Qantas A380 uncontained #2 engine failure
My understanding is that in the 1990's, RR patented it's Fan Blade design. Subsequently PW tried and failed to have the patent disallowed. Earlier this year, RR commenced legal proceedings against PW for violation of patent because of the Fan Blade shapes on their PW1000G and GP7200 engines. Using the old adage that the best defence is attack, PW lodged a counter-suit against RR because their patent is "invalid and unenforceable" (ie even though they lost their attempt to have the RR patent disallowed, they refuse to accept the court's decision). The latest action by PW to try to make it illegal for Boeing to import Trent 1000's is really raising the stakes because of the critical nature of the B787 production. I suspect that there is a lot of politics going on behind the scenes.
Apologies for the thread drift.
ILS27Left, thanks for posting the details of the AD.
Apologies for the thread drift.
ILS27Left, thanks for posting the details of the AD.
Apols for slow response to Sabreman24's post #588 - but here's another pic (from Perth Now) which was originally fairly well hidden in mingocr83's post #12.
This was the picture I referred to in a BBC News interview on 4 Nov.
airsound
This was the picture I referred to in a BBC News interview on 4 Nov.
airsound
Last edited by airsound; 8th Nov 2010 at 10:00. Reason: wrote 558 instead of 588 - there's a freudian slip, now.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,002
Received 2,893 Likes
on
1,238 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: overthehillsandmountains
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been searching for confirmation that Qantas did perform the inspections mentioned in the August AD.
Mr Joyce said "Qantas met all the requirements of two Airworthiness Directives (ADs) applying to the Trent 900 engine. We take compliance with any Airworthiness Directives extremely seriously,” he said. “Two ADs applied to the Trent 900 engines we use on our A380s. One is no longer relevant to Qantas following an engine modification, and we are fully compliant with the other."
I wonder why he didn't just say the inspections were done.
Since the AD required inspection within 150 flight cycles, a long time on an A380, maybe QF can be "fully compliant" without doing the work.
Mr Joyce said "Qantas met all the requirements of two Airworthiness Directives (ADs) applying to the Trent 900 engine. We take compliance with any Airworthiness Directives extremely seriously,” he said. “Two ADs applied to the Trent 900 engines we use on our A380s. One is no longer relevant to Qantas following an engine modification, and we are fully compliant with the other."
I wonder why he didn't just say the inspections were done.
Since the AD required inspection within 150 flight cycles, a long time on an A380, maybe QF can be "fully compliant" without doing the work.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Belgium, near BRU
Age: 45
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the rumours are taking a larger scale... According to a source on A.net VH-OQA will be scrapped (parted out for spares) at SIN due to the extensive amount of damage on the plane and thus no insurance company would give permission for a ferry flight to France for repairs...
Wonder what will be next?
Wonder what will be next?
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oz
Age: 70
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airsound,
Thank you..... I seem to have missed that image
They appear to be a part of a stator set.... the centre blade has bleed holes in it and the blade to the left shows cone patterns from the bleed holes.
Thank you..... I seem to have missed that image
They appear to be a part of a stator set.... the centre blade has bleed holes in it and the blade to the left shows cone patterns from the bleed holes.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hopefully vaguely relevant
Location of engine that caught fire
a series of pictures of an uncontained engine failure on a 767 (as mentioned previously)
i thought they were nicely detailed as to what occured at that time.
Location of engine that caught fire
a series of pictures of an uncontained engine failure on a 767 (as mentioned previously)
i thought they were nicely detailed as to what occured at that time.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering ....
I have been looking more closely at the image of the part on the trolley.
(post 588) I have inverted it and shifted the colour markers with this result. Centre right of image there is a rounded star shape, right next to the line marked on the disc.
A witness mark from something adjacent ? to me it looks like the shape found in an oil pump, and beyond the mark itself a discoloured area.
Much as I would like to post my first image to this forum, I have not yet figured out how to .. could somebody pm me instructions please ? alternatively pm me your email address and I can drop it across.
From an engineering perspective this is way beyond my field of expertise, but as seen previously there is a wealth of eng. experience on this forum ... any ideas ? or just a co-incidence ?
TR
(post 588) I have inverted it and shifted the colour markers with this result. Centre right of image there is a rounded star shape, right next to the line marked on the disc.
A witness mark from something adjacent ? to me it looks like the shape found in an oil pump, and beyond the mark itself a discoloured area.
Much as I would like to post my first image to this forum, I have not yet figured out how to .. could somebody pm me instructions please ? alternatively pm me your email address and I can drop it across.
From an engineering perspective this is way beyond my field of expertise, but as seen previously there is a wealth of eng. experience on this forum ... any ideas ? or just a co-incidence ?
TR
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oz
Age: 70
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kwateow
Since the fleet's grounding and engine inspections as per the AD(s), at least 3 suspect engines have discovered. It is reasonably clear to myself that the revelent inspections had not been performed prior to the fleet's grounding, hence Joyce's comments.
!50 cycles equates 120 days, on average, provided there are no a/c issues.
I wonder why he didn't just say the inspections were done.
Since the AD required inspection within 150 flight cycles, a long time on an A380, maybe QF can be "fully compliant" without doing the work.
Since the AD required inspection within 150 flight cycles, a long time on an A380, maybe QF can be "fully compliant" without doing the work.
!50 cycles equates 120 days, on average, provided there are no a/c issues.
Guest
Posts: n/a
forget
If I supplied proof of all (or any) post, it would: A: consume space, B: consume time, and C: defeat the mission of this website. imo.
This is Rumours and News.... The Rumour part eg: 'Hangar gab', "Whadda Ya Know?" The News part, at an earlier time, related to "proof", but given the state of the journalists' approach these days, especially as re: Aviation, Rumours and News are interchangeable (imo). Rumour: What is that fod on the stator vane piece, that resembles a turbine part? ad hoc "welding"? Teddy?
Simonpro Thank you for your support, 'tail sweep'. Owe you one.
bear
If I supplied proof of all (or any) post, it would: A: consume space, B: consume time, and C: defeat the mission of this website. imo.
This is Rumours and News.... The Rumour part eg: 'Hangar gab', "Whadda Ya Know?" The News part, at an earlier time, related to "proof", but given the state of the journalists' approach these days, especially as re: Aviation, Rumours and News are interchangeable (imo). Rumour: What is that fod on the stator vane piece, that resembles a turbine part? ad hoc "welding"? Teddy?
Simonpro Thank you for your support, 'tail sweep'. Owe you one.
bear
Last edited by bearfoil; 8th Nov 2010 at 13:11.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oz
Age: 70
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A further 3 day delay before Qantas' A380s resume service
Qantas says A380s grounded for three days | News.com.au
And do read the last Para...........
Qantas says A380s grounded for three days | News.com.au
And do read the last Para...........
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its been 20 years since I worked for RR and in the jet engine industry (RR RB211-E4 era) in general and my memory is failing - but the turbine disk fragment looks like a 120 degree segment which if I recall correctly tends to suggests a high speed/energy/overspeed failure. So maybe a compressor/fan blade failure triggered a domino effect that ended in a shaft failure and resulting turbine overspeed once the load from the compressor is lost. Also the fact that the disk has no blades or even any remnants of blades might suggest they were shed with the engine running in overspeed vs mechanical damage. Either that or a straight disk failure due to disk metallurgical problem.
Obviously all of this speculation at this point but having the vast majority of the pieces will allow the RR failures (!) lab (I worked there for a summer) to diagnose stress fracture, fatigue failure etc. This is why the authorities are asking for help to find the other disk fragment to complete the picture.
Obviously all of this speculation at this point but having the vast majority of the pieces will allow the RR failures (!) lab (I worked there for a summer) to diagnose stress fracture, fatigue failure etc. This is why the authorities are asking for help to find the other disk fragment to complete the picture.
Guest
Posts: n/a
iamhives
I speak CEO. "For at least 72 hours". Meaning: "In your dreams". Alternate meaning? "Buy some time, mate". "These are NEW engines". Meaning: "Not (OUR, nor MY) FAULT!!. RR?", placing responsibility prior to proof, etcetera.
Oil where it should not be? This is not something that can be "Inspected away". It means a strip. An engine (NEW) with this problem is on the way to becoming a white elephant, for it means insufficient engineering, design, and or manufacture. No Line wants a hangar Queen(sland). A six month duty cycle for every TRENT 900 between inspection or strip is simply not going to happen.
What happened? Any rotating mass that can "migrate" on the shaft, to damage the bearing or seal, and cause oil fire, is not acceptable. As you state, the missing blades are telling, they suggest "severed" in place, not loss of integrity, nor "blade loss". It is reasonable to think that they were removed as the wheel bunched up against the Stator ring. If the fragment of IPT attached to the piece of stator is any indication, we are looking at the "Genesis" of wheel loss. Pure guess would be: migrating wheel was unplanned, had it been, a thrust bearing of some strength would be included to defeat any hub contact with the shaft bearing or its seal.
I guess the fragment of Turbine at more like 145 degrees, but in any case, the size of it suggests retention of roughly one third of integrity. The larger the piece, the less suspect of failure. It had to go somewhere, without having time to "pack", and the shaft was not going to let go peacefully; wherever the remaining piece(s) lay, it is not far from the site where this piece was found.
bear
I speak CEO. "For at least 72 hours". Meaning: "In your dreams". Alternate meaning? "Buy some time, mate". "These are NEW engines". Meaning: "Not (OUR, nor MY) FAULT!!. RR?", placing responsibility prior to proof, etcetera.
Oil where it should not be? This is not something that can be "Inspected away". It means a strip. An engine (NEW) with this problem is on the way to becoming a white elephant, for it means insufficient engineering, design, and or manufacture. No Line wants a hangar Queen(sland). A six month duty cycle for every TRENT 900 between inspection or strip is simply not going to happen.
What happened? Any rotating mass that can "migrate" on the shaft, to damage the bearing or seal, and cause oil fire, is not acceptable. As you state, the missing blades are telling, they suggest "severed" in place, not loss of integrity, nor "blade loss". It is reasonable to think that they were removed as the wheel bunched up against the Stator ring. If the fragment of IPT attached to the piece of stator is any indication, we are looking at the "Genesis" of wheel loss. Pure guess would be: migrating wheel was unplanned, had it been, a thrust bearing of some strength would be included to defeat any hub contact with the shaft bearing or its seal.
I guess the fragment of Turbine at more like 145 degrees, but in any case, the size of it suggests retention of roughly one third of integrity. The larger the piece, the less suspect of failure. It had to go somewhere, without having time to "pack", and the shaft was not going to let go peacefully; wherever the remaining piece(s) lay, it is not far from the site where this piece was found.
bear
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just read about the` scrapping` on A-net , and like the posters there i think that rumour is the result of an overactive imagination;
to copy the reply from a-net on the topic of scrapping.
Ok so I'm not an expert but this triggers my baloney detector for several reasons:
- Three engine ferries are not that uncommon.
- Why would the pylon have been overstressed?
- Why would the hydraulic system need replacing?
- Stringers can be replaced.
- I doubt the material investigation is complete. Seems a bit early to talk about scrapping
- Three engine ferries are not that uncommon.
- Why would the pylon have been overstressed?
- Why would the hydraulic system need replacing?
- Stringers can be replaced.
- I doubt the material investigation is complete. Seems a bit early to talk about scrapping
to copy the reply from a-net on the topic of scrapping.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Three engine ferry wants justification relative to cost of repair, and probability of success in returning to service, that is in the realm of the underwriter, and it is their call, exclusively. Exception? Hold harmless the Insuror, and replace at full value from the Company treasury. AAH, but which Company?
The pylon itself is most likely "intact", but its mounts may not be, that means repair to the wing, at least.
Hydraulics are compromised when there is sever or fod introduced to the system, and it is allowed to run, after the failure. The bits chew on everything inside, pumps, slaves, filters, sensors, etc.
No one here has seen the Wing Spar. The cabling in the airstream suggests damage to the main spar. The exit wound on the top of the wing is either the result of a deflection or a rebound of the offending piece(s) off the spar? Putty and paint will not suffice. The top skin is one single piece !! At 4000kg, any thing done to repair it will be a "Patch". "Patched Up" has an unfortunate ring to it.
Expect the best, plan for the worst.
The pylon itself is most likely "intact", but its mounts may not be, that means repair to the wing, at least.
Hydraulics are compromised when there is sever or fod introduced to the system, and it is allowed to run, after the failure. The bits chew on everything inside, pumps, slaves, filters, sensors, etc.
No one here has seen the Wing Spar. The cabling in the airstream suggests damage to the main spar. The exit wound on the top of the wing is either the result of a deflection or a rebound of the offending piece(s) off the spar? Putty and paint will not suffice. The top skin is one single piece !! At 4000kg, any thing done to repair it will be a "Patch". "Patched Up" has an unfortunate ring to it.
Expect the best, plan for the worst.
Last edited by bearfoil; 8th Nov 2010 at 14:50.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
can't see it being written off either...
unless the costs to fix it approach the cost of a replacement (some $350M), then financially, it would make no sense.
This also ignores the likes of Airbus interests, no way will they want to see it scraped, would send out completely the wrong message to potential customers.
let's not forget, somewhere along the line, somebodies insurance is going to have to pay for this, and I can't believe it's in anybodies interests to scrap it.
As for the ferry flight to get it back to France, I imaging Airbus would be best placed to manage how this is organised/covered.
unless the costs to fix it approach the cost of a replacement (some $350M), then financially, it would make no sense.
This also ignores the likes of Airbus interests, no way will they want to see it scraped, would send out completely the wrong message to potential customers.
let's not forget, somewhere along the line, somebodies insurance is going to have to pay for this, and I can't believe it's in anybodies interests to scrap it.
As for the ferry flight to get it back to France, I imaging Airbus would be best placed to manage how this is organised/covered.
Three engine ferry wants justification relative to cost of repair, and probability of success in returning to service, that is in the realm of the underwriter, and it is their call, exclusively.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bearfoil, You said...
Not may delay, or could delay, but will delay. I can't find mention of this anywhere. Did you make it up for effect?
but it will delay the 787 perhaps another six months. (Or Longer)