NJA Phenom 300 Engine Failure @ SFO
08-24-2024, 10:14 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: Retired NJA & AA
Posts: 2,006
NJA Phenom 300 Engine Failure @ SFO
https://youtu.be/U3Mq_sUN5Wo
Fairly heavy with 7 total on board and over 4000lbs of fuel. N337QS.
They were heading to Jackson Hole, WY which was one of my favority airports to fly into. I didn't get to see it that much since I was based in the Eastern USA and didn't get out west very often.
They cleared runway 28R and then asked for a tow. If I remember correctly (big if) single engine taxi wasn't in the ops specs hence the tow request. I had meant to ask in RGS if we could single engine taxi in this event, especially if at a small airport with no tugs. But I never did find out.
Fairly heavy with 7 total on board and over 4000lbs of fuel. N337QS.
They were heading to Jackson Hole, WY which was one of my favority airports to fly into. I didn't get to see it that much since I was based in the Eastern USA and didn't get out west very often.
They cleared runway 28R and then asked for a tow. If I remember correctly (big if) single engine taxi wasn't in the ops specs hence the tow request. I had meant to ask in RGS if we could single engine taxi in this event, especially if at a small airport with no tugs. But I never did find out.
08-27-2024, 04:22 PM
#3
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2022
Posts: 45
https://youtu.be/U3Mq_sUN5Wo
Fairly heavy with 7 total on board and over 4000lbs of fuel. N337QS.
They were heading to Jackson Hole, WY which was one of my favority airports to fly into. I didn't get to see it that much since I was based in the Eastern USA and didn't get out west very often.
They cleared runway 28R and then asked for a tow. If I remember correctly (big if) single engine taxi wasn't in the ops specs hence the tow request. I had meant to ask in RGS if we could single engine taxi in this event, especially if at a small airport with no tugs. But I never did find out.
Fairly heavy with 7 total on board and over 4000lbs of fuel. N337QS.
They were heading to Jackson Hole, WY which was one of my favority airports to fly into. I didn't get to see it that much since I was based in the Eastern USA and didn't get out west very often.
They cleared runway 28R and then asked for a tow. If I remember correctly (big if) single engine taxi wasn't in the ops specs hence the tow request. I had meant to ask in RGS if we could single engine taxi in this event, especially if at a small airport with no tugs. But I never did find out.
08-27-2024, 07:33 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,502
https://youtu.be/U3Mq_sUN5Wo
Fairly heavy with 7 total on board and over 4000lbs of fuel. N337QS.
They were heading to Jackson Hole, WY which was one of my favority airports to fly into. I didn't get to see it that much since I was based in the Eastern USA and didn't get out west very often.
They cleared runway 28R and then asked for a tow. If I remember correctly (big if) single engine taxi wasn't in the ops specs hence the tow request. I had meant to ask in RGS if we could single engine taxi in this event, especially if at a small airport with no tugs. But I never did find out.
Fairly heavy with 7 total on board and over 4000lbs of fuel. N337QS.
They were heading to Jackson Hole, WY which was one of my favority airports to fly into. I didn't get to see it that much since I was based in the Eastern USA and didn't get out west very often.
They cleared runway 28R and then asked for a tow. If I remember correctly (big if) single engine taxi wasn't in the ops specs hence the tow request. I had meant to ask in RGS if we could single engine taxi in this event, especially if at a small airport with no tugs. But I never did find out.
Not sure why they needed to burn fuel to land underweight. Overweight landings are a non event as long as you don't exceed the vertical speed limits. Most jets that's 300 to 400 fpm. Safest course of action is to get on the ground.
08-31-2024, 03:34 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2011
Posts: 227
Not disagreeing but what is the max landing weight used for then? If they were pretty full going out might have needed to come down 600 lbs or so to get under that? But yeah, one engine isn't a great experiance especially if you've had a failure in one already (can be a common cause sometimes).
08-31-2024, 10:43 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,502
Not disagreeing but what is the max landing weight used for then? If they were pretty full going out might have needed to come down 600 lbs or so to get under that? But yeah, one engine isn't a great experiance especially if you've had a failure in one already (can be a common cause sometimes).
Max landing weight limits are for normal operations, not emergencies.
09-01-2024, 04:00 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Window seat
Posts: 5,455
Delaying landing to get down to max landing weight? I'm Phenom 300 qualified and that's the first time I've heard of that. The overweight landing inspection took about 30 minutes on a w/b and was never an issue. Airliners are certified to 600 FPM at max landing weight and 360 FPM at max takeoff weight. IDK what the corporate jet certification limits are but I've never seen a Phenom 300 landing approaching 300 FPM at touchdown. They're typically very nice as it's an easy to land jet.
09-04-2024, 07:39 AM
#9
Speed, Power, Accuracy
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: PIC
Posts: 1,723
ATC wants to know fuel in TIME. Fire department that will respond to the emergency landing on the ground wants to know fuel in POUNDS. They want more information on fire potential. Give ATC both.
09-04-2024, 08:20 AM
#10
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2019
Posts: 47
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
