Engine failure on final approach
04-19-2023, 12:21 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,539
Originally Posted by firefighterplt
100% depends on the airplane and the situation.
In the F/A-18, if I lose an engine (especially #2) and I’m not otherwise in extremis (fuel state, fire, etc), I’m getting away from the ground, getting things suitcased, coming up with a good gameplan, and then executing said gameplan.
I don’t like to be reconfiguring, securing engines, running EPs, etc in close proximity to the ground unless it’s VERY necessary.
edit: just realized you said part 121. My bad. Anyway, I’ll leave my line of thinking as food for thought.
In the F/A-18, if I lose an engine (especially #2) and I’m not otherwise in extremis (fuel state, fire, etc), I’m getting away from the ground, getting things suitcased, coming up with a good gameplan, and then executing said gameplan.
I don’t like to be reconfiguring, securing engines, running EPs, etc in close proximity to the ground unless it’s VERY necessary.
edit: just realized you said part 121. My bad. Anyway, I’ll leave my line of thinking as food for thought.
04-21-2023, 12:15 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: 747 Captain (Ret,)
Posts: 797
With a simple engine failure (not fire or severe engine damage), on the 747, continue and land using NORMAL procedures and flap settings. Missed approach procedures remain the same as all engines operating.
Joe
Joe
04-23-2023, 10:25 AM
#24
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 37,798
Originally Posted by joepilot
With a simple engine failure (not fire or severe engine damage), on the 747, continue and land using NORMAL procedures and flap settings. Missed approach procedures remain the same as all engines operating.
Joe
Joe
04-29-2023, 01:03 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,183
Originally Posted by joepilot
With a simple engine failure (not fire or severe engine damage), on the 747, continue and land using NORMAL procedures and flap settings. Missed approach procedures remain the same as all engines operating.
Joe
Joe
05-07-2023, 02:03 PM
#27
On Reserve
Joined APC: May 2012
Position: Rather not say
Posts: 17
My $.02 to add in is that considerations in this case can be very type-specific as well. When I flew the Hawker, there was a checklist for an engine failure in the landing configuration that called for moving the flaps from 40° to 25° and setting Vref+20 if a safe landing wasn’t already assured. I honestly don’t think too many people really thought about that checklist very much. I don’t think I ever heard an instructor or check pilot mention it. It wasn’t a memory item but I absolutely think it should have been. You can imagine what a mess it could be for someone to lose an engine at 400’ on final, fully configured, and to not know about this legitimate procedure to get rid of some of that drag.
The point to my post: It absolutely pays to really comb through that QRH and have type-specific discussions like these about the scenario the OP brought up. Good question, OP.
The point to my post: It absolutely pays to really comb through that QRH and have type-specific discussions like these about the scenario the OP brought up. Good question, OP.
05-07-2023, 04:00 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 453
Originally Posted by CrawData
My $.02 to add in is that considerations in this case can be very type-specific as well. When I flew the Hawker, there was a checklist for an engine failure in the landing configuration that called for moving the flaps from 40° to 25° and setting Vref+20 if a safe landing wasn’t already assured. I honestly don’t think too many people really thought about that checklist very much. I don’t think I ever heard an instructor or check pilot mention it. It wasn’t a memory item but I absolutely think it should have been. You can imagine what a mess it could be for someone to lose an engine at 400’ on final, fully configured, and to not know about this legitimate procedure to get rid of some of that drag.
The point to my post: It absolutely pays to really comb through that QRH and have type-specific discussions like these about the scenario the OP brought up. Good question, OP.
The point to my post: It absolutely pays to really comb through that QRH and have type-specific discussions like these about the scenario the OP brought up. Good question, OP.
05-17-2023, 08:33 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2021
Posts: 319
Originally Posted by MysteriousMrX
My understanding: *outside* the final approach fix... if you were to lose an engine, you go missed and work the checklists and come around again.
*inside* the final approach fix, you continue and land.
yes/no? (This is part 121, if that makes a difference)
*inside* the final approach fix, you continue and land.
yes/no? (This is part 121, if that makes a difference)
05-17-2023, 10:11 AM
#30
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,391
There aren't a lot of scenarios in which it makes much sense to be on final, briefed and prepared to land, and upon experiencing an engine failure, execute a single engine-go around.
Certainly the circumstances dictate, and a major system shift might dictate a need to get away, get up, and get right, but for the most part, if one is landing, has a runway in front, is going downhill and toward that runway, and already has a plan, it trumps most other considerations. The devil you know is better than the one you don't; the open runway ahead is a safer alternative in most cases to abandoning the approach to go re-invent the wheel.
What caused one engine to fail may cause the other to go. Notify ATC, press on, land. Even with a V1 cut, we don't do a lot, even if the engine is on fire, until we reach a safe or clean-up altitude on climb-out. With an engine-loss on approach, arguably less critical, there's not a whole lot to re-think as we continue our descent to a long, safe runway.
Certainly the circumstances dictate, and a major system shift might dictate a need to get away, get up, and get right, but for the most part, if one is landing, has a runway in front, is going downhill and toward that runway, and already has a plan, it trumps most other considerations. The devil you know is better than the one you don't; the open runway ahead is a safer alternative in most cases to abandoning the approach to go re-invent the wheel.
What caused one engine to fail may cause the other to go. Notify ATC, press on, land. Even with a V1 cut, we don't do a lot, even if the engine is on fire, until we reach a safe or clean-up altitude on climb-out. With an engine-loss on approach, arguably less critical, there's not a whole lot to re-think as we continue our descent to a long, safe runway.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
