FSU Problem (Not photographic, but aviation)

[ClaremontPhoto]

Everybody in Portugal was laughing over this yesterday, and I thought it deserves a wider audience:

The Portuguese firefighting aircraft are way too small for the large scale forest fires we have each summer.

This year the government has leased three large FSU firefighting aircraft with aircrew and groundcrew. The basic lease is €12,000,000 with an add-on hourly rate if/when the planes are used.

On Friday there was a demonstration laid on for the press. It was to show how the FSU aircraft will work with the firefighters on the ground.

One aircraft flew just above the surface of a large lake and scooped up water.

Then an engine failed, and the pilot couldn't gain altitude so he dumped the water to reduce weight.

The plane still couldn't gain altitude as it had just taken off and had a full fuel load, so the pilot dumped fuel.

By now the plane was flying over a forest and still in full view of the press cameras.

The fuel ignited and set fire to the forest.

I wonder if we get a partial refund of some of the €12M?

 

[wlewisiii]

I know that can seem humorus. However, consider the crew on the aircraft who knew that no matter how hard they tried they were probably about to die? An engine failure on a heavy aircraft is almost impossible to survive. For anyone; no matter how good. If they managed to live by dumping fuel, then god was with them.

Thier families have my prayers - in this case, gratefully, of thanksgiving.

As for refunds, talk to whomever - in the FSU or Portugal - who did the last maintenance on those engines. They are the ones who need to have thier toes held to the fire...

William

 

[David Murphy]

The above statements are not correct.

An engine loss on any aircraft is usually a survivable event for the crew.

Large multi-engine aircraft are typically better performers in an engine-out emergency than smaller multi-engine aircraft.

Multi-engine transport pilots are well versed in handling these situations (or should be) as was evident in this particular case.

As far as holding mechanics "toes to the fire", such draconian reactions are not a precscription for making aviation a safer endeavor. Mechanics may or or may not have been responsible for the engine failure by making an error, and in any event no mechanic ever wants to harm his clients. Engine failures can also result from a multitude of other causes including (commonly) pilot error and the random unexpected failure of engine components. Corrections to procedures and remedial training may be required as opposed to punitive actions.

Despite these technicalities, the safety of the flight and its crew is paramount as you point out.