More Questions
Thanks Sooty yes. No need to be rude.
I just cannot see the offset (eccentric) bore in the pipe being a design feature. If it was a design feature it was a serious error. No consultant/check engineer would sanction that design without due process. By that I mean a belt and braces dissection of how the pipe would react in situ. I just cannot see how that design would be purposefully offset like that. It is agin every principal known. It appears to be shoddy work.
The NTSB has cited this as a manufacturing flaw. If Rolls Royce claims this was a design feature they are committing hari kiri.
BEAR: These engines were on a full maintenance lease from the RR company. So the only stuff the Qant guys did was top up the oil and do a visual check that all is OK. When the A-380 got to a destination port you would expect another check of the turbine oil and maybe another top up. So as far as I can see, this sounds crazy I agree, that nobody really knew at RR just how much these engines were consuming oil. I really think it was that incompetence: a proper record was not made of the oil being consumed.
I would not take a ride on a RR equipped A-380 until we have a fully documented and approved published report.
The most disturbing aspect is why this aircraft had just passed a C check with the Lufthansa facility in Germany. Moreover, why could LHT make a very definitive statement that "they saw no reason to stop operation of their A-380". What did they know that Qantas did not?
All replies most welcome.