From:         michael keenan <>
Organization: The University of Manitoba
Date:         03 Nov 96 19:56:58 
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

On 28 Oct 1996, Keith Barr wrote:

> In article <airliners.1996.2169@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
> Charles Platt <> wrote:
> >I was told by a 747 captain that he could continue a takeoff on two
> >engines. But even if this is untrue, if an ETOPS plane loses two engines
> >on takeoff, it's in MUCH DEEPER trouble, wouldn't you say?
> Does anyone know if there has ever been a case of multiple, simultaneous,
> unrelated, turbine engine failures above V1?  It seems to me that if you
> have two engines die, no matter how many you have, they are all likely to go.

The only scenario I can think of is with tri-jets. If you lose one of the
wing engines on a DC-10/MD-11 or an L-1011, and it's an uncontained
failure, I could imagine pieces of the engine getting sucked into the
intake of the tail engine and taking that out. I did hear of a case of a
DC-10 that had a piece of its engine nacelle on No. 1 or No. 3 come off
and get sucked into No. 2. This was reported briefly in one of Fred
McClement's admittedly alarmist books. If it happened with a piece of the
nacelle it's plausible that it could happen with a piece of the actual
engine in an uncontained failure.