3 ms·
The problem sounds to me like it's triggered by environmental conditions, not random chance: "during a step climb to a higher altitude in ice crystal icing cond
by ken 8y ago
The problem sounds to me like it's triggered by environmental conditions, not random chance: "during a step climb to a higher altitude in ice crystal icing conditions". In that case, does having two identical engines really constitute redundancy?
- eloff 8y agoExactly, are we looking at correlated or uncorrelated risk here, because that makes a huge difference!
- cmurf 8y agoAs the probability of a condition triggering failure increases, there is a decreasing probability that redundancy helps. e.g. volcanic ash is also an environmental trigger. But it is likely to certain to cause engine failure. No amount of ash is acceptable, but there is a density at which engine failure will happen quickly, and it's going to affect all engines at pretty much the same time. So in this extreme case, certain probability of engine failure in the triggering conditions means you have no redundancy with additional engines. Whereas the problem sounds more variable and complex. Probably is low, therefore additional engines does provide redundancy just not as much redundancy as being in non-triggering conditions. Decent chance there's enough time to find another altitude to avoid additional failures.