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

Norwegian 787 blows a donk in FCO

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

Norwegian 787 blows a donk in FCO

Old 11th Aug 2019, 12:19
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,350
Norwegian 787 blows a donk in FCO

https://avherald.com/h?article=4cb6a09d&opt=0

A Norwegian Long Haul Boeing 787-8, registration LN-LND performing flight DY-7115 from Rome Fiumicino (Italy) to Los Angeles,CA (USA), was in the initial climb out of Rome's runway 16R when an engine (Trent 1000) failed emitting debris onto the ground below. The crew stopped the climb at 3000 feet, secured the engine and returned to Rome for a safe landing on runway 16R about 23 minutes after departure.

The Mayor of Fiumicino reported 25 vehicles and 12 houses were damaged by debris falling off the aircraft, one man on the ground was hit too. The man was just frightened and remained uninjured however.

Local residents reported glowing pieces of metal rained down in the hundreds.

The airline reported the aircraft returned to Rome due to a technical problem.

Italy's ANSV have dispatched investigators on site.
Not too familiar with the engine problems on the 787, but I thought they needed to be modified? Are the airlines allowed to fly the aircraft while they wait for the engines to be modified? Or is this incident an unrelated issue?
Luckily nobody on the ground got killed.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2019, 17:13
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 170
The RR engines (Rotating Rubbish...) have several restrictions on them. Many of them are cycle limited, and some versions have been restricted to ETOPS 138 instead of 180. I am sure this will place further restrictions on those junk engines. Rolls Royce and Boeing, not a great combination these days...
NEDude is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2019, 20:13
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: North
Posts: 37
This was an updated Package B engine...
Icejock is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2019, 20:19
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 50
Posts: 1,453
Originally Posted by Icejock View Post
This was an updated Package B engine...
Whoops. Doesn't bode well...
atakacs is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2019, 21:13
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by Icejock View Post
This was an updated Package B engine...
Can you elaborate? There are about 5 different issues with those engines and I'm curious if you know what was updated on it. Thanks.
Dave Therhino is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2019, 21:25
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South East
Age: 50
Posts: 40
I guess in the strive for efficiency that reliability has taken a hit. The alternate engine has issues too pushing current technology to the limits, the GE90 on the 777 still has regular BUG failures after 25 years, as for the MAX and now A320NEO with their stab AFCS faults, the A350 computer resets every so many days, it all reminds me of working the L1011 Tristar in the 1990's. I am afraid it looks like we are now in an industry relying on backups rather than designing safety and reliability in to the airframes and engines in the first place. I think they call it safety risk assessment.
Alwaysairbus is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2019, 21:38
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 50
Posts: 1,453
From the various picture showing up this one seems to have pretty much disintegrated. Lucky that no-one got hurt.
atakacs is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2019, 21:52
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 62
Posts: 410
This is also the same basic engine on the A330-900 modified for bleed air. It’s the only engine option on the 900 so might impact sales on a already slow selling airframe.
Sailvi767 is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 05:03
  #9 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 1,949
Originally Posted by Sailvi767 View Post
This is also the same basic engine on the A330-900 modified for bleed air. It’s the only engine option on the 900 so might impact sales on a already slow selling airframe.
Nope the 787 engine problems that both GE and RR are seeing failures on are basically due to the requirements placed upon them. GE engines have also seen failures and premature replacements.

RR have said the issues on the 787 engine are specific issues related to the airframe.

There seems to be a good reason why the 747-8, 737MAX, A350, A320neo, A330neo, and 777X did not got “bleedless”. The energy needs to be extracted from the engine somehow.
swh is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 06:00
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by swh View Post
RR have said the issues on the 787 engine are specific issues related to the airframe.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that.
Dave Therhino is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 10:19
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: FL390
Posts: 333
There seems to be a good reason why the 747-8, 737MAX, A350, A320neo, A330neo, and 777X did not got “bleedless”. The energy needs to be extracted from the engine somehow.
#14 (permalink)
Dave Therhino's AvatarDave Therhino , 12th Aug 2019 05:00
Exactly. I'm not sure why Boeing went all-electric on the 787. I can see arguments for the cabin air supply, but taking 250kW from the IP turbine, rectifying it, and inverting it once again to drive the CACs surely outweighs the simple benefit of taking bleed air directly from the compressor.

The air quality seems no better (very dry) since Boeing updated the CAC schedules to minimise surging.

Likewise with the electric brakes - they seem bulkier than their hydraulic equivalents and more prone to failure.

Pros? Well, I'm a big fan of the dual engine start.
Fursty Ferret is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 12:09
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 494
This is also the same basic engine on the A330-900 modified for bleed air. It’s the only engine option on the 900 so might impact sales on a already slow selling airframe.
Actually, the Trent 7000 on the A330-800 and -900 is derived from the Trent 1000-TEN on the 787 and the Trent XWB 84 on the A350 both of which are substantially different to the Trent 1000-A/B/C and, while not immune to some of the same issues, is likely to be far less affected.
Torquelink is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 13:31
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,049
A lot of folk deriding the engine without knowing what actually happened to cause it! Was it caused by FOD or a bird strike or a mechanical failure?
Out Of Trim is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 14:34
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,218
Originally Posted by Out Of Trim View Post
A lot of folk deriding the engine without knowing what actually happened to cause it! Was it caused by FOD or a bird strike or a mechanical failure?
Well of course many like to sound knowledgeable by citing history. I just can't recall a similar event (dumped turbine blade pieces) on the B787, but I'm sure somebody will throw out something.
lomapaseo is online now  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 18:59
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,350
Originally Posted by Out Of Trim View Post
A lot of folk deriding the engine without knowing what actually happened to cause it! Was it caused by FOD or a bird strike or a mechanical failure?
I’ve never seen a birdstrike cause anything like this. Damage yes, but a spray of engine parts out the back? 25 houses and 12 cars damaged by falling parts. Norwegian says this is an ongoing investigation and doesn’t want to comment.
If this is a modified engine as somebody said, it’s really bad news for operators with these engines.
Add the fact that engine pairs have about the same number of hours and I for one would be reluctant to go on an aircraft with these engines.
The modifications are about fanblades/turbine blades?
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 19:23
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 587
Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem View Post
Add the fact that engine pairs have about the same number of hours
I heard the rumor that the first thing Norwegian does with a new plane straight out the factory is swapping one of the new engines with an old one..
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 19:25
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning
Age: 59
Posts: 485
Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem View Post


I’ve never seen a birdstrike cause anything like this. Damage yes, but a spray of engine parts out the back? 25 houses and 12 cars damaged by falling parts. Norwegian says this is an ongoing investigation and doesn’t want to comment.
If this is a modified engine as somebody said, it’s really bad news for operators with these engines.
Add the fact that engine pairs have about the same number of hours and I for one would be reluctant to go on an aircraft with these engines.
The modifications are about fanblades/turbine blades?
The engine pairs don't necessarily have the same hours. There's currently a restriction on fitting two engines (of the type affected by the known problems) with more than a certain number of cycles on the same aircraft. This is for exactly the reason you are concerned about.
Porrohman is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 19:28
  #18 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,350
Originally Posted by Porrohman View Post
The engine pairs don't necessarily have the same hours. There's currently a restriction on fitting two engines (of the type affected by the known problems) with more than a certain number of cycles on the same aircraft. This is for exactly the reason you are concerned about.
Where do they get old engines from?
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 19:38
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,049
Arrow

Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem View Post


Where do they get old engines from?
I'd guess from one of their older fleet and swapped for the new one. So one older and one new on each aircraft until enough new ones available to swap out all the older ones maybe.
Out Of Trim is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2019, 20:19
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 62
Posts: 410
Originally Posted by Fursty Ferret View Post
Exactly. I'm not sure why Boeing went all-electric on the 787. I can see arguments for the cabin air supply, but taking 250kW from the IP turbine, rectifying it, and inverting it once again to drive the CACs surely outweighs the simple benefit of taking bleed air directly from the compressor.

The air quality seems no better (very dry) since Boeing updated the CAC schedules to minimise surging.

Likewise with the electric brakes - they seem bulkier than their hydraulic equivalents and more prone to failure.

Pros? Well, I'm a big fan of the dual engine start.
The 787 is humidified. The cabin air quality is the best out there. Pure air without the additions from the engine and a comfortable humidity level instead of near zero in other airframes.
Sailvi767 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

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