Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
QF A380 CLUE: An Airworthiness Directive  
User currently offlinemarchie From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 21 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 16815 times:

This may be posted already but it has arisen in UK media this evening that EASA previously issued an airwothiness directive concerning the RR TRENT 900 engine on August 4th 2010. Indeed an interesting development.

Below is an excerpt taken from the document which I assume is in the public domain.
Here is a link to the full report document found on the Channel4 website.

http://www.channel4.com/media/c4-news/pdf/EASA_AD_2010-0008R1_1.pdf

***
AD No.: 2010-0008R1
Date: 04 August 2010

ATA 72
Engine – Intermediate Pressure Shaft Coupling Splines –Inspection

Manufacturer(s):
Rolls-Royce plc

Applicability:
RB211 Trent 900 series engines, all marks, all serial numbers.
These engines are known to be installed on, but not limited to, Airbus
A380 series aircraft.

Reason:
Wear, beyond Engine Manual limits, has been identified on the abutment
faces of the splines on the Trent 900 Intermediate Pressure (IP) shaft rigid
coupling on several engines during strip. The shaft to coupling spline
interface provides the means of controlling the turbine axial setting and
wear through of the splines would permit the IP turbine to move
rearwards.
Rearward movement of the IP turbine would enable contact with static
turbine components and would result in loss of engine performance with
potential for in-flight shut down, oil migration and oil fire below the LP
turbine discs prior to sufficient indication resulting in loss of LP turbine disc
integrity. Some of these conditions present a potential unsafe condition to
the aeroplane.
This AD requires inspection of the IP shaft coupling splines and,
depending on the results, requires further repetitive inspections or
corrective actions....

[Edited 2010-11-04 15:07:42]

[Edited 2010-11-04 15:13:37]

[Edited 2010-11-04 15:28:58]

[Edited 2010-11-04 15:29:23]

[Edited 2010-11-04 15:31:02]

[Edited 2010-11-04 15:39:48]

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineUTAH744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 200 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 16168 times:

Looks like the "smoking gun" to me. I wonder what EASA will come up with in the coming days. I appreciate your post as many replys on the other A380 threads are off subject, or wild speculation.


You are never too old to learn something stupid
User currently offlineairportugal310 From Palau, joined Apr 2004, 3608 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 16117 times:

Quoting UTAH744 (Reply 1):
Looks like the "smoking gun" to me. I wonder what EASA will come up with in the coming days. I appreciate your post as many replys on the other A380 threads are off subject, or wild speculation.

Looks that way...must have been fairly obvious to mx engineers



I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5627 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 16117 times:

Quoting marchie (Thread starter):
This AD requires inspection of the IP shaft coupling splines and,
depending on the results, requires further repetitive inspections or
corrective actions....

Does the AD specify a time frame either by calendar or hours/cycles?

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15727 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 16081 times:

Quoting marchie (Thread starter):
resulting in loss of LP turbine disc
integrity.

Seems pretty consistent with pictures of the mangled QF engine.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2940 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 15196 times:

Certainly very interesting news. Now that it has really happenned in a bad way, I wonder what the action will be by RR.

User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4395 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 15148 times:

Maybe this explains why LH continues to fly the A380 - if they have this inspection done regular already they know their gun isn't smoking.

User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13985 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 15067 times:

Quoting UTAH744 (Reply 1):
Looks like the "smoking gun" to me. I wonder what EASA will come up with in the coming days. I appreciate your post as many replys on the other A380 threads are off subject, or wild speculation.

It will only be a problem if RR or QF exceeded the maximum timeframe given in the AD for accomplishing this AD.
If the AD´s due date hasn´t expired yet or if the inspections have been carried out and nothing found within the legal timeframe, both QF and RR will be in the clear.

Jan


User currently offlinesolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 851 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 14614 times:

QF may resume 380 op within 48 hours.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...me-a380-operations-within-48h.html



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 14532 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 7):
It will only be a problem if RR or QF exceeded the maximum timeframe given in the AD for accomplishing this AD.
If the AD´s due date hasn´t expired yet or if the inspections have been carried out and nothing found within the legal timeframe, both QF and RR will be in the clear.

The odd thing is that Joyce has not THIS TIME referred to these ADs. Whereas they have been mentioned before in dispatches as it were! But it is difficult to attribute any significance to it. The unions would be sure to have mentioned it had neglecting these been a possible contributing cause. They would not miss a trick like that.


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4395 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 14299 times:

First inspection has to be done after 400 cycles, which can mean a year almost. Issued in August, I doubt the A380 have already had the 150 cycles recommended in this in 70 days. So not having inspected this could still be within the directive, and LH still is safe of it anyways.

It would turn out that the directive was too optimistic...


User currently offlineDizzy777 From Australia, joined Dec 2009, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 14176 times:

15 Jan 2010 issue of the AD has the following further action tables attached (revisions of the AD give reference to procedure updates) and can be found at

http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_pad_09_136.zip/AD_2010-0008R1_2



Table 1.b: On-wing Borescope Inspection – Further Action and Repetitive Inspection Intervals
Condition
Measured spline crest in accordance with section
3.A of Rolls-Royce NMSB 72-AG329 Revision 1
is:
Action
Compliance Time /
Repetitive Interval (not to
exceed)
Less than 0,5 mm with no material remaining Remove the engine Before next flight
Less than 0,5 mm with some material remaining Remove the engine Within 10 flight cycles
Equal to or more than 0,5 mm but less than 1 mm Repeat inspection Within 50 flight cycles
Equal to or more than 1 mm but less than 1,5 mm Repeat inspection Within 100 flight cycles
Equal to or more than 1,5 mm but less than 2 mm Repeat inspection Within 200 flight cycles
Equal to or more than 2 mm but less than 2,4 mm Repeat inspection Within 300 flight cycles
Equal to or more than 2,4 mm (2) Repeat inspection Within 400 flight cycles
Note (2): The nominal unworn dimension of the spline crest is 2,65 mm.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6590 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 13959 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 7):
It will only be a problem if RR or QF exceeded the maximum timeframe given in the AD for accomplishing this AD.
If the AD´s due date hasn´t expired yet or if the inspections have been carried out and nothing found within the legal timeframe, both QF and RR will be in the clear.

Jan

In the clear vis-à-vis the AD, but it would still mean (and even more) RR has a design or manufacturing problem !



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineCFBFrame From United States of America, joined May 2009, 531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5019 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 12):
In the clear vis-à-vis the AD, but it would still mean (and even more) RR has a design or manufacturing problem !


That may be true, and a design modification may be required long term. For most airlines, a mod is a nice thing to know will be coming but the challenge is establishing on wing time before engine removal. Since the fleets are so small, inspecting and replacing engines can have a major impact on a/c availability. Interesting this is the 14th a/c, so SIA will have a much bigger issue with this than QF. Maybe, with the larger fleet, SI has had the ability to inspect and replace easier than QF.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6590 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4859 times:

Someone said on another topic that SQ doesn't use its frames as much as QF.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30858 posts, RR: 86
Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4715 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Aesma (Reply 14):
Someone said on another topic that SQ doesn't use its frames as much as QF.

SQ has had frames in service for a longer period of time, however, which might affect the flight cycle / flight hour count.


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...
Thai Picks RR Trent 900 Engines For A380's posted Thu May 15 2008 06:15:00 by WINGS
First RR Trent 900 Engine Test Movie posted Fri Jul 7 2006 13:40:01 by AutoThrust
Chances Of RR Trent 900 Powering A350s? posted Fri Feb 25 2005 20:07:55 by CRJ900
RR Improving The Trent-900 posted Wed Oct 28 2009 08:00:53 by Scipio
Saudi Arabian Picks RR Trent 700EP For A333 Fleet. posted Wed Apr 8 2009 01:14:55 by WINGS
BA 777 RR Trent 220 Engine Safety Alert posted Sun Mar 1 2009 02:23:45 by Readytotaxi
Air Canada- Harsh Criticism In Media? posted Fri Jan 2 2009 11:35:52 by JoePatroni
Boeing 737-900 No Longer In Production? posted Thu May 1 2008 08:44:47 by Speedmarque
RR Trent 1000 Gains Certification posted Tue Aug 7 2007 12:42:41 by BDRules
RR Trent 1000 First Flight? posted Tue Mar 27 2007 01:11:12 by BoeingBus