PSA CRJ incident

DE727UPS said:
No problem. They were just going the extra mile with complying with SNA noise abatement...
Click to expand...

How the heck would EEC switches turn off the fuel? Maybe I'm just used to the new(er)-fangled -300ER junk. Getting some stick time in some old JT-9s soon, though.
 
A-300F4-622R said:
The Delta 767-200 on climbout from LAX, relatively low altitude over the water after taking off to the west. Got REAL quiet. They moved the EEC switches (or whatever they are called on the CF6-80A, don't remember) to the overhead panel after that one!
Click to expand...

"Those EEC switches" don't turn off the engine. It's an alternate engine control, not a fuel cutoff. I believe the DL 767 thing was turning off both fuel control switches. Not sure why you would do that, even by accident. Maybe they were old skool guys trying to lean the mixture.
 
dasleben said:
How the heck would EEC switches turn off the fuel? Maybe I'm just used to the new(er)-fangled -300ER junk. Getting some stick time in some old JT-9s soon, though.
Click to expand...

Story, as told to me, was an early Delta 767-200 that had the EEC switches right above the fuel cutoff switches. On initial climbout, crew gets EEC failure message and procedure was to turn off BOTH EEC switches. Crew mistakes fuel cutoff switches for EEC switches and things got quiet in a hurry. Crew, obviously realized their mistake and relit both engines.

The FAA made Boeing move the EEC switches to the overhead to prevent confusion with fuel cutoff switches after this incident.
 
DE727UPS said:
"Those EEC switches" don't turn off the engine. It's an alternate engine control, not a fuel cutoff. I believe the DL 767 thing was turning off both fuel control switches. Not sure why you would do that, even by accident. Maybe they were old skool guys trying to lean the mixture.
Click to expand...

Thank you, master of the obvious. Now if I only knew if it was legal to do a CAT III approach without an operating control tower.
 
A-300F4-622R said:
Thank you, master of the obvious. Now if I only knew if it was legal to do a CAT III approach without an operating control tower.
Click to expand...

Don, you ever get to fly with this guy? I'd sure have a lot of fun looking across the cockpit and saying "geaaaarrrrr up biaaaatch!"

:)
 
A-300F4-622R said:
Thank you, master of the obvious. Now if I only knew if it was legal to do a CAT III approach without an operating control tower.
Click to expand...

HAHA. Actually, I think it could very easily be legal to do that. Have yet to see a good reference why it's not. Subject for another thread, perhaps.
 
A-300F4-622R said:
Story, as told to me, was an early Delta 767-200 that had the EEC switches right above the fuel cutoff switches. On initial climbout, crew gets EEC failure message and procedure was to turn off BOTH EEC switches. Crew mistakes fuel cutoff switches for EEC switches and things got quiet in a hurry. Crew, obviously realized their mistake and relit both engines.

The FAA made Boeing move the EEC switches to the overhead to prevent confusion with fuel cutoff switches after this incident.
Click to expand...

That sounds plausible. You should have said it that way the first time. I still think they were trying to lean it out.
 
Whatever happened, apparently the crew had the presence of mind and composure to get the engines re-lit. Besides the engine damage, the airplane landed in one piece and everyone is ok. I am thankful for the flying skills they employed after the flame out to prevent a bad situation from getting MUCH worse. What happened up to that point is the mystery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top