Medium large transport shuts down engine due oil loss. Diverts to emergency landing.

Attributes
ACN	206869
Time
Date	199204
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : dtw
State Reference	MI
Altitude	msl bound lower : 24000 msl bound upper : 24000
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zob tower : lal
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	cruise other other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 16000 flight time type : 200
ASRS Report	206869
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : declared emergency other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft

Narrative:

Due to rapid oil quantity loss on right engine, it was shut down by me when failure was imminent to preempt no oil pressure seizure of engine. The point is this! London, ont was closer but we had no approach plate for same, and visibility 2 1/2 fog. Company not approved for surveillance ASR approachs (if available?) and I decided to continue to dtw -- the closest þsuitableþ airport, since I had approach plates for dtw. Note: the FAA imposes a synthetic needles burden on PIC by far to land at closest airport in point of time even if suitable -- in whose judgement? ARTCC thought london suitable, I did not. If visibility had been 4 mi and 1000 ft, would london have been þsuitableþ; still not. Far is not good and should be strictly subject to captþs discretion! Thanks!

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MLG SHUTS DOWN ENG DUE OIL LOSS. DIVERTS TO EMER LNDG.

Narrative: DUE TO RAPID OIL QUANTITY LOSS ON R ENG, IT WAS SHUT DOWN BY ME WHEN FAILURE WAS IMMINENT TO PREEMPT NO OIL PRESSURE SEIZURE OF ENG. THE POINT IS THIS! LONDON, ONT WAS CLOSER BUT WE HAD NO APCH PLATE FOR SAME, AND VISIBILITY 2 1/2 FOG. COMPANY NOT APPROVED FOR SURVEILLANCE ASR APCHS (IF AVAILABLE?) AND I DECIDED TO CONTINUE TO DTW -- THE CLOSEST þSUITABLEþ ARPT, SINCE I HAD APCH PLATES FOR DTW. NOTE: THE FAA IMPOSES A SYNTHETIC NEEDLES BURDEN ON PIC BY FAR TO LAND AT CLOSEST ARPT IN POINT OF TIME EVEN IF SUITABLE -- IN WHOSE JUDGEMENT? ARTCC THOUGHT LONDON SUITABLE, I DID NOT. IF VISIBILITY HAD BEEN 4 MI AND 1000 FT, WOULD LONDON HAVE BEEN þSUITABLEþ; STILL NOT. FAR IS NOT GOOD AND SHOULD BE STRICTLY SUBJECT TO CAPTþS DISCRETION! THANKS!

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.