Airbus and Boeing products running behind schedule

[BigDUSA 71]

You guys are crazy!

 

Only a small percentage of the original Comets crashed. According to you - No big deal -

 

I do not have a clue what the expected lifetimes of those engines are - My guess is probably 3-5 thousand hours before replacement.

 

If you have one out of a thousand, that's unacceptable to me - 7 out of 20 (or 80) after such a short time is a major problem.

 

Your right given the very small number of A380 in service and they have experienced four problems with the Rolls Royce engines. Like you say this is a major problem.

[wacmedia 277]

Hi,

 

Rolls Royce are the most famous name in engine manufacture. They have great engineers and I'm sure this minor problem will be sorted soon. WSJ said that Qantas use a higher thrust setting than the other airlines which might be a factor.

[TheFiend 1,181]

You guys are crazy!

 

Only a small percentage of the original Comets crashed. According to you - No big deal -

 

49 747s have been written off in accidents... 3% of the total biult..... perhaps that is no big deal to you.

 

148 737s have been written off...... perhaps that is no big deal to you..

 

The A380 didn't crash as a result of the catastrophic engine failure.... it landed safely. No body was injured but the way you Boeing fanboys are going on about it it is a real "big deal"

 

I do not have a clue what the expected lifetimes of those engines are - My guess is probably 3-5 thousand hours before replacement.

 

If you have one out of a thousand, that's unacceptable to me - 7 out of 20 (or 80) after such a short time is a major problem.

 

One engine has suffered a catastrophic failure..... 6 have been discovered to be suffering from oil leaks. Surely these oil leaks should have been picked up during the normal regular maintenance inspections. Oil leaks are repairable.

[TheFiend 1,181]

Hi,

 

Rolls Royce are the most famous name in engine manufacture. They have great engineers and I'm sure this minor problem will be sorted soon. WSJ said that Qantas use a higher thrust setting than the other airlines which might be a factor.

 

The higher thrust Trent 972 variant is used on the Qantas and Singapore A380s. Luftansa A380s use the 970 variant.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Hi,

 

Rolls Royce are the most famous name in engine manufacture. They have great engineers and I'm sure this minor problem will be sorted soon.

 

They already have. Looks like the "major problem" isn't a major problem at all - except for RR's accounts.

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Rolls-Royce said it would fix an engine fault which forced a Qantas A380 superjumbo to make an emergency landing last week, although the cost of the incident will mean slower profit growth this year.

 

"The failure was confined to a specific component in the turbine area of the engine. This caused an oil fire, which led to the release of the intermediate pressure turbine disc," the British enginemaker said on Friday.

 

"Our process of inspection will continue and will be supplemented by the replacement of the relevant module according to an agreed program." Chief executive John Rose said the upgrade would be undertaken in collaboration with EADS-owned planemaker Airbus, Trent 900 customers, and regulators.

 

Anyway, the RR episode was a nice little diversion from the saga of the self-igniting 787. Are the test aircraft still grounded, or what? More importantly, which supplier was to blame?

Edited November 12, 2010 by CheshireTom

[TheFiend 1,181]

Anyway, the RR episode was a nice little diversion from the saga of the self-igniting 787. Are the test aircraft still grounded, or what? More importantly, which supplier was to blame?

 

How about this article or this one

 

An on board fire is dangerous.....

 

The fire on board a 787 Dreamliner test plane Tuesday caused substantial damage to one of two main power-distribution panels inside the rear electrical-equipment bay, Boeing said Thursday.

 

An engineering document obtained by The Seattle Times says "extensive smoke, fire and structural damage exist to the P100" electrical panel.

 

That panel is a key component that takes power from the left engine's generator and distributes it through the airplane to power vital systems.

 

Photos accompanying the document showed several charred electrical boxes and a burned insulation blanket that is meant to keep heat and flames away from the carbon-fiber plastic-composite fuselage.

 

Senior Boeing executives told The Times that the photos reveal specific innovations in the electrical panel's design that could benefit competitors. At their request, the Times decided not to publish the photos, but only to describe what they show.

 

That sounds like an fault condition has caused the fire. Surely power supply equipment should have been designed and specified to be able to react to large fault currents without causing fires.

 

And how pathetic are Boeing for not wanting photos of the panels published in case competitors saw them......

 

If it means the electrical distribution system needs to be redesigned then this will cause another major delay to the Nightmareliner.

Edited November 12, 2010 by TheFiend

[CheshireTom 1,377]

If it means the electrical distribution system needs to be redesigned then this will cause another major delay to the Nightmareliner.

 

The sad thing is that the 787 production charade was so predictable. The greatest achievement at Boeing was convincing people otherwise.

 

From 2006 ....

 

 

 

Edited November 12, 2010 by CheshireTom

[joekicker 53]

It was a scheduled landing in Laredo.It DID NOT land there because of the fire.The flight was scheduled from Yuma to Laredo.It was made under emergency conditions.And it was,as my guess,having to do with the myriad of test equipment on board,not a faulut of the operating systems themselves.

 

Or maybe not. The Seattle Times says not. It says the plane caught on fire DURING a test, not BECAUSE of a test:

 

Boeing says a failure in one of the plane's two main power panels led to a fire in the blanket...

 

.

[eltib 54]

wrong post, sorry tom.

Edited November 12, 2010 by eltib

[eltib 54]

So why aren't they building the Nightmareliner???

 

 

It's garnered a new name in the media, it's also known as the

 

7L87

[BigDUSA 71]

The sad thing is that the 787 production charade was so predictable. The greatest achievement at Boeing was convincing people otherwise.

 

From 2006 ....

 

 

 

I agree if you count on the Italians and British sub contractor's to deliver components on time and within specifications. It's a losing proposition.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

I agree if you count on the Italians and British sub contractor's to deliver components on time and within specifications. It's a losing proposition.

 

 

 

Your xenophobia is showing again.

Edited November 12, 2010 by CheshireTom

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Here we go again ....

 

Further Boeing Dreamliner delays called 'inevitable'

 

By Ben Mutzabaugh, USA TODAY

 

Further delays to the Boeing 787 Dreamliner are "inevitable" as a result of Boeing grounding its 787 test fleet following an on-board fire on one of the jets. At least that's according to Douglas Harned, a Sanford C. Bernstein analyst, who predicts Boeing will no longer be able to deliver it's the first 787 to launch customer to ANA as projected in February.

 

Bloomberg News writes "even in a best-case scenario, with no fundamental electrical flaws, further delays are 'inevitable' because it will be difficult to continue those specific tests with repairs underway, said [Harned]."

 

 

FAA halts certification testing of Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner after incident

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. (BNO NEWS) — The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on Friday said it has no plans to resume certification testing of Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner aircraft until it fully understands what caused an incident on Tuesday.

“The FAA does not plan to resume certification testing until we clearly understand the cause of the incident and identify any corrective actions that might be needed,” said FAA spokesman Lynn Lunsford, while adding that it only applies to flight testing of the aircraft.

[BigDUSA 71]

Your xenophobia is showing again.

 

Damn shame that Boeing can't depend on European companies to live up to the contracts they signed.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Damn shame that Boeing can't depend on European companies to live up to the contracts they signed.

 

Your xenophobia is showing again.

[jacko 8,778]

Damn shame that Boeing can't depend on European companies to live up to the contracts they signed.

And sometimes USA ones....

An employee familiar with the problem at Boeing's 787 plant in Charleston, S.C., said floor beams and fuselage frames were among the major parts that have not showed up on time.

 

The major 787 suppliers affected, including Boeing Charleston, recently shipped Dreamliner sections that were only about 60 percent complete inside to Everett.

[BigDUSA 71]

LONDON – An Airbus executive said Friday that Rolls-Royce has identified a faulty bearing box as the cause of the oil leak problem implicated in the midair disintegration of an engine on one of the world's largest airliners, an Australian newspaper reported.

 

Airbus Chief Operating Officer John Leahy told reporters in Sydney that Rolls-Royce had at some point fixed the bearing box on newer versions of the massive Trent 900 engine, a model designed for the massive A380 superjumbo. He said Rolls was now fixing it on older versions. The Herald Sun reported his comments on its website.

 

His comments did not address why Rolls-Royce had not fixed the bearing box in older versions of the engine.

 

Airbus did not elaborate and Rolls-Royce declined to comment on his remarks.

 

The box in question contains the metal ball bearings that allow movement of the drive shaft that spins the turbines inside jet engines. Investigators have said that leaking oil caused a fire in the engine of a Qantas A380 that heated metal parts and made the motor disintegrate over Indonesia last week, sending shrapnel into the wing and cutting vital safety systems before the jetliner landed safely in Singapore.

 

They have focused on broken pieces of the engine's heavy turbine disc, a plate that holds the turbine blades that move air through the motor.

 

Engines on the A380 malfunctioned four times before the disintegration on the flight from Singapore to Sydney. All of the planes landed safely.

 

The problems dating to 2008 led to two warnings for airlines to check parts of the Trent 900.

 

Three of the four problems centered on the turbines or oil system.

 

Rolls-Royce Group PLC said in an update to investors Friday that the disintegration of the Qantas engine resulted from a problem in a specific component in the Trent 900, but it did not provide details.

 

"The failure was confined to a specific component in the turbine area of the engine. This caused an oil fire, which led to the release of the intermediate pressure turbine disc," Rolls-Royce said.

 

The statement supports a report from the European Aviation Safety Agency, which issued an emergency order Thursday requiring airlines to re-examine their Trent 900s and ground any planes with suspicious leaks.

 

Leahy said the new models of the Trent 900 had been redesigned to eliminate the problem of excess oil causing turbine fires. He said that Rolls-Royce was retrofitting the older versions with new parts to stop the oil leaks and computer software that would shut down an engine with leaking oil before it was put at risk of disintegration.

 

"In the future the computer will have software that can identify a problem at the outset and it will shut down an engine before a turbine disc can go out of control and come apart," Leahy told the Herald Sun.

 

Leaks or oil stains have been discovered on six of the total of twenty A380s operated by Qantas, Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines that use the Trent 900, a technologically advanced model designed to be lighter, quieter and more efficient than older engines. Qantas and Singapore Airlines have grounded nine of the world's largest airliner between them while Germany's Lufthansa has already replaced an engine on one of its A380s.

 

Rolls-Royce's chief executive said the company will be replacing the relevant part to enable its customers to bring the whole fleet back into service.

 

Airbus will take Rolls-Royce engines off the final assembly line in Toulouse, France, and send them to Qantas "so we can get Qantas back up and flying," the Airbus press office said.

 

The disintegration on the Qantas A380 was far more serious than the airline has implied in its public statements, however, experts said.

 

Damage from engine shrapnel to the wing over the engine occurred very close to the wing's front spar, one of two support beams in the wing that attach the wing to the plane, said John Goglia, a former member of the National Transportation Safety Board and an expert on airline maintenance. If the shrapnel had hit the spar it could possibly have weakened the spar and even have caused the wing to fall off, he said.

 

As it was, the shrapnel appears to have damaged electrical cables and hydraulic lines inside the wing, Goglia said. Pilots were unable to close the landing gear doors, an indication of hydraulic damage, and had difficulty shutting down the engine next to the engine that disintegrated, an indication of an electrical problem, he said. The A380 has four engines.

 

Photos and video of the incident and its aftermath show the shrapnel clearly ruptured a hydraulic line and an electric line in the wing, cutting off the pilots' control of half the brake flaps and the remaining engine on the affected wing, along with the door of the landing-gear compartment, said Joerg Handwerg, a spokesman for the pilots' union for Lufthansa.

 

In its trading update Friday, London-based Rolls-Royce said the incident will cause full year profit growth "to be slightly lower than previously guided," but it also said that the company's other operations will help to offset any losses. Back in July, the company said that its underlying profits would grow by 4-5 percent compared to 2009.

 

Shares in the company rose after the update — a signal that investors are happy to see a definitive statement after days of silence from the world's second-biggest engine maker behind General Electric and one of the last globally important industrial manufacturing companies in Britain.

 

Rolls-Royce shares were up 4 percent at 607.5 pence ($9.74) in midmorning trade on the London Stock Exchange.

 

Handwerg said that minor problems are routine for any jet engine, but it is possible that the issues were an indication that regulators did not adequately check the engine before approving it for commercial use.

 

"When you see we have a problem with not just one of these engines but several then it points towards that we have a problem in the certification process," Handwerg said.

___

 

Associated Press Reporters Michael Weissenstein in London and Joan Lowy in Washington contributed to this report.

QUOTE

 

Damn lucky the wing didn't fall off when the Rolls Royce engine exploded.

[TheFiend 1,181]

The problems dating to 2008 led to two warnings for airlines to check parts of the Trent 900.

 

So the airlines have known for 2 years about a problem but failed to rectify it? That points to a lax maintenance culture at the airlines concerned. Surely their E,I,M & T (Examination, Inspection, Maintenance and Testing) process should have been modified to include those areas of concern.

[BigDUSA 71]

So the airlines have known for 2 years about a problem but failed to rectify it? That points to a lax maintenance culture at the airlines concerned. Surely their E,I,M & T (Examination, Inspection, Maintenance and Testing) process should have been modified to include those areas of concern.

 

We have three quality airlines and they all ignored maintenance bulletins on a new series of engines? I could go along with one airline with shoddy maintenance practices but three all at the same time. I don't think so.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

We have three quality airlines and they all ignored maintenance bulletins on a new series of engines? I could go along with one airline with shoddy maintenance practices but three all at the same time. I don't think so.

 

The problem has already been identified and the fix notified.

 

Is the 787 is still grounded? Any updates?

[BigDUSA 71]

The problem has already been identified and the fix notified.

 

Is the 787 is still grounded? Any updates?

 

Has Qantas started flying The A380 again? Any updates?

[TheFiend 1,181]

We have three quality airlines and they all ignored maintenance bulletins on a new series of engines? I could go along with one airline with shoddy maintenance practices but three all at the same time. I don't think so.

 

Three quality airlines obviously failed to react to 2 warnings from Airbus/Rolls Royce. Not shoddy, but perhaps a bit careless.

[ozijeff 9]

Qantas is waiting until all 380 RR engines are checked and cleared.

I believe oil leaks have been found in a few others.

When fixed, they will be up in the air again but no set date given.

[BigDUSA 71]

Qantas is waiting until all 380 RR engines are checked and cleared.

I believe oil leaks have been found in a few others.

When fixed, they will be up in the air again but no set date given.

 

This must be costing Qantas BIG money to have so many planes out of service for so long?

[TheFiend 1,181]

This must be costing Qantas BIG money to have so many planes out of service for so long?

 

The continuing saga of the Nightmareliner delays must be costing Boeing big time.... especially after the latest saga of the incendiary electrical panels.....

 

Boeing Co. shares fell $2.18, or 3.2 percent, to $67.07 on Wednesday, making it easily the worst performer in the Dow Jones industrial average.

 

It's already hit Boeings share price.