Anyone experienced this?
#1
Thread Starter
On Reserve
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Anyone experienced this - 737NG engine issue, reported tonight in Seattle news:
Troubles on takeoff with some Boeing 737NG engines | KING5.com Seattle
Troubles on takeoff with some Boeing 737NG engines | KING5.com Seattle
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,217
Likes: 52
From: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Anyone experienced this - 737NG engine issue, reported tonight in Seattle news:
Troubles on takeoff with some Boeing 737NG engines | KING5.com Seattle
Troubles on takeoff with some Boeing 737NG engines | KING5.com Seattle
#5
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Does not sound as though anyone is entirely sure what "it" is.
I've seen autothrottles disconnect as a result of the computer sensing N1 over commanded speed, but never have experienced an exceedence which broke an operating limitation (or even got close). Usually the triggering event for this mode is a low altitude level off or cut back, which Alaska might experience more than other operators. Never heard of such a thing leading to an exceedence. It is pretty easy to reach down and pull a thrust lever back, and we have immediate action items which prescribe just that action.
The CFM56 is probably the most reliable engine ever put on an airplane. It easily makes it's 30,000 hours on the wing.
In older designs the Fuel Controllers were limiting devices which reduced flow, leaving higher flow available in the event of a FCU or HMU failure to keep the engine running. Those would surge when a Fuel Controller broke or dropped off line. I think anyone with several thousand hours in a PW1XX series turboprop has seen that at least once.
Of course, this could not happen on a MD88. It has a FOC-U (First Officer Control Unit)
I've seen autothrottles disconnect as a result of the computer sensing N1 over commanded speed, but never have experienced an exceedence which broke an operating limitation (or even got close). Usually the triggering event for this mode is a low altitude level off or cut back, which Alaska might experience more than other operators. Never heard of such a thing leading to an exceedence. It is pretty easy to reach down and pull a thrust lever back, and we have immediate action items which prescribe just that action.
The CFM56 is probably the most reliable engine ever put on an airplane. It easily makes it's 30,000 hours on the wing.
In older designs the Fuel Controllers were limiting devices which reduced flow, leaving higher flow available in the event of a FCU or HMU failure to keep the engine running. Those would surge when a Fuel Controller broke or dropped off line. I think anyone with several thousand hours in a PW1XX series turboprop has seen that at least once.
Of course, this could not happen on a MD88. It has a FOC-U (First Officer Control Unit)
#6
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
But, if the failure is somewhere in the DEEC and the HMU then I guess the thing might not respond. Never seen (or heard) of that happening. The throttles on the CFM56 are fancy dual redundant switches. They are an electronic connection to this:
#10
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



