It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Singapore Airbus 330 has double temp engine failure

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77

Instead of spamming your thread, prove it. You keep saying that they can be predicted, so predict it.




posted on May, 27 2015 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77

If it was, they wouldn't have got the engines re-started.

Zap, does the Airbus have a Ram Air Turbine generator?

Unless they find something different, I'll go with ice clogging a sensor port.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

Yes they do. They flew through weather shortly before the power loss, so some kind of ice is probably the cause.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: cosmania
a reply to: buddah6

No. You last as soon as possible. Single Engine failure is rare and an emergency. Dual engine failure is nearly catastrophic for an A330. The only reason I would think they didn't land at Hong Kong is that they were too high to descend easily.

Icing could account for dual flameout and no visible damage. Icing in fuel systems has flamed out both motors in the past. The electronic data systems in the RR motors will tell the tale of what happened in their systems. Still.

Get your butt on the ground ASAP. Pilots are weird.

Yes we are! 17,000 hours and two combat tours is enough to be a little weird...lol.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: buddah6

I think it's the fuel. Ramp rats are almost as bad.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Blackfinger

And then the idiots flew another hour and a half to Shanghai.


Then turned it around in 4 hours and flew a return trip.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: Blackfinger

Serious question for the airline pilot types on this forum:

Is it normal procedure that when both engines loose power and the aircraft start falling out of the sky, to decide after the engines had been re-started, to continue on your journey? A little over 1 1/2 hour to your final destination, even though they could have diverted to Hong Kong that was only about 1/2 hour away, not knowing what the cause of the engine power loss was in the first placumber of reasonse?
Granted we don't know all the particulars of the indecent but it seams a little reckless on the surface to a non-pilot such as myself.


Your question has the keys to the answer. A flameout can occur for a number of reasons: extreme precipitation (Southern Airways 242); improper use of crossfeed pumps (East African Airlines 5Y-ADA); trying to run on an empty tank (1977 Benghazi Libyan Arab Airlines Tu-154); volcanic ash ingestion (British Airways Flight 9); fuel contamination (United Airlines Flight 310); icing (Scandinavian Airlines Flight 751); excessive alpha (angle-of-attack) due to low speed (Pinnacle Airlines Flight 3701); bird strikes (US Airways Flight 1549). If the cause is known to the pilots and it is a transient problem that can be corrected by flying out of the rain, decreasing alpha, switching to a tank that actually has some kerosine, or the like, and if after restart the annunciator panel is dark and the guages look good, there is no problem with continuing on. We don't know the cause. A decision was made by people with years and thousands of hours of experience. I wasn't there so I'm not going to second guess a decision that turned out just fine.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499
a reply to: EndOfDays77

If it was, they wouldn't have got the engines re-started.

Zap, does the Airbus have a Ram Air Turbine generator?

Unless they find something different, I'll go with ice clogging a sensor port.


Yes, the 330, at least those with the CFM-56, has a RAT, but that doesn't help a restart. For that you need to be in the windmilling restart envelope (230-280 knots) or use the APU bleed air to help. The RAT will give you 2500 psi hydraulics and electrics, though. On most aircraft it extends automatically but on the 330, there is a pushbutton on the overhead panel.



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: F4guy

You'll be hard pressed to find any A330 with CFM-56's, though I'm pretty sure you meant to say CF-6.



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 06:22 AM
link   
You could not disprove it Zaphod and it was painful to watch.In fact nobody could disprove it with the weight of data I put forth.Again we clearly have another case of celestial EMP and the location is quite telling as it is in the vicinity of the Sundra/Phillipine plate-which for those that have read my thread will know,was expected and bolsters the true reason behind these crashes.

You are supposed to be an expert on this subject and are none the wiser than Joe Bloggs.

Here is my thread again in case you missed it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

BTW I was not spamming,that is a very negative comment.How about? I am the only person offering a near water tight explanation and there is clearly a cover up? I am a dedicated contributor on ATS and am looking after the well being of my fellow humans.Why don't you contribute your own thread in stead of incessantly "spamming" threads like this and chasing your own tail offering nothing in the way of explanation.

a reply to: Zaphod58



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77

There were plenty of people that found holes in your thread. You simply hand waved them away because you didn't like them.

You keep saying that it can be predicted, so put your money where your mouth is and predict the next magic EMP pulse.



posted on Jun, 1 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: waynos
a reply to: F4guy

You'll be hard pressed to find any A330 with CFM-56's, though I'm pretty sure you meant to say CF-6.


You are correct. I was thinking CFM because of the rain/hail flameout problem history. The 330 uses the CF or the RR Trent, a great engine.



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77


I've read your thread. It's possibly the stupidest theory I've ever seen. A woman that is in telepathic contact with grey aliens is providing "authentication" for a mysterious planet causing specific systems on individual aircraft to fail, and you perceive this to be "watertight", whereas everything that the scientific community can present that disagrees with your theory must have been tampered with or falsified. An approach that seems strangely familiar.

However, all is not lost. You said it's easy to predict events once one understands the signs. Excellent! You can blow me away and shoot me down for thinking you to be a deluded nutcase by predicting the next event! A proper prediction, not the vague crap about Caribbean and Irish Sea routes with no timescale you tried on that thread. Where and when. Nice and easy for you. Tick tock......



posted on Jun, 2 2015 @ 07:50 AM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77
"No please do go on!........." (Mr Burns presses protection goon alert button furiously)

Not since a certain notorious fruitcake by the name of esecallum have I had such a giggle. I read the thread but have to say that despite many excellent responses to your obviously deluded (un)reality, the best to me was the very first by AutumnWitch657 who simply said "Put your phone away and watch where you're driving". Enough said right there.

You clearly know nothing about basic gas turbine operation otherwise you would know that a functioning engine in cruise without any operating parameter changes will NOT fail due to EMP, because EMP wont affect the basic "suck, squeeze, bang, blow" of such a self sustaining combustion cycle. The fuel pump is driven mechanically directly from the gearbox and has more than enough suction to ensure continuity of supply, so explain how EMP can affect a mechanical device? The igniter's dont actually normally function at this point (unlike in a four stroke engine), only unless commanded to at start, due to flame out or if manually selected on the ENG start rotary knob on the A-330's cockpit overhead panel, and in any case the LP fuel supply valves will default to open regardless of power. Even if all power dropped off the EEC's the engine would continue running at the last known power setting until it ran out of juice, despite where planet X isn't (anywhere).

Either make a prediction NOW, and stick by it or shut up and get back under your bridge.

....... Now where were we? Oh yes the stupidity of SIA pushing its pilots to continue to the planned destination instead of a divert after a probable fuel or intake icing event. Not the first time they have caused such an incident with those tactics.

Nor is it the first time that a double engine shutdown due to fuel pump icing has occurred, how about a certain BA 777 from a few years back? (G-YMMM anyone?).

LEE.

edit on 2-6-2015 by thebozeian because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join