Gear Down Ferry With Engine Failure

[pelmet]

An interesting scenario for this crew........


C-GPAJ, a Chartright Air Inc. Bombardier Challenger 601 was conducting positioning flight
HRT056 from Saint Maarten/ Princess Juliana Intl (TNCM), Saint Maarten to Miami/Opa Locka
Executive (KOPF), FL with 2 Flight crew and a mechanic on board. The aircraft was operating
under Chartright Air's MEL for a landing gear issue and landing gear was pinned down for the
flight. During Cruise at FL200 over the Island of Mayaguana, Flight crew received a Left engine oil
pressure light on EICAS (Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System) accompanied by
excessively high ITT indication. The engine failed very soon after, flight crew completed the
appropriate checklist, declared an emergency and diverted to Abraham's Bay/Mayaguana
(MYMM), Bahamas. the flight landed in MYMM without further incident. Maintenance is
troubleshooting the engine issue.

[Big Pistons Forever]

You know you are having a bad day when……

[Bug_Stomper_01]

An interesting scenario for this crew........


C-GPAJ, a Chartright Air Inc. Bombardier Challenger 601 was conducting positioning flight
HRT056 from Saint Maarten/ Princess Juliana Intl (TNCM), Saint Maarten to Miami/Opa Locka
Executive (KOPF), FL with 2 Flight crew and a mechanic on board. The aircraft was operating
under Chartright Air's MEL for a landing gear issue and landing gear was pinned down for the
flight. During Cruise at FL200 over the Island of Mayaguana, Flight crew received a Left engine oil
pressure light on EICAS (Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System) accompanied by
excessively high ITT indication. The engine failed very soon after, flight crew completed the
appropriate checklist, declared an emergency and diverted to Abraham's Bay/Mayaguana
(MYMM), Bahamas. the flight landed in MYMM without further incident. Maintenance is
troubleshooting the engine issue.

Looks like they had problems with this engine in October of this year too….

October 18, 2021

Incident at TORONTO / LESTER B. PEARSON INTL ON (CYYZ)
A Chartright Air Inc. Canadair CL600-2A12 (C-GPAJ/HRT056) from West Palm Beach, FL (KPBI) to Toronto/Lester B. Pearson, ON (CYYZ) declared a "PAN PAN" on the downwind for Runway 24L and advised shutting down its left engine. HRT056 landed on Runway 24L at 0016Z without further incident. No operational impact.

https://avrodex.com/?q=C-GPAJ

[PilotDAR]

I would not be willing to ferry an airplane, (particularly a multi engine one) if doing so required the gear to be pinned down. I have had to twice fly gear down maintenance ferry flights in twins with the requirement that the gear be left down, but not pinned down. The rationale being that if you loose an engine, and retracting the gear will enable you to continue to a safe landing - even gear up, that's more safe than not being able to continue flight on one engine and gear down. For the C 310R, the emergency procedures for engine failure say to check that the gear is up, and not to extend it until you're within gliding distance of the runway.

I have no knowledge if this type describes a procedure for a gear down or gear pinned down ferry flight, but no twin I have flown does. This is an example of where inventing new abnormal procedures should be really well thought out beforehand.

[pelmet]

I suppose it is a calculated risk analysis in a private operation. Should be reliable engines. Maybe the weight was limited.

From my point of view, I might ask myself for a comparison....would I be willing to fly a perfectly serviceable Islander? The answer is.....yes.

[Bug_Stomper_01]

I would not be willing to ferry an airplane, (particularly a multi engine one) if doing so required the gear to be pinned down. I have had to twice fly gear down maintenance ferry flights in twins with the requirement that the gear be left down, but not pinned down. The rationale being that if you loose an engine, and retracting the gear will enable you to continue to a safe landing - even gear up, that's more safe than not being able to continue flight on one engine and gear down. For the C 310R, the emergency procedures for engine failure say to check that the gear is up, and not to extend it until you're within gliding distance of the runway.

I have no knowledge if this type describes a procedure for a gear down or gear pinned down ferry flight, but no twin I have flown does. This is an example of where inventing new abnormal procedures should be really well thought out beforehand.

I see your logic, I’d have to see the flight manual but I’m pretty sure it would have to be approved in order to ferry in that configuration. Either way I do think you’re probably correct for piston aircraft however twin turbine generally have enough jam to take off and land on one stove, but again, what does the flight manual say?

[Bede]

I would not be willing to ferry an airplane, (particularly a multi engine one) if doing so required the gear to be pinned down.

My guess is that the ferry permit or MEL dictated the gear to be pinned down.

[Bug_Stomper_01]

I suppose it is a calculated risk analysis in a private operation. Should be reliable engines. Maybe the weight was limited.

From my point of view, I might ask myself for a comparison....would I be willing to fly a perfectly serviceable Islander? The answer is.....yes.

The islander is certified inherently for this configuration, not sure about the machine in this scenario.

[Bug_Stomper_01]

I would not be willing to ferry an airplane, (particularly a multi engine one) if doing so required the gear to be pinned down.

My guess is that the ferry permit or MEL dictated the gear to be pinned down.

You would be correct, the MEL has to have conditions met for the flight to commence.

[pelmet]

I suppose it is a calculated risk analysis in a private operation. Should be reliable engines. Maybe the weight was limited.

From my point of view, I might ask myself for a comparison....would I be willing to fly a perfectly serviceable Islander? The answer is.....yes.

The islander is certified inherently for this configuration, not sure about the machine in this scenario.

One has to go beyond the certification analysis and think about the actual risk. Of course, there is the legal requirement which one may like to follow. But if TC has approved a ferry permit, one can still ask the same question.....how much risk am I willing to take? This aircraft may not be able to maintain altitude if an engine is lost.......am I willing to ferry it? One could ask the same question of a lot of aircraft that we fly on a regular basis.

[Bug_Stomper_01]

I suppose it is a calculated risk analysis in a private operation. Should be reliable engines. Maybe the weight was limited.

From my point of view, I might ask myself for a comparison....would I be willing to fly a perfectly serviceable Islander? The answer is.....yes.

The islander is certified inherently for this configuration, not sure about the machine in this scenario.

One has to go beyond the certification analysis and think about the actual risk. Of course, there is the legal requirement which one may like to follow. But if TC has approved a ferry permit, one can still ask the same question.....how much risk am I willing to take? This aircraft may not be able to maintain altitude if an engine is lost.......am I willing to ferry it? One could ask the same question of a lot of aircraft that we fly on a regular basis.

The legality would be in line with the MEL which needs to conform to the type’s flight manual and / or manufacturers instructions. This was a ferry flight of course, no passengers on board, the MEL for this And any machine is a go / no go.

Well there you have it, page 95 (32-1) SSN&I 30-2


30-2 Landing Gear Retraction System
(604, 605, 650)



(M) May be inoperative provided:
a) Operations are conducted in accordance with AFM Supplement 6 (Flight with Landing Gear Down),
b) Operations are not conducted in known or forecast icing conditions,
c) Ground lock pins are installed to ensure all three landing gears are locked down throughout flight,
d) In-flight performance information given in the Flight Crew Operating Manual (FCOM), is used,
e) Extended overwater operations are prohibited,
f) Both pilot headsets are worn,
g) Flight Compartment and Cabin Interphone Systems are operative,
h) Both Flap Power Drive Units are operative,
i) CAT II operations are prohibited, and
j) Repairs are made within 1 flight day.

https://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/mmel/cl-600 ... v%2010.pdf



The caveat being (e) Extended overwater operations are prohibited. The flight permit would have been issued for this I’m guessing. The increased load on the left engine that is the position of the last engine issue (if it’s still the same engine) would likely have caused the engine failure is my guess

[PitchLink]

Yeesh

[Bug_Stomper_01]

This would have been a fun undertaking for the ames involved. That’s literally in the middle of nowhere with a burnt stove