Turkish Airlines A330 Suffers Engine Failure: Circles For 4 Hours

[@x2006charger]

Well... if anyone ever doubted an airliner could fly on one engine... here you go.

[@spanishinquisition3173]

May as well have made it to Johannesburg

[@THALASA]

Sure, but there is no way you would ever get any insurance on your planes.

[@nurrizadjatmiko21]

Oh my. That was a pretty long time circle in the air for the emergency landing

[@alooga555]

Circling around for 4 hours used to be a typical evening for flights landing at JFK. s/

[@wadehiggins8107]

Orbiting for 4 hours is crazy!

[@chocolatechris7304]

That's like waiting 4 hours at the hospital with a broken arm

[@valmirsallahu4209]

I’ve experienced a emergency landing on an Airbus A319 from Cancun to Philadelphia. We were half way through our trip when suddenly the pilot announced that we had high engine temperature on the left engine. He or the crew did not say anything else. We didn’t even know we diverted until we landed an Raleigh International. We had to then wait 4 hours at RDU then take another flight to CLT then finally back to PHL. It surly was an interesting flight.

[@Jet-Pack]

On the photos you have shown of the aircraft I could not see any fuel dumping ejector pipes, so I'd assume it does not have that option installed.

[@omarmehmood14]

The plane had one JOB

[@MrRandomppl]

circled over south of hong kong for 2 hour long fuel dumping right after take off on a BA 747 flight from HKG to LHR... felt like eternity already...

[@dhaferalamry7157]

Overweight landing is permitted according to the A330 FCOM limitations provided the overweight landing procedure E-QRH complied with as advertised therefore spending 4 hours holding over IST in my perspective wasn’t a wise decision,unless the Turkish Airline policy have their own practice regarding such abnormalities or emergencies .though landing safely is the objective also fuel saving and passenger consideration shouldn’t be overlooked .happy landings

[@noahwilliams8918]

“TK42(1), why aren’t you dumping fuel?” “TK42(1) do you copy?!”

[@szechunglui4898]

All of below are referring to non-neo A330 Actually, most A330s don't install fuel dumping system. A330 (both A332 and A333) have its max. overweight-landing weight as 227T (standard MLDW 182T-A332 / 187T-A333) And MTOW 233T (old version) / 238T (A332 reduced MZFW) / 242T (newest non-neo version), Fuel dumping system is not required with that different, same as why 757 doesn't have fuel dump. However, doing an overweight landing close to its max required a lot of time for engineering check after parked. Airlines tend to reduce the weight to its standing MLW in non-life threatening situation by holding for hours to avoid spending days on checking.

[@hewhohasnoidentity4377]

The A330 doesn't require fuel dumping capabilities because it can land at it's maximum takeoff weight if necessary. It just requires additional inspections, which would not cause a problem in this case when the aircraft needed an engine replacement anyway.

[@mbeganovic27]

Could you elaborate on the diversion of flight LH456 to DEN which happened yesterday, November 21?

[@ib7.idrisbachir771]

Lufthansa?

[@seagullsbtn]

The Nov 5 lH 456 diverted to Kef due to unruly passenger. Three hours later continued on to LAX

[@mbeganovic27]

@@seagullsbtn how did you get this information?

[@SunnyShiny1]

I experienced once about 30 years ago. On a business trip, taking Dragonair direct flight from HKG (Kai Tak at that time) to PEK in the afternoon. The flight time was approximately 4 hours flying the L1011 Tristar. I was in a window seat, the sun was at the right side of the aircraft indicated heading north. The sunshine was irritating to my eyes, so I pulled down the shade. Flight attendants started serving dinner shortly after take off. About 1 hour after airborne, above the province of Hunan, while flight attendants were collecting meal trays, I pulled up the shade and noticed the sun was not on my side, common sense told me the aircraft was heading south. I asked myself is it because of sun setting? Shortly after I noticed the sun was on the opposite of the aircraft, the captain announced there was some issues with one of the 3 engines. As such, the aircraft had to go back to HKG. The captain announced the aircraft would circle around outside HKG above to release fuel, because the aircraft was fully loaded for this journey. I saw white fume ejecting from the wing tip. It took more than an hour to release fuel, we safely landed HKG. What an experience in life.

[@thegirdedmind]

In 2008, I was aboard a Boeing 777 headed for London when someone called in a bomb threat. We dumped a full load of fuel and then landed in Montreal. We deplaned and authorities pulled the freight and combed the plane. We refilled with fuel about four hours later and flew on to London.

[@magnustan841]

Wonder if they could drop to a lower altitude and extend the landing gear to increase drag and burn up fuel faster and make it back to the airport quicker. But I’d imagine that would be dangerous if the last engine gave up. Maybe At least put dow flaps and deploy speed brakes to increase drag.

[@ZRHTrainspotter]

Thats a typical compressor stall

[@jlmarc01]

Those A330 are getting old. Never crazy for such plane

[@leroypenn558]

Planes very rarely keep the same engines as they were manufactured with. Consider them separate products with different lifespans.

[@frxxseazsn]

Lol yeah even the 747 , 757

[@kimschroder9354]

I live north of Hamburg and basically beneath the approach path for its north/south runway. One time, I was outside and saw a plane approaching and it had two clearly visible fuel dumping streaks tailing from the middle of its wing. I’ve never seen that before, but I always wondered why the did that.

[@Elias-xy9kc]

What!? I read before that some A330's and 767's aren't equipped with fuel-dumping systems ,but an airline like Turkish that Flys them on long-haul routes *should* have their A330's equipped with fuel-dumping systems! Flying for four hours to burn fuel is too much, if equipped with fuel dumping systems it wouldn't have taken 30 minutes!

[@stefanbindl8902]

TK6361 is circling right now at IST. It's a 777 this time.

[@sithiradulanjithgalhenaged6974]

A compressor stall ?

[@anirudhtyagi2769]

Airliners are certificated to land with a sink rate of approx 360 ft. /min. at the structural limited TOW, and with approx 600 ft. / min. at the maximum landing weight. Normal sink rate at touchdown averages 120 ft. /min. Therefore, structural problems will not arise, provided sink rates at touchdown are controlled and do not exceed 360 ft./min. All it requires is an inspection for a heavy landing, and that does not take much time (about an hour).

[@mesoma7274]

Wow. The second engine failure this month!

[@ronaldcuieii4775]

I have aboard this nice A320 on one of the low cost American carriers. Circled around the air for about 45 minutes before landing. Once landed we were met with fire engines before being escorted to the gate. Don't know what happened. Later in the day we continued to our destination on the same aircraft😟😊😊.

[@julianbrelsford]

Airplanes have a lot of sensors and when a sensor is not working correctly it could SEEM like there is a safety problem when in fact there's only a bad sensor. And with the correct part in hand, it may well be possible for a maintenance worker to replace the part in under an hour. For exame I've heard of landing gear not SHOWING as fully down and locked when in fact the only problem is a sensor and engines probably have their own version of the "all you need is to replace one sensor" kind of problem. (I know car engines can have that problem)

[@ronaldcuieii4775]

@@julianbrelsford oh ok🙂. That's sharp🤗

[@peeticek1624]

how did they landed and used reversal thrust when only one engine was operating? did they use just brakes for these cases?

[@andy-ally]

You can still use operating engine thrust reverse as aircraft has separate thrust levers for each engine but you need to input sufficient amount of rudder to compensate asymmetric thrust.

[@bartcarolgroeneveld-alvers3780]

These aircraft are certified to stop in the required distance with brakes only. Thrust reversers create additional safety margin and reduced landing distances but are not required for dispatch.

[@troysta747]

I was flying Manila to Singapore on Jetstar Asia when we hit birds on takeoff and had to land immediately. I have it all on video as we hit the birds on takeoff, wasn’t till I watched slow motion you can see the birds flying past. It was an A320 and we landed with 4 hours of fuel on board.

[@MarktheSharkC]

I’m sure that AirJunker didn’t have the fuel dump option!

[@navinstrument8353]

Orbiting for 4 hours is one thing. Do you get food during the wait?

[@ssg8663]

If it's gonna take 4 hours to land a flight, might as well continue on half way to your destination. Emergency landing has no meaning for the time it takes to address the emergency situation

[@SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648]

Well, I think they did this to remain sufficiently close to a suitable airport should the other engine also quit (gliding in would be easy) -- while still hoping to burn off enough fuel to land without landing like a ton of bricks or failing to stop before reaching the end of the runway....

[@wholeeyschmoley580]

UNDERRATED CHANNEL

[@ibrahimmakumba9448]

I'm not a pilot or aircraft engineer but the idea to cycle around for 4 hours sounds more weird to me.I think fuel damping option should be mandatory

[@derchemiker9940]

As long as the Aircraft is under control it’s all good. An Engine failure isn’t that bad. Of course you wouldn’t proceed to your destination with 1 Engine. Beside from that you could do an overweight landing if there is a time critical emergency such as fire. The B777 for example has an overweight landing Checklist/Procedure. I’m sure the A330 has something similar.

[@mukanyawic]

@@derchemiker9940I am a Captain on the B767-200ER. My company has got 2 of them. one has a fuel dumping system and the other one doesn't. For that aircraft, there is no overweight landing checklist. All the guidance on how to go about it is in the Flight Crew Training Manual and the Operations Manual

[@almerindaromeira8352]

@@mukanyawic what's the procedure then? Inputting current weight into the FMS and praying for sufficient runway lenght available at the desired airport? From the top of my head I assume the landing speed to be higher and the brakes to overheat.

[@mukanyawic]

@@almerindaromeira8352 the QRH has a section where you can crosscheck the expected landing weight against the available runway length. If that says No then you got to go where there is sufficient runway for that weight. Boeing specifically says in a dire emergency you should NOT delay landing in an attempt to reduce landing weight. Obviously one should then fly the aircraft accurately and on speed to touchdown. There will Obviously be maintenance inspections that need to be carried out before that aircraft can be returned to service. Ideally in a situation where you have to do an overweight landing, the crew should go to where there is a very long runway if possible and feaseable

[@ibrahimmakumba9448]

@@derchemiker9940 one more question in case you decide to land with one engine while still overweight in the event you failed to land ,is it possible TOGA with only one working Engine ...?

[@austinsmith7715]

If they flew around for four hours they where burning the fuel not dumping. If the captain and ATC decided to do a fuel dump they would have been in the air for way less time then 4 hours

[@seagullsbtn]

Four hours. They need to speed up their checklist and procedures

[@spiderspencer7334]

Imagine second engine fails too ( not impossible), which would lead to a forced landing with all that fuel.

[@RobEJC]

I wonder if the passengers got full meal and beverage service during the flight?

[@marciacunningham6119]

So we learn everything EXCEPT who manufactured the engines on this A330.

[@ATIMELINEOFAVIATION]

Honestly not that surprised but interesting 🇹🇷

[@andersonrodriguez8258]

DJ aviation dont report nothing involving Airbus issues lol

[@johnmatthews8088]

As issue was a failed engine they would simply stop the engine over with another get plane in fleet againn

[@NR-vw2rd]

Avoid a heavy landing, not hard landing (there’s a difference).

[@tridatnguyen3588]

Turkish Airlines sure now is out of a JOB for a while :)).

[@kaprios1709]

4 hours circles for safety landing... 🤔 Never mind.... it's OK... 😊

[@shortyian1]

4 hours 😂…. Might as well flew in the direction of its intended destination for 4hrs and land somewhere on the way 🤷‍♂️

[@FrancoisTX1974]

Turkish with is exotic schedule….+ or - 3 hours and the post Covid maintenance of the plane is pretty bad and incident happen more And Morwmoften

[@finleyfendt3750]

Get that airplane on the ground, NOW. An overweight inspection after landing should have been considered by the crew, and land.

[@RoderikvanReekum]

With the Fokker 130 NG this would not have happened due to the superior quality of the special designed engines, that will never go faulty, moreover fuel dumping maganisments will be a free compulsory option.

[@bjoe385]

They should have just done a British Airways and flew there anyway.

[@RoyalMela]

I wish it was TK-421.

[@tinykingdom4494]

Anyway CF-6 is still most reliable in my opinion.

[@slaheddinechiboub8247]

Delaying landing in an emergency is a crime If any harm happened to any passenger following delay intentionally the airline will be in big trouble On the other hand if all passengers die due to the emergency followed with landing than God bless them

[@HaCkEr6662k7]

fouuuuuuuuuuur houuuuuuuurs... dafuq!

[@BChandl13]

Looks like it took in a bird or some debris, but birds at 2am is pretty rare, but not unheard of

[@MSRTA_Productions]

Oofish

[@mrnino5086]

oh yeah south africa is a winner

[@henrikfenneberg6449]

Overweight landings has a procedure. It is not a problem and it does not result in a hard landing. Especially not on an Airbus with its flightlogic. This rather shows that Simple Flying does not really know it’s stuff. So goodbye and good luck from me. 👎🏻👎🏻

[@alexanderhall4281]

Am amazed by how it can fly with one engine...

[@ruarifollows5180]

hi

[@davidkamen]

That "left engine" is called the "port side engine".

[@EvanAviator]

No, it is usually/commonly referred to as the left or #1 engine

[@SimpleFlyingNews]

Hey David, the point of Simple Flying is that we attempt to make aviation accessible to everyone. Left engine is much more descriptive to many than port engine. - TB

[@parimal7528]

When country itself is in FATF grey list, no wonder Turkish airlines must be having poor maintenance.

[@John-ww3ji]

Fuel dumping mechanism should be made Mandatory for all Jet engine Aircrafts. Circling for long hours is very unsafe for the Flight crew, cabin crew and its passengers. In any incident the Safety of all on board the aircraft or ship is always paramount. This could have long term health problems or side effects on all on board this flight ship.

[@Tasek7]

Turkish airlines a330 suks🤣

[@Tasek7]

love from bangladesh🇧🇩🇧🇩🇧🇩🇧🇩

[@frxxseazsn]

Lol yeah even the 747

[@user-yt198]

@@frxxseazsn Yeah, even the 797 😂

[@John-ww3ji]

Fuel dumping mechanism should be made Mandatory for all Jet engine Aircrafts. Circling for long hours is very unsafe for the Flight crew, cabin crew and its passengers. In any incident the Safety of all on board the aircraft or ship is always paramount. This could have long term health problems or side effects on all on board this flight ship.

[@derchemiker9940]

Why is it unsafe? As long as the Aircraft is under control it’s all good. An Engine failure isn’t that bad. Of course you wouldn’t proceed to your destination with 1 Engine. Beside from that you could do an overweight landing if there is a time critical emergency such as fire. The B777 for example has an overweight landing Checklist/Procedure. I’m sure the A330 has something similar.

[@jetBlue_83]

🤣🤣🤣

[@sam3407]

What ? How is it unsafe, Mr. Armchair Analyst ?