PAL flight looses Starboard engine on take off

[Dave Hounddriver]

10 hours ago, Tommy T. said:

The Boeing 777 is designed to fly for at least 3 hours on one engine for a distance up to 1320 nautical miles or 2110 kilometers.

Funny how we can find different info from different sites we Google.  I found that the 777 is certified for 5 and a half hours on one engine, which is even better than the 3 hours you found.  I feel safer now.:

Quote

 

 . . . the Boeing Dreamliner is certified for ETOPS-330. This means that the aircraft can fly routes that take it as far as 330 minutes (five and a half hours) of single-engine flying time from the nearest viable airport.

Other twin-engine airliners, like the Boeing 777, are also certified for ETOPS 330.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/airliners-can-fly-on-a-single-engine-2018-2

[Mike J]

Flights over the ocean seldom follow the shortest path.  They usually curve to stay within a certain range of the shoreline to allow for an unplanned landing.   For LAX to MNL there would be quite a few places to land.  San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Vancouver, Anchorage, Japan, Korea, etc.

 

[Tommy T.]

11 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

Funny how we can find different info from different sites we Google.  I found that the 777 is certified for 5 and a half hours on one engine, which is even better than the 3 hours you found.  I feel safer now.:

 

I think the discrepancy, at least in my case, is that my Google source was dated 2007, I believe. So I am sure the data was likely way out of date. There have been so many advances in aircraft and engine technologies since then. I am glad you posted that, Dave. It will give all of us a bit more piece of mind.

[Marvin Boggs]

1 hour ago, Mike J said:

Flights over the ocean seldom follow the shortest path.  They usually curve to stay within a certain range of the shoreline to allow for an unplanned landing.   For LAX to MNL there would be quite a few places to land.  San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Vancouver, Anchorage, Japan, Korea, etc.

 

Pretty sure those flight paths ARE a straight lines Mike, given the curvature of the earth.  When I fly to the US east coast from Hong Kong, the flight path is pretty much right over the north pole.

There used to be a requirement for trans-oceanic flights that airliners must have more than two engines.  This led in part to the development of those interesting 3-engined jets we used to have, like the 727 and DC-10.  Odd looking ducks, but if one engine failed, the idea was the trip could be completed on the other two.  Not sure when that rule was changed, but it must have given the insurance actuaries some sleepless nights!  

 

CAN I ASK A SENSITIVE QUESTION....... Do Filipinas seem a little overly nervous about flying?  Seems like I have to explain every little bump and noise whenever we fly, can't let her fly alone, etc. 

[Mike J]

20 minutes ago, Marvin Boggs said:

Pretty sure those flight paths ARE a straight lines Mike, given the curvature of the earth.

Straight line from LAX to Philippines would be approximately 6,000 miles (Google earth my straight line)

Curved flight from LAX to Philippines would be approximately 7,290 miles (Google earth my curved line) 

Actual flight miles 7,305 miles https://www.airmilescalculator.com/distance/mnl-to-lax/

 

[Old55]

 

[Pinetree]

15 hours ago, jimeve said:

Taken from one of Tom's quotes.... The Boeing 777 is designed to fly for at least 3 hours on one engine for a distance up to 1320 nautical miles or 2110 Kilometers. Don't how big the pacific is but......only one engine.

although that is true in terms of the regulation, a B777 neo, indeed any of the variants of that aircraft,   can fly unrestricted by time, on one engine, provided of course that it has the fuel to do so, but most regulatory authorities insist that airliners must at all times be within 2 hours flying time of an alternate diversion airport. . 

Edited November 23, 2019 by Pinetree

[Dave Hounddriver]

5 hours ago, Pinetree said:

most regulatory authorities insist that airliners must at all times be within 2 hours flying time of an alternate diversion airport. . 

At what speed?

One would think that "2 hours flying time" would vary quite a bit depending on altitude, load, remaining fuel, number or engines functioning, etc.  The "2 hours flying time" could vary enough to be an insignificant number.  Or could it?  What does "2 hours flying time" mean in terms of distance?

[Arizona Kid]

Last time I took a PAL flight from LAX it was 16 hrs. One stop in Hawaii for offloading and on loading passengers. Don't know if they took on fuel or not but I got stuck in a middle seat. That was torture. 

Damn the technicalities..I got there.   

[Viking]

9 hours ago, Mike J said:

Flights over the ocean seldom follow the shortest path.  They usually curve to stay within a certain range of the shoreline to allow for an unplanned landing.   For LAX to MNL there would be quite a few places to land.  San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Vancouver, Anchorage, Japan, Korea, etc.

 

I think like Marvin here, those lines are probably pretty straight if you put them on a globe, not a  flat map. Another thing to consider is that the Earth is rotating. When  taking of from LAX the captain don´t "aim" at where MNL is at the takeoff, he "aim" at where it will be when the plane arrive. Airliners also like to fly in the jetstream, to save fuel, time and money so it is sometimes an advantage to take a longer way to benefit from that.