Anyone have any friends at Continental who have any info regarding a flight my friend was on Saturday 3-6-04. Apparently flight #1670 departed 3:45 ORL - CLE had an engine failure at altitude and landed safely at ATL. He said he felt the plane shake abruply twice. All but 10 boarded 2 hours later to go to CLE. Good job Continental. I just wanted to know if anyone knew a cause yet.
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
engine failure on B737
- Thread starter jimmyw
- Start date
- Watchers 3
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
FN FAL
Freight Dawgs Rule
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2003
- Posts
- 8,573
I met a guy flying freight in Beech 99's just before Christmas, that was part of a flight crew from Spirit that suffered a double flame out in a DC-9 (or what ever the heck it is they fly at Spirit).
Him and his Captain were appealing some type of enforcement action.
He told me that they managed to get a re-light on one of the engines and get the plane down safely, but that they never quite got full power out of the one they re-lit.
So from the sounds of it, this flame out and double flame out schizzle is pretty common, cause I had about five of them mothers TODAY! I aint a kidding you either.
Engine fires too, I think I had at least three of them today.
There I was, thought I was going to die! Then our sim time was up and I had to go back to the hotel and open a couple of them there HARPS and drink em.
Nothing like comming home from a hard day at the orifice and having nice cold one.
Him and his Captain were appealing some type of enforcement action.
He told me that they managed to get a re-light on one of the engines and get the plane down safely, but that they never quite got full power out of the one they re-lit.
So from the sounds of it, this flame out and double flame out schizzle is pretty common, cause I had about five of them mothers TODAY! I aint a kidding you either.
Engine fires too, I think I had at least three of them today.
There I was, thought I was going to die! Then our sim time was up and I had to go back to the hotel and open a couple of them there HARPS and drink em.
Nothing like comming home from a hard day at the orifice and having nice cold one.
FN FAL
Freight Dawgs Rule
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2003
- Posts
- 8,573
CHI02IA151
HISTORY OF FLIGHT
On June 4, 2002, at 1238 central daylight time, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, N823NK, operated as Spirit Airlines Flight 970, experienced a loss of power from both engines while in cruise flight at flight level (FL) 330. The power loss occurred about 20 nautical miles west of Wichita, Kansas. Power from both engines was restored and the airplane diverted to the Wichita Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas, without further incident. The 14 CFR Part 121 scheduled passenger flight was operating on an instrument flight rules flight plan. No injuries to the 105 passengers or 6 crewmembers were reported. The flight originated from the Denver International Airport, Denver, Colorado at 1140 and was en route to the Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
In a telephone interview, the captain stated that the flight was uneventful until he and the first officer simultaneously noticed the low-pressure compressor speed (N1) and EPR indications were low on both engines. He said that they also noticed that the airspeed was deteriorating very rapidly. He stated that he took control of the airplane, disconnected the autopilot, and started an immediate descent. He said that the stick shaker activated briefly. The captain went on to describe the restart of the engines and subsequent descent and landing. He stated that a right engine restart was accomplished about 17,000 feet altitude, and the left engine started on its own a short time later. The captain stated that everything was normal prior to the incident and after the engines were restarted. He said that the autopilot was engaged and the autothrottles were on when the event happened. He stated that he did not recall seeing the throttle levers moving and if they did move, they did they moved very slowly. He said that ice protection was not used and the temperature never got close to plus 6 degrees. The complete summary of the interview is included in the public docket associated with this accident.
In a telephone interview, the first officer stated that one hour into the flight he felt a vibration that came on fast and got worse in a matter of seconds. He said that the captain took control of the airplane and disengaged the autopilot. He said that the stall horn sounded and the stick shaker activated and the captain pushed the nose of the airplane down. He said that both engines were rolled back. When asked about the vibration, the first officer stated that he was not sure if it was a stall, or a pre-stall buffet. He stated that engine anti-ice was off. The first officer reported that the airplane broke out on top of the clouds at 17,000 feet and was in the clear after that. He stated that there were a just a few scattered cirrus clouds. He stated that at the time the stall warning activated, both engines rolled back simultaneously while the throttles stayed in position at the normal cruise setting. He said that the captain pushed the throttles forward but there was no response from the engines. The complete summary of the interview is included in the public docket associated with this accident.
PERSONNEL INFORMATION
The captain held an airline transport pilot certificate with single and multi-engine airplane ratings. He was type rated in the DC-9. His most recent first class medical certificate was issued on December 20, 2001, and listed the limitation that he wear corrective lenses. The captain reported that he had been employed by the airline since February 1998, and that he had been a captain since February 2000. The report submitted by the airline listed his total flight experience as 7,200 hours. The report listed 1,720 total hours and 1,400 hours as pilot in command in the same make and model as the incident airplane. The pilot reported that he had received training at the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) safety schools, including accident investigation. He reported that at the time of the incident, he was the ALPA alternate for the Aviation Safety Actions Program (ASAP) review committee, and the local Air Safety Chairman for Spirit Airline's Fort Lauderdale, Florida base.
The first officer held an airline transport pilot certificate with single and multi-engine airplane ratings. His most recent first class medical certificate was issued on March 11, 2002. The report submitted by the airline listed his total flight experience as 8,900 hours with 376 hours in the same make and model as the incident airplane. The first officer had no logged pilot in command time in the incident aircraft make and model.
AIRCRAFT INFORMATION
The airplane was a McDonnell Douglas DC-9-82, serial number 48020.
METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION
A Meteorological Factual Report was prepared in conjunction with the incident investigation. Weather radar data indicates that about 7 minutes prior to the incident, the cloud tops were 30,000 feet at the incident location and 35,000 feet about 10 nautical miles west. The weather radar echo intensity at 33,000 feet altitude was 16 dBZ at the incident location about 8 minutes prior to the incident. The upper air data for Topeka, Kansas, about 99 nautical miles northeast of the incident, shows temperatures of -38.1 and -47.4 degrees Celsius at 31,339.0 and 35,006.6 feet altitude respectively at 0700. The temperatures were -36.5 and -45.7 degrees Celsius at 31,338.4 and 35,006.6 feet altitude respectively at 1900. The complete Meteorological Factual Report is included in the public docket associated with this report.
FLIGHT RECORDERS
The digital flight data recorder (DFDR) was removed from the airplane and the data read out at the National Transportation Safety Board's recorder laboratory in Washington, D.C. The data is recorded with reference to the DFDR subframe reference number (SRN), where each SRN equals 1 second of elapsed time. Examination of the data revealed that the incident flight originated about 1,800 SRN and landed about 5,892 SRN. The DFDR data indicates that the dual engine roll back event began about 48 minutes and 45 seconds into the flight at 4,725 SRN. Graphs of various recorded parameters were plotted. The complete DFDR report, including the parameter plots, is included in the public docket associated with this report.
The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) circuit breaker had not been pulled after the incident. As a consequence, the recording contained on the CVR did not cover the time of the incident and the CVR was not read out.
TESTS AND RESEARCH
The NTSB conducted an on-scene examination of the airplane and engines on June 5, 2002. A Powerplants Group was formed, and the complete Powerplants Group Factual Report is included in the public docket associated with this report. Among the items examined were the engines, fuel tank boost pumps, fuel heater and anti-ice valves. Examination of the right engine revealed several nicks dents and tears to the 7th stage compressor blades. No other damage or anomalies were found that could be associated with the incident. A power assurance check of the left engine showed that it could attain take off power without exceeding any performance limits. A power assurance check of the right engine was not performed due to the damage noted to the 7th stage compressor blades. Fuel samples were taken from each of the airplane's fuel tanks, engines, and the fuel truck that serviced the airplane at the departure airport. All of the fuel samples were found to conform to the applicable specification.
Examination of the DFDR data revealed that the roll back of both engines occurred about SRN 4,725. The only engine performance parameter recorded is EPR. The DFDR data shows that the airplane was in level flight at FL330. At SRN 4,183, about 9 minutes and 2 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR indication was 1.74, the right engine EPR indication was 1.69, the airplane's airspeed was 269.25 knots, and the pitch attitude was 1.79 degrees. By SRN 4,199, 8 minutes and 46 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR had increased to 2.00, the right engine EPR had increased to 1.95, the airspeed had dropped to 260.5 knots, and the pitch attitude had increased to 2.24 degrees. By SRN 4,285, 7 minutes and 20 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR had decreased to 1.77, the right engine EPR had decreased to 1.72, the airspeed had increased to 273.5 knots, and the pitch attitude had decreased to 1.79 degrees. This occurred while the airplane remained at FL 330. DFDR data shows that the autothrottles reached the EPR limit during this period.
At SRN 4,416, about 5 minutes and 9 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR indication was 1.69, the right engine EPR indication was 1.63, the airplane's airspeed was 271.75 knots, and the pitch attitude was 0.9 degrees. By SRN 4,482, 4 minutes and 3 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR had increased to 2.03, the right engine EPR had increased to 1.91, the airspeed had dropped to 260.25 knots, and the pitch attitude had increased to 1.34 degrees. Over the next 4 minutes and 3 seconds, until SRN 4,725, the EPR indications fluctuated between 2.08 and 1.96 on the left engine, and 2.04 and 1.91 on the right engine. During this same period, the airplane remained at FL 330, the airspeed dropped to 209.25 knots, and the pitch increased to 4.91 degrees. Between SRN 4,725 and 4,735, the EPR indications for the left and right engines dropped to 1.05 and .86 respectively. By SRN 4,749, 24 seconds after the roll back, the airspeed had dropped to 187 knots and the pitch had increased to 8.44 degrees. DFDR data shows that the autothrottles reached the EPR limit during this period. The DFDR plots are included in the public docket material associated with this report.
HISTORY OF FLIGHT
On June 4, 2002, at 1238 central daylight time, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, N823NK, operated as Spirit Airlines Flight 970, experienced a loss of power from both engines while in cruise flight at flight level (FL) 330. The power loss occurred about 20 nautical miles west of Wichita, Kansas. Power from both engines was restored and the airplane diverted to the Wichita Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas, without further incident. The 14 CFR Part 121 scheduled passenger flight was operating on an instrument flight rules flight plan. No injuries to the 105 passengers or 6 crewmembers were reported. The flight originated from the Denver International Airport, Denver, Colorado at 1140 and was en route to the Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
In a telephone interview, the captain stated that the flight was uneventful until he and the first officer simultaneously noticed the low-pressure compressor speed (N1) and EPR indications were low on both engines. He said that they also noticed that the airspeed was deteriorating very rapidly. He stated that he took control of the airplane, disconnected the autopilot, and started an immediate descent. He said that the stick shaker activated briefly. The captain went on to describe the restart of the engines and subsequent descent and landing. He stated that a right engine restart was accomplished about 17,000 feet altitude, and the left engine started on its own a short time later. The captain stated that everything was normal prior to the incident and after the engines were restarted. He said that the autopilot was engaged and the autothrottles were on when the event happened. He stated that he did not recall seeing the throttle levers moving and if they did move, they did they moved very slowly. He said that ice protection was not used and the temperature never got close to plus 6 degrees. The complete summary of the interview is included in the public docket associated with this accident.
In a telephone interview, the first officer stated that one hour into the flight he felt a vibration that came on fast and got worse in a matter of seconds. He said that the captain took control of the airplane and disengaged the autopilot. He said that the stall horn sounded and the stick shaker activated and the captain pushed the nose of the airplane down. He said that both engines were rolled back. When asked about the vibration, the first officer stated that he was not sure if it was a stall, or a pre-stall buffet. He stated that engine anti-ice was off. The first officer reported that the airplane broke out on top of the clouds at 17,000 feet and was in the clear after that. He stated that there were a just a few scattered cirrus clouds. He stated that at the time the stall warning activated, both engines rolled back simultaneously while the throttles stayed in position at the normal cruise setting. He said that the captain pushed the throttles forward but there was no response from the engines. The complete summary of the interview is included in the public docket associated with this accident.
PERSONNEL INFORMATION
The captain held an airline transport pilot certificate with single and multi-engine airplane ratings. He was type rated in the DC-9. His most recent first class medical certificate was issued on December 20, 2001, and listed the limitation that he wear corrective lenses. The captain reported that he had been employed by the airline since February 1998, and that he had been a captain since February 2000. The report submitted by the airline listed his total flight experience as 7,200 hours. The report listed 1,720 total hours and 1,400 hours as pilot in command in the same make and model as the incident airplane. The pilot reported that he had received training at the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) safety schools, including accident investigation. He reported that at the time of the incident, he was the ALPA alternate for the Aviation Safety Actions Program (ASAP) review committee, and the local Air Safety Chairman for Spirit Airline's Fort Lauderdale, Florida base.
The first officer held an airline transport pilot certificate with single and multi-engine airplane ratings. His most recent first class medical certificate was issued on March 11, 2002. The report submitted by the airline listed his total flight experience as 8,900 hours with 376 hours in the same make and model as the incident airplane. The first officer had no logged pilot in command time in the incident aircraft make and model.
AIRCRAFT INFORMATION
The airplane was a McDonnell Douglas DC-9-82, serial number 48020.
METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION
A Meteorological Factual Report was prepared in conjunction with the incident investigation. Weather radar data indicates that about 7 minutes prior to the incident, the cloud tops were 30,000 feet at the incident location and 35,000 feet about 10 nautical miles west. The weather radar echo intensity at 33,000 feet altitude was 16 dBZ at the incident location about 8 minutes prior to the incident. The upper air data for Topeka, Kansas, about 99 nautical miles northeast of the incident, shows temperatures of -38.1 and -47.4 degrees Celsius at 31,339.0 and 35,006.6 feet altitude respectively at 0700. The temperatures were -36.5 and -45.7 degrees Celsius at 31,338.4 and 35,006.6 feet altitude respectively at 1900. The complete Meteorological Factual Report is included in the public docket associated with this report.
FLIGHT RECORDERS
The digital flight data recorder (DFDR) was removed from the airplane and the data read out at the National Transportation Safety Board's recorder laboratory in Washington, D.C. The data is recorded with reference to the DFDR subframe reference number (SRN), where each SRN equals 1 second of elapsed time. Examination of the data revealed that the incident flight originated about 1,800 SRN and landed about 5,892 SRN. The DFDR data indicates that the dual engine roll back event began about 48 minutes and 45 seconds into the flight at 4,725 SRN. Graphs of various recorded parameters were plotted. The complete DFDR report, including the parameter plots, is included in the public docket associated with this report.
The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) circuit breaker had not been pulled after the incident. As a consequence, the recording contained on the CVR did not cover the time of the incident and the CVR was not read out.
TESTS AND RESEARCH
The NTSB conducted an on-scene examination of the airplane and engines on June 5, 2002. A Powerplants Group was formed, and the complete Powerplants Group Factual Report is included in the public docket associated with this report. Among the items examined were the engines, fuel tank boost pumps, fuel heater and anti-ice valves. Examination of the right engine revealed several nicks dents and tears to the 7th stage compressor blades. No other damage or anomalies were found that could be associated with the incident. A power assurance check of the left engine showed that it could attain take off power without exceeding any performance limits. A power assurance check of the right engine was not performed due to the damage noted to the 7th stage compressor blades. Fuel samples were taken from each of the airplane's fuel tanks, engines, and the fuel truck that serviced the airplane at the departure airport. All of the fuel samples were found to conform to the applicable specification.
Examination of the DFDR data revealed that the roll back of both engines occurred about SRN 4,725. The only engine performance parameter recorded is EPR. The DFDR data shows that the airplane was in level flight at FL330. At SRN 4,183, about 9 minutes and 2 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR indication was 1.74, the right engine EPR indication was 1.69, the airplane's airspeed was 269.25 knots, and the pitch attitude was 1.79 degrees. By SRN 4,199, 8 minutes and 46 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR had increased to 2.00, the right engine EPR had increased to 1.95, the airspeed had dropped to 260.5 knots, and the pitch attitude had increased to 2.24 degrees. By SRN 4,285, 7 minutes and 20 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR had decreased to 1.77, the right engine EPR had decreased to 1.72, the airspeed had increased to 273.5 knots, and the pitch attitude had decreased to 1.79 degrees. This occurred while the airplane remained at FL 330. DFDR data shows that the autothrottles reached the EPR limit during this period.
At SRN 4,416, about 5 minutes and 9 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR indication was 1.69, the right engine EPR indication was 1.63, the airplane's airspeed was 271.75 knots, and the pitch attitude was 0.9 degrees. By SRN 4,482, 4 minutes and 3 seconds prior to the roll back, the left engine EPR had increased to 2.03, the right engine EPR had increased to 1.91, the airspeed had dropped to 260.25 knots, and the pitch attitude had increased to 1.34 degrees. Over the next 4 minutes and 3 seconds, until SRN 4,725, the EPR indications fluctuated between 2.08 and 1.96 on the left engine, and 2.04 and 1.91 on the right engine. During this same period, the airplane remained at FL 330, the airspeed dropped to 209.25 knots, and the pitch increased to 4.91 degrees. Between SRN 4,725 and 4,735, the EPR indications for the left and right engines dropped to 1.05 and .86 respectively. By SRN 4,749, 24 seconds after the roll back, the airspeed had dropped to 187 knots and the pitch had increased to 8.44 degrees. DFDR data shows that the autothrottles reached the EPR limit during this period. The DFDR plots are included in the public docket material associated with this report.
FN FAL
Freight Dawgs Rule
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2003
- Posts
- 8,573
I did a search of the NTSB, the FAA and an exhaustive search of news articles on www.google.com I didnt find any news or information that would support your friends claim of an engine out with the airline you mention. I'm not saying it didn't happen...but engine outs are a mandatory report item and there is no report.
As far as handing out congratulations...
...I'd wait till I found out why the engine quit in the first place. The guy I met from the above incident with the DC9 double engine flameout and his captain are both out of jobs...so no hero's medals there.
Last edited:
I've confirmed this engine out was the real McCoy in spite of searches or ntsb requirements on engine failures.Maybe there is a ten day reporting period,I don't know. He said the plane shook and the captain came on the p.a. and said we've lost engine 1.
True story. maybe Atlanta tv stations were kept out of the loop also.
True story. maybe Atlanta tv stations were kept out of the loop also.
A Squared
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 3,006
FN FAL said:
An engine failure is not a mandatory report under the NTSB regulations, unless there is structural damage to a turbine engine, or if there is loss of power on 2 or more engines. Under part 121 a report is required any time an emergency is declared, which would presumably cover the 737 engine failure. However the reports filed for declaring an emercency do not generally find thier way onto the NTSB websites. It may appear on the FAA's incident website, but the operator does have 10 days to file the report.
Obviously a double engine flameout with an uncontrolled descent of 16,000 feet is going to be much more interesting to the NTSB than a single engine failure and an uneventful diversion and landing.
FN FAL said:
Any info on what went on there? My uninformed guess from reading the report is that it was either a) some malfunction in hte suto throttle system, in which case it would hardly seem the crew's fault, or b) fuel starvation, which would seem to be the crew's fault.
IDpilot said:
actually, it would be worse to tell them nothing, or just that there's a problem and we need to land right now. being up front and honest is what passengers are owed. imagine the news stories you'd get out of a plane full of passengers who only found out the reason their flight was cut short was because of an engine failure, after they landed.
you obviously don't want to scare them but i would most definitely tell the passengers one of the engine quit, we're trying to get it started again, the aircraft is completely under control and capable of flying on one engine, but we're going to land in atlanta to get things squared away. (something of that nature!)
FN FAL
Freight Dawgs Rule
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2003
- Posts
- 8,573
We'll, I would get more information on this double flameout but the Spirit FO that lost his job over the incident dismantled a Beech 99 into a runway just before christmas while flying for a 135 operator and I haven't seen much of him since then.
He did say that him and the Captain were sent packing, and that the incident engines had been written up quite a bit before this incident. He made no mention of fuel exhaustion and it's not in the NTSB Factual report.
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
