Goonybird Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Here are some great pics of an AC A330 returning to YVR after suffering a fuel leak. http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=108173&perpage=15&pagenumber=2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 I know why the leak, and for that, I'm afraid our department is at fault. What can be said? I sincerely hope corrections of procedure, or improvement in comprehension of procedure, ...or whatever the underlying cause... are actioned as soon as yesterday! But....can someone explain to me why the fuel was still pouring?... why the fire handle wasn't pulled? Were they still trying to use/using that engine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 The written text on pprune says that there a was a fuel leak noted on the wing however from the pics it looks like the nacelle. Seems to me that the only way for this to continue was if the engine stayed running. Don't want to armchair-quarterback but a fuel leak from somewhere in the nacelle!! Seems like a good time to shut it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Par88 Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Busy time for the folks up front. Since they decided to return for landing pretty quick, I will guess that the source of the fuel leak would have been unconfirmed to the flight crew and therefore an engine shutdown would have been an "unrelated" failure had the soure of the leak been a blocked vent or other. We don't know what info the pilots got from those looking out the passenger window. The passengers and crew are safe.....a job well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 "HP Fuel Line on fuel-oil heat exchanger detached" I'd be very surprised if the engine was still running, given the direction the fuel was taking, but perhaps, in their very busy hustle to get the beast down safely, they didn't have time to check for EGT? ...Naw, EPR would drop pretty quick too if it had flamed out... Surely they'd know if it had? I'm unfamiliar with the 330 and it's engines... Is the fuel source for the fuel/oil heat exchanger separate from the fuel delivered to the burner from the HP pump? Or inline? Still, I'm curious to know what the QRH might say, or whatever folks might think about in such a case... Would it not be an automatic response to trailing a huge plume of fuel from the viscinity of the engine, to see if the thing is indeed making power, and consider the fire handle in any case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Roger that. I'd give an arm and a leg or two to be sure those folks never had to make such a performance because of errors on our side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Roger that. I'd give an arm and a leg, or two, to be sure such a performance was never needed because of errors on our side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 The obvious question is.....was the engine running???? Can anyone confirm it was running??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AME Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 I was wondering what the fuel imbalance was at touch down???? Just curious as the main objective was achieved, aircraft on the ground and everyone still standing, good job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LOCBCVORDME1rwy33 Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 ""I'm unfamiliar with the 330 and it's engines"" For more thechnical details about Airbus powerplants see the link below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Greener Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 I really hate guessing, but for the two gents up front getting the info... from who? All the F/A's are still in their seats, a pax must relay the problem, and how do they quantify a "big" leak, and how is it interpreted by the flight crew when passed on by the Incharge. We've all had "incorrect" reporting of problems from the back. The pilots eveidently wanted to land ASAP and if you are, why go back and inspect yourself... a real busy time for us and perhaps with no further indications, fire, egt etc, what they did was great. The fuel loss, even as great as it was, would have been tough to notice over such a short time. A running engine is better than a shut down one. Mitch, don't beat your own head for mistakes made by maint. We "piluts" make the best of a bad situation and the only time I have a problem is if it was due to negligence. Mistakes happen. Cheers, and Merry Christmas to all. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Should be able to tell from the amount of flap visible in the landing pic, but I'm not familiar enough with the 330 to determine whether it has normal two engine landing flap showing or a single engine flap setting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicoChico Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 You are a true pro Mitch! In this age when ducking responsibility is running rampant your comments are refreshing and I salute you. (from and airplane to an airplane fixer) Chico merryxmasandahappynewbeertoo....or as mrliwouldsaygungheyfatchoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicoChico Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 You are a true pro Mitch! In this age when ducking responsibility is running rampant your comments are refreshing and I salute you. (from an airplane breaker to an airplane fixer) Chico merryxmasandahappynewbeertoo....or as mrliwouldsaygungheyfatchoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Mitch; Re "But....can someone explain to me why the fuel was still pouring?... why the fire handle wasn't pulled? Were they still trying to use/using that engine?" In one sense, the explanation is simple: There were no warnings, no ECAM messages and no indications of abnormality. In an Airbus, crew action without such indications is generally a no-no. Must run, but will come back to this thread. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooney Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Very interesting event indeed. This event seems to have lots of similarities to the Air Transat glider. Good thing this happenned in daylight, otherwise the crew could have been facing a similar situation, as I suspect that this fuel leak was detected by visual reference first. What system information and when did the crew received the first indication of something was wrong? Was the SOPs adequate for this situation? A lots of questions come to mind. In any event, job well done by the crew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpy Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 The crew of the A330 were alerted to the fuel leak by a WestJet crew in postion behind them. The captain apparently called WestJet to personally thank whoever notified ATC of the situation. Very nice gesture IMO....nice to see we're all looking out for each other in this profession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 There were no warnings, no ECAM messages and no indications of abnormality. In an Airbus, crew action without such indications is generally a no-no. I realize you are in a hurry, re your response, but I hope you don't mean that all you rely on is what is in the cockpit,(ECAM) or what you can "feel". I think that the fact another aircraft reported the problem would be good enough info for some action and if in doubt, have a crew member look. I wasn't there and I assume you weren't as well, and Lord knows the crew did get it back in one piece...... but let us suppose that a catastrophic event followed after the crew took no action, (if in fact they did not, in this case,due to a fuel leak. I don't know about you but I would be "urging El Capitain" to shut number two down when another aircraft reported the leak.It seems to me that although we practice single engine procedures every six months, there seems to be a reluctance to actually shut one down when the situation is "different" than what is presented in the SIM. I'm certainly not knocking the crew for what they did or did not do, I'm merely stating that perhaps more emphasis in SIM should be put on what we would call "unusual" situations. Good thing this did not happen during a dark and stormy night......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 In the event the engine flamed out, the indications would be very obvious and instant to the flight crew. However, in the case where the engine is still providing power without warnings, most pilots would be very careful to assess before shutting down the engine. Any info from outside the aircraft is subject to the statistical failings of eye witnesses. And info from inside the cabin, although very helpful, must be considered in an unhurried manner. For example, flight attendants are used to directing passengers to the right or left side of the aircraft as they board from the front (ie: looking rearward). Consider the possible consequences of shutting down an engine on the "right" side of the aircraft and then discovering that the F/A's "right" wasn't the same as your "right". ...and then finding out that the one engine left operating has a massive fuel leak from the pylon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Thanks Chico. Gungheyfatchoy back at ya. And Sing Dung Faa Low to you and yor'n! Merry Christmas. ( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Hi Starman... I understand what you're saying about the reliability of the information they had in such a short time... But I'm wondering if you're sure when you say "In the event the engine flamed out, the indications would be very obvious and instant to the flight crew."? If fuel was still flowing... spools still turning enough to develop oil pressure... sticks and switches still in the correct positions... The good-old, Airbus got-yer-back-covered systems in there to throw in some rudder for you....? Do the Busses with EPR have EPR low warnings for other than T/O config? Or what would trigger the "instant" indication? Cheers, and Merry Christmas to you... ( Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sputnik Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 I don't think it was returning to Vancouver. I'm pretty sure it went on and landed in Calgary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 From PPRUNE 06 Nov 03: The Air Canada Airbus 330-343 aircraft, registration C-GHKX, carrying 92 passengers had departed runway 26L at 14:23 PDT for Calgary when fuel was observed leaking from the right wing. With fuel venting at a high rate, the pilot declared an emergency and circled over the greater Vancouver area at approximately 1500 feet, before returning to YVR to land visually on runway 26 left at 2238Z. The aircraft taxied onto runway 12, with fuel continuing to vent. The aircraft was met by Airport Fire Fighting, who dispensed foam as a precautionary measure. Estimated fuel loss was approximately 3700 kg. Runway 26 left was closed for flushing and sweeping for two hours. There have been unconfirmed reports that fuel landed on vehicles as the aircraft approached the runway. Due to the fuel contamination on the runway, all arrivals and departures were routed to Runway 26 right. Runway 26 right is not normally used for departures due to noise abatement procedures. HP Fuel Line on fuel-oil heat exchanger detached & crew landed back quickly after a 3700kg fuel loss. Engine Model: RB211 TRENT 772B-60 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Interetsing Don... Thanks for that. You know, of course I'm not at all familiar with the bigger Airbus's (airbusses? airbuses? airbi?) Nor am I familar with any 3 spool, RB211 dash-anythings, so I don't even know how the fuel is routed on the machine... I can look when I get to work. ...anyway, I came to where I wondered if the fire had simply gone out, with the oil pressure switch still made, and fuel still flowing, would there be any indication of the lost egt and epr, other than visually on the "guage"? Or, was the fire still burning?, in which case I'd be interested in hearing how the fuel is routed?.... some kind of fuel heat/oil cool system, that's independant of the fuel to the burners somehow? Cheers Don, Merry Christmas. ( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 LOL, I think of "Hoover's" when I hear CF6'-80s, at idle, since they create that distinctive "Hoooooooooo" sound... (a pair of those, in, or just slightly out of harmonic sync, and it's a 67 or 310... a slightly lower pitch and periodically enhanced audible harmonic mismatches like so: ooooooOoooOOooooooOooooooooooOooOOOOOooooo, and it's a dear old DC10 ) These bloody 3 spool things are something else! Especially the older ones, coming up to speed.... good grief, how long does it take? I can't imagine the pain of starting 4 of them on some old 747 with RB211's.... Turing 4....... ..... "What day's today Fred?" "It's Tuesday Bob".... ... ... [sometime later] ....Turning 1 ..... "What day's today Fred?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.