F-16.net

Just wondering what do you do it you have an engine failure after take of. Do you try land or just punch out?

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Senior member Joined: Dec 14, 2006 Posts: 473

Depends on the variables.

What kind of variables?

Here are the primary variables...

Altitude
Airspeed
Weight
Position over the field or runway
Wind
Visibility

Then there is what type of "engine failure"... (which is a big gray area...)

Engine total failure?
Flame-out?
Partial failure? (BANG, Vibration, but RPM OK, making less power?)
Fire?
AB Burn-through?
Compressor Stall?
Bird-Strike?
Ice Ingestion?
AB Blow-out?
No Oil Pressure?
Low Oil Pressure?
Engine control system fault?
Engine auto-transfer?

The type of engine "failure" will often determine what action(s) to take, and how long one has to address the situation. If time/speed/altitude isn't available to address the engine situation then it's best to walk home. Wink

Then there is engine type...

(IMO) PWs will handle damage/malfunctions better than a GEs. PW's control system logic (Computers) in the PW-220 and PW-229 is very fault tolerant, and has multiple fault levels prior to transferring to secondary control. (Hydro-Mechanical) A PW is outstanding at is taking birds, ice, and the occasional tree/bush and operating until the pilot finds his way home. One of PW's famous terms for their engines is "graceful degradation." GEs, from what I read in mishap reports, seem to be binary. (On or Off)

Just ask Gums how well PWs will eat ice...

Keep 'em flyin' Thumb

TEG

Senior member Joined: Dec 14, 2006 Posts: 473

Don’t you think things like altitude, speed, attitude, distance, heading, traffic, weight, etc… might be relevant factors and considered variables?

I think in most cases ejection is strongly suggested, however I think there still is some discretion available to the pilot.

This goshawk pilot elected to fly it in, in my opinion he should’ve probably ejected, however he got lucky and was quite skillful. He saved the taxpayers quite a bit of money, but the risks were a little high in my arrogant opinion. Though I offer some slight criticism, I think the pilot is superb.

VT-9 Birdstrike with Pilot Summary (T-45 Goshawk)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdkGEVpYvMQ

Edit

I wrote my post before/while That_Engine_Guy posted, his post was excellent.

Ah..... So its kind a hard question to answer without the right info then. Haha. What about a flame out on take off? Or is that still kinda hard to answer?

Critical Action Procedures
needs a little updating ... no such critter called BUC

A3.1.3. ABORT:
A3.1.3.1. Throttle - Idle
A3.1.3.2. Hook - Down (Above 100 Knots or If Required)

A3.1.4. AB MALFUNCTION ON TAKEOFF (TAKEOFF CONTINUED):
A3.1.4.1. Throttle - MIL
A3.1.4.2. Stores - Jettison (If Required)

A3.1.5. ENGINE FAILURE ON TAKEOFF (TAKEOFF CONTINUED):
A3.1.5.1. Zoom
A3.1.5.2. Stores-Jettison (If Possible)
A3.1.5.3. Eject

A3.1.6. ENGINE FIRE ON TAKEOFF (TAKEOFF CONTINUED):
A3.1.6.1. Climb
A3.1.6.2. Stores - Jettison (If Required)

A3.1.7. LOW THRUST ON TAKEOFF/AT LOW ALTITUDE (NON-AB):
A3.1.7.1. PW 200:
A3.1.7.1.1. EEC/BUC Switch - Off.
A3.1.7.1.2. If Thrust Is Still Insufficient:
A3.1.7.1.3. Throttle - MAX AB.

A3.1.7.1.4. If Thrust Is Still Insufficient:
A3.1.7.1.5. Throttle - MIL
A3.1.7.1.6. EEC/BUC Switch - BUC
A3.1.7.1.7. If Nozzle Fails To Close After Transferring To BUC Or If Thrust Is Still Insufficient:
A3.1.7.1.8. EEC/BUC Switch - OFF
A3.1.7.1.9. Throttle - MAX AB
A3.1.7.1.10. Stores - Jettison (If or When Required)
A3.1.7.2. GE100/129 / PW220/229:
A3.1.7.2.1. Throttle - AB.
A3.1.7.2.2. Stores-Jettison (If Required).
A3.1.7.2.3. If PRI thrust is insufficient to maintain level flight at a safe altitude:
A3.1.7.2.4. Engine Control Switch – SEC

A3.1.8. ENGINE FAILURE/AIRSTART:
A3.1.8.1. PW200:
A3.1.8.1.1. Zoom (If at Low Altitude)
A3.1.8.1.2. Stores - Jettison (If Required)
A3.1.8.1.3. Throttle - OFF
A3.1.8.1.4. Airspeed - As Required
A3.1.8.1.5. EEC/BUC Switch - As Required.
A3.1.8.1.6. When RPM Is Between 40-25 Percent And FTIT Is Below 700 Degrees:
A3.1.8.1.7. Throttle - IDLE
A3.1.8.1.8. JFS - Start 2 When Below 20,000 Feet and 400 KIAS
A3.1.8.2. PW220:
A3.1.8.2.1. Zoom (If At Low Altitude)
A3.1.8.2.2. Stores - Jettison (If Required)
A3.1.8.2.3. Throttle - OFF
A3.1.8.2.4. Airspeed - As Required.
A3.1.8.2.5. When RPM Is Between 50-25 Percent And FTIT Is Below 700 Degrees:
A3.1.8.2.6. Throttle - IDLE
A3.1.8.2.7. JFS - Start 2 When Below 20,000 Feet and 400 KIAS
A3.1.8.3. PW229:
A3.1.8.3.1. Zoom (If at Low Altitude)

A3.1.8.3.2. Stores - Jettison (If Required)
A3.1.8.3.3. Throttle - OFF, then Midrange
A3.1.8.3.4. Airspeed - As Required
A3.1.8.3.5. JFS - Start 2 When Below 20,000 Feet and 400 KIAS
A3.1.8.4. GE100/129:
A3.1.8.4.1. Zoom (If at Low Altitude)
A3.1.8.4.2. Stores - Jettison (If Required)
A3.1.8.4.3. Throttle - OFF, then Midrange.
A3.1.8.4.4. If A Relight Does Not Occur Before RPM Decays Below 50 Percent, Or If Below
10,000 Feet AGL:
A3.1.8.4.5. Engine Control Switch - SEC
A3.1.8.4.6. Airspeed - As Required
A3.1.8.4.7. JFS - Start 2 When Below 20,000 Feet and 400 KIAS

A3.1.9. OUT-OF-CONTROL RECOVERY:
A3.1.9.1. Controls - Release
A3.1.9.2. Throttle - (GE) Idle, (PW) MIL if in AB.
A3.1.9.3. If In An Inverted Deep Stall:
A3.1.9.4. Rudder - Opposite Yaw Direction (Delete this step for Block 40/42/50/52 aircraft).
A3.1.9.5. If Still Out-Of-Control:
A3.1.9.6. MPO Switch - OVRD and Hold
A3.1.9.7. Stick - Cycle in Phase

VarkVet wrote:

Critical Action Procedures
needs a little updating ... no such critter called BUC

No such motor called PW-200 no-mo in USAF/ANG/AFRes. Applause

Another thing to note in the procedures:

A3.1.9. OUT-OF-CONTROL RECOVERY:
A3.1.9.1. Controls - Release
A3.1.9.2. Throttle - (GE) Idle, (PW) MIL if in AB.

Stems from a Class-A where it was found the GE won't run long without oil pressure like the PW. PW will operate 30 seconds at MIL with zero Oil Press. Cool

Keep 'em flyin' (Safely) Thumb

TEG

Senior member Joined: Dec 14, 2006 Posts: 473

That_Engine_Guy wrote:

Stems from a Class-A where it was found the GE won't run long without oil pressure like the PW. PW will operate 30 seconds at MIL with zero Oil Press.

Sure that mishap wasn’t an isolated incident? I thought part of the military and FAA requirements was that most gas turbines had to be able to run something like 3-5 minutes at full non AB power. I thought most military engines and commercial engines had to pass this test before certification.

Oil seals forgotten on a November 6, 1996 BAe 146
http://www.iasa-intl.com/pdf/royal146.pdf

An L-1011 descending into Nassau, The Bahamas, lost oil pressure in engine no. 2. The flight crew shut down the engine and diverted back to Miami, Florida. On the return to Miami, engines no. 1 and no. 3 shut down. At 3,800 ft above the ocean, the crew recovered engine no. 2. The flight crew then completed a single-engine landing at Miami. The O-ring seals on the master chip detectors for each engine were missing, causing engine oil loss. Remaining time on the running engines before they would have seized up was estimated to be on the order of a couple of minutes after touchdown.
http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publica ... b8404.html

On a BAe-146, a low-oil warning on one engine prompted the crew to shut down the engine. Low-oil warnings then occurred on two additional engines, which were reduced to idle. The crew increased thrust on the remaining engine and diverted to the nearest airport. Inspection of the engines discovered that three of the four engines did not have seals on their chip detectors and that oil leaked from the engines. The airplane had just completed a shop visit and was returning to its home airport.

A 737-400 made an emergency landing after low-oil warnings occurred on both engines during climb. Investigation revealed that the hand-crank cover assemblies on both engines were missing from the engine gearboxes, allowing oil to leak.

During descent on a 747-100, engine no. 2 was shut down because of oil loss, and engine no. 3 was shut down for the same reason eight minutes before landing. Investigation revealed the improper installation of the centrifugal oil filter retaining rings in both engines.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeroma ... 02txt.html

I read the report... It prompted the change "Throttle - (GE) Idle"

ATFS_Crash wrote:

That_Engine_Guy wrote:

Stems from a Class-A where it was found the GE won't run long without oil pressure like the PW. PW will operate 30 seconds at MIL with zero Oil Press.

Sure that mishap wasn’t an isolated incident? I thought part of the military and FAA requirements was that most gas turbines had to be able to run something like 3-5 minutes at full non AB power. I thought most military engines and commercial engines had to pass this test before certification.

Oil seals forgotten on a November 6, 1996 BAe 146
http://www.iasa-intl.com/pdf/royal146.pdf

An L-1011 descending into Nassau, The Bahamas, lost oil pressure in engine no. 2. The flight crew shut down the engine and diverted back to Miami, Florida. On the return to Miami, engines no. 1 and no. 3 shut down. At 3,800 ft above the ocean, the crew recovered engine no. 2. The flight crew then completed a single-engine landing at Miami. The O-ring seals on the master chip detectors for each engine were missing, causing engine oil loss. Remaining time on the running engines before they would have seized up was estimated to be on the order of a couple of minutes after touchdown.
http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publica ... b8404.html

On a BAe-146, a low-oil warning on one engine prompted the crew to shut down the engine. Low-oil warnings then occurred on two additional engines, which were reduced to idle. The crew increased thrust on the remaining engine and diverted to the nearest airport. Inspection of the engines discovered that three of the four engines did not have seals on their chip detectors and that oil leaked from the engines. The airplane had just completed a shop visit and was returning to its home airport.

A 737-400 made an emergency landing after low-oil warnings occurred on both engines during climb. Investigation revealed that the hand-crank cover assemblies on both engines were missing from the engine gearboxes, allowing oil to leak.

During descent on a 747-100, engine no. 2 was shut down because of oil loss, and engine no. 3 was shut down for the same reason eight minutes before landing. Investigation revealed the improper installation of the centrifugal oil filter retaining rings in both engines.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeroma ... 02txt.html

The L-1011 incident happened at Eastern Airlines, the pilot and crew did a fantatic job in bringing the bird back on #2 with all the warning lights flashing and warning horns singing. Approach was low and fast directly into Miami.

The tower cleared him for a direct approach from 55 miles out just after he reported that all 3 engines had failed and cleared the landing pattern so that his approach would not be disrupted. Good work by the tower, coatguard and crash fire/rescue teams.

This incident resulted in the MSG-2 procedure change where the same person should not do maintenance on all of the engines during the same stopover. In MSG-3 it was a recommended practice that the same task is not done on engines at the same stopover, this is now a mandatory requirement for ETOPS clearance.

What happened way back then was that the chip detectors were removed during routine inspection and sent back to the shop for inspection. The back shop used to be responsible for replacing the "O" rings when they put the cleaned and inspected chip detectors back into the box.

Due to multiple previous incidents, the policy of the backshop replacing the "O" seals was changed to the installer being responsible for installing new seals, the back shop was still responsible for removing them.

The person who installed the chip detectors was on leave when this policy change occurred and had not been told of this change . . . now he was under pressure . . . replacement decectors not where they were supposed to be . . . late at night . . .in bad lighting . . . poor union / management environment . . . end of shift . . . lots of good human factors issues.

Due to multiple previous incidents at Eastern like this, the FAA had formally advised Eastern of their concern and the issue had been identified as a potential risk by Lockheed and Rolls-Royce.

Both companies had recommended an engine run to check for leakage after chip detector replacement, the recommendation was accepted by Eastern for inclusion in their customized manual but this change was not communicated to the maintenance people or the flight crews. It was however used by Eastern management as demonstration of closing action on the issue to the FAA.

Since this incident almost every commercial and military engine has gone to positive self sealing chip detector bodies and some engine manufacturers require during the post shop visit engine test that a portion of the run is done with the chip detector removed to confirm that the self sealing feature works.

The easiest and most common way this feature gets hosed up now is when someone used an incorrect tool (screwdriver or ice pick) to drain the engine sump.

The BAE-146 incident was Murphy having a laugh and telling everyone that he is alive and well.

The next incident at Eastern was when they put a steel broom through an engine during a test cell run.

Edit:

To ATFS_Crash's point about the testing requirement for certification, that is correct. Engines have to demonstrate that capability during certification.

In this incident the #2 engine was serviced and demonstrated the capability to be run to stabilized full power after the incident during which it ran without measurable oil in its system for at least 15 minutes.

Those are some great pilots to have done that!! Cheers for the info!

Enthusiast Joined: Feb 01, 2008 Posts: 74 Status: Offline

If your jet flames out after take-off BEFORE you retract the LDGR, then you should land straight ahead in a normal length runway. If it flames out AFTER retraction, then Zoom, Stores jettison (if possible) & Eject. That's it pretty much for me.

Cheers, John.

F-16.net

Forum: F-16 Procedures

Engine failure after take off - Punch out?