US 22 PHX-HNL diverts to ITO

[SegmentKing]

Considering the approach at ITO, you could have (likely) only landed that one direction as the other would be unavailable in the possible case of single engine go-around.

Talk about uninformed........

ussnark,

I was looking at the approach plates and at 500' AGL you MUST turn either left or right (depending on runway), and its not a gentle little turn. I believe one called for going from 210 to 100 and 290 to 030... that's one heck of a turn at only 500 feet! Elevation jumps to 1800 in less than 5 miles from the end of the runways with some of the land increasing 700 feet in elevation per mile!

 

[FenixFlyer3]

"An America West Boeing 757 flight from Las Vegas to Honolulu was diverted to Hilo this weekend when one of its two engines shut down after experiencing vibrations."

Try reading the original post Cap. We use to have a saying about taking tests, RTFQF before answering and making a fool of yourself. (Read The F***n Question First).

I think it'll still be recorded as an event and could put your 180 minute rule routes in jeopardy should another one occur.

Mtnman

With all due respect, the original post has incorrect information. Flight 22 operates between Phoenix and Honolulu. The engine was not shut down, it was brought to idle.

The rest of this thread has been spent flaring nostrils and measuring testicle sizes. Take a break you guys and get some fresh air, sheesh.

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

ussnark,

I was looking at the approach plates and at 500' AGL you MUST turn either left or right (depending on runway), and its not a gentle little turn. I believe one called for going from 210 to 100 and 290 to 030... that's one heck of a turn at only 500 feet! Elevation jumps to 1800 in less than 5 miles from the end of the runways with some of the land increasing 700 feet in elevation per mile!

shades of Kai Tak!

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMpLaKJYxp8

 

[Callsign_Cactus]

Being forced to bring an engine to idle, then diverting is not considered an engine failure event? Are you on drugs?

Your kind of logic could be used to justify one engine at TO thrust and one engine at idle for takeoff, which might be par for the course.

An engine at idle is not considered "continuously available" considering that it was reduced to idle for high vibration, a pretty good symptom of imminent engine failure. That is like saying, yeah we had two turning, one engine and an APU.

Considering the approach at ITO, you could have (likely) only landed that one direction as the other would be unavailable in the possible case of single engine go-around.

Talk about uninformed........

I have to agree with nark on this one. For all practical purposes that engine was shutdown. We really need to do a better job in our Hawaii ETOPS operation.

 

[Mtnman928]

With all due respect, the original post has incorrect information. Flight 22 operates between Phoenix and Honolulu. The engine was not shut down, it was brought to idle.

The rest of this thread has been spent flaring nostrils and measuring testicle sizes. Take a break you guys and get some fresh air, sheesh.

Agreed! However, the immediate concern is that company, east and west cannot have incidents like this occur. Not having the 180 minute option eliminates Hawaii flights and puts a burden on European operations. Hopefully, a problem like this becomes paramount in the MX department and corrections are made.

Mtnman

 

[Kev3188]

I can't keep myself from asking this, but what is a Jungle-jet?

Anything from the Embraer family.

 

[nycbusdriver]

I can't keep myself from asking this, but what is a Jungle-jet?

Anything from the Embraer family.

And to answer the possible "why?"

Embraer is a Brazilian company. Hence, the "jungle."

 

[Happy_People]

Interesting side note: Captain is a relatively recent upgrade to the 757 and is in his late 30s. F/O is a former commuter pilot in his very early thirties. Both are reserve pilots and were called out 2 hours prior to the flight. I guess these snot-nosed, inexperienced, couldn't get hired anywhere else, can't believe they let 'em fly jets losers were just plain lucky they survived.

Loser! What rag mag do you get your info from? Is that where you order your pro-activ from too?

The Captain is not in his 30's. He is NOT relatively new to the 757. He's been on the plane for awhile now since he transitioned from 737 as a Capt. And so what if the FO is in his early 30's. He's been on this aircraft his entire duration at HP. Just because they are on reserve dooesn't mean CRAP. Reserve at times goes very senior on this plane. As a cabin crew member I have flown several times with both. Both are great pilots and are highly respected by other pilots. I would fly with these 2 men any day. From what i've heard from a more reliable source than your fellow zit-faced friend Jessica Simpson is these guys did a fantastic job of communicating with the cabin crew and passengers. Any Flight Crew that was faced by this situation and landed without further incident deserves respect and praise.... not snot-nosed, inexperienced, and ignorant comments like yours. If anyone deserves negative feedback its our company for not providing us with the tools to do our jobs. Like proper MX for these rat-traps
flying back and fourth over the Pacific.

So take your interesting side-note and shuv it!!

 

[AstroLounge]

Btw, I was actually giving some kudos to the crew for the Hilo landing.... that airport is notorious for crosswind landings, and if you have to come in from the west, you pretty much maintain the same altitude above the ground for the last 10 miles on approach (due to the slope of the volcanos).

And by the way, there are no HP/US agents in Hilo... so however these passengers were reaccomodated, it must have been a difficult task to complete.

I've flown HP to/from Hawai'i more than I'd like to admit, but I never really recall any flights being late (over 30 minutes)... flight crews were always good, some FA's are difficult, but otherwise my trips have been 'uneventful'.

"Some F/A's difficult....?" 🙄 Come On, now. I have chatted with several of the Westies and even many of them have some snide, cynical desciptions of the "Hawaiian Cartel" as they are referred to. The Service to Hawaii needs to be upgraded (a/c and service).......STOP Playing Russian Roulette over the Pacific.

 

[hulagirl]

"An America West Boeing 757 flight from Las Vegas to Honolulu was diverted to Hilo this weekend when one of its two engines shut down after experiencing vibrations."

Try reading the original post Cap. We use to have a saying about taking tests, RTFQF before answering and making a fool of yourself. (Read The F***n Question First).

I think it'll still be recorded as an event and could put your 180 minute rule routes in jeopardy should another one occur.

Mtnman

No offense, take your own medicine. We don't fly LAS-HNL, and never have since the early '90's. There was NOT an engine shut down. Period. It won't be recorded as "an event" that will jeopardize ETOPS.

 

[dariencc]

There was NOT an engine shut down. Period. It won't be recorded as "an event" that will jeopardize ETOPS.

What the hell is the matter with these people?

 

[BoeingBoy]

What the hell is the matter with these people?

Technically, "these people" are right. If the engine isn't shut down, which apparently it wasn't, it wouldn't count as an IFSD (In-Flight Engine Shutdown) under ETOPS rules.

"Following ETOPS operational approval, the operator must monitor the propulsion system reliability for the airplane-engine combination used in ETOPS, and take action as required by §121.374(i) for the specified IFSD rates."

"In-flight shutdown (IFSD) means, for ETOPS only, when an engine ceases to function (when the airplane is airborne) and is shutdown, whether self induced, flightcrew initiated or caused by an external influence. The FAA considers IFSD for all causes: for example, flameout, internal failure, flightcrew initiated shutdown, foreign object ingestion, icing, inability to obtain or control desired thrust or power, and cycling of the start control, however briefly, even if the engine operates normally for the remainder of the flight. This definition excludes the airborne cessation of the functioning of an engine when immediately followed by an automatic engine relight and when an engine does not achieve desired thrust or power but is not shutdown."

Jim

 

[dariencc]

Technically, "these people" are right. If the engine isn't shut down, which apparently it wasn't, it wouldn't count as an IFSD (In-Flight Engine Shutdown) under ETOPS rules.

"Following ETOPS operational approval, the operator must monitor the propulsion system reliability for the airplane-engine combination used in ETOPS, and take action as required by §121.374(i) for the specified IFSD rates."

"In-flight shutdown (IFSD) means, for ETOPS only, when an engine ceases to function (when the airplane is airborne) and is shutdown, whether self induced, flightcrew initiated or caused by an external influence. The FAA considers IFSD for all causes: for example, flameout, internal failure, flightcrew initiated shutdown, foreign object ingestion, icing, inability to obtain or control desired thrust or power, and cycling of the start control, however briefly, even if the engine operates normally for the remainder of the flight. This definition excludes the airborne cessation of the functioning of an engine when immediately followed by an automatic engine relight and when an engine does not achieve desired thrust or power but is not shutdown."

Jim

Sorry, Jim, you're usually a reliable source, but you're out to lunch on this one. "hulagirl" said this:

There was NOT an engine shut down. Period. It won't be recorded as "an event" that will jeopardize ETOPS.

It sure as hell is an EVENT under ETOPS rules. IFSD is just one of a number of reportable events. Have too many of these "events" and your ETOPS authority could, and should, go away. I remember when the Feds were telling us that US Airways had the best North Atlantic ETOPS operation. I know they don't feel that way now. Also, our Hawaii operation is considered substandard and is on thin ice.

Here is a list of other reportable items. Some are more serious than others. There is a lot more information in the regs regarding ETOPS reliabilty standards, but this is a good start.

(2) In addition to the items required to be reportedby FAR §§ 21.3 and 121.703, the following informationshould be included:• In-flight shut downs• Diversions or turnbacks• Uncommanded power changes or surges• Inability to control the engine or obtaindesired power• Problems in systems considered to have afundamental influence on flight safety• Failure to start the APU while airborne• Uncommanded inflight shut-downs of theAPU• Any other event the inspector considers detri-mental to extended-range operations(3) Items/systems that are considered critical toflight safety include the following:• Electrical, including batteries• Hydraulic• Pneumatic• Flight instrumentation• Fuel• Flight control• Ice protection• Engine start and ignition• Propulsion system instruments• Navigation and communications• Auxiliary power-units• Air conditioning and pressurization• Cargo fire suppression• Emergency equipment• Any other equipment that is required forextended range operations

 

[ussnark]

ussnark,

I was looking at the approach plates and at 500' AGL you MUST turn either left or right (depending on runway), and its not a gentle little turn. I believe one called for going from 210 to 100 and 290 to 030... that's one heck of a turn at only 500 feet! Elevation jumps to 1800 in less than 5 miles from the end of the runways with some of the land increasing 700 feet in elevation per mile!

Thanks, you made my point and, was there no better airport? If the dude would have had to go-around, the landing runway at Hilo would have been critical, especially if they had to utilize the crippled engine and it did something unexpected.

This kind of story bothers me in that apparent inexperience in relatively unfamiliar environments results in (apparent) casual mistakes, basically reducing the level of safety because, what? I can respect the decision. It just seems a better decision should have been made. Perhaps the crew was scared and wanted to get on the ground but the airport seems marginal to be used and likely would not be considered adequate by most pilots, just for a possible single-engine go.

 

[SegmentKing]

its an easy straight in approach if you are approaching from the west, but if you have to go around, its a mega tight turn (tighter than the DCA depts to the N) or you'll be parking the plane somewhere around the UH campus. If you are coming in from the east, your approach is like doing the "Expressway-River approach" for runway 31 at LGA.. try doing that one with one good motor...

Expressway Approach LGA

ITO is not widely used anymore, even though it's closer to the volcanos and prettier side of the Big Island, but because the airport has nasty winds (worse than OGG) and there's always bad weather.

The pilots probably could have made it to KOA or OGG, but I wasn't in the cockpit to determine their line of thinking. OGG would be bad because you've only got a 7,000 foot runway, KOA is 11 and change, i think.

Regarding the ground transport, its about a 2 hour drive to Kalaoa (where the KOA airport is) via the Saddle Road.. its quite a nice, up and down, bumpy drive 😛 probably the most scenic road I've ever been on!

Here is the only departure plate i could find for Hilo (PHTO)

Paris three

Approach Plate for RWY 26

TACAN rwy 26 PHTO