A380 Engine Shut down-CDG
 

Out of interest, I read this on Avherald and few minutes ago:

By Simon Hradecky, created Saturday, Nov 10th 2012 21:31Z, last updated Saturday, Nov 10th 2012 21:31ZAn Emirates Airbus A380-800, registration A6-EDO performing flight EK-201 from Dubai (United Arab Emirates) to New York JFK,NY (USA), was enroute at FL340 about 30nm northeast of Kosice (Slovakia) when the crew shut the #4 engine (GP7270, outboard right hand) down. The aircraft set course in direction of Frankfurt/Main (Germany) descending to FL100, about 85nm east of Frankfurt the aircraft changed course to fly south around Frankfurt and divert to Paris (France). The aircraft landed safely on Charles de Gaulle Airport's runway 26R about 140 minutes after the engine was shut down.

A replacement Airbus A380-800 registration A6-EDM was dispatched from Dubai to Paris as flight EK-3073 and resumed flight EK-201 reaching New York with a delay of 12 hours.

A passenger reported the crew announced engine #4 had been shut down.

The incident aircraft was able to position to Dubai on Nov 8th as flight EK-7002 and resumed service about 35 hours after landing in Paris.

Perhaps there is more info on the shutdown???

This is taken from R&N.

Mutt

Mello Mutt,
I later saw the same thing again published under another thread here somewhere.

I also see another engine failure out of Sydney with the Airbus A180 (one-eighty), and another engine failure/fire on the cripple seven going into Mumbai.

Something is not good, what's going on????

380 making all the news.

Ex 380, you must be happy that you can't 'technically' blame AB for an engine issue :) Interesting that these engines now seem to be following in the vein of the RR's though-hope they get it resolved soon, it is starting to become monotonous!

Lots of issues lately with these engines...is EK maintenance able to keep up with the expansion of the airline? We all know that there has been a steady intake of pilots, is EK Engineering doing the same? Not stirring any pots here, just curious as it doesn't seem to get much attention here...I would hate to think that it might be a shortage of staff contributing to any problems...

Maybe our tec department saw a too big of cost cutting by the bean counters or A R ...
they are squeezed quite tight after he took control... not the best athmosphere there...

As always, the bean counters never been held responsible...

Ah yes - but they do have very good IFE ;)

3 engine failures in a week? Time to stop cost cutting and hire a significant number of engineers. Those guys are so short in numbers it ain't funny.

Heard a whole bunch of QF engineers were just made redundant, hopefully some of them will plug the hole...:suspect:

Edit: Actually that's 4 failures in 10 days (330 in Zambia was it?!)

Looks like. EK is going for the most engine shutdowns in month record. Be careful out there

The don

Doesnt the number of in-flight shutdowns impact directly on your ETOPS rating..?

Err...not for four engine aircraft....

It does. It effects the overall rating of the Maint Dep.

Really? Thanks-you learn something new every day!!

Ah good.....not such a stupid question then, eh, wiz?!!

Stands to reason if you think about it....an engine is unaware of whether it adorns the wing of a 2 or a 4 engined aeroplane. A failure is thus a failure and this does affect the ETOPS stats of an airline irrespective of how many engines were actually present. Engineering maintain their engines and by having good stats (as in in-flight shutdowns) then a longer ETOPS time is allowed. Start showing a poor or declining rate and the ETOPS time comes into question. Guess eyebrows will be raised here.....

For what it's worth, I heard that ETOPS-wise only in flight shut-downs on ETOPS sectors influence the statistics that might reduce the overall fleet ETOPS status.

That's why they always tell you NOT to shut down the engine, at least not in the ETOPS sector.

In the BOM-T7 case it seems typical: Maint gets notice of a deteriorating engine status, tells crew there's no problem (!!), to continue and to monitor the parameters, as shutting down now would have an impact.
Later on the engine starts getting the ****ters and the crew has to go emergency, but it's no longer in the ETOPS frame, so no one no longer cares .... the stats are satisfied, Maint did what they were supposed to do and the crew can now be blamed for not having shut down earlier ....

Might not be the exact case here, but you might get the drift.

I think you'll find IFSD stats are based on engine type, not aircraft or operator, for the purpose of ETOPS compliance.
A380 shouldn't affect B777 reliability figures.

GLOFISH.......who are THEY?;)

Payscale

I get your drift.

It's simple: You're strongly advised to listen to 'them'.
They however always disclaim their advice instantly.
You do otherwise -> you're most probably in for t+b, even with a good outcome.
You follow their advice and it goes south -> you're in for t+b or six feet under.

I'm just saying that on your ETOPS sector you will rarely get the printout advising you to go ESD, but more often to drag it along in idle to the next airstrip ....

All for the stats!
For the very same reasons there are all these evil birds finding their way into Airbus engines ......