Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > Engineers & Technicians
Reload this Page >

NTSB urjent action on CF6-50

Wikiposts
Search
Engineers & Technicians In this day and age of increased CRM and safety awareness, a forum for the guys and girls who keep our a/c serviceable.

NTSB urjent action on CF6-50

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 8th Jun 2010, 02:41
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Romeo 14
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
NTSB urjent action on CF6-50

Anyone on here seen this little nugget?
There was a thread on "Frieghtdogs", but the pilot's don't seam too interested.
I really think that recommendations 1 and 3 could spell death to the GE powered 742 and the DC10,, but would like more ground engineers opinions.
I don't think that in the current climate the FAA will even hesitate to issue an AD to these exact requirements.

Sorry for the cut and paste:



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:
  1. 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)
  2. 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.
  3. 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)
  4. 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.
WOW
--heracles
Heracles is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2010, 02:45
  #2 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Romeo 14
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here's the link for those interested in the original:

SB-10-20


Hot section scope every 15 cycles,, for most operators of the GE powered Classic,, thats just about every second day. I'm sure GE will assign absolutely zero priority to redesigning and certifying that new rotor, lol.

WOW
--heracles
Heracles is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2010, 03:00
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Romeo 14
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
and,, I can NOT believe I misspelled the title,,lol. Sorry
--heracles
Heracles is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2010, 05:06
  #4 (permalink)  
rmm
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: BNE
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Seems odd that the -45/50 having been around since 1969 starts having these issues in the last 2 years. I could understand if it were a faulty bunch of disc's but according to the article it's caused by unbalance forces of the HP rotor.
rmm is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.