Posted on 11/08/2010 3:35:33 AM PST by Srirangan
Australia's Qantas Airways has grounded its A380 fleet for at least another three days as it investigates oil leaks as a possible cause of the explosion which tore apart one of the super jumbo's engines last week. Qantas shares fell as its reputation as one of the world's safest airlines came under the spotlight and investors started counting the financial cost of grounding aircraft and compensating passengers.
(Excerpt) Read more at aerospace19.com ...
Hmmm... there have never problems reported before with the engines. This is highly unusual even on a super jumbo jet like the Airbus A380.
Boeing 747-8 is the American competitor in the long haul route market segment. Most airlines have ordered the A380.
“Hmmm... there have never problems reported before with the engines.”
Well, we should keep in mind that there are as yet actually only a small number of A380 in service. So, this plane should be thought of as still in beta test. Personally, I have no desire to fly on this plane for a few years. If one of these planes, god forbid, should ever go down it’s going to make one heck of a mess.
I doubt it.The plane has been in service four years with no major incidents reported until now.
I’m not surprised there has been a problem discovered with the engines. The manufacturer will determine the cause and there will be an appropriate fix.
This is a safe aircraft, this publicized incident notwithstanding.
I would attribute this to the very successful marketing campaign conducted by Airbus a few years ago.
A380, for me, however don’t match up to the hype because of the basic airstrip / run way changes required to support these birds.
This automatically makes it non-viable in a cargo / military / disaster relief role and would be unable to land in many of the older airports around the world.
Actually, with the way the weight is distributed over the body, no major ground reinforcement is needed since the weight is effectively the same as a 747. All that’s needed is to move the ground signage further away from the wings. So it can land on runways constructed for a 747 and that means it can land in most of the world’s airports that accommodate a 747.
With multiple entry platforms, an A380 can be boarded and de-boarded in around 34 minutes.
The 748 is not really a competitor, having less range and far less total pax capacity. Few customers have ordered the 748i. Far more have ordered the 748f.
Keep in mind that many A380 operators have ordered it with the GP7200 engines made by GE/Pratt, rather than the Rollers.
So, quite a few A380’s are totally unaffected by the RR engine problems.
http://www.enginealliance.com/gpintro.html
In standard economy configuration the A380 can carry 853 passengers.
A Boeing 747-8 in standard economy configuration can carry 581 passengers.
Both planes are designed to be fuel-thrifty and reduce operating costs in long-route market segments.
Rolls-Royce has never had those problems before. Both the British component maker and GE/Pratt have had an excellent reputation for reliability in the aviation industry.
That's something that Airbus has to match with the A350 XWB-1000--I wish Airbus lots of luck!
Comparatively in the A380 program, I believe the Trents have had far more troubles than the EA’s.
Also, there was a Trent 1000 with a failed IPT disc due to oiling problems in the 787 test program.
Rolls has not had these problems in the past, but they seem to be increasing.
Most of these RR engine problems are in the RB211 family, which includes the Trents.
We also had BA038 with the Trents quitting due to an inability to deal with fuel icing.
GE90’s have had an annoying IFSD problem due to software, apparently.
No, right at 3 years. First delivery was October 2007, with initial service later that month.
Rolls-Royce had this same problem just last August with the Trent 1000 engine they developed for the Boeing 787. The failure of the Trent 1000 occured in the same section of the engine where it is suspected the Trent 900 failed.
The Trent 900 on the A380 and the Trent 1000 on the 787 are very similar in design.
Rolls-Royce investigating Trent 1000 engine failure"Industry sources say the failure, which is believed to have been uncontained, occurred in early August on a production 'Package A' model Trent 1000 engine that will power early 787-8 aircraft for launch customer All Nippon Airways, and has been initially traced to the single-stage intermediate pressure (IP) turbine. The IP turbine in conjunction with the IP compressor supplies the electrical power for the 787's systems. "
Airbus dropped the freighter version due to lack of interest. It can not be made into a nose loader/tail loader. This is where the 747-800F has a significant advantage.
Well... here's your problem!
PS. Dayum, that thing is big!
Oil leak makes BOOM time to land.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.