Saudi 744 engine drops off at CAI

[Muaskid]

This from yesterday - must be more to this one than meets the eye.....!

A Saudi Arabian Airlines Boeing 747-400, re-positioning flight SV-9302 from Cairo (Egypt) to Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) with 22 crew, rejected takeoff from Cairo ...One of the four engines of a Saudi Airlines passenger aircraft fell on the runway of Cairo International Airport while taxiing for take off.
The outer engine on the right wing of the Boeing 747 dropped off and rolled out to hit the airport's perimeter fencing and leaving a hole in it.The airport was closed for all flight operations as it took two and half hours for the ground staff to clear the runway.The runway was closed for about 2.5 hours until the debris was removed.
The aircraft had brought 416 passengers to Cairo on a charter flight and was scheduled to re-position to Jeddah without passengers.

[mutt]

This report is somewhat different.....

A Saudi Arabian Airlines Boeing 747-400, re-positioning flight SV-9302 from Cairo (Egypt) to Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) with 22 crew, rejected takeoff from Cairo at low speed around 07:30L (04:30Z) when engine #4 (outer right) failed leaving debris behind on the runway. The airplane slowed safely.

The runway was closed for about 2.5 hours until the debris was removed.


Usually the B747-400 can be identified by winglets on the outer portion of the wings :):)

Anyway they are improving, last time they lost the whole engine after takeoff in Jeddah and i dont mean Saudia......

Mutt

[Jetjock330]

I should imagine the F/O looks out his windows and shouts, Captain, We have lost engine 4!"

Yes my dear son, now get me that checklist!

But captain, we have lost engine 4!!!!!:E

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Remember the morning an engine literally fell off a BA Classic landing at YMML.
The whole front engine mount pulled off the forward end of the pylon.
Tootle pip!!

[flaps22]

Seems to be Phuket air 747-300 on contract to Saudia. Engine failure on take off.
Reports says #3 and engine still on pylon.

[ErwinS]

Incident: Phuket B743 at Cairo on Jul 17th 2010, rejected takeoff (http://avherald.com/h?article=42e762d1&opt=0)

With pictures. HS-VAC indeed.

[Ex Cargo Clown]

Looking at those pictures they have gotten very lucky.

I assume they are GE engines, just what has happened there? Doesn't look like a broken fan.

[Spanner Turner]

See this thread (http://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/417531-ntsb-urjent-action-cf6-50-a.html) for NTSB Report relating to CF6 3rd stage LPT disc failure mode.

Another one bites the dust.

:ok:
.

[Intruder]

There is another known failure mode of the LPT shaft that caused the failure in an Atlas 747 taking off from Guyaquil, Ecuador several years ago.

[akerosid]

Yes, this acft is GE powered; it was formerly PH-BUU of KLM, although ironically Phuket Air was banned from flying to AMS; I believe the airline is still banned from the EU.

(I think they also had a 743 - possibly this one? - parked at LGW for quite a long time).

[IndAir967]

I should imagine the F/O looks out his windows and shouts, Captain, We have lost engine 4!"

Yes my dear son, now get me that checklist!

But captain, we have lost engine 4!!!!!

good one .....
:ok:

[Smoketrails]

And if this had happened at 37,000 feet?

[sunny11410]

@Mutt
Last time they also didn't loose the "whole engine" but a portion of the LPT module ( like the actual event at Cairo) !
Subject CF6-50E2 engine ( 1st event ) is still sitting at JED if u want to have a look :ok:

It's a well known problem ( LPT Stg.3 disk failure ) caused by vibrations due to HPT rotor unbalance. Most often happened due to mid chord burning of HPT Stg.1 blades ( known prob ). Since most of the B747 classic operates have a deactivated AVM system, increased N2 vibrations can't be observed during TAKO and Cruise.

FAA has recently surperseded the initial AD Note for repetitive BSI inspection ( 175 CIS ) and issued AD2010-12-10 calling for a repetitive BSI of 75 CIS + additional checks ( e.g. EGT system etc ) + special instruction in case of TREND shifts or reported vibs.
The new AD Note was issued after the NTSB recommendation to FAA office ( other thread ).

It has ( normally ) nothing to do with bad maintenance or so but with problems on some HPT Stg.1 blade part numbers. If these blades are "burning" down ( like matches ), the N2 system can go into unbalance with an intersetion to the N1 system, causing cracking ( HCF / HAF ) at the outer rim of the LPT Stg.3 disk. So actually the problem is not the LPT stg.3 disk itself as highlighted by the FAA but the final "result" of the HPT blade problem.

[Earl]

[url]http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/333810-phuket-engine-failure-jed-04-jul-08-a-2.html[/u

[Heracles]

Actually,, as the originator of the thread Spanner references, I need to point out a bit of trivia. The original report was an NTSB report with urgent recomendations; These are often the origin of FAA AD's. The FAA can still reject them and do nothing, however unlikely. I'm sure there will be a case argued about the quality of "off-shore" maint.The US carriers will squeal like pigs,,it'll be interesting.
My guess is that it will be a few months before anything regulatory comes of this known-since-conception flaw,, but this will add to the "harsh" side of the judgement scales.
--heracles

[mrdeux]

And if this had happened at 37,000 feet?
Not a pilot, are you!

[ArthurR]

Smoketrails
And if this had happened at 37,000 feet?

It didn't
imagine if it had happened in the Hangar :mad:

[Super VC-10]

From tech log: -

#4 engine missing (signed pilot) :eek:

#4 engine found just outside airfield perimeter fence (signed maintainer) :ok:

[contractor25]

I would say the engine is still there, just the jetpipe decided to go it's own way.
I doubt the damage would have been that much more serious at fl370. A big bird like the 747 can handle it. tanks might be punctured and a fe bits of alu missing, but I'd say the craft will make it down in one bit.

Not too long before or after the ElAl 747 in AMS a B707 cargo dropped 2 complete engines over France and landed on a military field in France. Crew escaped by using escape ropes but sadly the craft burned down because it was outside normal ops hours...

You would see these sights ( and worse) at Ostend in the late 80's and early 90's where old tired b707 and DC8's had dropped a complete engine in flight or had on wing engine explosions in flight.

[Omni Range Zero]

Might this one be known as a Phuket Bucket...:}

[sitigeltfel]

#4 engine missingRemove spark plugs, clean and adjust gaps
If plugs are sooty, lean mixture in carburettor
Adjust valve clearances to tolerances
Ensure air hole in fuel tank is unobstructed
Remove any debris from float chambers
If engine still "missing," remove cylinder heads and de-coke them.

[Vage Rot]

Thank the Lord it was a podded engine - might have ended my military flying career on the old Rod!

[SomeGuyOnTheDeck]

Perhaps the thread title should now be revised to 'Bits of Saudi 744 engine drop off at CAI'.

It appears to have been a significant incident, but not one meriting the title, or the implicit drama of the situation. Nothing to see here, move along...

[superspotter]

"Perhaps the thread title should now be revised to 'Bits of Saudi 744 engine drop off at CAI'. "

743 even...

[mutt]

Or even....
'Bits of Thai 743 engine drop off at CAI' :):)


Thanks for the correction sunny11410, :)

Mutt

[SLFguy]

"Nothing to see here, move along..."

This, along with "just another day in the office", makes me cringe every time I read it.

[DownIn3Green]

I don't know, but can the F/O even see #4 from the cockpit???

[barit1]

Foggy recollection - but I think you'd be lucky to see the winglets, let alone #1 or #4.

[Spanner Turner]

You can see #1 & #4 engines from a 747 flight deck.

Only the nose cowl section though. You can also see a fair bit of the outer wing (and if it's a 747-400, the complete winglet too)

I look out the flight deck window to observe the outboard aileron to confirm the outboard aileron lockout actuator functions correctly.

:ok:
.

[clunckdriver]

Reminds me of a great log book entry I heard about way back when. {KC97?}"Whilst in cruise at eighteen thousand feet, the number four RPM, PRT RPM, Oil presure, fuel flow, and all indications for number four engine, fell from cruise readings to zero, followed a few seconds later by the number four engine which fell from its normall position on the wing to an unknown location between two small islands south of Goose Bay."

[lomapaseo]

Once talked with a pilot on a A310 who was jumpseating a Pan Am out of Hambug when an engine blew its turbine at rotation spraying pieces all over the place.

The engine fire bell went off and the N1 and N2 went to zero (unusual for N2). After securing the engine by the book taking two firings of the fire bottles, the extra pilot went back to have a look. He scrunched down to look over the shoulder of a seated passenger and noted a large hole in the side of the engine but not flames. The woman passenger noticed him and asked if that hole was unusual. His reply was that it was only a minor problem and not to worry as they would have it looked at on the ground. Then when he got back to the cockpit he said holy sh** you should see the size of the hole in the side of that engine.

[good spark]

all this reminds me of that old joke- british aeroplanes buried their engines in the wings while the yanks buried them in fields.


gs

[lexxie747]

never mind

[barit1]

lomapaseo:
Once talked with a pilot on a A310 who was jumpseating a Pan Am out of Hambug when an engine blew its turbine at rotation spraying pieces all over the place.

The engine fire bell went off and the N1 and N2 went to zero (unusual for N2). After securing the engine by the book taking two firings of the fire bottles, the extra pilot went back to have a look. He scrunched down to look over the shoulder of a seated passenger and noted a large hole in the side of the engine but not flames. The woman passenger noticed him and asked if that hole was unusual. His reply was that it was only a minor problem and not to worry as they would have it looked at on the ground. Then when he got back to the cockpit he said holy sh** you should see the size of the hole in the side of that engine.

Same event (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/419574-american-b767s-develop-cracks-pylons.html#post5816117), I'm sure.

(thinks: There's at least the possibility the vibs were sufficient to actually disengage the drive splines of the tower shaft, leaving the gearbox undriven. Since the GB drives the N2 tachometer, it would now read zero, even if the core were windmilling. Of course, fuel & lube pumps inop too.) :8

[gulfairs]

The last 747 that I flew was a classic 200 series and as I remember one cannot see the wings nor the engines from the flight deck windows!:8

[Intruder]

You just didn't look hard enough!

[Spanner Turner]

You just didn't look hard enough!


or maybe didn't turn head far enough! (but it's true)

http://i795.photobucket.com/albums/yy231/DixonErase/747ViewRange.jpg


Above is the sight line from the "design eye point", you can see even more if you lean forward a bit and put your head on the top of the glareshield !!

Of course the great little SP allowed you to see even more - although the engine noise was a bit louder as the engines were closer to the flight deck!

:ok:

.

[Heracles]

6000-ish hours on the 742F,,I never once saw an outboard exhaust cowl(or where one SHOULD be in this case) inflight, those pesky inboards get in the way. Just sayin'
That bit of trivia aside, can we all agree that this can not bode well for the future of the CF6-50 as we know it?
--heracles

[lomapaseo]

can we all agree that this can not bode well for the future of the CF6-50 as we know it?

:confused:

New engines break and they get fixed

Old engines break between overhaul periods and they get fixed.

As long as they stay fixed they are as good as new.

[Heracles]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 27, 2010
SB-10-20
FOUR RECENT UNCONTAINED ENGINE FAILURE EVENTS PROMPT NTSB TO ISSUE URGENT SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS TO FAA
Washington, DC - The National Transportation Safety Board today issued two urgent safety recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The first recommendation asks that the FAA require operators of aircraft equipped with a particular model engine to immediately perform blade borescope inspections (BSI) of the high pressure turbine rotor at specific intervals until the current turbine disk can be redesigned and replaced with one that can withstand the unbalance vibration forces from the high pressure rotor. The second recommendation asks the FAA to require the engine manufacturer to immediately redesign the disk. The NTSB issued an additional recommendation for a requirement that operators perform a second type of inspection and another recommendation related to the engine manufacturer regarding the installation of the replacement disk.
All four recommendations apply to the low pressure turbine (LPT) stage 3 (S3) rotor disk in the General Electric (GE) CF6-45/50 series turbofan engines that can fail unexpectedly when excited by high-pressure (HP) rotor unbalance.
An uncontained engine event occurs when an engine failure results in fragments of rotating engine parts penetrating and exiting through the engine case. Uncontained turbine engine disk failures within an aircraft engine present a direct hazard to an airplane and its passengers because high-energy disk fragments can penetrate the cabin or fuel tanks, damage flight control surfaces, or sever flammable fluid or hydraulic lines. Engine cases are not designed to contain failed turbine disks. Instead, the risk of uncontained disk failure is mitigated by designating disks as safety-critical parts, defined as the parts of an engine whose failure is likely to present a direct hazard to the aircraft.
In its safety recommendations to the FAA, the NTSB cited four foreign accidents, which the NTSB is either investigating or participating in an investigation led by another nation, in which the aircraft experienced an uncontained engine failure of its GE CF6-45/50 series engine.
The date, location, and circumstances of these four events (none had injuries or fatalities) are as follows:
On July 4, 2008, a Saudi Arabian Airlines (Saudia) Boeing 747-300 experienced an engine failure during initial climb after takeoff from Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This investigation has been delegated to the NTSB.
On March 26, 2009, an Arrow Cargo McDonnell Douglas DC-10F, about 30 minutes after takeoff from Manaus, Brazil, experienced loss of oil pressure in one engine. The pilots shut down the engine and diverted to Medellin, Columbia. This investigation has been delegated to the NTSB.
On December 17, 2009, a Jett8 Cargo Boeing 747-200F airplane was passing through 7,000 feet above ground level (agl) when the flight crewmembers heard a muffled explosion and immediately applied left rudder. With one engine losing oil pressure, the airplane returned to land at Changi, Singapore. The NTSB is participating in the investigation that is being led by the Air Accident Investigation Bureau of Singapore.
On April 10, 2010, an ACT Cargo Airbus A300B4 experienced an engine failure while accelerating for takeoff at Manama, Bahrain. The crew declared an emergency, rejected the takeoff, activated the fire suppression system, and evacuated the airplane. The NTSB is participating in the investigation that is being led by the Bahrain Ministry of Transportation - Civil Aviation.
The four recommendations to the FAA are as follows:

Immediately require operators of CF6-45/50-powered airplanes to perform high pressure turbine rotor blade borescope inspections every 15 flight cycles until the low pressure turbine stage 3 disk is replaced with a redesigned disk that can withstand the unbalance vibration forces from the high pressure rotor. (Urgent)
Require operators of CF6-45/50-powered airplanes to perform fluorescent penetrant inspections of CF6-45- 50- low pressure turbine stage 3 disks at every engine shop visit until the low pressure turbine stage 3 disk is replaced with a redesigned disk that can withstand the unbalance vibration forces from the high pressure rotor.
Immediately require General Electric Company to redesign the CF6-45/50 low pressure turbine stage 3 disk so that it will not fail when exposed to high pressure rotor unbalance forces. (Urgent)
Once General Electric Company has redesigned the CF6- 45/50 low pressure turbine (LPT) stage 3 disk in accordance with Safety Recommendation [3], require all operators of CF6-45/50-powered airplanes to install the newly designed LPT S3 at the next maintenance opportunity.The safety recommendation letter to the Federal Aviation Administration with all four safety recommendations may be found here: http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2010/A-10-098- 101.pdf (http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2010/A-10-098- 101.pdf)


Do some research dude,, The "engines break between overhaul" line ain't working this time. The hot section boroscope interval has been reduced and reduced,,, still aint working. In addition, further research shows that this problem has been know since certification and was allowed due to the theory that ample warning of failure would be provided to the aircrew. Then in the early 2000's at least 3 of the major US carriers running the CF6-50 elected to disable/remove thier Engine Vibration Monitors,, with FAA concurence.
"Big Picture" is; (as my small mind see's it)
1- The FAA knew about this problem since conception, yet still certified the motor. (industry friendly)
2- The FAA allowed the Air Carriers to disregard the EVM's. (industry friendly)
3- The FAA, after repeated failures of the CF6-50 turbines gradually reduced the required inspection increment. (industry friendly)
4- The NTSB issues 2 (of 4) Urgent recommendations to the FAA ;requiring crushing inspection intervals (can the FAA be industry friendly again in this case?)
5 - AFTER these recommendations are made public, ANOTHER CF6-50 dynamicly disassembles it's turbine. (ah,, FAA?? what are you doing to do??)
The FAA, in my humble opinion can NOT afford to be "cool" on this one. The idea of a "knee-capped" CF6-50 is NOT pleasing to me either,, trust me.
Gonna be interesting here in a few months.
--heracles

[barit1]

...can we all agree that this can not bode well for the future of the CF6-50 as we know it?
--heracles

Don't forget that spare parts sales is a big chunk of an OEM's profit margin, and there's a reputation to withhold. GE is, I'm sure, motivated to produce a longterm fix for the CF6-50 - not just a beefier stg 3 LPT wheel, but for the HPT blade too. The -50 was the first engine to pass the 20K hr mark on wing, and we'll soon enough see how much of the problem is maintenance-induced.

[411A]

...and we'll soon enough see how much of the problem is maintenance-induced.
How do you say.... American Airlines.:}

[sunny11410]

First reaction ( just the beginning ):
GE will release 2ea new SB's for CF6-50s coming week, asking for an once thru the fleet action program,
including engine vibration surveys and special ultrasonic inspection of the LPT Stg.3 disk ( on-wing ).
Engines will be splitted into three categories ( 1 - 3 ) whereas most of the CF6-50 engines will likely fall into "cat 1",
which requires to carry out these actions within 15 cycles!!!after the effectivity date of SB.
FAA obviously considers to cover this requirement by AD Note asap.

This will be a major burden for all -50 operators!
Operators NDT inspectors haven't even been trained so far for this special inspection but several GE courses are setted up within the next two weeks.

This taff time schedule will become a challenging lesson for everybody!
And this is just the beginning......:sad:

[Wirelock]

it's not the worst time of year to have these inspections. hangars are generally empty this time of year. most airlines would be able to plan the inspections without a big operational impact. lets hope the inspections find some bad engines so we can avoid another event.:ok:

[lomapaseo]

lets hope the inspections find some bad engines so we can avoid another event.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Finding only one bad engine would be just about perfect.

It confirms the inspection criteria and statistically suggests that the problem is not widespread. Of course no more failures would help in this confirmation as well.