Kyler

How about "Pilot induced engine failures" and "Mechanical engine
failures" or "Non Pilot induced engine failures"?

There are probably some more sharp ones out there who can parse your
query and add to a proposed listG

Big John


On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 02:09:19 GMT, Kyler Laird
wrote:

"Peter Duniho" writes:

My comments are specifically targeted at genuine *failures*. That is,
something broke.

Ah...o.k. That *is* different and I can appreciate the distinction.

There are plenty of reasons an engine might stop running,
but not all of them are pertinent to a reliability analysis discussing
failure rates and statistical chances of failure. You seem to keep trying
to introduce irrelevent types of engine failures, while I try to make clear
what it is I'm talking about.

No, I was coming at it more from the pilot's (rather than the
mechanic's) perspective. It's not "irrelevent" to a pilot when the
engine makes an uncommanded stop in flight. I think it's common for
pilots to call such stoppages "engine failures." I can see that
there might be a better term for it.

O.k., fuel exhaustion, air starvation, misfueling, ... are no longer
causes of "engine failures". Now to come up with a name for what
people mean when they talk about undesired engine stoppage...

Thanks for sticking with me through this.

--kyler