Malaysian 777 engine problem in Stockholm
 

Yesterday a Malaysian 777 had to return after takeoff due to engine problem. Dumped fuel and landed without problems.

Some pictures and text (swedish) here: http://www.expressen.se/index.jsp?a=740274

The aircraft arrived late from New York and one newspaper here in Sweden says that it was because of engine problems in New York.

Anyone with more info?

I can only add the obvious which is the aircraft would have been a B777-200ER. Rumour has it that they were headed to KUL which would have made it flight MH091.

Likely was reg 9M-MRI as they were just in EWR on 2/11 and scheduled to return to KUL via Stockholm on 3/11.

Is it???
 

It seems like there is an increasing incidence of engine loss, is it better reporting or indeed more frequent events????

And now this case of silver-rimming getting the Mumbai bash. :eek:

Nov 5,2006 - this just in........
 

Hi resolution photo added Nov 5 to the a.nut website here showing debris and smoke trailing from the port engine.

Looks like burned oil.

Maybe looks like burned oil....does burned oil have rather large white looking fragments in it as you can see in the photo?

it begs the question re the recent AD re having to use TOGA on the GE 90s......115000lbs of poke is an awful lot of energy to expend on every take off.

Or they GE's on the aircraft in ?

HF, Agreed on the smoke. :ok:

Just heard that this A/C may have just come off some heavy maintenance recently. (C or D check was due ?) only a rumour at this point, but from a reliable source. ;)

BC, pretty sure MHs 777s are all RR powered.

Engines wouldn't be touched.

They are Rolls Royce Trent 800's

eng 1
 

Very nice picture on a.net...clearely that he blew nbr 1 eng...can't believe though that the capt did not get any indication in the cockpit:=

vapilot2004
 

The airliners.net pic doesn't show any evidence of significant rudder/aileron deflections -- would the engine likely be developing normal or near-normal thrust?

The failing engine appears to be missing the circular 'collar' shaped structure (I don't know the correct name for it) just forward of the exhaust cone - are the remains of this perhaps what is being ejected aft?

He obviously did, otherwise they would not have returned to Stockholm. Looks like it happened just as they were retracting the gear.

I guess so. Until it was shut down by the crew.
Looks like a blown bearing.

Threemile - engines not touched on a "C" check? Seems a bit strange to me.

Vapilot - what relevance would a recent heavy maintenance check have in this regard? Although there is a chance of a maintenance error, this is a bit speculative.

Threemiles

Sorry, engines not touched?? You've got to be joking!

Even the very latest FADEC Powerplants require attention,
AND certainly during a maintenance check!

BAe146??:{ :{

Good eyes there JT! I see that in the pic. That collar is the exhaust shroud - couple of inches forward are where the turbines reside.


I know the aircraft was out of service for a while. The check was just a guess. Wasn't my intention to imply any faulty maintenance work. At least 99% of the time, things are better after major maintenance - not worse. :ok:

Could a D check be completed in 2 weeks on this aicraft?

If the engine was shut down by the crew, why did they go dump fuel over the ocean?...risking loosing the second engine.

Id rather be on the ground having done an overwight landing rather then risk being over the ocean when i loose the second engine.

Or are procedures different on the 777?

Thanks