The last new one!

[BoeingBobby]

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/06/boei...gine-jets.html

I am proud and honored to have been part of the legacy.
With over 12000 hours in them and having flown every model of the 74 built except for the SP, I can say she was one of the most solid, dependable and fun aircraft I have had the pleasure to fly.

[Evan]

She'll be flying around for another 50 years.

Two new VC-25 are still to be delivered. Massively out of touch with the times decision; Boeing even tried to switch them to the 787, but they're a done deal.

[BoeingBobby]

She'll be flying around for another 50 years.

Two new VC-25 are still to be delivered. Massively out of touch with the times decision; Boeing even tried to switch them to the 787, but they're a done deal.

The -8 is an incredible machine. Personally I prefer 4 engines out over the ocean. ETOPS is not a fun thing.

[Evan]

The -8 is an incredible machine. Personally I prefer 4 engines out over the ocean. ETOPS is not a fun thing.

That's understandable on an instinctive level but, since ETOPS began in the late 70's, has there ever been a dual engine trans-oceanic failure that wasn't caused by something that would also result in a four-engine failure? I appreciate that a single engine failure on a four-engined plane is more fail-passive.

[3WE]

The -8 is an incredible machine. Personally I prefer 4 engines out over the ocean. ETOPS is not a fun thing.

I’d also think that the ability to go “straight” to wherever is worth something…including saved fuel.

[Gabriel]

I’d also think that the ability to go “straight” to wherever is worth something…including saved fuel.

Most of the planes do that even with fewer engines. In most "best route" routes you are never more than 4h 30min (ETOPS 330) away from the closest suitable diversion airport. There are a few exceptions though.

And Evan is right that it never happened that an airplane had a failure over the ocean where 4 (or 3) vs 2 engines made or would have made the difference. In fact, there was never a case of multiple independent engine failures i the Jet era. Not that I know at least.

The cases that I know where more than one engine failed were:
- Running out of fuel
- Volcanic ashes
- Birds (Sully... here having more engines may or may not have made a difference, but being 50 minutes instead of 3 hours from the closest airport not)
- Structural failure with engines sucking debris (it affected both engines on the same side)
- Uncontained engine failure (affected both engines on the same side)
- Shutting down the wrong engine (here having more engines would most definitively make a difference, unless you keep shutting down good engines, but being 50 minutes instead of 3 hours from the closest airport not).
- Maintenance doing the same mistake in all engines.
- Ice in the fuel blocking the oil/fuel heat exchanger blocking the flow of fuel to the engines.
- Fuel contamination (with DEF).

But the chances are there. Small, but not zero. It is almost certain that sooner or later there will be a case where a terrible accident in a tween flying far from a suitable field could have been avoided by either having more engines or remaining closer to suitable airports.

[BoeingBobby]

B-777 OVERWATER ENGINE FAILURE Suggested sequence of events 1. Crew maintains control of A/C.
2. Crew handles QRC immediate action items correctly.
3. Crew agrees upon enroute diversion alternate (SATCOM- DSP)
4. PF begins off-track maneuver. HDG SEL 90 from track in direction of alternate
5. Crew turns on all external lights.
6. PF begins drift down. Call for MCP alt set to VNAV ENG OUT cruise alt. EO speed or 320/.83 whichever is most reasonable considering terrain.
7. PF ensures MCT, monitors A/C performance, PNF handles comm.
8. PNF declares emergency with mayday on guard, common and/or HF as appropriate
9. PNF gives position, Flight ID, Track, Longitude/Latitude and altitude with all calls.
10. PNF requests clearance to enroute alternate with GP facility or guard relay.
11. Crew recalls pilots on break to cockpit via PA.
12. PNF records FMC position in scratch pad to be entered on plotting chart and to be forwarded to dispatch via MFD "MAYDAY" report or SATCOM link.
13. PNF completes checklist reference items.
14. PNF builds offset 25NM Pacific/30NM Atlantic (Offset execute or LNAV armed optional HDGSEL may be required if ETOPS alternate behind) Cross tracks below FL 290 Pacific/FL285 Atlantic.
15. PNF copies clearance to alternate.
16. Crew proceeds to alternate at 325kts /Mach .83 when able at SE altitude.
17. PNF communicates with DD, FA's, SAMC and Pax as required.
18. Crew initiates preparation for ditching and/or evacuation if necessary.
19. Crew prepares estimates for FIRs or diversion airport.
20. Crew plots FMC position every 15 minutes on plotting chart on line drawn from initial diversion point to alternate.
21. Crew reviews ditching procedures if necessary.
22. Crew requests RCC information via DD if necessary.
23. Crew briefs approach, evacuation potential, runway exit plan and crew member assignments as necessary.
* If the EO SPD (slower drift down IAL) is chosen, about 2 minutes will be available for deceleration at altitude on the track before a descent becomes necessary and the initial rate of descent will be very slow with MAX CONT thrust set on the good engine. If 320/.83 is entered, the initial rate of descent will be higher exiting the track.

B-747 OVERWATER ENGINE FAILURE Suggested sequence of events

1. Continue to destination
2. 3 engine approach & landing---no change from 4 engine approach.


This was given to me by one of my friends on the 777 when I was still working.


Remember what ETOPS stands for?
Engines turn, or people swim.


From Gabriel, "In most "best route" routes you are never more than 4h 30min."

That's a long damn way out over the North Pacific in a single engine jet!

[Gabriel]

B-777 OVERWATER ENGINE FAILURE Suggested sequence of events
1. Crew maintains control of A/C.
2. Crew handles QRC immediate action items correctly.
3. Crew agrees upon enroute diversion alternate (SATCOM- DSP)
4. PF begins off-track maneuver. HDG SEL 90 from track in direction of alternate
5. Crew turns on all external lights.
6. PF begins drift down. Call for MCP alt set to VNAV ENG OUT cruise alt. EO speed or 320/.83 whichever is most reasonable considering terrain.
7. PF ensures MCT, monitors A/C performance, PNF handles comm.
8. PNF declares emergency with mayday on guard, common and/or HF as appropriate
9. PNF gives position, Flight ID, Track, Longitude/Latitude and altitude with all calls.
10. PNF requests clearance to enroute alternate with GP facility or guard relay.
11. Crew recalls pilots on break to cockpit via PA.
12. PNF records FMC position in scratch pad to be entered on plotting chart and to be forwarded to dispatch via MFD "MAYDAY" report or SATCOM link.
13. PNF completes checklist reference items.
14. PNF builds offset 25NM Pacific/30NM Atlantic (Offset execute or LNAV armed optional HDGSEL may be required if ETOPS alternate behind) Cross tracks below FL 290 Pacific/FL285 Atlantic.
15. PNF copies clearance to alternate.
16. Crew proceeds to alternate at 325kts /Mach .83 when able at SE altitude.
17. PNF communicates with DD, FA's, SAMC and Pax as required.
18. Crew initiates preparation for ditching and/or evacuation if necessary.
19. Crew prepares estimates for FIRs or diversion airport.
20. Crew plots FMC position every 15 minutes on plotting chart on line drawn from initial diversion point to alternate.
21. Crew reviews ditching procedures if necessary.
22. Crew requests RCC information via DD if necessary.
23. Crew briefs approach, evacuation potential, runway exit plan and crew member assignments as necessary.
* If the EO SPD (slower drift down IAL) is chosen, about 2 minutes will be available for deceleration at altitude on the track before a descent becomes necessary and the initial rate of descent will be very slow with MAX CONT thrust set on the good engine. If 320/.83 is entered, the initial rate of descent will be higher exiting the track.

B-747 OVERWATER ENGINE FAILURE Suggested sequence of events

1. Continue to destination
2. 3 engine approach & landing---no change from 4 engine approach.

Good point and nicely presented. That said, I think that you are oversimplifying the 747 situation a bit (correct me if I am wrong).

Depending on your cruise altitude, weather conditions and weight, most likely you will need to drift down too.
You will also need to check your new 3-engines fuel needs, you might not have enough fuel to approach at the destination, go around, fly to the alternate and land with the required reserves.
Also, regardless of whether it is legal or not, I would question the judgement of being in a flight from SFO to Shanghai, having an engine fail close to Hawaii and decide to continue to the destination. Not to mention being in a flight from SFO to LHR, having an engine basically explode during take-off, and continue all the way across continental North America and then across the North Atlantic ocean. As certain BA crew did. And the FAA wanted to investigate them for reckless and careless operation.

From Gabriel, "In most "best route" routes you are never more than 4h 30min."

That's a long damn way out over the North Pacific in a single engine jet!

I agree. I would not enjoy the experience.
But welcome to ETOPS 330 anyway (which is 5hs 30 min).

[BoeingBobby]

Good point and nicely presented. That said, I think that you are oversimplifying the 747 situation a bit (correct me if I am wrong).

Depending on your cruise altitude, weather conditions and weight, most likely you will need to drift down too.
You will also need to check your new 3-engines fuel needs, you might not have enough fuel to approach at the destination, go around, fly to the alternate and land with the required reserves.
Also, regardless of whether it is legal or not, I would question the judgement of being in a flight from SFO to Shanghai, having an engine fail close to Hawaii and decide to continue to the destination. Not to mention being in a flight from SFO to LHR, having an engine basically explode during take-off, and continue all the way across continental North America and then across the North Atlantic ocean. As certain BA crew did. And the FAA wanted to investigate them for reckless and careless operation.



I agree. I would not enjoy the experience.
But welcome to ETOPS 330 anyway (which is 5hs 30 min).

Actually, if it's over half way through the flight, you will probably climb for 3 engines. There never has or more than likely never be another aircraft that can do what the 74 can. And remember that the aircraft is a machine. It doesn't know if it's day or night, or if it's over mountains or ocean. It can't help it if an idiot gets behind the thrust levers.

[Evan]

B-747 OVERWATER ENGINE FAILURE Suggested sequence of events

1. Continue to destination
2. 3 engine approach & landing---no change from 4 engine approach.

I don't think that applies to messy engine failures. I seem to recall a four holer of the Airbus persuasion that lost a single engine and barely made it back to base.

But sure, in most IFSD situations, better to have a couple spares.

[kent olsen]

My story:
I had a DC-8 crew make a precautionary landing in Keflavick after something went wrong with one of the engines. Don't remember what. I airlined out there to do a 3 engine ferry back to JFK. After inspecting the engine and tying done the fan blades (a -73 with CFM engines). I scrubbed the takeoff 3 days in a row. It was pouring down rain and because there's not very much weight on the nose wheel there is a restriction on 3 engine takeoffs on contaminated runways.

Well the company finally dropped a new engine off for me on one of our 74's going to Saudia. So, a 4 engine takeoff but about 15 mins past our ETP to Gander we lost oil pressure on one of the original good engines. So if we had been on 3 engines and had to shut an engine down we would have had to land in Gander but since we had 3 operating engines we just kept going to JFK.

[BoeingBobby]

I don't think that applies to messy engine failures. I seem to recall a four holer of the Airbus persuasion that lost a single engine and barely made it back to base.

But sure, in most IFSD situations, better to have a couple spares.

That's a Bus, not a Boeing!

[Evan]

My story:
I had a DC-8 crew make a precautionary landing in Keflavick after something went wrong with one of the engines. Don't remember what. I airlined out there to do a 3 engine ferry back to JFK. After inspecting the engine and tying done the fan blades (a -73 with CFM engines). I scrubbed the takeoff 3 days in a row. It was pouring down rain and because there's not very much weight on the nose wheel there is a restriction on 3 engine takeoffs on contaminated runways.

Well the company finally dropped a new engine off for me on one of our 74's going to Saudia. So, a 4 engine takeoff but about 15 mins past our ETP to Gander we lost oil pressure on one of the original good engines. So if we had been on 3 engines and had to shut an engine down we would have had to land in Gander but since we had 3 operating engines we just kept going to JFK.

Great story. Curious: was the 747 carrying the replacement engine internally or on the wing? One thing to consider here is that AFAIK the 747 is the last airframe capable of mounting a spare engine pylon.

[3WE]

B-747 OVERWATER ENGINE FAILURE Suggested sequence of events

1. Continue to destination
2. 3 engine approach & landing---no change from 4 engine approach.

Don't tell Evan, but wouldn't you provide some rudder input?

[BoeingBobby]

Great story. Curious: was the 747 carrying the replacement engine internally or on the wing? One thing to consider here is that AFAIK the 747 is the last airframe capable of mounting a spare engine pylon.

Now I'm a little impressed.