Air France lose B777 ETOPS 180'
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sekant - I think what's being said is that GE's CFMI tie up with Snecma may have included a commitment by the French via their controlling shareholding to make AF buy GE - Snecma also have a JV (CFAN) on the GE90-115B:
http://www.le-webmag.com/article.php...cle=46&lang=en
AF-KLM have issued an RFP for something in the 787/350 market but insist that it run GE which may cause Airbus some problems as GE haven't agreed an engine on the 350XWB platform yet.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...9lM&refer=home
It may also be the reason they insisted on a CFM engined A318 when Airbus were originally going to be solely PW6000 on that platform (although some might say it was lucky they did insist, given the development delays the PW6K suffered).
http://www.le-webmag.com/article.php...cle=46&lang=en
AF-KLM have issued an RFP for something in the 787/350 market but insist that it run GE which may cause Airbus some problems as GE haven't agreed an engine on the 350XWB platform yet.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...9lM&refer=home
It may also be the reason they insisted on a CFM engined A318 when Airbus were originally going to be solely PW6000 on that platform (although some might say it was lucky they did insist, given the development delays the PW6K suffered).
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: FR
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbubba, thank you very much! A key phrase is 'demonstrate' [...] without service experience (for 'early ETOPS'). I guess that today there may be enough engine-hours with the 773-GE115 to satisfy even the 'conventional' rule AC 120-42A? I have not yet read everything in the link posted, but I assume that the AC 120-42A will 'take over' as soon as the service experience required has been met?
Thanks!
Thanks!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Newcastle, WA, USA
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, AF have plenty of A342 and A343 both of which have >30% higher maximum payload range than the 777-300ER. (Reply17)
Huh? I'm sure this must be news to AF and the rest of the aviation world. The A342/3 payload range capability can't even match the 772ER much less the 773ER. Are you thinking of the 773?
On the main topic though.
I believe the 773ER has recently completed 1.3 million engine flight hours with three IFSD of GE90-115B's.
http://www.alleventsgroup.com/archiv...yb3VyIChHRSBBd
Doing the math gives an IFSD rate of 2.3x10-6.
Required IFSD rate for 180 min. ETOPS is .02X10-3.
The GE90-115B failure rate could be 10 times higher without jeopardizing its 180 min ETOPS capability.
Huh? I'm sure this must be news to AF and the rest of the aviation world. The A342/3 payload range capability can't even match the 772ER much less the 773ER. Are you thinking of the 773?
On the main topic though.
I believe the 773ER has recently completed 1.3 million engine flight hours with three IFSD of GE90-115B's.
http://www.alleventsgroup.com/archiv...yb3VyIChHRSBBd
Doing the math gives an IFSD rate of 2.3x10-6.
Required IFSD rate for 180 min. ETOPS is .02X10-3.
The GE90-115B failure rate could be 10 times higher without jeopardizing its 180 min ETOPS capability.
Last edited by Old Aero Guy; 29th Nov 2007 at 19:59.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4 Engine Shutdown Frequency
Maths,chaps! Although it is true that the probability of a shutdown on a four-jet is double that of a twin, the probability of two shutdowns on the same. day is much smaller. If you don't believe me consider the case of (say) a B52 How often do they lose four engines at the same time?! Whether the four jet is safer or not depends (of course) on whether it will fly on two engines and for how long.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Fawlty Towers-Torquay
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safe Extended Range Operation
With all due respect some of you obviously do not know much about ETOP rules. losing an ETOP has nothing to do with whether the airline had problems or faults for reasons beyond their control.The aircraft manufacturer must obtain type design approval from the applicable regulatory authority for the airframe and the engine combination to achieve Sufficient level of reliability in service so that Safe Extended Range Operation may be conducted based on ;
120 Minutes IFSD 00.027 each 1000 engine/hours
180 Minutes IFSD=0.022 each 1000 engine/hours
And the type design reliability and performance IAW AC 120-42 (CMP) of configuration maintenance and procedure from the manufacturer.
But then again I am only a hotel owner in Torquay what do I know about ETOP FAA AC 120.42A Rules!
Safe flying to all from Sybil,Polly and Manuel!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
With all due respect some of you obviously do not know much about ETOP rules. losing an ETOP has nothing to do with whether the airline had problems or faults for reasons beyond their control.
But then again I am only a hotel owner in Torquay what do I know about ETOP FAA AC 120.42A Rules
"The INTRODUCER"
Just how American is GE90
Financial share is: GE 60.5%; Snecma 23.5%; IHI Japan 9%; FiatAvio 7%.
(So moderately American I suppose - certainly not 100% as stated.)
Also worth noting that AF didn't just select CFM for A318, it was them that essentially forced Airbus to offer CFM. Would have been PW6000-only if Airbus had its way.
(So moderately American I suppose - certainly not 100% as stated.)
Also worth noting that AF didn't just select CFM for A318, it was them that essentially forced Airbus to offer CFM. Would have been PW6000-only if Airbus had its way.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ Old Aero Guy
Either Wikipedia've got their figures wrong or I have trouble understanding the definitions:
"range fully loaded":
A342: 8000 nm
A343: 7400 nm
A346: 7750 / 7900 nm (depending on engine)
the corresponding figure for the 777 would have to be "max. payload range":
B777-300ER 5500 nm
max range is given as 7930 nm, but that would be with reduced payload
or were you thinking about the 777-200LR which does have a may payload range of 7500 nm, i.e. slightly above the A343 but below A342?
if (and that is more of an IF) "range with max. passengers" is the same as "range fully loaded" and "max. payload range", then even the A330 compares favorably:
A332: 6749 nm
A333: 5669 nm
Either Wikipedia've got their figures wrong or I have trouble understanding the definitions:
"range fully loaded":
A342: 8000 nm
A343: 7400 nm
A346: 7750 / 7900 nm (depending on engine)
the corresponding figure for the 777 would have to be "max. payload range":
B777-300ER 5500 nm
max range is given as 7930 nm, but that would be with reduced payload
or were you thinking about the 777-200LR which does have a may payload range of 7500 nm, i.e. slightly above the A343 but below A342?
if (and that is more of an IF) "range with max. passengers" is the same as "range fully loaded" and "max. payload range", then even the A330 compares favorably:
A332: 6749 nm
A333: 5669 nm
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Rosterwilltell
Age: 68
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@BRE
To get this right. A full load needs to be expressed in weight then compare the range.
A340 300 max payload ~ 50 tonnes range 6000NM.
B777 200ER (not LR) ~ 60 tonnes range 7500NM.
regards
A340 300 max payload ~ 50 tonnes range 6000NM.
B777 200ER (not LR) ~ 60 tonnes range 7500NM.
regards
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Geneva
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Financial share is: GE 60.5%; Snecma 23.5%; IHI Japan 9%; FiatAvio 7%.
(So moderately American I suppose - certainly not 100% as stated.)
Also worth noting that AF didn't just select CFM for A318, it was them that essentially forced Airbus to offer CFM. Would have been PW6000-only if Airbus had its way."
Thanks, so I stood to be corrected. I suppose then that Air France does abide by some sort of national industrial policy - although, if that was their primary criteria, they would not have so many 777 on their fleet.
(So moderately American I suppose - certainly not 100% as stated.)
Also worth noting that AF didn't just select CFM for A318, it was them that essentially forced Airbus to offer CFM. Would have been PW6000-only if Airbus had its way."
Thanks, so I stood to be corrected. I suppose then that Air France does abide by some sort of national industrial policy - although, if that was their primary criteria, they would not have so many 777 on their fleet.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As stated on an earlier topic, although the GE90-115B had a good first 3 years with no IFSD, they have now had 5 in the last 5 months. This burst of failures gives an approximate IFSD rate of
5*1000/(115*2*10*30*5) = 0.015/1000 Engine flight hours
Now this on the face of it is still below the (0.02) 180 ETOPS guidelines, although close to the 330 mins.
I believe this is the first AF IFSD, and therefore they may be taking a conservative approach in limiting ETOPS in light of the recent burst of 5 fleet IFSDs, the last (AF) one of which appears to be something of a more serious failure.
Perhaps Air France/authorities must be concerned over this recent St Petersburg failure - that it could be a problem they can not easily manage their way through, or just don't fully understand yet.
5*1000/(115*2*10*30*5) = 0.015/1000 Engine flight hours
Now this on the face of it is still below the (0.02) 180 ETOPS guidelines, although close to the 330 mins.
I believe this is the first AF IFSD, and therefore they may be taking a conservative approach in limiting ETOPS in light of the recent burst of 5 fleet IFSDs, the last (AF) one of which appears to be something of a more serious failure.
Perhaps Air France/authorities must be concerned over this recent St Petersburg failure - that it could be a problem they can not easily manage their way through, or just don't fully understand yet.
Bear Behind
Perhaps the first of an AF GE90-115B but in December 2005, an AF 777 had to divert into Irkutsk due to engine issues en route Seoul to CDG (this flight is operated today by a -300ER but I don't know if the incident was to a -300ER or a -200ER); and, IIRC, it was an AF 777 that had to divert into Tenerife also due to engine issues a long time ago. It's certainly not an unknown phenomenon.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@donotfeed:
I still have trouble reconciling your info with that on wikipedia:
"A340 300 max payload ~ 50 tonnes range 6000NM"
vs. "range fully loaded: A343: 7400 nm"
either fully loaded and max payload are not the same or somebody's figures are wrong.
I still have trouble reconciling your info with that on wikipedia:
"A340 300 max payload ~ 50 tonnes range 6000NM"
vs. "range fully loaded: A343: 7400 nm"
either fully loaded and max payload are not the same or somebody's figures are wrong.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
panda-k-bear,
The Irkutsk AF incident 2 years ago was a 777-200ER with GE90-94Bs. Cause, if I recollect was a compressor blade failure causing surge/stall. This current one was a 777-300ER with GE90-115Bs.
I think the engines are slightly different beasts, therefore unlikely to be the same failure.
Don't recall the Tenerife incident - when was that?
The Irkutsk AF incident 2 years ago was a 777-200ER with GE90-94Bs. Cause, if I recollect was a compressor blade failure causing surge/stall. This current one was a 777-300ER with GE90-115Bs.
I think the engines are slightly different beasts, therefore unlikely to be the same failure.
Don't recall the Tenerife incident - when was that?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Fawlty Towers-Torquay
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Waldorf Salad
Airbubba
"ETOPS certification can and has been pulled for various carriers over the years. Pan Am lost 120 minute ETOPS for a while a couple of decades ago due to problems with the PW4000 engines."
I am not sure what kind of Airbubba you were smoking when you read my post or perhaps is the Waldorf Salad you eats on that side of the world that cause such a side effect. ETOP duration is based on reliability statistic. if you fall within the range then that what will determine the status the airline in whether is 120 or 180 Min. And that has nothing to do with Pan Am or Basel Fawlty Airline..or the price of a hotel room in Torquay!!!!.GOT IT!
And again Major Airbubba do accept my apology wont you as I am only a hotel owner in Torquay what do I know about ETOP FAA AC 120.42A Rules!
Safe flying to all from Sybil,Polly and Manuel!
"ETOPS certification can and has been pulled for various carriers over the years. Pan Am lost 120 minute ETOPS for a while a couple of decades ago due to problems with the PW4000 engines."
I am not sure what kind of Airbubba you were smoking when you read my post or perhaps is the Waldorf Salad you eats on that side of the world that cause such a side effect. ETOP duration is based on reliability statistic. if you fall within the range then that what will determine the status the airline in whether is 120 or 180 Min. And that has nothing to do with Pan Am or Basel Fawlty Airline..or the price of a hotel room in Torquay!!!!.GOT IT!And again Major Airbubba do accept my apology wont you as I am only a hotel owner in Torquay what do I know about ETOP FAA AC 120.42A Rules!
Safe flying to all from Sybil,Polly and Manuel!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Newcastle, WA, USA
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"range fully loaded":
A342: 8000 nm
A343: 7400 nm
A346: 7750 / 7900 nm (depending on engine)
the corresponding figure for the 777 would have to be "max. payload range":
B777-300ER 5500 nm (Reply 31)
The figures given above are for full passenger payloads on the A340's but MZFW payload on the 773ER. The full passenger range for the 773ER is comparable to the A346IGW, about 7900 nm.
A342: 8000 nm
A343: 7400 nm
A346: 7750 / 7900 nm (depending on engine)
the corresponding figure for the 777 would have to be "max. payload range":
B777-300ER 5500 nm (Reply 31)
The figures given above are for full passenger payloads on the A340's but MZFW payload on the 773ER. The full passenger range for the 773ER is comparable to the A346IGW, about 7900 nm.