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

Qantas A380 uncontained #2 engine failure

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

Qantas A380 uncontained #2 engine failure

Old 4th Nov 2010, 16:51
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 186
Mmm did have my doubts about a contra-rotating HP section but i don't think this is the cause.

To the informed, I speculate a knock on from the recent Singapore engine change and subsequent inspections in the UK.

Rolls Royce are a great British institution, I work with them closely and hope this does not cause too much damage.
Beeline is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 16:56
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 194
If a disc is allowed to break free then I am not going to sit next to the engine for fear I will get ripped apart...seems front engine standard not same as rear end
Sounds like we need more regulation for engine makers
I'd love to see your suggestions on how to protect against an uncontained disc failure, considering the forces involved (hint: 12,000rpm+)


I'm disappointed, PPRuNe.

10 pages, and still no METARs?

Standards are slipping.
oversteer is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 16:57
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,104
Let's put this into perspective. A Fan/Disc failure on the centre engine of a Tri-Jet is a different thing altogether. Cold someone in the know please tell us with authority, just how many accidents (by definition causing injury or death) have occurred on four-engined public transport aircraft following Fan/Disc failure? So as to give a fair comparison, it should differentiate between turbo-jet, high by-pass turbo-jet and the latest turbo fan engines.

This is a genuine question, I simply do not have the facility to research it myself.
Neptunus Rex is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 16:57
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DORSET
Posts: 191
Maybe it's time to ground Airbuses. They seem to have a dismal record, from the accident in France 'til now... especially as they are such a modern design..
sharksandwich is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 16:59
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 95
Ancient,

Qantas suspends A380 flights - Yahoo!7

at 2.05 there is vision of the engine running whilst the pax are disembarking.
lurker999 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:02
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 74
Posts: 1,055
VinRouge:

If an engine was running that does not necessarily indicate that is could not be shut down. Maybe the aircraft had only just stopped and the crew were still in the process of shutting down. Maybe one engine was kept running to provide electrical and hydraulic power until the APU or ground power was available.

I see no evidence to support speculation that the engine was out of control.
The Ancient Geek is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:04
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Member of the 32% club.
Posts: 1,767
It's pretty clear that they had no control of the No1 eng, but you have to also ask if they had any control of the failed engine, ie did the start master or fire switch actually do anything when selected on the No.2?
Airbrake is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:07
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bristol
Posts: 184
If a disc is allowed to break free then I am not going to sit next to the engine for fear I will get ripped apart...seems front engine standard not same as rear end
Sounds like we need more regulation for engine makers
If you're that worried why get on the plane in the first place.

All aircraft safety is a based on the relative probability that something will go wrong. Things do go wrong, but the chances of you being affected are microscopic. If you're looking for 100% safety then it's just not possible.

Maybe it's time to ground Airbuses. They seem to have a dismal record, from the accident in France 'til now... especially as they are such a modern design..
Please tell me that's sarcasm.
WillDAQ is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:08
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: mars
Posts: 5
surge due to bad controls design

given the charred cowl forward of the (most definitely uncontained) turbine failure, it's possible that this was an uncontrolled surge, followed by a disc failure due to overspeed.

modern jet engines have not-so-complicated control systems (PID-a-go-go) attempting to control a very complicated and nonlinear system. my guess is that the engine (during the climb phase, which is a max envelope type of operating area) entered a poorly modeled/unmodeled regime for which the controls system was not correctly designed.
b00bsmith is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:10
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Here and there
Posts: 167
If an engine was running that does not necessarily indicate that is could not be shut down. Maybe the aircraft had only just stopped and the crew were still in the process of shutting down. Maybe one engine was kept running to provide electrical and hydraulic power until the APU or ground power was available.

I see no evidence to support speculation that the engine was out of control.

So Let's see, Hmm. The engine is running to provide electrical while being flooded by a fire hose ? Come on !!
Melax is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:13
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: YPJT
Posts: 5
Only 200 posts before Sharksandwich posted about grounding Airbus

The standards are definitely slipping.

For those who have not seen his posts before, check his history out and you will see a recurring theme...

Last edited by mannej; 4th Nov 2010 at 17:15. Reason: poor spelling
mannej is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:13
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Estonia
Posts: 71
Using radio as alternative backup to wires in huge aircraft.

local RF commanded engine shutdown.
No way ! You want to enable terrorists to command a total engine shutdown ?
------------------------------
I have worked with some military radio equipment, and it is perfectly possible to protect critical radio signals from being jammed using good and old frequency hopping or making decoding of signals too difficult by crypting with impossible key lenghts and changing them sufficiently often via wires until wires are ok. Also, radios must not be active at all during normal operation. If wires are ok, radios are silent. As they use already some ethernet derivative protocol on their plane, it is not so difficult to add alternative channels like radios.
Prada is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:18
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: West sussex
Posts: 44
A380 grounded

A380 is grounded by Quantus due to one uncontained engine failure so why was the B777 fleet allowed to continue to fly (ETOPS et all) after the BA B777 dual engine failure resulting in a complete power loss?
1 to go is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:19
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: surrey
Age: 50
Posts: 14
A380 lhr

em flew one out of heathrow at 14.30 today !
e-jet190 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:24
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Belgium, near BRU
Age: 40
Posts: 38
@ e-jet190

Emirates operates EA powered A380's. The QF plane had RR engines.

So no need to ground EA powered birds.
Bralo20 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:29
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: surrey
Age: 50
Posts: 14
thanks for the info , thought they were all the same ?
e-jet190 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:34
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Belgium, near BRU
Age: 40
Posts: 38
Negative,

3 engines are in use:

1) Engine Alliance (EA) GP7270 used by Emirates & Air France

2) Rolls-Royce Trent 970/B used by Singapore Airlines & Lufthansa

3) Rolls-Royce Trent 972/B used by Qantas

Korean has the EA on order and Malaysian the Trent 970.


The Trent 972 is a slightly powerfull version of the Trent 970
Bralo20 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:34
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brussels
Age: 42
Posts: 64
Sharksandwich is an idiot

Fatal Plane Crash Rate for Selected Airliner Models

This is an engine issue versus an airframe manufacturer issue. Airbus does NOT equal RollsRoyce
shogan1977 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:35
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Quahog
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by b00bsmith
surge due to bad controls design
given the charred cowl forward of the (most definitely uncontained) turbine failure, it's possible that this was an uncontrolled surge, followed by a disc failure due to overspeed.

modern jet engines have not-so-complicated control systems (PID-a-go-go) attempting to control a very complicated and nonlinear system. my guess is that the engine (during the climb phase, which is a max envelope type of operating area) entered a poorly modeled/unmodeled regime for which the controls system was not correctly designed.
I realise Martian may be your first language but please spare us the worst excesses of technobabble and wild uninformed speculation.

The only things that seem fairly sure at this moment are:
1. There was an uncontained engine failure, and
2. It appears to have been impossible to shut down #1 normally after landing

As several people have stated above, there are some parts of the engine where a failure is not expected to be contained due to the high energy of the rotating parts. Therefore the engine is designed so these never experience a failure condition (by operation, maintenance, lifing). Equally it is not feasible to make an aircraft proof against every eventuality or it would be so heavy it wouldn't fly. The FMEA sets the severity of damage against the probability of it happening. The overall risk is mitigated by reducing the probability of the incident not protecting against its effects.

I suspect the investigators will be looking at two main issues.

1. What failed, and why, and is it a one-off?
2. Although the aircraft is not expected to withstand an uncontained engine failure is there sufficient redundancy in the engine control system?

As also indicated above the 'fail safe' condition for loss of signal to the engine control is to continue at last demanded power, it is obviously not a satisfactory condition if a single event can lead to loss of control.
Dodo56 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2010, 17:37
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: mars
Posts: 5
1toGo -

A380 is grounded by Quantus due to one uncontained engine failure so why was the B777 fleet allowed to continue to fly (ETOPS et all) after the BA B777 dual engine failure resulting in a complete power loss?

Only Quantas and Singapore Air are grounding their fleets voluntarily. The rest of the A380s are not grounded. The 777 fail was different also because it wasn't a brand spankin new airplane. However, in both cases (today and the 777) RR seems to struggle with controls design.
b00bsmith is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.