Fifth or third pod

[DaHai]

While travelling HKG/BNE the other day on CX A340, I wondered if the A340 could carry a fifth pod. I know the B747 can, but what about the B747-400. Then the thought went to the A320 and A330, and B767. Can they carry a third pod? Again I am aware that the DC10 could carry a fourth pod.
Can anyone please assist?

[Swedish Steve]

B747-200, DC10 and Tristar all carried pods. Their engine inop ferry performance was very poor, so engines had to be carried to the aircraft.
I have flown on Tristar ferry flights with an engine inop. It is not recommended, and the ferry range was about an hours flight with a RB211-22B, or two hours with a -524.
There are a few B744 that can carry pods, Qantas has the system. But with modern engines it is not necessary. A B744 can do a three engine take off ferry flight and fly for about 6 hours. We always ferry ours back to base.
With the reliability of modern engines it is just not worth it. It is cheaper to charter a freighter and fly the engine to the aircraft if necessary, than carry around the fittings for a pod all the time.

[nut turner]

As Swedish Steve has said B747,DC10 and L1011 have the capability to carry external Pods. RB211 engines is now the the main engine carried, however PW JT9D engines are carried on B747's and 7R4 engine used on 767's was carried on a B747. B707's also carried a V-Pod.

[Atlanta-Driver]

The early 747's where notorious for less than spritly performance with one engine inoprative. However in the newer models with higher thrust engines, 3-engine ferries are flown on regular basis by crews specificially trained for the task.

[tjc]

There are some options when AOG and away from Main Base. V-Pod an engine, frieghter an engine, truck an engine or pool an engine.

I have seen RR V-Pod on 744/747, not sure with CF6/PW options for 744. I am pretty sure a twin cannot carry a pod.

Some CF6 models can be transported in modules and shipped in the forward cargo of a 767 with the large forward cargo door option, but it takes a long time to get the engine back together and the AOG aircraft back on line.

I guess it gets down to how quick the airline wants the AOG back on line and how much money it will cost over lost revenue.

Nowdays, speed is not the priority.....!

[Terry McCassey]

. . . and even the old Boeing 707 could carry a spare !

[gas path]

.....And so could the VC10! Also IIRC the VC10 didn't have any performance penalties with a pod fitted.
The 744 it was a customer option to have the hard points and I think all of ours, bar a couple, are so configured.
The 747-100 fitted with Jt9d's could only uplift a JT9d. The -200/300/400 could carry either the RB211 or a JT9d.

[411A]

I have flown on Tristar ferry flights with an engine inop. It is not recommended, and the ferry range was about an hours flight with a RB211-22B, or two hours with a -524.

Hmmm, the poster must have worked for operators with rather poor maintenance/performance.

Standard body L1011 aircraft, RR RB.211-22B powered, had a usable engine inop ferry endurance of four hours.
Five hours for -524 engines.
IE: not a problem at all, provided of course that those flying these aircraft knew what they were doing.:rolleyes:
Of course, it very much depended on ambient temperature of the departure airport, temperatures aloft during ferry, terrain requirements, etc but was certainly possible....and not all that difficult.

[CV880]

With regard to 411A's comments I think it depends on whether one is operating to FAA or UKCAA rules. The UKCAA engine out ferry rules were much more penalising than the FAA's. I worked for an operator under CAA rules and we only 2 engine ferried Tristars once or twice in the early days as it was all too hard. Used the Tristar 4th pod initially, then bought a 747 freighter which was much easier and also got RR to position loan engines strategically around the network and never 2 engine ferried again.
For Gas Path, typically an aircraft is only certified to carry the same type and model engine in an engine underwing pod as fitted to the aircraft. Some JT9 models were more or less identical so a JT9 powered 747 could carry several variants of the JT9D.
At least one RR powered 747 operator got certification to carry Tristar RB211-22B's on its RR powered 747 using the 747 5th pod but this required a dedicated test flight to get the FAA to approve it.
DC8 could also carry a 5th pod similar to the 707.

[DaHai]

Thank you to every one who took the trouble to reply. I appreciate it. Nothing about the Airbus though. Does anyone know if the Airbus can carry a pod?

[nut turner]

CV880, QANTAS used to carry RR V-Pods on its later model JT9 powered 747's, also it was certified to carry JT9D-4R4 engines(767 engine) on its RR powered 747's.

[WHBM]

The Air India 747 which was lost to terrorsm over the Atlantic in 1985 was carrying an engine in a pod.

I believe that in the early days of the Tristar, Eastern had an AOG at Mexico City (7,000 feet elevation), started a 2-engine ferry to Miami, and got a second engine failure on climbout. They got away with it, but I believe they never did one with a Tristar again out of Mexico. 411A will probably know the story.

[Swedish Steve]

Hmmm, the poster must have worked for operators with rather poor maintenance/performance.


Well I worked on said Tristars for a few years, and I thought we were OK.
May I add we were departing from MCT in the summer at around 40degC, under British CAA rules. Even the good engines are not producing 100pc at that temp.

I remember it well because it was my first (of two). As an airline we only ever did five (in the 10 years I was there), and we never changed an engine away from base.

The reason for the low ferry time, was the small amount of fuel on board. I believe we were limited to 18 tons?
It wasn't until I had boroscoped the two engines and pronounced them fit that the F/Eng explained the lack of a V1. You didn't have climb performance on one engine until a few minutes after take off! Then they would not let me get off. I thought it was very dodgy, and was all for staying there a week to change the engine.

[gas path]

typically an aircraft is only certified to carry the same type and model engine in an engine underwing pod as fitted to the aircraft.
The 747-100 was limited to the JT9d because the 5th pod front mount banana link had a smaller diameter pin where it attached to the front spar. The -200 had two holes in the front spar the upper of which had a larger diameter hole for the (larger) pin and a corresponding longer banana link. The rear hardpoints were all the same 8 off 7/16 dia. bolt holes arranged in two groups of four for the rear mounts.:8
We've carried Jt9d and Rb211h engines on the -200 classics.

[411A]

May I add we were departing from MCT in the summer at around 40degC, under British CAA rules. Even the good engines are not producing 100pc at that temp.



That's the problem, UKCAA rules and 40C.
Answer?
Use FAA rules (after all, that is where the airplane was originally certificated) and wait for cooler nightime temperatures.
Some folks just simply cannot apply practical procedures to a situation to come up with a workable completely safe solution.
But nooooo, the UKCAA wants to reinvent the wheel.:rolleyes::rolleyes::}

[CV880]

To the original question,to the best of my knowledge there is no 5th pod capability on an A340 or any other Airbus.

Regarding the Mexico City Tristar engine out ferry/ second failure incident , legend has it the captain got the serial number of the one working engine and personally wrote to RR suggesting they send it to Japan and get a few hundred copies made as it was the only one worth anything. Whilst his employers were reputedly somewhat chastened by his action it got results in the form of rapid delivery of numerous upgrade mod kits to sort out the early RB211's problems. I believe they were only ferrying from Mexico City to a nearby sea level airport for refuelling for another ferry flight back to MIA.
I once saw a DC10-30 two-engine ferry from South East Asia to Oakland California (Transamerica I think it was).

Regarding 5th pod certification, if you buy the standard 5th pod package from Boeing it normally only covers the model engines certified for use on that fleet of aircraft however as noted by several posters if you spend extra bucks you can get other engine models included but it usually involves a dedicated test flight to check buffet, trim required etc and a revised Flight Manual supplement.