Here we go :suspect:... hang on, I thought all ENGINE maintenance WAS done onshore?!?!?!

Teresa,

Definately not fan. The fire marks are coming from the front of the thrust reverser cowl (Hot section). By the photos it is definately an uncontained turbine disc failure. And yes the engine design is supposed to contain this type of failure.

Does anybody remember the Air New Zealand 767 that blew a CF6-80A on climb out of Brisbane (I think 2002). That was a very similar event (uncontained failure) and they were very lucky that all the debris went outboard and thus did not enter the passenger cabin.

If I recall correctly that engine was purchased by Aviation Australia once the investigation was finished.

GB

Well done to the crew as usual for the way they handled it.

Typical responses on news sites about offshore maintainence and the unions getting thier day in the sun in the media.

Fleet manager on Qrewroom reporting more to this than meets the eye.

Channel 9 set a new low. "A Qantas jet exploded this afternoon." Followed by an animation of the QF72 diving vertically....:ugh::ugh:

FoxtrotAlpha, you are damn right! Here we go again. And rightly so!

For your info the aircraft recently came out of it's first heavy maintenance check in Germany. LTQ I think. And before you ask, NO, I don't work for QF.

Not as bad as the QF media spokesperson, Olivia Wirth, who couldn't recognise the corporate logo.

A quote from SMH: "A Qantas spokeswoman said there was "no suggestion it's come from our aircraft".

No wonder AJ wanted to get out of the presser quickly - wanted to get away from stupid questions from journalists.

Kremin - all the media have been terrible. 7 reported that is actually crashed. I switched through all of them and they were all just as bad. I swear they are getting worse.

Coverage on SBS showed the firies at Changi clearly spraying water or foam directly into engine 1?!!? Sympathetic damage perhaps?

Come clean Kremin....what's the gossip? ;)

blueloo & Capt K, I wondered about that

The Sky footage shows a tender using the cannon straight in the inlet of No.1 .... given the velocity of the fine sray exiting, was No.1 still turning and burning?

Reason I ask, is whilst this was happening, the stairs were already up on the righthand side and pax were exiting, so the cannon down the intake of No.1 was occuring quite some time after the aircraft stopping.

I wonder if the departing rotating parts of No.2 punched through some vital nerve bits in the forward spar area? ... control systems for No.1?!?!?!

Gear doors open and no slats out. Looks like possible complete loss of green hydraulic system? Is that also a gravity extension of NLG and WLG.

Tough day at the office boys. Well done!!!!!!!!

No goss... just that statement.:confused:

ABC also clearly had them sending water into the intake of No 1 with the engine still running. Fuel SOV inop?

Could have been a busy place up the front. Seems like damage to hydraulics, no slats, reverse thrust is only on the inboards so thats them out. And maybe not a lot of control with the outboard engine on landing and possibly at a pretty high weight.

How do you calculate the required runway length for that! :eek:

Well done all round.

PS: Also black mark on the pylon of 1, maybe some ejected bits found their way into it?

Red Kezzza
 

Just saw AJ on 7:30 Report. Kezza carefully laid out the interview to get the facts straight then set the trap.

AJ stepped straight into it.

His response should have been "keep it straight -no comment"

No...... he took the bait and put the boot in.:rolleyes:

Dope !:ugh:

This is "the pride of the fleet" buddy. Now is not the time to bang on about this.

You have more on your Irish plate than the ALAEA at this point in time.

Get on with it.

Can some one with some operational experience like the Chief Pilot ( PW) for example get on the TV. The Leprechaun looks way out of his depth.

Gas Bags,
My understanding is that engines are designed to contain blade failures but it is impossible to contain a turbine disc failure due to the mass of the disc and the huge amount of energy it has at high RPM. GB

There sure is. According to EASA Certification Specification Engine CSE 510 under “Safety Analysis” one of the failure definitions regarded as Hazardous Engine Effects is the non-containment of high energy debris.

And in CSE 520 “Strength”

(c) (1) The strength of the Engine must be such that the shedding of compressor or turbine blades, either singly or in likely combinations, will not result in a Hazardous Engine Effect

(d) Design consideration must be given to avoiding the risk of major rupture of Engine casings (particularly those which are subjected to high pressure loads) in the event of a local Failure in the casing or damage to the casing arising, for example, from a torching flame following a combustion system Failure.

http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/g/...ndment%202.pdf

So in a nutshell Rolls Royce, this is a big FAIL.

Lol. A route check as well! Just what you need! He probably needs to do another one due to not doing an an all engine landing! :}

attribute it to my ageing memory, but did not Nancy have an engine change earlier this year?

Aren't the turbines connected to the fan and hence spinning at the same RPM? If so the fan should have the higher energy.

I'll leave that open for debate.

However, watching the leprechaun on the 7.30 report just got me angry. Any other QF pilot watching would have felt the same emotion as the same man responsible for denying mainline pilots any career progression, the same man who didn't want mainline pilots "polluting" the Jetstar culture, waxed lyrically about how Qantas pilots are the best trained/most experienced in the world and what a wonderful job they did.:mad::mad::mad:

For the record; there is no empirical evidence to confirm those claims either way; all that can be said is that this crew and others have handled critical situations safely and professionally, as pilots should.

However:

If you truly believe that Alan, why are you hell-bent on diminishing and destroying mainline and it's culture? Why are you continually auctioning off mainline flying to the lowest bidder? Why do you seek to arrest the career progression of good pilots that your recruiting department spent so much time identifying?

You can't have it both ways Alan.

I doubt a third of the turbine disc counts as a normal number of blades...

There will be a lot to come out of this.


Another excellent crew display. Truly professional.