 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Widebody transport had left engine fail at FL260. Landed mia without incident. Each agency wanted full details of aircraft, souls on board, etc.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 121890 |
| Time | |
| Date | 198908 |
| Day | Sun |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | atc facility : pbi airport : mia |
| State Reference | FL |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 0 msl bound upper : 26000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Dusk |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | artcc : zma tracon : mia |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Widebody, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng |
| Navigation In Use | Other Other |
| Flight Phase | descent other landing other |
| Route In Use | enroute : on vectors |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 140 flight time total : 13000 flight time type : 1100 |
| ASRS Report | 121890 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | flight crew : declared emergency none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
| Situations | |
| ATC Facility | procedure or policy : unspecified |
Narrative:
During climbout through FL260, the left engine failed. Aircraft was on autoplt. We disconnected the autoplt and stopped the climb at 270, requested a turn toward mia and a drift down. The engine fail checklist was completed as well as the in-flight start checklist. We could not restart the left engine. The drift down and restart attempt as well as contacting mia company took approximately 10 mins. We were now 60 mi approximately from miami and had plenty of altitude to effect a landing in mia in case of a second engine failure. I did not consider returning to pbi at this time as mia was the nearest airport. Fll was not considered due to the ILS being out of service as well as the advantages of mia in terms of crash equipment, runway length and my familiarity with the airport. The approach was normal, I used the speed brake to lose the excess altitude and landed normally. I elected to fly the approach a little fast, vref plus 15, until the final 500'. The only problems encountered were from excessive disruptions from ATC, we gave our fuel, souls on board and which engine failed to each successive controller. What we needed was a little peace and quiet to give us time to relax and make sure everything was completed. Each request for information disrupts our train of thought. As pilots it is very difficult to not respond to an ATC request. After landing ground control then wanted to know our tail number and which engine had failed. It appears that each person has a report that must be filed when we use our emergency authority. If an emergency is in progress it would help if an ATC supervisor could follow the progress of the flight and keep each controller informed as to the status of the required information. This same information could be passed on to approach control, tower and ground. This might reduce the number of disruptive requests. It gets very busy in a 2-MAN, 2-ENGINE aircraft with an engine out, anything that disrupts the cockpit flow is potentially dangerous.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: WDB HAD LEFT ENGINE FAIL AT FL260. LANDED MIA WITHOUT INCIDENT. EACH AGENCY WANTED FULL DETAILS OF ACFT, SOULS ON BOARD, ETC.
Narrative: DURING CLIMBOUT THROUGH FL260, THE LEFT ENGINE FAILED. ACFT WAS ON AUTOPLT. WE DISCONNECTED THE AUTOPLT AND STOPPED THE CLIMB AT 270, REQUESTED A TURN TOWARD MIA AND A DRIFT DOWN. THE ENGINE FAIL CHECKLIST WAS COMPLETED AS WELL AS THE INFLT START CHECKLIST. WE COULD NOT RESTART THE LEFT ENGINE. THE DRIFT DOWN AND RESTART ATTEMPT AS WELL AS CONTACTING MIA COMPANY TOOK APPROX 10 MINS. WE WERE NOW 60 MI APPROX FROM MIAMI AND HAD PLENTY OF ALT TO EFFECT A LNDG IN MIA IN CASE OF A SECOND ENGINE FAILURE. I DID NOT CONSIDER RETURNING TO PBI AT THIS TIME AS MIA WAS THE NEAREST ARPT. FLL WAS NOT CONSIDERED DUE TO THE ILS BEING OUT OF SERVICE AS WELL AS THE ADVANTAGES OF MIA IN TERMS OF CRASH EQUIPMENT, RWY LENGTH AND MY FAMILIARITY WITH THE ARPT. THE APCH WAS NORMAL, I USED THE SPEED BRAKE TO LOSE THE EXCESS ALT AND LANDED NORMALLY. I ELECTED TO FLY THE APCH A LITTLE FAST, VREF PLUS 15, UNTIL THE FINAL 500'. THE ONLY PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED WERE FROM EXCESSIVE DISRUPTIONS FROM ATC, WE GAVE OUR FUEL, SOULS ON BOARD AND WHICH ENGINE FAILED TO EACH SUCCESSIVE CTLR. WHAT WE NEEDED WAS A LITTLE PEACE AND QUIET TO GIVE US TIME TO RELAX AND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING WAS COMPLETED. EACH REQUEST FOR INFO DISRUPTS OUR TRAIN OF THOUGHT. AS PLTS IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO NOT RESPOND TO AN ATC REQUEST. AFTER LNDG GND CTL THEN WANTED TO KNOW OUR TAIL NUMBER AND WHICH ENGINE HAD FAILED. IT APPEARS THAT EACH PERSON HAS A REPORT THAT MUST BE FILED WHEN WE USE OUR EMER AUTHORITY. IF AN EMER IS IN PROGRESS IT WOULD HELP IF AN ATC SUPVR COULD FOLLOW THE PROGRESS OF THE FLT AND KEEP EACH CTLR INFORMED AS TO THE STATUS OF THE REQUIRED INFO. THIS SAME INFO COULD BE PASSED ON TO APCH CTL, TWR AND GND. THIS MIGHT REDUCE THE NUMBER OF DISRUPTIVE REQUESTS. IT GETS VERY BUSY IN A 2-MAN, 2-ENGINE ACFT WITH AN ENGINE OUT, ANYTHING THAT DISRUPTS THE COCKPIT FLOW IS POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.