Narrative:

B747-200, 7F engines for power. 719000 pounds takeoff gross weight. At rotate noted vibration followed by loud boom and overtemp and failure of #3 engine. Began dumping fuel, aircraft cleaned up and engine shut down. Dumping continued to landing weight of 585000 pounds. Initial thoughts were that we were shedding tires. Failure occurred just past V1, prior to rotate. Immediate, low altitude fuel dump affected departure path area. Many public complaints. Special note: crew was briefed to dump fuel immediately should an engine failure occur due maximum weight for airplane and runway. As this was 'somewhat critical,' fuel dump was started very soon after lift off. As such, as we struggled to 1000 ft we were pouring jet fuel along our departure path at very low altitude until airplane cleaned up. Very bad press and many public complaints. In this case, 3 engines had overtemp lights with 1 failed. Dumping in this case may have been a sound emergency decision, but we may want to consider not overreacting or dumping fuel unless really necessary or at least until higher. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that he is convinced after this experience that fuel should never be dumped during initial climb since the amount of weight disposed of is insufficient during the first few mins of climb on aircraft performance. The fuel he dumped, approximately 134000 pounds, spread over a 6 mi area on departure, causing the company to have to wash hundreds of cars as well as many small animals and other property. He believes that the dumping could be held until reaching a higher altitude where the fuel has a chance to become vaporized. He also believes that the static power procedure used at the start of the takeoff roll was conducive to overtemping the engine which led to the failure of one. He does not think that the B747 should be permitted to make static start takeoffs! These recommendations have been made to the company with apparently no success. Cabin attendant and passenger observed flames coming from the right side of the aircraft, up to 20 ft in front and 60 ft to the rear!

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B747-200 FLC IMMEDIATELY DUMPED FUEL AND RETURNED TO LAND AFTER ONE ENG QUIT JUST PRIOR TO ROTATION AND TWO OTHERS EXCEEDED MAX TEMP. IN ADDITION, CABIN ATTENDANT AND PAX SAW FLAMES COMING FROM IN FRONT AND REAR OF THE R ENG.

Narrative: B747-200, 7F ENGS FOR PWR. 719000 LBS TKOF GROSS WT. AT ROTATE NOTED VIBRATION FOLLOWED BY LOUD BOOM AND OVERTEMP AND FAILURE OF #3 ENG. BEGAN DUMPING FUEL, ACFT CLEANED UP AND ENG SHUT DOWN. DUMPING CONTINUED TO LNDG WT OF 585000 LBS. INITIAL THOUGHTS WERE THAT WE WERE SHEDDING TIRES. FAILURE OCCURRED JUST PAST V1, PRIOR TO ROTATE. IMMEDIATE, LOW ALT FUEL DUMP AFFECTED DEP PATH AREA. MANY PUBLIC COMPLAINTS. SPECIAL NOTE: CREW WAS BRIEFED TO DUMP FUEL IMMEDIATELY SHOULD AN ENG FAILURE OCCUR DUE MAX WT FOR AIRPLANE AND RWY. AS THIS WAS 'SOMEWHAT CRITICAL,' FUEL DUMP WAS STARTED VERY SOON AFTER LIFT OFF. AS SUCH, AS WE STRUGGLED TO 1000 FT WE WERE POURING JET FUEL ALONG OUR DEP PATH AT VERY LOW ALT UNTIL AIRPLANE CLEANED UP. VERY BAD PRESS AND MANY PUBLIC COMPLAINTS. IN THIS CASE, 3 ENGS HAD OVERTEMP LIGHTS WITH 1 FAILED. DUMPING IN THIS CASE MAY HAVE BEEN A SOUND EMER DECISION, BUT WE MAY WANT TO CONSIDER NOT OVERREACTING OR DUMPING FUEL UNLESS REALLY NECESSARY OR AT LEAST UNTIL HIGHER. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT HE IS CONVINCED AFTER THIS EXPERIENCE THAT FUEL SHOULD NEVER BE DUMPED DURING INITIAL CLB SINCE THE AMOUNT OF WT DISPOSED OF IS INSUFFICIENT DURING THE FIRST FEW MINS OF CLB ON ACFT PERFORMANCE. THE FUEL HE DUMPED, APPROX 134000 LBS, SPREAD OVER A 6 MI AREA ON DEP, CAUSING THE COMPANY TO HAVE TO WASH HUNDREDS OF CARS AS WELL AS MANY SMALL ANIMALS AND OTHER PROPERTY. HE BELIEVES THAT THE DUMPING COULD BE HELD UNTIL REACHING A HIGHER ALT WHERE THE FUEL HAS A CHANCE TO BECOME VAPORIZED. HE ALSO BELIEVES THAT THE STATIC PWR PROC USED AT THE START OF THE TKOF ROLL WAS CONDUCIVE TO OVERTEMPING THE ENG WHICH LED TO THE FAILURE OF ONE. HE DOES NOT THINK THAT THE B747 SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO MAKE STATIC START TKOFS! THESE RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE COMPANY WITH APPARENTLY NO SUCCESS. CABIN ATTENDANT AND PAX OBSERVED FLAMES COMING FROM THE R SIDE OF THE ACFT, UP TO 20 FT IN FRONT AND 60 FT TO THE REAR!

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.