View Single Post
Old 14th Nov 2010, 14:42
  #63 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
barit1

If, as suspected, the failure in the 972 is due abuse (pushed 'em hard), a new set of parameters in affixing blame rear their head.

The extra 2k POT have to be certificated, and maintained differently, or at least "via AD". If the extra thrust was adhered to (this is a software limit), no abnormal or premature seal wear can happen, by design, engineering, manufacture, or use.

Identification and disclosure of the problem, with an addressed reg by the authority leaves Qantas off the hook, responsibility wise, but not on the fiscal end, No?

edit: this being tech log, I'll bring up a material issue re: vibration. The bearing oil seals are flexible, and subject to distortion, within limits, to acommodate transient movement of the rim. Given a Climb thrust, at its top, and most heat filled iteration, with attendant relaxation of the seal, its elastic rating becomes critical. With time, does it relax its pressure and resultant "sealing capability?" Oil migration is containment critical?

bear