B737-800 air carrier crew reported an engine malfunction in the descent and engine limits were exceeded. The crew shutdown the engine; continued on the arrival; and landed at the destination.
Synopsis
B737-800 air carrier crew reported an engine malfunction in the descent and engine limits were exceeded. The crew shutdown the engine; continued on the arrival; and landed at the destination.
Narrative
On the descent from FL300 we had suspected an engine failure due to a yaw motion of the aircraft and uncommanded auto throttle deactivation. The PF CA took manual control of the aircraft and we evaluated the aircraft state. We determined that the issue was an out of limits for the conditions on engine #1. The #1 engine was on maximum power with N1; N2; maxed out with the thrust lever in the idle position. Due to the descent the #2 eng was in idle and I had wanted to confirm and make sure we had thrust lever control in that engine at least. And manipulated the thrust lever to see if the engine would respond and it did. FO PM began the QRC; not applicable then QRH for the engine limit or surge or stall QRH procedure with the conditions meeting the criteria. The checklist completed with the #1 engine being shutdown due to the uncontrollable state. We continued the arrival and got direct ZZZ and elected to go direct ZZZ due to the altitude and engine high power state keeping our descent rate slower or even unable to descend greater than 300fpm for several minutes. After the single engine approach to land we elected to stop on the runway and have ARF inspect the aircrafts left engine for thermal; fuel; abnormalities. The ARF command stated the engine appears normal and we were towed to the gate with ARF. Post flight inspection observed no damage or abnormalities visually was seen but the N1; N2 engine gauges were displayed red.Cause: The recognition and slowing down helped alot before we precautionarily shutdown an engine going through the QRH as the situation and the labeled checklist was difficult to corelate at first and could be mistaken for an engine failure of the working normal engine #2 in this case as the #1 was higher numerical and gauges than the other as we were on the descent. The broad title of engine out limits QRH title did bring some confusion till the QRH conditions were read and corelated.
Second reporter narrative
While descending through about FL300 we had a suspected engine failure. The aircraft started to yaw to the right. After evaluating the situation it was determined that the issue was the number one engine was out of limits. It was producing power to the red line and increasing while the thrust levers were at idle. We ran the engine limit or surge or stall procedure which had us shut down the number one engine. We finished the appropriate checklist as we continued to our destination since we were already on the arrival into that airport. We completed a single engine landing and stopped on the runway. We had ARF inspect the aircraft to ensure there was no damage or leaking fluids. We were towed into the gate without issue. No damage was noticed on our post flight inspection and appropriate AML (Aircraft Maintenance Logbook) entries were made. Normal deplaning procedures were used.Cause: This was a different look on engine issues. Initially it was confusing as it seemed like number 2 was the failed engine. Taking the time to properly evaluate all data presented is key. The wording of the QRH procedure could be more clear. Engine Limit stall and surge didn't initially stick out as unable to control engine.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.