]

OK, I'll bite..........Tell us what the big picture is BIGGUY