Date: 25 Sep 97 01:39:45
From: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Chicago Software Works, Menlo Park, California
References: 1 2 3 4
View raw article
or MIME structure
>> I have another: Following an engine failure, is there any actual
>> requirement to land at that alternate airfield [180 or 60 or whatever
>> minutes away] or can you continue all the way to the destination on one
>> engine?
>
>In-flight engine shutdowns are not taken lightly. Following one, I
>suspect the standing orders at every airline are to proceed immediately to
>the nearest suitable airport.
For many carriers it's not simply a matter of standing orders but of
governmental regulation. For US carriers, FAR 121.565(a) applies:
Section 121.565 Engine inoperative: Landing; reporting
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, whenever an
engine of an airplane fails or whenever the rotation of an engine is
stopped to prevent possible damage, the pilot in command shall land
the airplane at the nearest suitable airport, in point of time, at
which a safe landing can be made.
(b) If not more than one engine of an airplane that has three or more
engines fails or its rotation is stopped, the pilot in command may
proceed to an airport that he selects if, after considering the following,
he decides that proceeding to that airport is as safe as landing at
the nearest suitable airport:
...
While not pertinent to ETOPS, the conditions enumerated under
paragraph (b) include obvious ones such as weather, terrain, weight,
etc. Remaining paragraphs of the section deal with reporting.
--
Karl Swartz |Home kls@chicago.com
|Work kls@netapp.com
|WWW http://www.chicago.com/~kls/
Moderator of sci.aeronautics.airliners -- Unix/network work pays the bills
