A380 engine trouble on Qantas flight

[Phil Bunch]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/04/indonesia.plane.emergency/index.html?hpt=T2

One TV news account (MSNBC) said that Qantas has grounded its A380s for inspections, etc.  This flight returned to Singapore in a normal fashion.

Sounds like a semi-routine engine failure to me, based on early news reports. I wouldn't have wanted to be on board, though!  We all know that a 747-400 would have handled this problem with greater redundancy (insert friendly grins here).

Here's a link to a video and a bit more sensationalistic reporting:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40000040/ns/travel-news/

[Mundyas]

It is of course early days but Sky News suggests an uncontained engine problem with debris found on the Indonesian island of Batam. Rolls Royce engines.

If a true report the worrying thing is the uncontained failure of the engine. As I say we will have to wait and see.

But of course the official investigation is the thing to read whenever. The "event" 15 minutes after takeoff then returning to Singapore and in the hold to burn off fuel.

A

[torrence]

Latest pix on CNN show a large part of the aft #2 nacelle missing and what look like scorch marks.  Re 747 - at least it had 4 engines  

Cheers,
Torrence
KLAX

[Phil Bunch]

A TV news item showed and claimed some wing damage in what appeared to be an area above and behind the front of the engine.  They also showed the fire department spraying the engine and I think some smoke too.

Must have been a heck of a lot of fuel to dump before landing.

[OKD]

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8119365/eu-safety-body-warned-about-jets-engines

Apparently EU sent ou a letter 3 months prior to yesterday's incident which indicated that certain actions or material types will cause the engine to SHUTDOWN.

If I am reading the news (EU's) correctly, it never mentioned the engine will blow up as reported via numerous news reports.

I am not a big fan of the A380 nor airbus, but chatting with a few of my commercial pilot friends before, they all prefer the A330 and the A340 over the 744. And only rated the B777 "nearly there" on par with the 330 and 340.

Comments guys?

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

Which is better/worse, Coke or Pepsi?

[Phil Bunch]

The NY Times, not known for taking sides prematurely, reports ongoing concerns about the Rolls Royce engine.  



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/business/global/05engine.html?ref=todayspaper

I personally assume, based only on general life and R&D work experiences, that the problem causing the engine to do rude things in flight will be diagnosed and addressed with reasonable speed by Rolls Royce, etc.  

Sometimes huge industrial projects go badly off track (recall the 1980s space shuttle loss due to a solid rocket booster exploding soon after launch).  Time will tell a simple, quick fix is needed or if a more stressful situation is at hand for Rolls Royce.

As others have said, we must wait for the official investigation(s) to know what's really going on.  It's interesting that only Qantas has grounded their A380s, assuming I understood the news stories.

[Mundyas]

Hi

Not all the A380's are powered by Rolls Royce engines. though are they? I haven't got full details here but am pretty certain Emirates for example use non RR engines.

Strangely (life is stranger than fiction) Qantas flight QF6 (reported as a 747-400) today had to turn back today  with an engine problem again RR engine I hear. Different types of RR engine though from A380 I believe.

Andrew

[Swiso]

Well..second Qantas incident and this time with a 744 :

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/05/singapore.qantas/index.html?hpt=T1


WoW....bad luck ?

AA

[Phil Bunch]

Hi

Not all the A380's are powered by Rolls Royce engines. though are they? I haven't got full details here but am pretty certain Emirates for example use non RR engines.

Strangely (life is stranger than fiction) Qantas flight QF6 (reported as a 747-400) today had to turn back today  with an engine problem again RR engine I hear. Different types of RR engine though from A380 I believe.

Andrew

I just reread the NY Times article, quickly confirming your information re the availability of multiple engines for the A380.  If I'm understanding things correctly, 20 of the 37 A380s use RR engines, and Emirates uses non-RR engines for their A380s. as you say.  Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding.  I didn't realize that I had skim-read the article too quickly.

As a related news item, I see that the A350, with much higher expected sales volume than the A380, only uses RR engines.  I was surprised to learn that a major airliner like the A350 has been developed with a single engine vendor.  I had previously thought that all major airliners had at least two engine vendors for various reasons, including avoiding the small chance of things going badly wrong with a single engine's performance and reliability.  

Here's a couple of paragraphs from the NY Times article:bb

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/business/global/05engine.html?ref=todayspaper

While the A380 program has not been a big commercial success for Airbus, the company has much more at stake with the A350. Airbus has 234 orders for the A380, but it already has 573 orders for the A350, which it expects to put into service in 2013.

"You design an aircraft around an engine, and the aircraft's performance depends upon its engine," said Richard L. Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group, a consulting firm in Fairfax, Va. "The real issue is Rolls-Royce's reputation as a development company. They promised an awful lot with the A350. There is a lot riding on that engine and on that plane, whose performance is entirely dependent on Rolls-Royce."

Here's an interesting quote from Qantas, who has temporarily grounded their A380s, also from the NY Times article.  Not such a nice thing to say about their engine vendor!

"This is an engine issue and the engines were maintained by Rolls-Royce since they have been installed on the aircraft," Mr. Joyce told reporters at the company's headquarters in Sydney. "We believe this is most likely a material failure or some kind of design issue."

-------------------
It will be interesting to see what happens from here.  Hopefully, whatever is going wrong with RR engines can be quickly learned and fixed.  Hopefully it will not be something major or really hard to avoid.

[Just to clarify, I've always personally liked RR engines, based entirely on appreciating the quality and craftsmanship of the RR luxury cars and also admiring the RR Merlin piston engine used in WWII fighter planes.  I don't have any meaningful attachments to any of the jet engine vendors.  As far as airliners go, I suppose I am a Boeing fan emotionally, mostly because of my enjoyment of PS1 and the 747-400.]

Finally, I like Coke much better than Pepsi, but I also believe this is a country specific issue - Canadian Coke is MUCH better than American Coke!!  Yet I wonder if I could really identify Coke vs Pepsi in a blind taste test.  (insert many friendly grins here).

[John H Watson]

The A380 incident was far from the average standard engine shutdown.

Large pieces of debris raining down on populated areas causing damage to property.
Hydraulic line severed, forcing the pilot to gravity drop the nose gear
Severed wiring not allowing the adjacent engine to shut down with the fuel cutoff lever (and presumably the fire handle). Fire fighters had to extinguish the engine with foam. There were also rumours that this engine was not at idle, but stuck at high rpms (Rumour only )

The Leading Edge flaps did not deploy, forcing the pilots to make a higher than normal speed approach. 4 tyres were blown on landing.
Engine turbine pieces went through the wing in several places.

Other incidents involving Qantas during the next 48 hours were fairly average  :mrgreen: , but the press latched onto them immediately.

JHW.

[OKD]

and sabotage was the latest topic caem into question, which the QF CEO denied.

[torrence]

I'm a bit surprised in light of all the attention paid to the Icelandic volcano last year, that no one has noted that these planes have been flying near the biggest eruption going on this year (Java).  I was never convinced that the authorities really understood what a 'safe' level of ash was around Iceland.  I.e. the difference between 'engines stop and you fall out of the sky' levels and more subtle longer term damage and stress from much lower concentrations of ash.

Cheers,
Torrence

Here's the link to today's Darwin Center's Red Zone volcanic advisory

http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDD65295.shtml

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

a. Don't mention the word "ash cloud", it's politically and economically incorrect.
b. We are now heading exactly there...

Thanks for the link, I printed out the docs and passed it to Roddy, currently out of
Singapore heading for the cloud   :mrgreen:



Jeroen



shameless plug: DONATIONS PLEASE  

http://www.hoppie.nl/wf/ or any other means or any other WF2010 team

[mabe54]

A very long time since I post last:

Interesting:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-05/pratt-whitney-sues-to-block-rolls-royce-engines.html

Hello Hardy!

MAB

PS: Hello Jeroen!

[OKD]

Now the problem has spread to SQ who also uses the same engine from RR.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/the-woes-which-have-grounded-qantass-a380s-spread-to-singapore-airlines/story-e6frg95x-1225950896383

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

And I just heard one of the 787 test aircraft had to make an emergency landing due to smoke on the flight deck. Interesting times for the FUD-throwers on both sides.


Jeroen

[OKD]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/boeing-787-dreamliner-in-emergency-landing/story-e6frg90x-1225950989301?from=public_rss

Yeah JH, heard about that as well, and apparently it started from the back - the electronic bay!! Just imagine what type of landing which the pilots had to perform?

[John Golin]

Interesting - since when is the Electronics Bay at the back of an aircraft? Or does the 787 have multiples with electrics replacing more systems?

Or is there a difference between the Electronics Bay and the Avionics Bay?

I notice Hamilton Sundstrand were mentioned - does it relate to the APU (which is of course  located at the rear of the aircraft)?

[John Golin]

Found a Boeing statement on their site;

EVERETT, Wash., Nov. 10, 2010 /PRNewswire/ -- During approach to Laredo, Texas, yesterday, airplane ZA002 lost primary electrical power as a result of an onboard electrical fire. Backup systems, including the deployment of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), functioned as expected and allowed the crew to complete a safe landing. The cause of the fire is still under investigation by Boeing.

The pilots executed a safe landing and at all times had positive control of the airplane and all of the information necessary to perform that safe landing.

Initial inspection appears to indicate that a power control panel in the aft electronics bay will need to be replaced on ZA002. We are inspecting the power panel and surrounding area near that panel to determine if other repairs will be necessary.

We have retrieved flight data from the airplane and are analyzing it in Seattle. This process will take several days. We are committed to finding the cause quickly but will not rush the technical team in its efforts.

The team was conducting monitoring of the Nitrogen Generation System at the time of the incident but there is no reason to suspect that the monitoring or earlier testing of that system had anything to do with the incident.

Consistent with our internal processes, until we better understand the cause of the incident on ZA002, we have decided to postpone flight test activities on other airplanes. Ground test activities will be conducted until flight test resumes.

Likewise, we cannot determine the impact of this event on the overall program schedule until we have worked our way through the data. Teams have been working through the night and will continue to work until analysis is complete and a path forward is determined.