AC engine failiure after dept YHZ.....ends up in YUL

[r22captain]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/air-canada-jet ... 43952.html

..An Air Canada flight was diverted to Montreal early Thursday after leaving Halifax in the midst of a lightning storm, during which a passenger reported flames coming from an engine.

Flight 860 and its 138 passengers took off for London, England, at about midnight. About 35 minutes later, there was a "malfunction" with the left engine and the pilot turned it off, Air Canada said in an email to CBC News.

Passenger Gwen Martin heard the loud bang.

"At that point the lights went off. The flight attendants were running around. I could tell at that point that it was a serious situation," said Martin, a CBC employee in Halifax.

Martin said the engine on the wing started spewing sparks and flames. She assumed it was a lightning strike.

"There was lightning all around us," she said. "The sky was lit up."

Martin sat terrified in her window seat at the front of the plane. Fear overcame other passengers too.

"They were definitely freaking out because they could see the flames from the engine," she said.

She said the flight attendants called it "a situation." The pilot announced they were diverting to Montreal but didn't confirm a lightning hit.

Martin began to question whether the plane should have left Halifax in the first place.

"That was on everybody's mind," she said. "Should we have even taken off with lightning around us?"

The plane couldn't return to Halifax because of the bad weather. It landed safely in Montreal about 2½ hours after takeoff.

Isabelle Arthur, a spokeswoman for Air Canada, said the crew followed standard operating procedures.

"We understand that this event was unsettling for passengers but all crew members are fully trained to handle situations of this nature, including our flight attendants ensuring the cabin and passengers are safe for landing," she said in an email.

The plane is out of service while technicians examine the engine.

The thunder and lightning storm blew into Nova Scotia late Wednesday night and moved across the province early Thursday.

Nearly 50,000 homes and businesses were without power at the height of the storm.
...

[Pratt X 3]

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/ACA8 ... /CYHZ/EGLL

http://climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/rada ... pe=Default

[bizjets101]

Aviation Herald

An Air Canada Boeing 767-300, registration C-FMWY performing flight AC-860 (scheduled dep Jun 1st) from Halifax,NS (Canada) to London Heathrow,EN (UK) with 138 people on board, was climbing through FL200 when a loud bang from the left hand engine (PW4060) was heard in the cabin. The crew shut the engine down, but could not return to Halifax due to weather (thunderstorms over the airfield with other aircraft already going around), considered diversions to Moncton,NB and Sydney,NS (Canada) and decided to divert to Montreal,QC (Canada) where the aircraft landed safely on runway 24R almost 2.5 hours after departure from Halifax.

The airline reported the cause of the engine failure is under investigation but ruled out an initial suspect of a lightning strike.

A replacement Boeing 767-300 registration C-GEOU departed Montreal about 10 hours after landing and is estimated to reach London with a total delay of 13 hours.

[Panama Jack]

Wow, two very different accounts of the same incident.

"The lights going out, engine and wing spewing sparks and flames while the sky was lit up and lightening all around." All that was missing was air raid sirens and you'd have a movie scene from the Battle of Britain.

[linecrew]

Question for those that know for sure, how could lightning be correlated to a major engine failure? Is it possible to lose a fan blade from a strike?

[jump154]

I still remember a lecture I attended while at University in the UK, given by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch.
The statement was made that "There is often nothing more confusing than an eye witness. Two is even worse" - based on the human brain's habit of filling in blanks to make something understandable. The example he gave was an airframe coming apart in flight - which is often accompanied by a loud bang due to the energy released in the breakup. Most lay-person eye witnesses will be convinced they saw a fireball, flames and smoke from an explosion, as that is the only way their brain can explain the loud bang. What someone actually saw and what they think they saw are often two different things.

[ehbuddy]

Just because the engine has failed and shut down does not eliminate the fact that a future problem may develop. I do not know anything about Air Canada's procedures but every company I have ever been with have stressed the importance of landing as soon as possible after an engine failure/fire.

Would it have not been prudent to have dumped some fuel and land in Moncton or someplace closer than Montreal?

[tbaylx]

Likely YUL was the filed T/O alternate, as long as it's within 1 hr single engine cruise time it's perfectly legal and safe to continue on with 1 engine, that's what it's purpose is if the wx is below landing limits. YUL was likely the best spot for them to go as it gets the pax out faster on another A/C and the engine change done quicker since YUL is a maintenance base. Might as well fly somewhere useful instead of cirlcling around tstorms to try and dump fuel.

A lightning strike is very unlikely to cause immediate damage on an engine, most of the time the strike exits out the tail or wing tips. However an inspection is required if its thought that the engine was hit, and it must be monitored for a certain number of hours after due to possible bearing damage/magnetization etc. Just cause pax said there was lightning in the area doesn't mean the AC was struck by it.

Flames and or sparks out the exhaust is quite a normal occurence on an engine failure, looks spectacular, but really a non event.

All in all it wasn't a big deal, but makes for good news if you have nothing better to print. Would be a more boring headline if they reported "Aircraft suffers routine failure handled safely and properly by crew, pax delayed but then onto destination"

[ehbuddy]

I had forgotten to factor in the time it would have taken to dump the fuel. Yes, I agree that Montreal was the best option both passenger and MTC wise. I suppose if a problem enroute to Montreal occured they could have slipped in to Quebec City.

[Old fella]

an RON in YUL at AC's expense - St. Cathrine's street and the usual haunts, here I come!!!!

[r22captain]

http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/c ... pe=0&narr=

ACA860, Boeing 767-300, enroute from Halifax (CYHZ) to London (EGLL), departed from Halifax on Runway 23 at 03:02Z. The aircraft was navigating around weather (numerous cumulonimbus (CB) clouds and lightning). At approximately 03:10Z, while at 20,300 ft and turning east to remain clear of restricted areas south of Halifax capped at 20,000 ft., the aircraft experienced an engine failure, declared "Mayday" and elected to maintain the current heading. The aircraft subsequently descended and penetrated CYD735 and CYD738 (there was no military activity within the airspace). The aircraft turned east and then north while planning the next steps as Halifax was experiencing multiple CB's and lightning on the approaches. ACA860 eventually elected to divert to Montreal (CYUL), exiting the Moncton Flight Information Region (FIR) at approximately 04:30Z. TSB Case Closed.

[yycflyguy]

ok, I'll say it. Nice job by the crew.

[whipline]

I'll say it to, great job. And they didn't even stall it.

[jabez]

I was one of those passengers.

No doubt many were scared and fearful - few wouldn't be - but all remained very calm -- there was no visible nor audible signs of panic. I suppose when you're several thousand feet above the terra firma you have little choice but remain calm.

The reporter from CBC (whom I didn't meet, but probably saw) was obviously very scared herself, but I doubt she interviewed many other passengers as to their concerns. Neither my wife nor I were 'scared.' We were apprehensive thinking about family, friends and colleagues, but we "looked death in the eye," without worry or fear. After we landed there was a measured amount of concern but great thankfulness we had all been spared from plummeting to untimely graves.

One of the worst parts of the whole ordeal was the cynicism of Revenue Canada -- they audaciously demanded all passengers go through Customs and Immigration -- in case anybody had bought duty-free in Halifax and carried it with them into Montreal. What were they thinking? How affected might their coffers be if people had brought and left the duty-free in Montreal? They had no feelings at all for the fact that over 100 people had disembarked from a flight where many feared for their lives. How callous!

But perhaps the worst part was the inadequacy of Air Canada in Montreal. They appointed only two staff members to assign hotel rooms to the scores of passengers. My wife and I were among the last dozen to get rooms -- some three hours after landing -- we got two hours of sleep before we had to return to Dorval for the rescheduled flight to Heathrow.

As for jump154's comments regarding a lecture attended some years ago -- a couple of the people I spoke to did see sparks BEFORE the loud bang. I was seated by the right wing so saw no sparks, but I did hear the loud bang, I heard alarms (presumably to alert the cabin crew) and I saw the lights go out. Probably turned off as part of the safety procedures.

In regards to tbaylx' comments regarding choice of airport, the pilot told us that it was unsafe to touchdown back in Halifax 'because of the storm.' He next announced they were thinking of Fredericton, but the weather was threatening there, too, so the only option was to fly to Dorval. We were in the air for greater than two hours, and well over the one hour 'legal' limit flying on one engine. And to suggest it is just a newsworthy item suggests callousness equal to that of Revenue Canada. Had you been a 'lay' person in the air and heard the captain say, 'we have lost the use of one engine, but we are perfectly safe and able to fly on the remaining engine,' what emotions would be going through your mind? "Oh, great, I now have a sensational story to sell to the press!"

Of interest to me is that the YHZ plane was not marked "Air Canada," but was marked "Star Alliance" - presumably a plane that may be used by any of the "SA" partners. Does this indicate that it was 'second-rate' used as a stand-in?

[yycflyguy]

A harrowing ordeal for all. Thanks for sharing your views on the incident. I just wanted to comment on a couple of things.

Of interest to me is that the YHZ plane was not marked "Air Canada," but was marked "Star Alliance" - presumably a plane that may be used by any of the "SA" partners. Does this indicate that it was 'second-rate' used as a stand-in?

The plane is indeed an Air Canada fin. We have a few planes that promote the Star Alliance and have the livery for it but rest assured it is an Air Canada plane that is not "shared" amongst the other Star Alliance members. It is maintained by Air Canada and crewed by Air Canada. The only difference is that marketing is promoting the Alliance. We also have a couple of Airbuses that promote commemorative anniversary milestones.

We were in the air for greater than two hours, and well over the one hour 'legal' limit flying on one engine.

The plane will fly on one engine quite well at altitudes far exceeding the MOCA/MEA to fly to YUL. The one hour limit which you speak of is when a take-off alternate is required because the airfield is below minimum's to land. Take off limits are lower than landing limits. YHZ was experiencing TSRA but had the minimum visibility that a take-off alternate was not required. It was 100% the correct decision not to attempt a landing at the airport where the wx had TSRA's. For the flight to London they were probably (speculating here) overweight for an immediate landing so burning off extra fuel was a good idea. YUL also is a maintenance base and can handle the displacement of 200 passengers. A good call from where I sit. Plus, there is only 1 YHZ daily flight where YUL has 2.

One of the worst parts of the whole ordeal was the cynicism of Revenue Canada -- they audaciously demanded all passengers go through Customs and Immigration -- in case anybody had bought duty-free in Halifax and carried it with them into Montrea

Anytime an international flight leaves and returns, or if a passenger does not board an international flight they have to re-clear customs.

Again, well done crew

[Company Itin]

With the account of the passanger above, saying that they were in the air for well over the 1 hour maximum for single engine, keep in mind that a fully loaded 767 hoping the pond is going to be WAY over a max landing weight. When you assume its going to be a 6 (rough guess here) hour flight, and are now looking at a landing after less than 1 hour, your going to be heavy and have to drone around (wether dumping fuel or not) to get down to a safe landing weight. Its possible that YUL is an acceptable departure alternate (or maybe one was filed closer, but YUL proved to be a better option). Just cause something is filed as an alternate, doesn't mean thats where your going to go. Its a legality to file something that meets the required criteria, but once your in the air, common sense prevails if theres a better option.

Well done to all the crew onboard. I wonder what management thinks their crews are worth now? All the best to the AC pilots with there ongoing Negots.

[Rockie]

The one hour limit which you speak of is when a take-off alternate is required because the airfield is below minimum's to land. Take off limits are lower than landing limits. YHZ was experiencing TSRA but had the minimum visibility that a take-off alternate was not required. It was 100% the correct decision not to attempt a landing at the airport where the wx had TSRA's. For the flight to London they were probably (speculating here) overweight for an immediate landing so burning off extra fuel was a good idea. YUL also is a maintenance base and can handle the displacement of 200 passengers. A good call from where I sit. Plus, there is only 1 YHZ daily flight where YUL has 2.

Further to that, the 767 is an ETOPS airplane so if a takeoff alternate is required the distance is limited to 120 minutes at single engine cruise, not 60. And if that's not enough that requirement is only for planning purposes and not a limit once you're airborne. In an emergency you land wherever you think is most appropriate given the circumstances.

[yycflyguy]

Well done to all the crew onboard. I wonder what management thinks their crews are worth now? All the best to the AC pilots with there ongoing Negots.

Good question, but I think they will just point out that we were executing our training (all in a days work). We should be celebrating how this emergency was handled in the media with our PR people but it is another lost opportunity to show our worth to the average passenger that we are the last line of defence for everyone's safety.

Further to that, the 767 is an ETOPS airplane so if a takeoff alternate is required the distance is limited to 120 minutes at single engine cruise, not 60. And if that's not enough that requirement is only for planning purposes and not a limit once you're airborne. In an emergency you land wherever you think is most appropriate given the circumstances.

Indeed. Thanks for pointing that out.

[Hawkerflyer]

And they didn't even stall it.

Nice. You are all class.

[tbaylx]

I was one of those passengers.

In regards to tbaylx' comments regarding choice of airport, the pilot told us that it was unsafe to touchdown back in Halifax 'because of the storm.' He next announced they were thinking of Fredericton, but the weather was threatening there, too, so the only option was to fly to Dorval. We were in the air for greater than two hours, and well over the one hour 'legal' limit flying on one engine. And to suggest it is just a newsworthy item suggests callousness equal to that of Revenue Canada. Had you been a 'lay' person in the air and heard the captain say, 'we have lost the use of one engine, but we are perfectly safe and able to fly on the remaining engine,' what emotions would be going through your mind? "Oh, great, I now have a sensational story to sell to the press!"

Of interest to me is that the YHZ plane was not marked "Air Canada," but was marked "Star Alliance" - presumably a plane that may be used by any of the "SA" partners. Does this indicate that it was 'second-rate' used as a stand-in?

Jabez,

My comment was more directed at the press than the passengers onboard. An engine failure is really not anything to be concerned about. The crews at any 1st world airline are trained and tested regularily on engine out procedures, the aircraft is certified and quite able to fly prefectly safely on one engine. Perhaps if the press stopped sensationalizing these incidents then the lay person wouldn't be quite as apprehensive when something like this happens. As stated above once airborne there is no "legal limit" for remaining airborne and the crew used their judgement and experience to fly the aircraft to a safe destination. I can appreciate the inconvenience of it all for the passengers, however sometimes this sort of thing happens. You took much more risk in your drive to the airport than you did on your flight thanks to well trained crews and modern reliable aircraft and hi bypass jet engines. I don't mean to minimize your feelings however it really isn't a life threatening situation.