A380 engine failure - Qantas
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Durham
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More Questions
Thanks Sooty yes. No need to be rude.
I just cannot see the offset (eccentric) bore in the pipe being a design feature. If it was a design feature it was a serious error. No consultant/check engineer would sanction that design without due process. By that I mean a belt and braces dissection of how the pipe would react in situ. I just cannot see how that design would be purposefully offset like that. It is agin every principal known. It appears to be shoddy work.
The NTSB has cited this as a manufacturing flaw. If Rolls Royce claims this was a design feature they are committing hari kiri.
BEAR: These engines were on a full maintenance lease from the RR company. So the only stuff the Qant guys did was top up the oil and do a visual check that all is OK. When the A-380 got to a destination port you would expect another check of the turbine oil and maybe another top up. So as far as I can see, this sounds crazy I agree, that nobody really knew at RR just how much these engines were consuming oil. I really think it was that incompetence: a proper record was not made of the oil being consumed.
I would not take a ride on a RR equipped A-380 until we have a fully documented and approved published report.
The most disturbing aspect is why this aircraft had just passed a C check with the Lufthansa facility in Germany. Moreover, why could LHT make a very definitive statement that "they saw no reason to stop operation of their A-380". What did they know that Qantas did not?
All replies most welcome.
I just cannot see the offset (eccentric) bore in the pipe being a design feature. If it was a design feature it was a serious error. No consultant/check engineer would sanction that design without due process. By that I mean a belt and braces dissection of how the pipe would react in situ. I just cannot see how that design would be purposefully offset like that. It is agin every principal known. It appears to be shoddy work.
The NTSB has cited this as a manufacturing flaw. If Rolls Royce claims this was a design feature they are committing hari kiri.
BEAR: These engines were on a full maintenance lease from the RR company. So the only stuff the Qant guys did was top up the oil and do a visual check that all is OK. When the A-380 got to a destination port you would expect another check of the turbine oil and maybe another top up. So as far as I can see, this sounds crazy I agree, that nobody really knew at RR just how much these engines were consuming oil. I really think it was that incompetence: a proper record was not made of the oil being consumed.
I would not take a ride on a RR equipped A-380 until we have a fully documented and approved published report.
The most disturbing aspect is why this aircraft had just passed a C check with the Lufthansa facility in Germany. Moreover, why could LHT make a very definitive statement that "they saw no reason to stop operation of their A-380". What did they know that Qantas did not?
All replies most welcome.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Durham
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Durham
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Durham
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rolls Royce Indianapolis USA
Ventus!
Thank you, I was getting lonely here.
I have a pal over in the USA and he told me that Rolls Royce USA have had qulaity and endurance problems with products made there.
Your ATSB did a hell of a good job on that report. As did your Qantas crew. They were lucky to an extent but by God they were skilled and cool.
Thank you, I was getting lonely here.
I have a pal over in the USA and he told me that Rolls Royce USA have had qulaity and endurance problems with products made there.
Your ATSB did a hell of a good job on that report. As did your Qantas crew. They were lucky to an extent but by God they were skilled and cool.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ventus45
If you are interested, here is the link to the NTSB report on the AA 767 on the ground incident at LAX.
ENG06IA018
Rumors have it that the portion of the disk embedded in the cowling of the other engine actually bounced off the ground at an angle that took it slightly through the bottom of the fuselage and then into the cowling.
Turbine D
If you are interested, here is the link to the NTSB report on the AA 767 on the ground incident at LAX.
ENG06IA018
Rumors have it that the portion of the disk embedded in the cowling of the other engine actually bounced off the ground at an angle that took it slightly through the bottom of the fuselage and then into the cowling.
Turbine D
Guest
Posts: n/a
Turbine D
That piece of disc scored the concrete, then penetrated both left and right casings at the exhaust nozzle to protrude out the cowling (Right side) of the cowling (#2). The picture is dramatic, and I cannot find it.
Thanks for the ETOPS protocol!!
bear
That piece of disc scored the concrete, then penetrated both left and right casings at the exhaust nozzle to protrude out the cowling (Right side) of the cowling (#2). The picture is dramatic, and I cannot find it.
Thanks for the ETOPS protocol!!
bear
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bearfoil:
In fact it penetrated the cowl (LH), the left side of the core nozzle, the nozzle plug, and stuck in the right side of the nozzle and cowl. This is all fairly lightweight material compared to engine casings. It didn't affect the #2 engine proper, although the implication of possibly inducing a second engine failure is obvious.
That piece of disc scored the concrete, then penetrated both left and right casings at the exhaust nozzle to protrude out the cowling (Right side) of the cowling (#2).
