First Air - Dec 11 2013 - Norman Wells

[bmc]

The single engine doesn't worry me so much. Engines do fail but I haven't heard of any cases where one failed in cruise and then the other failed an hour later while diverting.

It's the fire scenario that has me reviewing the ditching procedures and worrying how realistic they are.

About 10 or so years ago, AC was doing an evening YVR-HNL flight with 67. One of the engines had high oil consumption, which was noted from the previous crew. They were flying along the oil consumption accelerated. They watched the indication wind down to no more oil (or how ever it is indicated on a 67). While expecting to shut down the engine, the fire alarm went off on the good engine, forcing them to pull the fire bottle. Declared an emergency and landed at Dillingham.

I heard it second hand it was a few years back, so there could be missing or incorrect details.

[pelmet]

There seems to be a bunch of talk about takeoff alternates. Was the weather in Norman Wells poor when this happened.

TO alternate distance is based on zero wind in my experience. And it could vary depending on aircraft weight.

[old_man]

The single engine doesn't worry me so much. Engines do fail but I haven't heard of any cases where one failed in cruise and then the other failed an hour later while diverting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Ai ... Flight_855

Closest I can come up with.

[jet a1]

this site continues to degrade every day... here we have a crew that did a great job and landed safely. then idiots with absolutely no clue what they're talking about come on here and spend two pages sounding like children.... "what a dumb move", "i would never do that", "hey i know nothing about aviation in northern canada but i'm going to post like i do"
this site use to actually be a place where good information was passed between canadian aviators... now it's really become a joke.

[5dayer]

Well said

[tbaylx]

this site continues to degrade every day... here we have a crew that did a great job and landed safely. then idiots with absolutely no clue what they're talking about come on here and spend two pages sounding like children.... "what a dumb move", "i would never do that", "hey i know nothing about aviation in northern canada but i'm going to post like i do"
this site use to actually be a place where good information was passed between canadian aviators... now it's really become a joke.

[GRK]

What a mess being created here…firstly, this stuff is simple…no severe damage checklist takes 20 minutes…the work after the QRH might take a little time, but the items on the bird I fly are 4 memory items and it's done. Land at the nearest suitable airport…(my ride has a something a little different as it has a lovely number of options if only one gets shut down or fails) The engine stall or surge QRH is similar…land at the nearest suitable airport…
The yelling about Ops having a say by the poster above is a little "over the top", unless things have changed recently, there is a requirement in 705 operations to have a Co-authoritative responsibility between Ops (Dispatch) and the Captain. The decision to continue or return or divert is discussed and agreed upon by the whole operation, so yes, Commercial and Ops do have a say. This is not to say the full responsibility has been removed from the Captain, it means the operation has a say. If you're on fire or about to blow through the regs then Ops gets a phone call after a decision but if the choice is simple…it gets considered. Easy…not sure why Boxcutter is so incensed. Fly safe!
GRK

[swordfish]

@swordfish,
Interesting. I would bet your comment about Ops making the decision is correct. If true, how then does it work with a large carrier, if (and assuming it is safely within the aircraft performance envelope to do so) for safety reasons the crew elects to ignore the "recommendation" from Ops and land as is, where is? If S/E ops are a non-issue (and assuming no loss of critical services), does that mean that CFR capability or lack thereof at the landing site bears no significant weight in the decision making process?

As pointed out by subsequent posters, it was an assumption that SOCC made the decision (which of course can always be countermanded by the Captain...but why would he want to?), not a fact. My LIMITED experience in 705 is that with Class A or B dispatch, SOCC is as much a part of your crew as the F/O and the cabin crew. It would be a synergistic approach to the problem at hand.

While my contention is that an engine out a no-brainer, it IS an emergency, and Yes, CFR would have to be notified with the high-speed landing, limited flaps, no reverse, and brakes only, and a crosswind from the wrong side.

btw...here are some "brainers" (i.e. some things that the QRH/SOP does not provide for)

• Fire in the baggage or cargo that cannot be extinguished.
  Unexplained vibration in an engine when all your indications are normal (including prop deice).
  Outflow and dump valves frozen closed (recognized in the types that have a delay before pressurizing after takeoff), or a loss of vacuum (moisture frozen) in that line from the pressurization controller. Yes I am aware that the QRH will say close the bleeds; but when you took off from Rankin below the landing limits, and your destination is Yellowknife, Baker is your takeoff alternate, you have a mountain of conflicting decisions on your hands. Nothing is cut-&-dried, believe me.
  Noxious unidentifiable fumes from the cargo or in the ventilation system, and you can't determine which.
  Elevator trim frozen or immobile.
  Flying with one engine operating on the fuel topping governor.
  Windshield anti-ice not working on 1 side, and a limits approach coming up.
  Ice all over the plane, and you've passed your PNR.

There are many others - I just can't remember them all right now.

[swordfish]

There seems to be a bunch of talk about takeoff alternates. Was the weather in Norman Wells poor when this happened.

TO alternate distance is based on zero wind in my experience. And it could vary depending on aircraft weight.

No. There WAS some weather there, but depending on the time of the incident the lowest vis was about 3 miles. Above landing limits, anyway.

[pelmet]

There seems to be a bunch of talk about takeoff alternates. Was the weather in Norman Wells poor when this happened.

TO alternate distance is based on zero wind in my experience. And it could vary depending on aircraft weight.

No. There WAS some weather there, but depending on the time of the incident the lowest vis was about 3 miles. Above landing limits, anyway.

I wonder if it was a slippery runway in YVQ, after all, the vis was down a bit and as well, it doesn't appear to be a particularly long runway for a reduced flap landing and really only significant reverse thrust available on one engine, and somewhat higher visibility limits.

As well, I'm not sure why people are talking about engine severe damage(which require shutting the engine down) as the engine was kept operating to destination.

[tbaylx]

What a mess being created here…firstly, this stuff is simple…no severe damage checklist takes 20 minutes…the work after the QRH might take a little time, but the items on the bird I fly are 4 memory items and it's done. Land at the nearest suitable airport…(my ride has a something a little different as it has a lovely number of options if only one gets shut down or fails) The engine stall or surge QRH is similar…land at the nearest suitable airport…
The yelling about Ops having a say by the poster above is a little "over the top", unless things have changed recently, there is a requirement in 705 operations to have a Co-authoritative responsibility between Ops (Dispatch) and the Captain. The decision to continue or return or divert is discussed and agreed upon by the whole operation, so yes, Commercial and Ops do have a say. This is not to say the full responsibility has been removed from the Captain, it means the operation has a say. If you're on fire or about to blow through the regs then Ops gets a phone call after a decision but if the choice is simple…it gets considered. Easy…not sure why Boxcutter is so incensed. Fly safe!
GRK

You've obviously never run a B737 checklist through to completion then if you think it doesn't take 20 min. 4 memory items are the start, then you can run the qrh, then you get to run the single engine approach and landing, decide what your'e going to do and where you're going to go, sometime in there you can check your weather, landing weights, performance landing distance, talk to ops, passengers, brief the FA's, brief the approach, keep ATC up to date etc. It's easily a 20 min process.

Can you just do the 4 memory items and land? Sure you could if you were on fire or a wing was falling off, but otherwise its going to take 20 min at least with a sorted out crew to get everything done.

[Prodriver]

The Pilot did his job!

[boxcut]

this site continues to degrade every day... here we have a crew that did a great job and landed safely. then idiots with absolutely no clue what they're talking about come on here and spend two pages sounding like children.... "what a dumb move", "i would never do that", "hey i know nothing about aviation in northern canada but i'm going to post like i do"
this site use to actually be a place where good information was passed between canadian aviators... now it's really become a joke.

Yeah, you do sound like a child. Feel free to ask me about my knowledge of the Kitikmeot, Kivalliq, Baffin, and Valley regions, I'm well trained in all of them. My profession revolves around flight safety, and I think it's more then fine to question the actions of a crew and an airline if they were subject to commercial pressure in the face of an inflight emergency.

Commercial and Ops do have a say

NO. They DO NOT. Operational Control prior to brake release is shared by the PIC and the DXX, ops and Commercial has no say when it comes to safety. Ever. Once brakes release, the responsibility for the safety of the aircraft is 100% in the PIC, the DXX is there as a crewmember to aid and suggest courses of action, but the decision is in the hands of the Captain. In an inflight emergency, there is no way on God's green earth that Commercial or Operations has any damn say whatsoever over the safety of the aircraft. Ever.

Operational Control and (Commercial) Operations are two different things that people still occasionally mix up.

[Liquid Charlie]

Argue all you want it boils down to the Captain's decision on what is a "suitable airport" -- this case closed -- made his choice and proceeded and for you who are questioning his decision --if you have never been to "the wells" -- nuf said --

[Brown Bear]

If that's the case good job by the crew

Distance from CYVQ to CYZF is 370nm

If the engine failed three minutes out of CYVQ, and the flight crew kept on going to CYZF instead of returning to CYVQ provided the weather was good in CYVQ, they should have the book thrown at them.
And I'd also like to know if this was a full on engine failure, why the plane didn't go to a take-off alternate if they couldn't reland at YVQ, since I doubt an airport 370 nm from CYVQ qualifies as a TO Alternate.

My two cents.

They did the correct thing. Just because there IS a take off alternate, there is NO requirement to use it. Just as in a missed approach, there is NO requirement to use your filed alternate. An engine failure on a 737 is not something (in, and by itself) that would prevent, or in any way make it questionable for the crew to fly some 300 miles to an airport MORE suitable to them.
Your two cents are, well, two cents.

[Brown Bear]

This "Oh my God, we've lost an engine and must land RIGHT NOW....", mentality slays me.

[switchflicker]

Actually Boxcut, I think you would do well to tell us a bit about yourself. You say you are well trained in regions in the northern parts of Canada. Well trained to do what? You also say your profession revolves around flight safety. Who on this forum is not involved, not revolved in the safety of flight. Are you a dispatcher? or a charter sales rep?

I don't think you are an airplane mechanic nor a pilot, because of the venom you seem to have towards flight operations in general and more specifically towards First Air. You seem to be quite sure that the pilot didn't make the decision to proceed to Yellowknife, but rather that he or she allowed the decision to be make for them. Without inside information such as being one of the flight crew or the operations/dispatch personnel. You also seem to feel that he or she should have relanded at Norman Wells, but why? Were you on board and frightened, or were you in Norman Wells with some loved ones on the flight?

From what we have read here, the pilots had a real good idea what was going on in the offending engine. The suspect of a bird strike, the smell (of a cooking bird) the vibration consistent with some bird insides unevenly distributed around the fan blades. So there was a reason for the engine to misbehave. That answers so many questions that the pilots should have after a power loss. Further, apparently, the didn't feel a shutdown was necessary. Some of the reasons to keep the engine running are in keeping with the very flight safety that we are so concerned with on this forum all the time. Keeping the engine running will give redundancy for electrical generation, bleed air for air conditioning (pressurization) and to keep the loss of hydraulic services to a minimum. That offending engine could have also been used for emergency thrust should the need have presented it self.

Like I said at the beginning, why don't you tell us a bit about yourself, and perhaps you can give us a reason to have some confidence in your musings. Vague statements like 'the pilots should have the book thrown at them' really doesn't cut it

Regards

Sw

[Brown Bear]

Ah switchflicker, do we really care about his background? Ignore it. It's easier. We can all read, and draw our own conclusions. He's welcome to his opinion. Even a misguided one.

[Brown Bear]

+1
YZF has far more emergency services. Unless it was on fire I would have done the same.

So...
You've lost an engine, there was a smell of burning, and you have passengers on board. Your aircraft has no ETOPS certification, and you can turn around and go to a good strip 10 minutes away, or fly for over an hour on a single engine running hard to keep you airborne, over rugged wilderness, praying it doesn't fail as well.

I'm struggling to see the rationale in continuing on to YZF.

Okay, I'm curious. What does ETOPS have to do with anything? I've flown several turbine twins on one engine to destinations more than an hour away. Just because an aircraft isn't a 777, doesn't mean it can't fly an hour, or more on one. Your definition of a "good strip" and this captain's definition may differ? How much 722 time do you have? Try learning from folks who might know more than you. One of the posters on this thread has many thousand hours on these wee Boeings. You are arguing with him, for one.

[Liquid Charlie]

I have no clue where ETOPS came into this -- unless the NWT left Canada -- and handle "boxcut" -- mmmm -- was that subliminal after 9/11 or deliberate ----

TP 6327, Safety Criteria For Approval of Extended Ra
nge Twin-Engine Operations (ETOPS), is published by
Transport Canada Safety and Security
under the authority of the Director General, Civil Aviation by the Director,
Standards in co-ordination with the Director, Aircraft Certification.
This publication has been prepared for use and guidance of
Canadian air operators operati
ng, or seeking authority to
operate, two-engine aeroplanes more than 60 minutes at the one-engine-inoperative cruise speed, from an adequate
airport on routes that are not wholly
within Canadian Domestic Airspace.

[swordfish]

I'm casually wondering what type of bird is flying around in the middle of winter, at 6,000' or higher, in almost dark, without a clearance, without radar or TCAS...?

[GRK]

Tbaylx:

Maybe we're splitting hairs, I actually have run a QRH to two on the DC10, '72 '73 '75 '76' '744 320 330. Of course it takes time, but if you read my post again, I make ref to that. You might say I get what you're saying but the guy making all the noise does not. I will not be bickering with Boxcutter here as he or she seems to be too cement headed to understand what most people here are saying. (I think you and I live in the same part of the world? PM me some time.)
Merry Christmas all…

GRK

[boxcut]

Ah switchflicker, do we really care about his background? Ignore it. It's easier. We can all read, and draw our own conclusions. He's welcome to his opinion. Even a misguided one.

Yes, it is an opinion that YZF is further then YEV, or that YVQ is not a suitable airport for a 737 to land at, on a VFR day. Or rules about T/O alternates if they are required. Or opinions on the nature of co-authority.

The only opinion I really have is that a commercial decision took preference over a more conservative one. Since none of us were in the cockpit, that part is conjecture.

Congratulations to the pilots for getting to YZF and down safely. Will that get you off my back about the pilots now?

[pelmet]

Based on terrain, approaches, runway length, etc, it looks to me like Norman Wells is a suitable alternate under ideal conditions only such as very good weather, dry runway, etc. If it is marginal, such as what appears to be on that day, I would be very tempted to consider it as not suitable and therefore YZF would be next on my list to consider.

[GRK]

Boxcut:

Despite my promise not to bicker I must add that Norman Wells has such a low category of CFR that a return for any other reason except imminent danger would mean that most experienced crews would consider somewhere more suitable to proceed to. The Commercial and Ops conversation would be something like this:
"XXX has shut down an engine out of Norman Wells, he's asking if he can continue to Yellowknife or do we want him to return? There are XX number of pax with XX number of connections, what's your thinking? Commercial: "Can we bring em here? Ops: If the Captain agrees, and the weather is good enough? Yes, better to have the jet here where we can fix the problem and our passengers are inconvenienced as little as possible. There…commercial does has a say after all! It's been there all along, and with your own admitted northern experience you should know that. Incidentally, one of the passengers who was onboard that flight is a friend of the family, is a first responder in Norman Wells and had a front row seat to the incident. He is quite happy he ended up in Yellowknife and not back where he started with a busted jet and not much in the way of CFR to offer.