VR-HDB
17th Jan 2005, 14:49
I remember reading that the Trent engines do not use IEPR, is this correct?
If so, why did RR decide to not use it as they did on the RB211?
Another thing, I was reading about the incident in the Pacific when they had a blocked Pt2 tube (Takeoff B732) - the Captain writing the article talks about what happened when they switched on the anti-ice and got strange indications on the EPR gauge:
My mind went back to a paragraph in the
Potomac accident report which mentioned
that with the engine anti-ice switched on and
the PT2 tube blocked, the EPR needle would
indicate a reverse reading to that expected.
I don't get it - wouldn't the EPR indication be lower, either the Pt2 becomes 'unblocked' -> lower EPR(?). Or, if it remains blocked, you have a normal(?) drop in the EPR because of the increased bleed?
If so, why did RR decide to not use it as they did on the RB211?
Another thing, I was reading about the incident in the Pacific when they had a blocked Pt2 tube (Takeoff B732) - the Captain writing the article talks about what happened when they switched on the anti-ice and got strange indications on the EPR gauge:
My mind went back to a paragraph in the
Potomac accident report which mentioned
that with the engine anti-ice switched on and
the PT2 tube blocked, the EPR needle would
indicate a reverse reading to that expected.
I don't get it - wouldn't the EPR indication be lower, either the Pt2 becomes 'unblocked' -> lower EPR(?). Or, if it remains blocked, you have a normal(?) drop in the EPR because of the increased bleed?