FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Can a 767 fly without an engine?
View Single Post
Old Nov 18, 2001 | 8:16 am
  #26  
ATC
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Boston, Freefall: Chairman's Preferred -->Steerage Status
Posts: 667
RE: #2 The A10 Thunderbolt "Warthog" GE Turbofan engines can be jettisoned by the pilot using explosive bolts.

RE: #3 This is going back a while, but I thought that commercial jet engines were designed to shear off if the engine threw blades. Otherwise, like an off-balance washing machine, even a minor imbalance could precipitate a structural failure in the wing.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Efrem:
There are three different situations here.

1. Engine failure. Every multi-engine aircraft, not only commercial jets, is designed to fly, maneuver (perhaps in a restricted sense, especially as regards turning toward the side with the most remaining power) and land safely with one engine out. Pilots are trained to handle this situation.

2. Engine removed. In the totally hypothetical situation that an engine were designed like a drop tank, so that it could be physically released with no other damage to the aircraft, most multi-engine aircraft should still be able to fly and land. To my knowledge nobody has ever designed an airplane with quick-release engines (other than a few special-purpose takeoff assist rockets). I'm certain no commercial jet has them.

3. Engine falls off. Here the problem is that, if an engine that wasn't meant to fall off does, it will cause a lot of airframe damage in the process (or there was a lot of airframe damage that made it happen). It's this damage that creates the largest share of problems, not the lack of one engine's power or even the lack of the engine itself.

Unfortunately, the recent event was a #3.
</font>
ATC is offline