Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Another SQ 772 Ifsd In Japan  
User currently offlineAndrewtang From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 461 posts, RR: 10
Posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8928 times:

This seems to be the 5th or 6th incident on the 777 for SQ this month. Although they do not all relate to engines.

According to Straits Times, this flight was flying from Singapore to Nagoya when it experienced problems on Engine 2 and it had to be shutdown inflight though

http://www.straitstimes.com/Latest%2...ews/Singapore/STIStory_210181.html

[Edited 2008-02-25 00:30:38]

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePowercube From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8887 times:

Once again, it's great news to hear everyone is okay but this rash of IFSDs is starting to get just a little out of the ordinary now that it is effecting both GE and RR powered SQ birds. I love T7s and this doesn't hurt my confidence in the airframe, but I am not the average person. I wonder what Boeing has to say about this behind closed doors.

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8863 times:



Quoting Powercube (Reply 1):
this rash of IFSDs

...or is it a rash of reported/sensationalized engine issues?

I'm tempted to say the latter, as 1) this frequency of reporting really didn't "start" until after the BA incident, and 2) not all of which have even been actual IFSDs


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8804 times:



Quoting Powercube (Reply 1):
I wonder what Boeing has to say about this behind closed doors.

"What the heck is wrong with SQ and why can't they keep their newest and most advanced planes working?"



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8772 times:

Well, the event itself is nothing to worry about, but what is worrying for SQ is that they are having to add another real IFSD to their ETOPS quality follow up program, which definitely isn't good news for them.

Don't know how far off the first restriction they are, but they just moved a full step closer to seeing their ETOPS restricted or even revoked with this IFSD... TG knows what happens if you are unlucky and happen to have one too many.


User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 5, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8772 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
"What the heck is wrong with SQ and why can't they keep their newest and most advanced planes working?"

Apart from a fuel pump failure the A380 has been doing great.  Wink

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13745 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8764 times:

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 2):
..or is it a rash of reported/sensationalized engine issues?

I get a lot of data on Singapore Airlines' operations daily but very rarely do I see full blown tech problems that lead to AOGs. So I don't think it is media sensationalism, just a run of not positive luck.

If you average out the issues over a period of time and stretch the memory back more than three weeks then it probably does all average out though I do not have time to do any calculations.

Again, this was an unfortunate incident and I am sure SQNGO are taking care of their passengers.

[Edited 2008-02-25 01:02:24]


Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13745 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8749 times:

"Officials initially said the aircraft suffered engine problems, but later said a computer glitch involving the right engine appeared to be the cause of the trouble, adding investigations were continuing."

"The cause of the incident is being investigated by engineers, and the aircraft is expected to return to service once investigations are complete and components changed," Singapore Airlines said in an e-mail to The Associated Press.

More at Inquirer.net



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 8645 times:



Quoting WINGS (Reply 5):
Apart from a fuel pump failure the A380 has been doing great.

I was counting that. They can't seem to keep their 77Ws or A380s out of trouble, the two most advanced planes they fly... (and now the 772).

Nobody else is having trouble with their A380s... oh wait...  Wink



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 9, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 8431 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
Nobody else is having trouble with their A380s... oh wait...

Really? I thought that the majority of A380 customers were facing a hefty delays.  Wink

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineSparklehorse12 From Australia, joined Feb 2007, 908 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 8350 times:



Quoting WINGS (Reply 9):
Really? I thought that the majority of A380 customers were facing a hefty delays. Wink

Of course Boeing would never allow such a delay to occur ..hang on I heard vague reports the 787 is delayed...can anyone confirm this rumour?
 duck 



Airlines Flown : QF,NW,AA, CX, AC, MH, SQ, DJ, NZ, TG, PG,US, FJ, J8, AN, DD, JQ
User currently offlineRheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2289 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 8344 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
Nobody else is having trouble with their A380s... oh wait...



Quoting WINGS (Reply 9):
Really? I thought that the majority of A380 customers were facing a hefty delays.

LOL Good humour, really!! Very sharp observations!! Big grin


User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8663 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 8014 times:



Quoting WINGS (Reply 5):
Apart from a fuel pump failure the A380 has been doing great.

I hear their A345 are also doing pretty good. No IFSD's at all  Smile


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 7928 times:



Quoting Airbazar (Reply 12):
I hear their A345 are also doing pretty good. No IFSD's at all

No, but they have gone tech for 24 hours or more. Happened at EWR twice IIRC...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineGearup From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 578 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 6303 times:



Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 2):
...or is it a rash of reported/sensationalized engine issues?

100% correct!



I have no memory of this place.
User currently offlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 5574 times:

Another thread is turning into an A vs B match.  Angry

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 4):
Don't know how far off the first restriction they are, but they just moved a full step closer to seeing their ETOPS restricted or even revoked with this IFSD... TG knows what happens if you are unlucky and happen to have one too many.

How many do you have to have to get your ETOPS restricted? At the current rate it won't be many weeks until that happens!  Big grin



Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
User currently offlineWidebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 67
Reply 16, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5314 times:



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 4):
Don't know how far off the first restriction they are, but they just moved a full step closer to seeing their ETOPS restricted or even revoked with this IFSD... TG knows what happens if you are unlucky and happen to have one too many.

With the 777-200ER/777-300 fleets there ETOPS cert is not close to being in jeopardy. the 777-200ER fleet is 46 strong and is accumulating ETOPS hours rapidly. It would take about 20 more IFSD over the next year for them to fall out of ETOPS 180 qualification.

Their 77W fleet however can not sustain repeated events at this point. To that end GE and Boeing have both instituted additional monitoring and frequent oil analysis among the preventative measures to reduce the possibility of IFSD. Unfortunately this has led to at least one unscheduled engine removal not related to an IFSD event so far. This was not on an SQ ship.

It is quite strange that after a million basically trouble free hours there have been at least four IFSD related to HPT and gearbox related problems. GE will get things back on track as there is a huge imperative to do so.



-widebodyphotog



If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
User currently offlinePlairbus From Germany, joined Feb 2008, 311 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 3895 times:

Mmmm i think it is time that Boeing and the Airlines make in investigacion, and do something, that is really strange, i mean what is going on with the 777?

User currently offline7673mech From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 747 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3707 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would say that in the age of internet and real time news reporting, alot of sensationalism occurs when you have aircraft maintenance incidents.
I wish everyone would stop speculating about there ETOPS certificate coming into jeopardy. It would take a lot for that to happen.
Having worked my whole career at several "ETOPS" airlines - starting with the airline that took the first 67 ETOPS, and the same carrier later struggling to keep their 57's ETOPS qualified (thanks to mfg issue) I can tell you that it would be engine S/N and airframe based. IE - certain aircraft with certain Serial number engines would lose ETOPS authority prior to the whole fleet losing it.


User currently offlineA3 From Greece, joined Oct 2006, 262 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3659 times:

It seems that "4 engines 4 long haul" is now more meaningful than ever  Big grin  Big grin  Big grin


Don't spend your money on airlines that don't respect your business.
User currently offlineSparklehorse12 From Australia, joined Feb 2007, 908 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3568 times:



Quoting EMA747 (Reply 15):
Another thread is turning into an A vs B match. Angry

Yes, I hope it doesn't go that way. I love the 777 and variants....that sound of them idling when you are taxi-ing out to the run way sounds very cool indeed. It seems odd that SQ are the ones having the most amount of issues



Airlines Flown : QF,NW,AA, CX, AC, MH, SQ, DJ, NZ, TG, PG,US, FJ, J8, AN, DD, JQ
User currently offlineBrenintw From Taiwan, joined Jul 2006, 1723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3501 times:



Quoting Sparklehorse12 (Reply 20):
It seems odd that SQ are the ones having the most amount of issues

AFAIK, SQ also flies, by far, the largest fleet of them ... it's only natural that SQ would have more issues than anyone else.

The number to look at would be the number of "issues" per hour of flying time for SQ's fleet compared to other fleets. I suspect that figure would paint a very different picture.



I'm tired of the A vs. B sniping. Neither make planes that shed wings randomly!
User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1451 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3465 times:



Quoting Sparklehorse12 (Reply 20):
It seems odd that SQ are the ones having the most amount of issues

Not really, AF has had more issues with the 777's than SQ.



If you're going through hell, keep going
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
SQ Online-Check-In Question posted Wed Feb 13 2008 02:25:26 by LX001
SQ Pilot Fined In AUS For Importing Porn posted Wed Feb 13 2008 00:28:18 by Kevin
Another Runway Near Miss In US posted Sat Dec 8 2007 06:22:10 by Kaitak
Another Double Digit Increase In MSY Traffic posted Mon Dec 3 2007 12:05:35 by MSYtristar
SQ Prohibits Sex In Their A380 Suites. posted Tue Oct 30 2007 04:32:43 by Klmcedric
Another SAS Dash 8 Accident In VNO posted Wed Sep 12 2007 02:39:07 by CPHGuard
SQ A380 Deliveries In 2008 posted Fri Aug 10 2007 11:51:33 by Ua777322
Why No LCC's In Japan? posted Mon Jun 18 2007 04:03:57 by Skyhigh
Another Flyglobespan Emergency Landing In Hamilton posted Wed Jun 13 2007 15:00:58 by YHMYYZspotter
Another Emirates A380 Order In Sight? posted Fri May 18 2007 21:52:09 by FCKC