News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by cm2187 on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @12:54PM (#19037407)
By self destruct, I meant switching off the engines in flight seems to me to be a terribly dangerous behavior.
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by t0mas88 on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @01:05PM (#19037542)
Switching off is much safer than a turbine overspeed past certain limits. Because an engine failure (one engine) is a situation all pilots are trained for and it has an almost certain safe outcome. Airplanes fly and land just fine on a single engine. We all train for engine failures all the time.

On the other hand, a runaway engine fire or uncontained turbine failure is much much more likely to cause a crash.

So almost all jet engines are designed to have a shutdown (sometimes helped by the built-in fire extinguishers) as a worst case outcome. The quick response drill for an engine overspeed or temperature past certain limits is to shut it down immediately and pull the fire extinguisher handle.

Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by cm2187 on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @01:39PM (#19037852)
But why not throttling instead of switching off then?
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by t0mas88 on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @01:51PM (#19037987)
Good question, you could theoretically throttle a runaway engine by reducing fuel flow (unlike a piston engine where you can limit air intake). But in 9 out of 10 cases you've already done that by pulling back the power levers. The next step is to cut off the fuel, because the throttles didn't get it under control.
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by sbradford26 on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @02:56PM (#19038750)
Overspeed protection takes place once everything else has failed. The engine controls have already attempted to throttle down and such. If that doesn't work then overspeed kicks in.
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by metalliqaz on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @04:28PM (#19039704)
Adding on to this... things inside an engine happen FAST. Too much energy can spin up the turbines to the point of failure in milliseconds.
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by CamperBob2 on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @05:19PM (#19040186)
Yep, as anyone who has ruined a fan by shooting a canned air duster at it can attest. :(
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by ricardobeat on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @01:02PM (#19037505)
I think almost every plane can glide safely for a lot longer than it takes to restart the engines. Could be dangerous at low altitudes still.
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by aaronmdjones on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @02:15PM (#19038239)
That and restarting an engine in-flight is faster than starting it on the ground because it's already spinning (by virtue of sailing through the air, like a windmill). This is, aptly, called windmill starting.
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by madeofpalk on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @06:24PM (#19040705)
You would be surprised at just how safe and 'normal' shutting off the engines on a plane is.

Related, British Airways Flight 268, a B-747, when taking off from LAX had a problem with one of it's engines so they shut it off, and continued flying all the way to London, albeit to Manchester instead of Heathrow, with one less engine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_268

Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by cm2187 on Thursday January 31, 2019 @01:41AM (#19042911)
Shutting down one engine is one thing. Shutting down all engines is what surprised me.
Re:Boeing 787 Suffers Rare Dual Engine Failure on Landing by metalliqaz on Thursday January 31, 2019 @03:33AM (#19043359)
that's why this is news. it's very rare.