Jump to content
Aero Precision provides OEM part support for military aircraft operators across more than 20 aircraft
Sign in to follow this  
ruipssilva

Fuel dumping with an engine fire!

Recommended Posts

Hello

I’ve been around and learning with all of you for a while now but it’s my first time posting. My name is Rui and I’m a Herc driver in the Portuguese Air Force…. I’m also a proud SUPT grad! I did some of my best flying in the states…unfortunately not in the Herc ;)

The question I have is simple: would you, as a crew, have any special consideration while dumping with an outboard engine on fire? I’m asking because it is not in the flight manual and there as been some discussion in my sqn. about how you should dump in that situation. Some have the opinion that you should dump from the opposite dump mast only (we fly H models with dump valves). Some others say the fuel spray pattern will be well clear of the engine.Any comments on that?

Tks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I would think about dumping, take care of the engine fire. Before you can dump enought fuel to matter you might have a wing off light. Point to be made is if you can't stop a fire on an engine, LAND! But I was to start dumping with a fire anywhere on a wing I would use the other dump mast only, why take a chance to futher complicate things, after all at this point a bad day is getting worse!

My 2 cents worth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..... I think management would forgive an overweight landing, if this is your reason for

dumping. As C130H2FE says - deal with the fire first, then worry about the rest.

One of our members told of his experience with an engine fire, which resulted in the engine

falling off the wing in flight - can't find the story, though!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, dealing with the fire first is a good advise  …but my point is: you have an engine fire and deal with it, but, lets say your on departure and 3 engine climb performance is marginal, or, you might even be on the app. but a go around is always a possibility. As we all know 3 (or 2!!) engine performance might be marginal above certain GWs. So the scenario would be: engine fire, boldface (discharging both bottles) and now I need to loose some weight but I still see some smoke (and an occasional flame just to make it more fun) coming out of number 4! My climb performance is marginal and my number 3 is loosing oil px (yes…it’s one of those days). What would you do? Accept a lower dump rate (??) dumping from one side only and take your chances with the mountains or dump from both sides and take your chances with the fire? Will the fuel spray get any near that engine?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dump rate from one mast is not much different that using both. As other post stated if the fire continues you might have the engine fall off as the Pope E model did. From what I have heard it is the only time an engine fell off and the plane was not lost, not something I want to try! If you do decide to dump from the wing with a engine fire will it ignite? Not sure, never asked that question before. I tend to think it will not ignite but it would be determined on how far back the flames extend behind the engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scenario would be: engine fire, boldface (discharging both bottles) and now I need to loose some weight but I still see some smoke (and an occasional flame just to make it more fun) coming out of number 4!

My climb performance is marginal and my number 3 is loosing oil px (yes…it’s one of those days).

WHY NOT THROW IN A WINDMILLING PROP WHILE YOUR AT IT.....

What would you do?

Immediate return opposite direction....overweight landing and all....

Accept a lower dump rate (??) dumping from one side only and take your chances with the mountains or dump from both sides and take your chances with the fire?

Dump from both based on your description…. (the dump outlets are quite a distance from your engine.)

Run #3 until it runs out of oil/ oil pressure… (the reason for the immediate return)

Will the fuel spray get any near that engine?

No…. unless there is a wing structural failure due to the fire (exhaust area heat shield damaged…this fuel line is in the flapwell pretty well protected and if it were damaged you would not be able to dump from either side due to the manifold being pressurized all the way out to the outboard flap well area. (dump valves)

Edited by NATOPS1
Add

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By all means dump and dump from both masts, all you do by only using one dump mast is hurt yourself.

Dumping in never a quick process and if you needlessly cut your rate in half then it just takes that much longer to get the weight off.

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minimum speed for fuel dumping is 167 kts indicated. Operation at or above this speed will ensure you are ahead of any flame front in the event of an engine fire. This minimum speed is FAA mandated for aircraft certification and flight operation.

Edited by furd
spelling error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minimum speed for fuel dumping is 167 kts indicated. Operation at or above this speed will ensure you are ahead of any flame front in the event of an engine fire. This minimum speed is FAA mandated for aircraft certification and flight operation.

And for those aircraft not FAA certified such as our classic versions of the venerable C-130?

Didn't know the FAA had a min mandated speed...and how exactly do they test that you're ahead of the flame front? :eek: I'd like to watch those certification tests!:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question first and foremost should be...why is my engine on fire. If you think back 15 yrs or so, we had an AC-130H with the left wing on fire, and dumping hurt them more than helping. I understand that they had more than an enigne (full wing on fire) and a ruptured dump manifold dump more fuel on the fire, but dumping could be worst than better.

As Dan Wilson said, getting the weight off is the best thing to do, but then agian, I would land at 155K+ if needed. Easier to talk about it on the old mans carpert, than 6 feet under ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought that all dumping did was lead the fire department to the scene of the crash.

Don R.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are fast enough it would not matter what type of aircraft it was. The flame propagation rate ( flame advancement rate ) of any fuel would easily be calculated in a laboratory and I doubt if it was ever put to an actual flight test. That said the Australian Airforce had a display routine with their F111 at airshows that involved dumping fuel then igniting it with the afterburners. The aircraft flew the length of the runway at about 2000' with flaming fuel behind it and at an aircraft speed that was ahead of the flame front. A very impressive routine to observe.

The DC8 that I flew many years ago had the minimum dump speed of 167kts listed in the QRH Emergency Proceedures for dumping fuel along with other airmanship considerations. The airline used those same considerations for all their aircraft types.

Edited by furd
Typing error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No minimum speed on our legacy herks, not sure about the wunnerful J model though.

The gunship didn't have any ruptures to the dump manifold, it did however have several punctures through the manifolds coming out of the external tank, charring visible in the tank faring and wing surface just to the aft of the fairing, melted metal in the wing area above #2 engine (you know, the engine they said wasn't on fire) and NO evidence of charring or even sooting in the flap well area.

That wreck is the thing that out and out told me AF safety investigations are crap.

I would be hard pressed to find anything in that safety report that was factual - friggin idiot investigators.

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That wreck is the thing that out and out told me AF safety investigations are crap.

Just that one, Dan? I'm not happy with several of them.

In fairness, but not in defense, the SIB is given 30 days to investigate and complete their report. They have to prove nothing. They are supposed to use experienced dudes who have access to experts to come up with the most plausible course of action. All too often, they use the most convenient dudes...

Quite often, they get it completely wrong.

Let's not forget agendas, biases, and, yes, idiots.

In comparison, the NTSB does not have a set time to determine anything, but they do need to have compelling evidence to make claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for those aircraft not FAA certified such as our classic versions of the venerable C-130?

Didn't know the FAA had a min mandated speed...and how exactly do they test that you're ahead of the flame front? :eek: I'd like to watch those certification tests!:D

Google "RAAF F111 fuel dump and burn" to see video's of their displays. You will not see any certification tests however this is the closest you will get to an aircraft with a trailing fuel fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...