Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Post Engine Rolls Royce Explosion, Qantas Airways Grounds Airbus A380s
Aerospace19 ^

Posted on 11/08/2010 3:35:33 AM PST by Srirangan

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 11/08/2010 3:35:39 AM PST by Srirangan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Srirangan

Hmmm... there have never problems reported before with the engines. This is highly unusual even on a super jumbo jet like the Airbus A380.


2 posted on 11/08/2010 3:38:59 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I know. Below is what Wikipedia says about this: On 4 November 2010, Qantas Flight 32, registration VH-OQA (MSN0014), suffered a significant engine failure[211] en route from Singapore to Sydney and was forced to return to Singapore Changi Airport to land. There were no injuries to passengers or crew.[212][213] Parts of the engine nacelle fell onto the Indonesian island of Batam.[214] Later that day, Qantas announced that their entire A380 fleet would be grounded until the conclusion of an internal investigation taken in conjunction with the engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce plc.
3 posted on 11/08/2010 3:41:33 AM PST by Srirangan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Srirangan

Boeing 747-8 is the American competitor in the long haul route market segment. Most airlines have ordered the A380.


4 posted on 11/08/2010 4:02:30 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

“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.


5 posted on 11/08/2010 4:05:37 AM PST by snoringbear (Government is the Pimp,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: snoringbear

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.


6 posted on 11/08/2010 4:08:59 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

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.


7 posted on 11/08/2010 4:11:01 AM PST by Srirangan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Srirangan

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.


8 posted on 11/08/2010 4:15:41 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

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.


9 posted on 11/08/2010 4:17:54 AM PST by ltc8k6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Srirangan

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


10 posted on 11/08/2010 4:19:40 AM PST by ltc8k6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ltc8k6

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.


11 posted on 11/08/2010 4:21:06 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ltc8k6

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.


12 posted on 11/08/2010 4:23:08 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Srirangan
Small wonder why there is a LONG list of airlines wanting to buy the Boeing 777-300ER--reliable in service, better range than originally advertised, and the airlines really like the plentiful cargo space offered by this plane.

That's something that Airbus has to match with the A350 XWB-1000--I wish Airbus lots of luck!

13 posted on 11/08/2010 4:32:24 AM PST by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

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.


14 posted on 11/08/2010 4:35:49 AM PST by ltc8k6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: All

15 posted on 11/08/2010 4:58:23 AM PST by WakeUpAndVote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop; snoringbear
The plane has been in service four years with no major incidents reported until now.

No, right at 3 years. First delivery was October 2007, with initial service later that month.

16 posted on 11/08/2010 5:17:10 AM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Rolls-Royce has never had those problems before.

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. "


17 posted on 11/08/2010 5:26:15 AM PST by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Srirangan

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.


18 posted on 11/08/2010 6:11:39 AM PST by phormer phrog phlyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Well... here's your problem!

PS. Dayum, that thing is big!

19 posted on 11/08/2010 6:26:49 AM PST by Haiku Guy (Anything not about elephants is irrelephant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Haiku Guy

Oil leak makes BOOM time to land.


20 posted on 11/08/2010 6:49:50 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson