Cathay A330 double engine problems..
04-14-2010, 09:21 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 380
Cathay A330 double engine problems..
Seems Cathay had some fun with an A330. Good job from Aussie Expats at the pointy end.
Cathay Pacific Plane's Engines Malfunction At Hong Kong Airport
Cathay Pacific Plane's Engines Malfunction At Hong Kong Airport
04-30-2010, 10:33 PM
#7
On Reserve
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Posts: 23
There was a lot of discussion about this incident on another forum site and an awful lot of speculation and mis-information so that a clear picture of what actually occurred was impossible.
However, Cathy issued a memorandum to its Airbus fleet pilots which was posted on that forum and I understand the following to be the text of that memo:
This, I think, gives the clearest indication of what actually happened and removed an awful lot of cheap speculation and snide comments at the crew which was totally unjustified.
It is also interesting to note that Cathy has ceased obtaining fuel from the departure point, Surabaya. This is not to say that contaminated fuel was the cause.
However, Cathy issued a memorandum to its Airbus fleet pilots which was posted on that forum and I understand the following to be the text of that memo:
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:38:09 +0800
Subject: CX780 SUB-HKG 13 April 2010
To All Airbus Cockpit Crew,
As already covered by company news information and the public media, a major event occurred on flight CX780 Surabaya – Hong Kong on 13 April.
The crew had operated the aircraft, B-HLL, on the previous evening from Hong Kong to Surabaya. Crew complement was normal with two pilots and eleven cabin crew.
Routine maintenance checks were carried out overnight. All pre-departure preparations ex SUB were normal. There was nothing unusual about the aircraft weight, FOB (CFP fuel) and distribution. RTOW data used was in accordance with the Minimum Ground roll procedure as applicable to Surabaya. Weather at departure, en-route and arrival was good and not considered to be relevant to the event.
Initial Onset Conditions
Just before TOC, the aircraft experienced minor low frequency EPR oscillations. These oscillations had associated tracking of Fuel Flow. Later, this observation was followed with an ECAM message on ENG 2. After consultation with IOC, it was decided that the situation did not warrant an in-flight diversion.
Subsequent Engine Behaviour
During initial descent (passing FL310) ENG 2 experienced a surge and stall, and the engine could only be recovered to sub-idle speed for the remainder of the flight. Whilst levelling off at an intermediate lower altitude in the latter part of the descent, ENG 1 additionally experienced a gradual loss of thrust lever control, eventually resulting in an uncontrolled thrust increase to approximately 70% N1. The engine remained at this thrust level for the remainder of the flight.
Aircraft Flight Path
The aircraft was able to maintain altitude and speed until closer to the airfield, when further descent was commenced for an ILS approach onto RWY 07L. With the high residual thrust present on No1 engine, speed on intermediate and final approach remained high. Final configuration consisted of Flap 1 (with flap lever position at Flap 2), resulting in an approach speed of 230kts at the threshold. Flare and touchdown (at 220kts) was normal for these circumstances. Successful selection of REV, and appropriate braking enabled the aircraft to be stopped within 1,000ft of the threshold of RWY 25R.
After Landing
After the aircraft came to a stop, both engines were shut down (thrust on Eng 1 had remained at 70% N1). Brake temperatures rose rapidly. Comms were established with rescue services who advised tyre deflation and the presence of smoke/fire around the wheels. An emergency evacuation was successfully carried out with minor injuries to a small number of passengers.
Crew Actions
The Captain and First Officer both displayed commendable professionalism and airmanship of the highest order in successfully handling the challenging situation they faced.
Initial Investigations
CAD is conducting the investigation into this event, supported by CSD. An initial interview with the flight crew by CAD has taken place. EEC, QAR, and DFDR data have been successfully downloaded and are being analysed. All avenues of investigation, including fuel system fault and contamination, are being actively conducted with direct assistance and involvement from Airbus, and Rolls Royce.
Rolls Royce and Airbus have not issued any additional operational recommendations at this time. Updates on the investigation will be provided to all crew as soon as more information becomes available.
In the interim, crews are advised to contact Maintenance Control via IOC, if any abnormal engine behaviour is observed.
Kind Regards,
Steve Mihos & Gavin Haslemore
Airbus Fleet Office
Subject: CX780 SUB-HKG 13 April 2010
To All Airbus Cockpit Crew,
As already covered by company news information and the public media, a major event occurred on flight CX780 Surabaya – Hong Kong on 13 April.
The crew had operated the aircraft, B-HLL, on the previous evening from Hong Kong to Surabaya. Crew complement was normal with two pilots and eleven cabin crew.
Routine maintenance checks were carried out overnight. All pre-departure preparations ex SUB were normal. There was nothing unusual about the aircraft weight, FOB (CFP fuel) and distribution. RTOW data used was in accordance with the Minimum Ground roll procedure as applicable to Surabaya. Weather at departure, en-route and arrival was good and not considered to be relevant to the event.
Initial Onset Conditions
Just before TOC, the aircraft experienced minor low frequency EPR oscillations. These oscillations had associated tracking of Fuel Flow. Later, this observation was followed with an ECAM message on ENG 2. After consultation with IOC, it was decided that the situation did not warrant an in-flight diversion.
Subsequent Engine Behaviour
During initial descent (passing FL310) ENG 2 experienced a surge and stall, and the engine could only be recovered to sub-idle speed for the remainder of the flight. Whilst levelling off at an intermediate lower altitude in the latter part of the descent, ENG 1 additionally experienced a gradual loss of thrust lever control, eventually resulting in an uncontrolled thrust increase to approximately 70% N1. The engine remained at this thrust level for the remainder of the flight.
Aircraft Flight Path
The aircraft was able to maintain altitude and speed until closer to the airfield, when further descent was commenced for an ILS approach onto RWY 07L. With the high residual thrust present on No1 engine, speed on intermediate and final approach remained high. Final configuration consisted of Flap 1 (with flap lever position at Flap 2), resulting in an approach speed of 230kts at the threshold. Flare and touchdown (at 220kts) was normal for these circumstances. Successful selection of REV, and appropriate braking enabled the aircraft to be stopped within 1,000ft of the threshold of RWY 25R.
After Landing
After the aircraft came to a stop, both engines were shut down (thrust on Eng 1 had remained at 70% N1). Brake temperatures rose rapidly. Comms were established with rescue services who advised tyre deflation and the presence of smoke/fire around the wheels. An emergency evacuation was successfully carried out with minor injuries to a small number of passengers.
Crew Actions
The Captain and First Officer both displayed commendable professionalism and airmanship of the highest order in successfully handling the challenging situation they faced.
Initial Investigations
CAD is conducting the investigation into this event, supported by CSD. An initial interview with the flight crew by CAD has taken place. EEC, QAR, and DFDR data have been successfully downloaded and are being analysed. All avenues of investigation, including fuel system fault and contamination, are being actively conducted with direct assistance and involvement from Airbus, and Rolls Royce.
Rolls Royce and Airbus have not issued any additional operational recommendations at this time. Updates on the investigation will be provided to all crew as soon as more information becomes available.
In the interim, crews are advised to contact Maintenance Control via IOC, if any abnormal engine behaviour is observed.
Kind Regards,
Steve Mihos & Gavin Haslemore
Airbus Fleet Office
It is also interesting to note that Cathy has ceased obtaining fuel from the departure point, Surabaya. This is not to say that contaminated fuel was the cause.
05-03-2010, 08:34 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 100
Originally Posted by PLovett
There was a lot of discussion about this incident on another forum site and an awful lot of speculation and mis-information so that a clear picture of what actually occurred was impossible.
However, Cathy issued a memorandum to its Airbus fleet pilots which was posted on that forum and I understand the following to be the text of that memo:
This, I think, gives the clearest indication of what actually happened and removed an awful lot of cheap speculation and snide comments at the crew which was totally unjustified.
It is also interesting to note that Cathy has ceased obtaining fuel from the departure point, Surabaya. This is not to say that contaminated fuel was the cause.
However, Cathy issued a memorandum to its Airbus fleet pilots which was posted on that forum and I understand the following to be the text of that memo:
This, I think, gives the clearest indication of what actually happened and removed an awful lot of cheap speculation and snide comments at the crew which was totally unjustified.
It is also interesting to note that Cathy has ceased obtaining fuel from the departure point, Surabaya. This is not to say that contaminated fuel was the cause.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
