# A380 Engine Failure



## beaupower32 (Nov 4, 2010)

> SINGAPORE – Qantas grounded all six of its Airbus A380 superjumbos after one blew out an engine Thursday, shooting flames and raining large metal chunks before the world's largest airliner made a safe emergency landing in Singapore with 459 people aboard.
> 
> It was most serious midair incident involving the double-decker A380 since it debuted in October 2007 with Singapore Airlines flying it to Sydney — the same route that Qantas flight QF34 was flying when it was stricken over western Indonesia.
> 
> ...



Qantas jumbo makes emergency landing in Singapore - Yahoo! News


----------



## Pong (Nov 4, 2010)

I remember seeing photos of the debris on CNN a few hours ago. Holy cow, that is some damage to an A380 engine.

Though it's great to hear everyone's on the ground safe.


----------



## JohnAnthony (Nov 4, 2010)

I'm not going up in one of those buckets. I've got friends in the airline business that refer to it as the "scarebus."

Is the Airbus A380 safe? To the Moon


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 4, 2010)

I wouldn't have a problem flying in it, anymore than I would any other aircraft. 

Glad to see everyone is okay.


----------



## The Basket (Nov 4, 2010)

Yeah.

An engine going bang is not end if world.

No harm no foul.


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 4, 2010)

Unless you are sitting in the rotorburst area. Or it severs multiple hydraulic lines. Or slices open a wing tank. Or destroys you landing gear/tires. Or it takes out...


----------



## vikingBerserker (Nov 4, 2010)

beaupower32 said:


> One passenger, Rosemary Hegardy, 60, of Sydney, told The Associated Press that she heard two bangs and saw yellow flames from her window.



Never a comforting thing.


----------



## The Basket (Nov 4, 2010)

Matt308 said:


> Unless you are sitting in the rotorburst area. Or it severs multiple hydraulic lines. Or slices open a wing tank. Or destroys you landing gear/tires. Or it takes out...



Which never happened.

Modern engines are designed to contain any failure within its nacelle.

As aviation enthusiasts we dont want to be all crazy news media about this saying that this could have been a disaster and hundreds could have died.

Dont mean it aint serious but You can be killed driving a car or falling down stairs. Gotta keep the big picture and dont overdo the overkill.

I would happily fly a A380...just need someone to pony up the dough...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 4, 2010)

The Basket said:


> Yeah.
> 
> An engine going bang is not end if world.
> 
> No harm no foul.



Unless it is your only one, or it explodes, or the turbine blades and debri break into the rest of the wing, or you lose all of them.

I have lost both engines in a twin engine aircraft on takeoff before. Good thing Helos can auto-rotate.


----------



## JohnAnthony (Nov 4, 2010)

One issue we have in the USA is that FAA standards don't always keep pace with new technology so some aircraft get approved before they've been thoroughally tested. Problems get corrected after the planes have been in service - with passengers. I don't know how the Aussie approval system works.

But Airbus seems to have recurring issues with cowlings coming loose, not just on the 380 but on earlier models as well. And it's happened often enough to make one wonder if there are congenital defects, as opposed to operator or maintenance error.

I'm not cricizing the aircraft overall but clearly something needs to be done about the cowl problems before one of these mishaps does turn into a tragedy.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 4, 2010)

JohnAnthony said:


> But Airbus seems to have recurring issues with cowlings coming loose, not just on the 380 but on earlier models as well. And it's happened often enough to make one wonder if there are congenital defects, as opposed to operator or maintenance error.
> 
> I'm not cricizing the aircraft overall but clearly something needs to be done about the cowl problems before one of these mishaps does turn into a tragedy.



What cowling problems? I have not heard of any. Not saying it is not true, but I have not heard of any. I have flown on tons of Airbus aircraft as well, and never had a problem.


----------



## JohnAnthony (Nov 4, 2010)

April 2010 Jet Blue (320) loses cowl
April 2007 Frontier (319) loses cowl
January 2010 Volaris (320) loses cowl

And this Mexicana from just last August to name a few.

It is possible that all of these incidents are due to maintenence error, I'll grant that. But it does make you wonder...


----------



## The Basket (Nov 4, 2010)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Unless it is your only one, or it explodes, or the turbine blades and debri break into the rest of the wing, or you lose all of them.
> 
> I have lost both engines in a twin engine aircraft on takeoff before. Good thing Helos can auto-rotate.



I was talking about the A380.


----------



## Trebor (Nov 4, 2010)

I'm glad to see everyone is ok....but I'm not an airbus fan.....Boeing lover here...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 4, 2010)

JohnAnthony said:


> April 2010 Jet Blue (320) loses cowl
> April 2007 Frontier (319) loses cowl
> January 2010 Volaris (320) loses cowl
> 
> ...



Since I knew nothing about these, I went and looked them up right after I got home. It is very weird. I would be interested in finding out if it is a maint issue or an issue with construction. 

I have not found any major airlines such as Lufthansa that have had these problems though.


----------



## The Basket (Nov 4, 2010)

Is that an Airbus issue or an engine manufacturer issue?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 4, 2010)

The Basket said:


> Is that an Airbus issue or an engine manufacturer issue?



Cowlings would not be made by the engine manufacturer.


----------



## JohnAnthony (Nov 4, 2010)

Lufthansa has a great safety record so there may be something to the maintenance aspect - that's the other side of the argument. In fact, I always go to Lufthansa first when I'm flying to or around Europe.


----------



## tail end charlie (Nov 4, 2010)

Losing one engine out of four is hardly a big issue, losing one engine out of two isnt a huge issue, modern twin engined passenger planes can fly and land on one engine, the big issue on this flight was that having just taken off it was too heavy to land so it burned fuel off for a while..........hardly a world shattering event, its a new plane so its the focus of attention.


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 4, 2010)

The Basket said:


> Which never happened.
> 
> Modern engines are designed to contain any failure within its nacelle.



Not true. They are designed to minimize risk of a catastrophic rotorburst via multiple engineering methodologies. If it were true we would not have experienced recent accidents/incidents and airplane manufactures would not perform zonal analyses as part of their type design approval activities.


----------



## The Basket (Nov 4, 2010)

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY6KnPfR5xc_

Engine tested to destruction.


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 4, 2010)

tail end charlie said:


> Losing one engine out of four is hardly a big issue, losing one engine out of two isnt a huge issue, modern twin engined passenger planes can fly and land on one engine, the big issue on this flight was that having just taken off it was too heavy to land so it burned fuel off for a while..........hardly a world shattering event, its a new plane so its the focus of attention.




I've been on each end of a fuel dump. Flying on a 747 which dumped 26,000lbs (as I recall) and being misted in my front yard from a 777 that suffered a compressor stall. Once I calmed down after seeing 30ft flames shooting out of the port engine while making HUGE earth shaking repetative booms, the latter left an oily mess all over my vehicles as it turned out over the Puget Sound for an immediate return to Seattle-Tacoma airport.


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 4, 2010)

The Basket said:


> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY6KnPfR5xc_
> 
> Engine tested to destruction.




Basket they do that with every turbine powered Part 25 transport category airplane. It's a test. Not an assurance. And rotorburst accidents still occur.


----------



## tail end charlie (Nov 4, 2010)

Am I missing something or did a plane crash? I thought it lost one of four engines, it is not unusual to hear of a twin engines passenger plane like an airbus or boeing 777 turning back after losing an engine the 380 is a new plane so its news

like "earthquake in chile, not many dead"


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 4, 2010)

It's big news actually for two reasons. 

First, an engine of that size and thrust disentegrating is very uncommon. The amount of energy that such an huge engine failure must contain without incident is hugely impressive.

Second, God Forbid a Thousand Times, the first time a full A380 goes down it will be world news.


----------



## tail end charlie (Nov 4, 2010)

Matt308 said:


> It's big news actually for two reasons.
> 
> First, an engine of that size and thrust disentegrating is very uncommon. The amount of energy that such an huge engine failure must contain without incident is hugely impressive.
> 
> Second, God Forbid a Thousand Times, the first time a full A380 goes down it will be world news.



I dont know how big a failure it was, people heard a bang and saw things coming out of the engine lets see what the investigation says, I dont know that a bird strike has been eliminated yet.


----------



## drgondog (Nov 4, 2010)

sounds like a possible burner can/combustion issue..


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 4, 2010)

JohnAnthony said:


> One issue we have in the USA is that FAA standards don't always keep pace with new technology so some aircraft get approved before they've been thoroughally tested. Problems get corrected after the planes have been in service - with passengers. I don't know how the Aussie approval system works.



I don't know what you're basing that statement on but I totally disagree. I have worked on certification programs and if anything the Feds many times drag their feet until certification programs are beat to death and every "I" and "T" are dotted and crossed. I don't know any aircraft flying in the US that was certificated by the FAA that wasn't thoroughly tested before being placed into production and especially certificated under FAR 25 and I'd like you to name one aircraft that received a TC in this country that wasn't fully tested. There will always be some type of post-certification problem on any aircraft and that's why you have Airworthiness Directives.

Generally sub-tires manufacture cowlings. When I worked for Rohr Industries that was one of our main product lines. Cowl doors open commonly and I would say the majority of them are due to human error.

I just saw the news clip on this incident and as usual the media is making it more than what it is. In these days these high performance engines shouldn't fail like this but as long as an aircraft operates any time of turbine engine, there is always a possibility of this type of failure


----------



## vikingBerserker (Nov 4, 2010)

Hmmm perhaps Boeing has perfected an Airbus Gremlin.


----------



## Vic Balshaw (Nov 4, 2010)

Hey guys, any flying has its risks as does driving your car, QANTAS had the same problem with a 747 not so long back when the outer stbd engine blew a fan blade. It's an engine issue guys and at least QANTAS did the right thing and grounded the A-380 fleet immediately until investigations by RR are done.

As for the A-380, it's a nice quiet and comfortable flyer, this I can vouch for with Singapore and like any aircraft flying, is can be susceptible to a problem or two, let's just be grateful that this incident was manageable.


----------



## Trebor (Nov 4, 2010)

Matt308 said:


> It's big news actually for two reasons.
> 
> First, an engine of that size and thrust disentegrating is very uncommon. The amount of energy that such an huge engine failure must contain without incident is hugely impressive.
> 
> Second, God Forbid a Thousand Times, the first time a full A380 goes down it will be world news.




like the Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, or TWA 800


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 4, 2010)

Vic Balshaw said:


> Hey guys, any flying has its risks as does driving your car, QANTAS had the same problem with a 747 not so long back when the outer stbd engine blew a fan blade. It's an engine issue guys and at least QANTAS did the right thing and grounded the A-380 fleet immediately until investigations by RR are done.
> .



Like the MD-80 that killed a couple of people. Like I said, extremely rare. And catastrophic failures even more rare, but they still occur, they are mitigated by more than just a kevlar surround. Zonal analyses are done in similar fashion to military damage tolerance analyses. They look are structural redundancy, electrical isolation and hydraulic separation of systems and equipment. The engine shroud is only the first of many means of mitigating risks to hull loss.


----------



## drgondog (Nov 17, 2010)

An update from AVweb.com Newsflash

"Qantas A380 Was Heavily Damaged

The Qantas crew whose A380 suffered an uncontained engine failure earlier this month had their hands full in getting the super jumbo back to Singapore. Shrapnel from the engine disabled one of two main hydraulic systems, hampered the fuel transfer system, punched a hole in the forward wing spar and caused a major fuel leak. The cascading nature of such failures meant the pilots couldn't dump enough fuel to bring the aircraft down to its maximum landing weight and the fuel left in the airplane was unbalanced. Flaps, slats and spoilers couldn't be fully deployed and the gear had to be dropped manually. Once it was on the ground, the anti-lock brakes didn't work and, since the damaged engine was an inboard one, there was only one left for reverse thrust (the outboard engines of A380s don't have reversers because they often overhang the grass and might be FOD damaged). The heavy, significantly disabled aircraft needed virtually all of the 13,123 feet of available runway. The whole wing might have to be replaced and the aircraft is expected to be out of commission for months. Meanwhile, the cause of the engine problem has been determined and it's just adding to the PR problems facing manufacturer Rolls-Royce."

What a ride...


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 17, 2010)

Intermediate stage turbine ring total failure. Cracks found in other RR engines.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 17, 2010)

Major AD hitting the streets as we speak!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 17, 2010)

Today a Lufthansa A-380 destined for Tokyo had to return to parking while taxing out to the runway in Frankfurt. The crew reported vibrations and were concerned the nose gear was not operating properly. 

The gear was checked out and the aircraft then returned to service. It did not make the flight to Tokyo, the passengers took off on another A-380, but it will fly to S. Africa on Monday.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Nov 17, 2010)

Dam.


----------



## Wildcat (Nov 18, 2010)

drgondog said:


> An update from AVweb.com Newsflash
> 
> "Qantas A380 Was Heavily Damaged
> 
> ...



Wow, all credit to the pilot and crew.


----------



## Lucky13 (Nov 18, 2010)

*By ROHAN SULLIVAN and GREG KELLER, Associated Press Rohan Sullivan And Greg Keller, Associated Press – 29 mins ago*


SYDNEY – As many as half of the 80 Rolls-Royce engines that power some of the world's largest jetliners may have to be replaced after an oil leak caused a fire and the partial disintegration of one on a Qantas flight this month, the Australian national airline's chief executive said Thursday.

The 40 potentially faulty engines on the Airbus A380 would need to be replaced with new engines while the fault is fixed, raising the spectre of engine shortages that could delay future deliveries of the 7-story-tall superjumbo.

It was not clear how serious the problem would be, but the comments by Qantas CEO Alan Joyce were the most definite accounting yet of a problem that now appears larger than first imagined when one of his airline's engines came apart over Indonesia, spewing metal shrapnel into a wing and severing vital operating systems.

Qantas has grounded its fleet of six A380s, each powered by four of the giant Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine. Joyce told reporters that Qantas may have to replace 14 engines, each worth about $10 million.

Rolls-Royce has indicated that the number of engines that needed to be replaced was "40 engines worldwide," he said.

"That's what they think they'll have to change," he said.

Rolls-Royce has remained virtually silent since Nov. 4 as its stock price has dropped. The company was scheduled to hold a news conference at a major biennial air show in the southern Chinese city of Zhuhai in Wednesday, but canceled it, without giving a reason.

An Airbus spokesman couldn't immediately be reached for comment.

Lufthansa said it will only have to change one of the Trent 900 engines on its three A380s. Singapore Airlines, which flies 11 of the superjumbos, declined to comment on whether it may have to change as many as 25 engines.

Aviation regulators have said Rolls-Royce intends to provide new engines to put on planes while the faulty ones are repaired. Airlines typically keep some spares, and Airbus has talked of sending replacement engines from its assembly lines, but the need to replace 40 engines could still cause significant disruption to airline schedules.

"Rolls-Royce are still working through the criteria for which engines need to be changed," Joyce said. "We're hoping to understand precisely which engines need to be replaced and therefore we can have a firm timeline for when they will be back in the air, but we are still a few days away from that."

Rolls-Royce shares were fluctuating on the London Stock Exchange on Thursday. By early afternoon, they were marginally higher — up 0.1 percent at 600 pence — erasing small losses in the morning session. The stock has now lost around 8.6 percent since Nov. 4, but it started to make up some ground on Wednesday when it rose 1.8 percent after the company announced a new marine contract and its share of an engine contract to Brazil's TAM Airlines.

Investigators say leaking oil caught fire in the Qantas engine on Nov. 4 and heated metal parts, causing them to disintegrate. Experts say chunks of flying metal cut hydraulics and an engine-control line in the wing of the A380, causing the pilots to lose control of the second engine and some of the brake panels on the damaged wing in a situation far more serious than originally portrayed by Qantas.

The Sydney-bound flight returned to Singapore where it made an emergency landing, safely ending the most serious safety incident for the world's newest and largest passenger plane.

The European air-safety regulator last week issued an urgent order requiring all operators of Trent 900 engines to conduct repeated inspections of several parts, including the oil service tubes, to ensure there was no "abnormal" leakage. If any such leaks are found, the airlines are prohibited from using the engines.

Qantas says three Trent 900 engines have been removed in addition to the one that blew out. Singapore Airlines and Lufthansa briefly grounded some of their planes after the Qantas scare but returned all but one them to service after conducting safety checks.

Singapore Airlines has said it replaced three Trent 900s. Lufthansa replaced one but said the reason was unrelated to the Qantas blowout.

Singapore Airlines hasn't been told how many of its Rolls Royce engines need to be replaced, and is continuing to fly all of its A380s in the meantime, the airline's Vice President for Public Affairs Nicholas Ionides said. 

Lufthansa spokesman Thomas Jachnow said the German airline will only have to change one of its Trent 900 engines. "The talks are over now with Rolls Royce and Lufthansa, and the result is that we are lucky — only one engine neds to be changed," Jachnow said. 

Rolls-Royce said Friday that it would be replacing modules, or sections of linked parts, aboard Trent 900 engines that were found to have oil leaks, but provided no other details. 

Joyce said Rolls-Royce had ordered modifications on parts of the Trent 900 engines and indicated it had done so before the Nov. 4 incident. But there was no early indication to Qantas that the modification was significant. 

"Rolls-Royce have gone and modified certain parts of this engine," he said. "If this was significant and was known to be significant, we would have liked to have known about that ... We and Airbus weren't aware of it. 

"But it depends on what the purpose of modifications were for," Joyce added. "It doesn't look like it's a significant modification, but it is a modification that has an impact on how the engines are performing. And it is a modification that indicates whether you are going to have a problem or not with the engine." 

Airbus has said new Trent 900s coming off the production line should not have the oil leak problem, but says the changes were ordered after the Qantas incident. It has denied an Australian newspaper's report that an Airbus executive said Rolls-Royce started making changes to some versions of the engine before Nov. 4. 

Joyce said the normal procedure for nonurgent modifications ordered by an engine manufacturer is to make the change when the engine is next brought in for routine maintenance. 

"If this incident hadn't occurred, eventually all these engines would have had this modification," he said. "Now, because it is an indicator, we are not taking any risks. We're taking the engines off and making sure this modification is in place before the engines are put back on the aircraft." 

The other airlines that fly A380s, Dubai's Emirates and Air France, use engines built by Engine Alliance, a 50/50 joint venture between GE Aircraft Engines and Pratt Whitney. 

Airbus has received orders for 234 of its A380s, which sell for list price of $346.3 million. A total of 38 of the aircraft have been delivered. Emirates and Qantas are the biggest customers for the jet, with 58 and 20 total orders so far. 

In the first nine months of the year, Airbus delivered 14 A380s and took in 32 new orders. 

___ 

Associated Press Writers Christopher Bodeen in Zhuhai, China, Rod McGuirk in Canberra, Australia, Alex Kennedy in Singapore and David Rising in Berlin contributed to this report.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Nov 18, 2010)

That's amazing, and at $10 million each.


----------



## razor1uk (Nov 18, 2010)

Yep thats a lot of bucks for effectively at the moment, a production run of say 100 engines total, but I'd say that RR is offering them atleast at 60% real cost. 
Scaling up an enstablished and reliable engine will always cause problems different from the source engine.
I initially though it might have been a Bird Strike; thats a effing huge turbofan engine intake per engine the suction generated at climbing flight power by 4 of those monsters might have sucked a bird in from far ahead that was otherwise trying to fly away from the approaching Flying Lusitania


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 18, 2010)

Wow...

That is all I can say. Wow...


----------



## michaelmaltby (Nov 21, 2010)

The following by Geo Jonas of The National Post is the most descriptive piece I have read on the recent Quantas A-380 RR Trent engine mishap.

Qantas's close call

MM


----------

