Dual Engine Failure during Climb-out on Airbus A320: Baltic Aviation Academy

preview_player
Показать описание
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

I cannot believe you have not taken into account the human factor.  This was a dual-engine loss at 2500 feet, followed by an immediate water landing with 155 souls on board.  No one said you are going to lose both engines at an altitude lower than any jet in history, but be cool, head back for LaGuardia like you're picking up the milk.  No one has ever trained for an incident like that--no one, ever!

jeopardy
Автор

lesson learned. If you ever have both engines failed before reaching 2000 feet, slowly whisper to the microphone for blackbox to record; "Mommy I love you"

stingreen
Автор

man, this is interesting as hell. haha. great job, young pilot! I'm just a regular Joe in the US who was surfing YouTube and came across this. I'm fascinated with how precisely pilots handle emergencies like this. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE an opportunity to try and fly a commercial simulator just once in my life. I watched THIS young man/pilot handle this flame out emergency so calm and reactive, it just really made me grin and feel better about flying in general! again, outstanding job, young man!

davelloyd
Автор

one question. After the engines failure as usual you lost all of your power in electrical and hydraulic systems and counted on the ram air turbine. Why didn't you turn on the APU for power?

Demetris.Michael_CyprusUSA
Автор

Great video! 3:35 Only one question. How without both of the engines gear could come down using regular handle? There should be no pressure in hydraulic system in this case. One should have used gravity extension. Or not? Did I miss something?

thmUNIX
Автор

Dear Richy, this video is meant to show "what is (almost) the lowest height from which you can return" :) In the case of flight 1549, what could have happened remains what could have happened. I am very happy that they survived, how they survived, even though it was a very difficult situation and good job by the crew, is not so important!

SirijusS
Автор

I love the noise and acceleration of an A320.. Awesome.

rossarmstrong
Автор

You might be able to pull off 2000ft if you delay gear extension as long as possible. Extended landing gear makes a lot of drag. They may let you dump fuel too to lighten the load.

YeshuaAgapao
Автор

Look at the ECAM at 4:44
"Doors not closed" :D

nikkocnn
Автор

Jacob, the hydraulics are very much there, the difference is that pilot input is converted into electronic signal and then to hydraulic actuators, instead of a more direct linkeage

SirijusS
Автор

Congratulations on saving the crew and passengers! Would there be another plane on the runway at a busy airport?

JohnSmith-hnkv
Автор

did you figure the landing gear drag to the first landing why didn't you wait longer

jamesthornton
Автор

An MD-81 lost both engines at 3200 feet after departure from Arlanda, Stockholm, Sweden, after ice broke off of the wings and was ingested into the engines. Never for the briefest of moments was it on the pilots minds to return to the airport, they set it down in a clearing down range, and everyone on board made it. Had they started making sharp turns at low speed and low altitude, the most likely outcome is that noone had made it.

Tjita
Автор

APU supplies only electrical and pneumatic systems .. In this situation he used the batteries for the instruments and deployed the RAT for hydraulic which were essential in this situation.

mryasser
Автор

i don't understand what you are referring to, but that simulation featured the loss of Green and Yellow systems situation. On the a320 a loss of all hydraulics situation is unlikely to happen as the Blue system is powered by the RAT.

ctdesing
Автор

Why dont you started the APU and used the Gravity Gear Extension ? PS Good Video

Atanasovsky
Автор

This is a Question Mark Turnback from 2, 500 agl on A320. Landed safely. Great pilot. No copilot needed either. I teach Question Mark Turbacks on singles and multies from 700 agl to 1, 200 agl depending on airplane, weight and winds on specific take off.

outwiththem
Автор

wouldnt you start the apu first instead of relying on the ram ?

TK-mhdn
Автор

Its not the electricity that is the issue, the APU just provides a little trust, which may be the difference between landing on a runway and crashing 15 feet from it

matthewschneider
Автор

It takes time to start a gas turbine engine. They don't start in a few seconds like a piston engine. And if there was for example a bird strike the engine could be damaged to the point of it being unusable, as it was with the Hudson Miracle.

Tuppoo