Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Acceptable Deferred Defect???

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Acceptable Deferred Defect???

Old 2nd Apr 2001, 16:54
  #1 (permalink)  
Capt PPRuNe
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Question Acceptable Deferred Defect???

This was sent to me this morning...

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">The following pictures prove the superior dispatchability and survivability of the Boeing 747.

An Asian airline operator came into FRA (Frankfurt, Germany) for an unscheduled refuelling stop. The reason became soon apparent to the ground crew: The fan on the number 3 engine didn't look so good. That had apparently been no problem for the tough guys back in Asia: Get yourself some sturdy straps and wrap them around fan blades and the structures behind, thus stopping any windmilling and associated uncomfortable vibration while in flight caused by the suboptimal fan. Off you go into the wild blue yonder with another revenue-making flight! If you get low on fuel, just set it down on at the closest airport, FRA in this case.

But that's when the problem started: Those Germans are so picky that they grounded the aircraft!

After that, the airline operator had to raise some money (took about 10 days) to get the engine changed. The repair contractor also decided to do some inspection work on the other engines because none of them looked all that great anymore. The result: A total of 3 engines were finally changed on this airplane before it was allowed to fly again.


Hmmmmm.......</font>


 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 17:04
  #2 (permalink)  
Unwell_Raptor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Exclamation

I presume that you could tell which engineer had devised the 'fix' as his trousers fell down straight afterwards.

Quite unbelievable!
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 17:43
  #3 (permalink)  
Delta Wun-Wun
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wink

Never been raced or rallied sir....Owned by an old lady who only took it out the garage once a fortnight to collect her pension....Honest!!!

------------------
GET THE BLOODY NOSE DOWN!
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 18:43
  #4 (permalink)  
angels
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Those photos are utterly astounding! Were it not for the stature of the poster (!!) I would have assumed an April Fool of some sort.
I suppose you can't drop a hint as to the airline involved (I've got the blue on fuselage, but still can't work it out)....
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 18:50
  #5 (permalink)  
Flap 5
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Question

At a guess - Air China? Based in Beijing.
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 19:05
  #6 (permalink)  
ExSimGuy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Red face

I trust this was the #3 or #4 engine; if I had been boarding that thing and taken one look at the engine, guess who'd have been getting the flight delayed for his bags to be off-loaded! I know I tend to "wax lyrical" about the reasons for having more than 2 donkeys but . . .

SH-one-T

If this had been posted a day earlier, despite the qualifications of the poster, I'd definitely say it was a wind-up!

(looking back at the pictures, it looks like a left-side donk - are pax BLIND? )

------------------
What goes around . . .
. . often lands better!

[This message has been edited by ExSimGuy (edited 02 April 2001).]
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 19:09
  #7 (permalink)  
quid
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Question

Are we sure it wasn't just a routine 3 engine ferry? The straps through the blades are a common procedure in that case.
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 19:37
  #8 (permalink)  
HighSpeed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

danny,

surely this must be some kind of an april fool's joke...
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 20:42
  #9 (permalink)  
I'd rather
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

tell us the name of the airline pleeeeease...
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 20:45
  #10 (permalink)  
nilnotedtks
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

a three engine ferry is perfectly safe and legal on a B747 and ferry is the word, no passengers allowed. As a rule of thum, the fan on the ead engine has to be either tied up or the blades removed and the three good engines borescoped before each and every departure. Even the good old DC10/MD11 can depart on 2 engines, a ferry of course and no Chinese accounting allowed. As Dodgy says, 2 Cross pens, a Leatherman and plenty of B******t
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 21:13
  #11 (permalink)  
Icarus
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Lightbulb

Looks a bit dodgy to be a B747, I bet my bottom dollar on it being a IL76 (ever seen A 747 wing like that! hmm )and quite possible Aeroflot judging by the colour scheme, for comparison:

http://home.worldonline.dk/~lai/afl_il76.html

 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 21:24
  #12 (permalink)  
Mooney
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I dont think those are 747 engines either...

[This message has been edited by Mooney (edited 02 April 2001).]
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 21:49
  #13 (permalink)  
Capt PPRuNe
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Question

Posted exactly as received from someone in Oz. Don't associate the a/c in the background as being the a/c from which the engine has been removed as it is on a 'trolley'. Only posted because it sounded interesting.


------------------
Capt PPRuNe
aka Danny Fyne
The Professional Pilots RUmour NEtwork
 
Old 2nd Apr 2001, 21:50
  #14 (permalink)  
gas path
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

That is, or rather what's left of it is, a P&W JT9D.
The wing in the background is a 747 wing.
Probably a bird strike.
IF it did have punters on board I bet there wasn't an awful lot of runway left at the end of the T.O run
As nilnotedtks points out a ferry flt. is perfectly safe on three, although usually the fan is removed the core blanked and spraged, to prevent it from rotating as it has a tendancy to dump all it's oil due to the lack of bearing pressurisation
 
Old 3rd Apr 2001, 14:49
  #15 (permalink)  
Cold Soak
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Lightbulb

Looks more like hail damage to me...

------

Taken from "China Airlines Strategic Book" mission statement:

"We will be the most reliable airlines".


... so it can't be them!
 
Old 3rd Apr 2001, 16:07
  #16 (permalink)  
SeldomFixit
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I've seen aircraft that never get washed unless they fly through severe chemical storms. This lil puppy obviously struck a flock of cargo straps. With maintenance standards like this, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see revenue cargo in the cold stream, secured by those straps !!
God bless their little cotton sox but the shame of it is, they probably don't know any better.
 
Old 3rd Apr 2001, 16:19
  #17 (permalink)  
SKYDRIFTER
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

MORE THAN HAIL DAMAGE -

The engine is sitting on a mobile cradle. The extent & nature of the damage is more than just hail & certainly not a bird strike. The damage looks as though it was involved in an accident with FOD ingestion.
 
Old 3rd Apr 2001, 20:44
  #18 (permalink)  
gaunty
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Phhaaaaaaark

They'l never load me through an aerobridge in that part of the world again.

I think I'll insist on the old walk across the tarmac past the engines and up the stairs routine.
 
Old 4th Apr 2001, 01:56
  #19 (permalink)  
SunSeaSandfly
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

3 engine ferry on 4 engined aircraft has been a procedure since day dot.
Done it on a DC-6, in another life.
Not sure about strapping blades, looks like they may be strapped to stators, which would seem to make sense if you want to stop rotation.


What the story was on the rest of the engines was I don't know, but boroscope and filter/chip checks are normally mandatory, maybe they were not done?


Even when they are done there are no guarantees.
I saw a PanAm L-1011 leave BGI on a 2 engine ferry to JFK and lose a second one soon after T/O. He announced he was returning due to engine failure and the controller started to issue vectors and altitudes, his response was not totally printable but in effect said "you don't understand, I am returning directly to the airport NOW, clear all traffic."
He was still dumping at touchdown and JUST made it.


Ref the damage, I have seen a JT8-D in worse shape after an incident with more than half a dozen ducks. It still ran, but only at 1.3 EPR- but even that was welcome, since the other one had also swallowed ducks and had hiccuped (sp?) twice, but kept running. This second engine had feathers from an estimated 3 ducks on the stators, but no significant damage to the fan blades.
Can one infer that a JT8-D has a limitation of 3 ducks max?

[This message has been edited by SunSeaSandfly (edited 03 April 2001).]
 
Old 4th Apr 2001, 11:13
  #20 (permalink)  
ExSimGuy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

SunSeaSandfly ,

Can I ask how many engines were on the aircraft that had the "duck lunch" - I hope we're not talking ETOPS here (here I go again about long haul twins!)

As for the PanAm Clipper Skipper - I can imagine how I would have phrased it too

------------------
What goes around . . .
. . often lands better!
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.