Yes Sir. ;)Anyway, If you pull the fire switch your for sure that the fuel, Hyd and Elec. lines won't burn as that has been cutoff. But still, it would be a good idea for Boeing to build in 2 bottles for each engine.

>Yes Sir. ;)>Anyway, If you pull the fire switch your for sure that the>fuel, Hyd and Elec. lines won't burn as that has been cutoff.>But still, it would be a good idea for Boeing to build in 2>bottles for each engine.You could do it, but it will cost you weight and space.Andrew

How heavy can fire bottles be? :D

>What would happen if a 2-engine aircraft loses an engine, I>mean when the engine falls off the wing. Wouldn't that cause>the plane to roll over the opposite site due to sudden loss of>balance? And of so, could this be counteracted by>back-pressure on the opposite aillerons?>>DirkThe last thing you want to encounter during a Take-off, or during a flight, is your engine falling off. The Engine Cowling isn't that much of a problem, but you do get much more drag from the "naked" engine. An engine falling off, is a much more bigger problem, your weight and balance are not correct anymore, you've got a hydraulic leak, and more problems you don't want to know about. It won't happen that quickly (with the correct bolts installed), I know from my schoolbooks that every Boeing 744 engine is mounted to the Pylon with 4 huge bolts, but the engine only needs 3, back-up system.I think some of you remember the AA191 crash in 1979 at O'Hare Airport during take-off, and for all the Dutch people in this forum, I think all of you remember the "Bijlmerramp".And to answer Dirk's question; No, if an AC starts to roll after losing an engine, there's no stopping to it.Let's hope, that none of these accidents will ever occur again.

Have you ever had to change a fire bottle? :DMatthew Murray

The possibility of having a single engine fire is remote to start with.Then the possibility that it doesn't go out with the first bottle even more remote.Then the possibility that you have a second engine fire!!I'd say you would have more chance of being hit by a falling piece of a blazing space shuttle while walking down the street than having that happen.Worst case is it either burns off and falls into the ocean(remember that where this aircraft spends like 90% of its life) or you jettison the thing.Pod seperations are trained routinely for the aircrfat i fly(A320)and really from a handling point of view its now great drama.Apart from having just about every warning ecam you can imagine the aeroplane goes fine apart from some buffett from drag caused by the remaining bits.I'd image the 400 is no different but with less buffett as its a heavier aircraft.The probability of a dual engine fire and having the first use both bottles is so insignificant that it bears no time thinking about.CheersDarren

Hi,the AA191 crash was due to the inability to control the roll of the airplane after the left wing-mounted engine detached at around VR, but this was not due to insufficient aileron authority (the aileron can overcome the roll induced by the loss of an engine). The airplane, unfortunately, entered in a stalled condition of the outer part of the left wing (thus rendering any aileron input useless)because the leading edge slats retracted when the pneumatic supply from the torn-off engine was lost. The crew correctly executed the one engine inoperative take-off procedure, following the F/D commands, but what was not even forecast in the engineering and testing process of the DC-10 (the chance of losing partially the slats was considered so remote that was not contemplated in the certification process), was that the attitude commanded by the F/D would decrease the speed BELOW the stalling speed of the "clean" outer part of the wing.

Sure of this ? (RR equipped planes with 8 fire indicators ?) ?I made a search in airliner.net and got some overhead pictures of BA's 744 that seems to have the 4 fire handles/indicators as the other ones...