Joined
·
18,679 Posts
This might make you pi$$ your pants.
Flight 328 Engine Failure
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
Joined
·
416 Posts
Here is the flight's "Strava"
![]()
Joined
·
7,180 Posts
What are people complaining about?? They arrived 5 hours and 46 minutes early!Here is the flight's "Strava"![]()
Joined
·
3,087 Posts
Seeing as how it's a 777, there probably was little risk after the initial malfunction. That model was designed to fly across the entire Pacific ocean with only 1 engine working....
Joined
·
416 Posts
Yes, B777 is ETOPS certified. I believe any commercial passenger aircraft has to be able to operate on half of its engines, if needed.
The question is, did the older one do this or the younger one?
Joined
·
3,087 Posts
I believe that the 777 was the first plane to be ETOPS certified at model introduction. That means, unlike other twin-engine planes, it did not need to prove it's engine reliability over millions of flight miles before being certified.
For those of you not aware of what ETOPS is, many years ago, it was decided that cross-oceanic planes needed multiple engines in case 1 (or sometimes 2) failed over the wide ocean. Back in the piston era this was common. The Lockheed Constellation was infamous for starting with 4 engines and landing with only 3 still working. As a result, early jet liners had 4 engines. Cost reductions resulted in the designs of tri-jets in the next generation, but after a few years of improving engine reliability, the ETOPS regulations came into effect. As a result, planes like the 737, 757 and 767 were allowed to fly over open oceans, but only after extensive reliability testing, years after they were originally introduced.
The 777 was designed from the beginning to compete against 3 and 4 engine jets, but with only 2 engines. Reliability testing was done as part of the type development, with the intention to sell the 777 from it's introduction as a long-range, trans-oceanic 'heavy' jet.
Joined
·
35 Posts
Reminds me of the classic Twilight Zone scene - Nightmare at 20,000 Feet -
Joined
·
442 Posts
That was an ENGINE failure and probably an error of the GE repair staff since I believe that they make most of the modern commercial jet engines. When did you ever work on commercial or military aircraft so that you might have some idea of what you're talking about? In total I worked on military and commercial aircraft for 7 years. A commercial shop would only need to accidently send out an engine that just came in for servicing.
Joined
·
11,019 Posts
this message is brought to you by the Dept of Redundancy Dept....
Joined
·
442 Posts
Doesn't it bother you that people are perfectly willing to take cheap shots at Boeing? The 787 was perfectly good and we didn't have any problems with it because American pilots didn't try to climb out to steeply. But they recalled them all and reprogrammed the software to warn foreign pilots that they were climbing too steeply. People that would scream to high heaven about the carbon fiber failures, swearing that bikes like Canyon that have terrible reputations for breaking are perfectly safe will naysay Boeing which makes the overwhelming most commercial aircraft in the world and with a far better safety record than other manufacturers. That F82 you have in your picture was hated by most of its pilots. It was so scary to pilot that it was only in service for something like 7 years and always in a secondary cover role.
Joined
·
40,866 Posts
we know a guy who lives almost under the flight path, the debris landed blocks from their house, he heard and saw it!
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!