Another Engine Lets Go........Merged
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another Engine Lets Go........Merged
Hearing reports that another RB211 has let go 6 minutes out of Bangkok on the QF1. Before the critics attack about the newsworthiness of reporting an aircraft engine failure, it's not the one failure I am concerned about but the increasing rate of failures caused by a common fault that Qantas are incapable of fixing becasue their RB211 Engine shop was closed down last year. Engine shops are not part of our membership group.
ATSB released a report a couple of days ago detailing the issue after investigating the November occurance. I think this makes about 10 such recent failures.
Investigation: AO-2010-090 - Total power loss - Boeing 747, VH-OJD, near Changi Airport, Singapore, 5 November 2010
ATSB released a report a couple of days ago detailing the issue after investigating the November occurance. I think this makes about 10 such recent failures.
Investigation: AO-2010-090 - Total power loss - Boeing 747, VH-OJD, near Changi Airport, Singapore, 5 November 2010
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: sydney
Age: 76
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree bad decision to clse the Engine shop , turned out such a good product for many years. Some very good people lost their jobs as a result. Now come the chooks to roost
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I see your point Warren, but think of it this way. Do you want to be average, below average or above average. In the case of engine failure stats you want to have a rate well below average.
Definition of average : The Cream of the Crap, and the Crap of the Cream!
Definition of average : The Cream of the Crap, and the Crap of the Cream!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jaba
I'm genuinely (sp?) interested mate. We only hear about the bad stuff, not how many 1000hrs they do in between. Mind you, the 744 has twice the number of engines of my regular ride, so its reasonable to expect to hear of twice the number of failures.
I do a bit of etops flying and was wondering how the QF RB211 compares...
I'm genuinely (sp?) interested mate. We only hear about the bad stuff, not how many 1000hrs they do in between. Mind you, the 744 has twice the number of engines of my regular ride, so its reasonable to expect to hear of twice the number of failures.
I do a bit of etops flying and was wondering how the QF RB211 compares...
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Back of beyond
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas QF1 to London stranded at Bangkok by engine and management failures
May 20, 2011 – 9:21 am, by Ben Sandilands
Qantas flight QF1 a Boeing 747-400 has returned to Bangkok this morning after one of its Rolls-Royce RB211 engines failed.
There is no immediate replacement engine available and around 300 or more passengers are for at least the short term stranded.
But from the outset this is no ‘ordinary’ engine failure. It is much more serious. Since Qantas closed its specialist RB211 maintenance and overhaul shop at Sydney it has experienced an increased incidence of failures from the engines which are now handled in a Rolls-Royce facility in Hong Kong.
Sources in Qantas say the issue is not the quality of work at the Hong Kong facility, which carries out all the actions Rolls-Royce deems necessary for the aging engine design, but that it doesn’t do the special things the Sydney facility did to them to keep them working reliably to the unique needs of Qantas RB211 operations.
Qantas use the engine on very long range non-stop oceanic routes as well as the kangaroo routes to London. No other airlines does. The loss of the unique experience in making these engines work as Qantas intended is a serious indictment of the poor technical competence of Qantas management, and its doctrinal rather than case by case assessment of measures to cut costs.
There are a number of very serious RB211 failures on Qantas jets on recent flights under investigation by the ATSB including one last winter on a 747-400 departing San Francisco for the 14 hour trans Pacific flight.
The ATSB recently concluded its inquiry into a more recent incident to a Qantas 747 leaving Singapore for Sydney, ironically carrying the passengers from QF32, the A380 on which a Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine disintegrated the previous day, and also an engine which Qantas had also trusted to overhaul by the maker rather than its own team.
This is what the ATSB said in its summary of the RB211 incident on the Singapore relief flight:
A review of Qantas values when it comes to its obligations to keep RB211 engines as safe as they used to be is urgently required.
The airline is also under tabloid media fire this morning over the pressure it applies to pilots to carry minimal fuel, following the embarrassing diversion of an A380 to Adelaide airport on a flight from Singapore to Melbourne this week.
Those pressures have been discussed on a number of occasions in the last few years in Crikey and Plane Talking reports, notably the management suggestion to pilots that the risks of diversion and the costs they entail are less than the continuing penalty of flying jets with more fuel than is technically require to arrive in perfect conditions at a destination carrying the legal minimum reserves.
Qantas has been contacted for updates and responses.
Another Nail in the managements coffin!!!!
May 20, 2011 – 9:21 am, by Ben Sandilands
Qantas flight QF1 a Boeing 747-400 has returned to Bangkok this morning after one of its Rolls-Royce RB211 engines failed.
There is no immediate replacement engine available and around 300 or more passengers are for at least the short term stranded.
But from the outset this is no ‘ordinary’ engine failure. It is much more serious. Since Qantas closed its specialist RB211 maintenance and overhaul shop at Sydney it has experienced an increased incidence of failures from the engines which are now handled in a Rolls-Royce facility in Hong Kong.
Sources in Qantas say the issue is not the quality of work at the Hong Kong facility, which carries out all the actions Rolls-Royce deems necessary for the aging engine design, but that it doesn’t do the special things the Sydney facility did to them to keep them working reliably to the unique needs of Qantas RB211 operations.
Qantas use the engine on very long range non-stop oceanic routes as well as the kangaroo routes to London. No other airlines does. The loss of the unique experience in making these engines work as Qantas intended is a serious indictment of the poor technical competence of Qantas management, and its doctrinal rather than case by case assessment of measures to cut costs.
There are a number of very serious RB211 failures on Qantas jets on recent flights under investigation by the ATSB including one last winter on a 747-400 departing San Francisco for the 14 hour trans Pacific flight.
The ATSB recently concluded its inquiry into a more recent incident to a Qantas 747 leaving Singapore for Sydney, ironically carrying the passengers from QF32, the A380 on which a Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine disintegrated the previous day, and also an engine which Qantas had also trusted to overhaul by the maker rather than its own team.
This is what the ATSB said in its summary of the RB211 incident on the Singapore relief flight:
On 5 November 2010, a Boeing Company 747-438 aircraft, registered VH-OJD departed Changi Airport, Singapore on a scheduled flight to Sydney, New South Wales. When the aircraft was climbing through 2,000 ft, a loud bang was heard accompanied with aircraft yaw and vibration. The crew shut down the number one engine, declared a PAN and received approval from air traffic control for a return to Singapore. The crew then jettisoned fuel for about forty minutes. Emergency services were in attendance when the aircraft landed safely a short time later.
A subsequent examination confirmed that the engine had sustained serious damage as the result of a compressor blade release from the stage 1 high pressure compressor (HPC 1). The engine was replaced and the aircraft returned to service.
The aircraft operator is continuing to bring their RB211-524G engines to the latest modification status at engine shop visits. However, should the rate of engine failures increase significantly a review of current modification policy will be undertaken. (Our emphasis)
As ever so tactfully described in the summary, the report actually gets stuck into Qantas for pacing the necessity to modify the RB211s to a safer standard gradually, rather than immediately.A subsequent examination confirmed that the engine had sustained serious damage as the result of a compressor blade release from the stage 1 high pressure compressor (HPC 1). The engine was replaced and the aircraft returned to service.
The aircraft operator is continuing to bring their RB211-524G engines to the latest modification status at engine shop visits. However, should the rate of engine failures increase significantly a review of current modification policy will be undertaken. (Our emphasis)
A review of Qantas values when it comes to its obligations to keep RB211 engines as safe as they used to be is urgently required.
The airline is also under tabloid media fire this morning over the pressure it applies to pilots to carry minimal fuel, following the embarrassing diversion of an A380 to Adelaide airport on a flight from Singapore to Melbourne this week.
Those pressures have been discussed on a number of occasions in the last few years in Crikey and Plane Talking reports, notably the management suggestion to pilots that the risks of diversion and the costs they entail are less than the continuing penalty of flying jets with more fuel than is technically require to arrive in perfect conditions at a destination carrying the legal minimum reserves.
Qantas has been contacted for updates and responses.
Another Nail in the managements coffin!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Aus
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What M Harris demolished in a few years whould take QF 20 years to rebuild the skill level again to what EOC had,I would be very surprised if
QF could even get any of the old boys back,just to pass on there skills.
EOC used to have a policy that if you found something that may not make it to the next o/haul it was replaced,sure the final engine that came out of the line may have cost a bit more but it stayed on wing a lot longer,
I remeber QF getting an award from P&W for a JT9D that was bolted to a wing for 12000hours.
It is not only the Long Haul A/C engines that QF is having broblems with,the same can be said for the quality of the 737 and A320 engines,have a look at the unscheduled engine changes Jetstar have had over the last 3 years,
It started with Engineering,then the Hosties and now after the pilots,won't be long before we get on a flt from Syd to Mel and all you will be able to smell is curried lips and Ars**les comming from the galley with a banter of asian hosties asking if you want laska for runch and meanwhile a couple
of very low time drivers up the front looking puzzled at the big red handle
flashing and lots of sirens going,and saying ,we lot got raught riss in training,what the F**k going rong,whilst the left dive of the A/C increases.
Swiss Cheese Theory?
QF could even get any of the old boys back,just to pass on there skills.
EOC used to have a policy that if you found something that may not make it to the next o/haul it was replaced,sure the final engine that came out of the line may have cost a bit more but it stayed on wing a lot longer,
I remeber QF getting an award from P&W for a JT9D that was bolted to a wing for 12000hours.
It is not only the Long Haul A/C engines that QF is having broblems with,the same can be said for the quality of the 737 and A320 engines,have a look at the unscheduled engine changes Jetstar have had over the last 3 years,
It started with Engineering,then the Hosties and now after the pilots,won't be long before we get on a flt from Syd to Mel and all you will be able to smell is curried lips and Ars**les comming from the galley with a banter of asian hosties asking if you want laska for runch and meanwhile a couple
of very low time drivers up the front looking puzzled at the big red handle
flashing and lots of sirens going,and saying ,we lot got raught riss in training,what the F**k going rong,whilst the left dive of the A/C increases.
Swiss Cheese Theory?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orstralya
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for interest sake, can anybody put a figure on the number of 747 RB211 failures Qantas have had since the uncontained failure out of San Francisco last year?
I'd then like to compare that to the failure rate of engines in the same fleet for the preceeding 10 years.
Beancounters will just never get it
I'd then like to compare that to the failure rate of engines in the same fleet for the preceeding 10 years.
Beancounters will just never get it
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas use the engine on very long range non-stop oceanic routes as well as the kangaroo routes to London. No other airlines does.
Nor does he mention BA 57 RR powered -400s (no oceanic I know).
For info BA and CX went through a spate of failures a while back so decided to get together and discuss how they operate their engines. QF was invited but apparently were not interested.
What is QFs reverse thrust SOP and what speed is it required to be idle / cancelled by?
Nunc est bibendum
QF was invited but apparently were not interested.
Getting rid of our engine overhaul center was stupid but please don't tar our operational people with not joining in forums that they are actually involved with.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: melbourne
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In five years when state rail start having engine failures,will anyone connect the dots and blame Murray.
i just cannot believe that these total ass clowns can go from one management job to another without reprisal.
EOC v M = eng failure
i just cannot believe that these total ass clowns can go from one management job to another without reprisal.
EOC v M = eng failure
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: sydney
Age: 76
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was not MH that closed the engine shop , it was the Scotsman brought in from RR who wound it down to the point that it wasn't viable . And the lack of investment in new facilities meant it had a bleak future . But , the product that came out of there was second to none . Now , we see the results.
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nor does he mention BA 57 RR powered -400s (no oceanic I know).
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So last week it was an engine failure in SIN, followed by an A check on the same aircraft, where it was decided to change another engine.
JQ's newest A330 with one U/S engine removed and another robbed to service QF A330 in BNE HM.
QF new A330 with chronic steering problems AOG in syd, (Now in AVV for 15 shake out test flights, or back to AIRBUS TLS).
This week its another engine failure, this time in BKK
Another QF 744 with half of it's right wing main landing gear out for repairs.
QF A330 with U/S IFE.
And reports of 2 ex offshore HM aircraft with extensive corrosion.
And who is it doing all the work to get these birds flying again?
RR = NO
JQ = NO
JHAS = NO
IASA = DEFINITELY NO!
SASCO = NO
HAECO = NO
ST AERO = NO
LTQ = NO
QE = YES
JQ's newest A330 with one U/S engine removed and another robbed to service QF A330 in BNE HM.
QF new A330 with chronic steering problems AOG in syd, (Now in AVV for 15 shake out test flights, or back to AIRBUS TLS).
This week its another engine failure, this time in BKK
Another QF 744 with half of it's right wing main landing gear out for repairs.
QF A330 with U/S IFE.
And reports of 2 ex offshore HM aircraft with extensive corrosion.
And who is it doing all the work to get these birds flying again?
RR = NO
JQ = NO
JHAS = NO
IASA = DEFINITELY NO!
SASCO = NO
HAECO = NO
ST AERO = NO
LTQ = NO
QE = YES
