A DC10-40 IN CRUISE AT FL340 DECLARED AN EMER DUE TO #1 ENG FLAMEOUT. DSNDED TO FL290 AND HAD A SUCCESSFUL RELIGHT AND RETURNED TO ASSIGNED ALT.

Narrative

WE WERE EBOUND AT FL340 ON NORTH ATLANTIC TRACK (NAT) V AT APPROX 50N39W WHEN WE ENCOUNTERED MODERATE TURB WHICH I BELIEVE WAS FROM THE WAKE OF COMPANY FLT JUST AHEAD OF US AT FL350. ENG #1 FAILED AND THE AIRSPD BEGAN TO DECREASE. BEING UNABLE TO HOLD ALT; WE DECLARED AN EMER ON FREQ 121.5; DEPARTED NAT V TO THE N AND BEGAN A SLOW DSCNT. WE CONTACTED GANDER RADIO ON THE HF RADIO; INFORMED THEM OF THE ENG FAILURE; OUR DEP FROM THE TRACK AND OUR DSCNT FROM FL340. WE ALSO DECLARED AN EMER WITH GANDER CTR DURING THIS COM. DURING THE DSCNT WE ACCOMPLISHED THE EMER ENG FAILURE CHKLIST AND SHUT DOWN ENG #1. AS WE DSNDED THROUGH ABOUT FL300; WE RESTARTED ENG #1 AND ALL ENG INDICATIONS WERE NORMAL. DURING THE DEV 30 NM N OF NAT V; THE ALT WAS NEVER BELOW FL290. BEING THAT WE WERE STILL OPERATING UNDER THE ORIGINAL EMER DECLARATION; I THOUGHT IT PRUDENT TO CLB BACK TO FL340 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1) I WAS CONCERNED THAT THE ADDITIONAL FUEL BURN RATE WOULD USE VALUABLE FUEL WE MIGHT NEED LATER. 2) FL340 WAS OUR ORIGINAL ALT WHEN WE LEFT NAT V. 3) IT WAS SAFE TO CLB SINCE NO OTHER ACFT WERE RPTING EMER STATUS IN THE AREA. WE ADVISED GANDER RADIO THAT WE WERE CLBING BACK TO FL340. SOON AFTER REACHING FL340; WE REQUESTED AND RECEIVED CLRNC TO INTERCEPT NAT V. SHORTLY AFTER WE RPTED ESTABLISHED ON NAT V; WE RECEIVED A NEW CLRNC TO 51N30W AND BEGAN NAVING TO THAT POINT. A BRIEF TIME LATER; WE RECEIVED A MESSAGE FROM GANDER RADIO THAT GANDER ATC WAS FILING A VIOLATION RPT DUE TO OUR CLB BACK TO FL340 WITHOUT AN ATC CLRNC. THE FLT CONTINUED TO CDG WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. I BELIEVE THE CAUSE OF THE ENG FAILURE WAS THE WAKE TURB FROM THE COMPANY FLT ONLY 1000 FT ABOVE US. SINCE THE VERT SEPARATION ON THE NAT SYS WAS ONLY RECENTLY REDUCED TO 1000 FT; I THINK A STUDY SHOULD BE DONE TO SEE IF OTHER PLTS HAVE HAD PROBS WITH WAKE TURB OVER THE NORTH ATLANTIC. DURING THE EMER; HF RADIO COMS WERE VERY DIFFICULT. WITH ALL THE TECHNICAL ADVANCES IN COMS AVAILABLE; ESPECIALLY LONG DISTANCE SATELLITE COMS; IT IS HARD TO BELIEVE WE ARE STILL USING THIS 'STONE-AGE' TECHNOLOGY TO COMMUNICATE OVER WATER. ANOTHER MAJOR COMS PROB WAS THAT WE COULD NOT TALK DIRECTLY TO THE CTLING FACILITY; IN THIS CASE GANDER CTR; BUT HAD TO RELAY ALL COMS THROUGH AN INTERMEDIARY (GANDER RADIO). THIS CAUSES A TIME DELAY WHEN IMMEDIACY IN COMS IS ESSENTIAL. THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY TO CTL TFC OVER THE NORTH ATLANTIC. THE PRESENT SYS IS TOO OUTDATED.