Red Panda From Hong Kong, joined Jun 2000, 1521 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6672 times:
As most of us know that there was an AirTransat lost two engines and almost crash-landed. Now it is found that the hydraulic pipe and fuel pipe were rubbed together and caused the fuel link. Article in Toronto Star says the two pipelines are too close to one another. This indicates a design problem.
This remind me that Cathay Pacific once grounded all its A330 due to engine problems as well. As far as I can remember, the engine oil on CX's A300 somehow intruded into the fuel pipe and caused engine overheat.
It seems that there is an on-going problem with RR's Trent 700 series engines.
Gerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 30
Reply 1, posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6620 times:
From Yahoo! News
Airbus Asks Carriers to Check Fuel
PARIS (AP) - European airplane maker Airbus has asked airlines flying its A330 to check the jet's fuel pipes as a precautionary measure after one of the planes lost engine power and made a harrowing emergency landing on the Azores Islands, a spokesman said Thursday.
``We want to be sure, even if the risk is small, that the same (problem) does not exist on other planes,'' said David Velupillai, a spokesman for Toulouse, France-based Airbus.
An Airbus A330-200 belonging to Canadian carrier Air Transat glided to an emergency landing on Aug. 24 after it lost engine power over the Atlantic Ocean because of a fuel leak.
The jet was carrying 304 people on a flight from Toronto to Lisbon and had to land at an airport in the Azores about 900 miles off Portugal's coast. The tires burst when it landed, and 11 people required hospitalization, but their injuries were not considered serious.
Airbus said it asked carriers this week to perform a ``visual check'' of fuel lines near the engines. Only aircraft that use engines made by British company Rolls-Royce are concerned, Velupillai said. The check applies to 84 planes in service with 15 carriers.
A preliminary report issued Tuesday by Portuguese investigators said a malfunctioning fuel injection pump caused low fuel pressure in both Rolls-Royce engines.
Airbus said it was the first such incident involving an A330 aircraft. The company has sent specialists to the Azores Islands to help Portuguese authorities investigate.
Canada's transport ministry said Thursday that Air Transat will revamp safety and maintenance procedures and implement special training sessions for extended flights.
Under the new procedures, Air Transat flights will have to head for the closest airport at the first sign of an engine-related emergency.
Air Transat, which specializes in charter flights from Canadian and European cities to vacation destinations, has submitted a plan to improve maintenance and hire more maintenance and quality-control personnel.
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
Rmm From Australia, joined Feb 2001, 525 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 6558 times:
What you must remember here is that alot a accessories are added
to the engine by the airframe manufacturer after engine delivery to
the production line. This is often referred to as the power plant build
up. The fuel line may have been clear of everything on leaving RR
but the hydraulic line added by airbus maybe the culprit.
Flygirl From Canada, joined Jun 2011, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6503 times:
A crack was found on a pressure fuel line on the right engine according to Transport Canada. This engine, from the RR pool, had recently been changed by AT's maintenence department. Perhaps the cause was an improperly installed replacement engine.
There is some history about the Trent 700 engine on the Airbus website. 38% of the A330 market are outfitted with them. If this was an engine flaw you would think that it would have cropped up before now and not on an engine that was recently installed and only had about 50 hours on it. Just some food for thought.
Reports from other airlines who have checked these engines are now coming it citing that they are without fault. Here's the one on AC from newswire:
Air Canada Undertakes Precautionary Inspections of Airbus 330-300 Rolls Royce Engines - Safety
Reconfirmed Through Engine Records Review
MONTREAL, Aug. 28 /CNW/ - Air Canada will complete today precautionary inspections of the 16 Rolls Royce Trent 700 series engines on its eight two- engine Airbus 330-300 aircraft. Completed inspections have confirmed that the
engines are in normal, safe operating condition and meet the manufacturers' most recent modification standards. In addition, Air Canada reviewed today its engine records and confirmed that all of its Rolls Royce A330-300 engines were
delivered in the newest configuration.
As safety is Air Canada's first priority, the airline commenced the engine inspections on a proactive basis early this morning. The inspections will be completed by early this evening on all aircraft in the Airbus 330-300
This afternoon Rolls Royce recommended that airlines worldwide operating Airbus 330 aircraft with Rolls Royce Trent 700 series engines conduct the same inspection Air Canada undertook proactively, which involves an inspection
confirming the integrity of the hydraulic and fuel systems.
Air Canada operates one of the youngest Airbus fleets in the world. The airline took delivery of the first of its eight A 330-300 aircraft in 1999. Air Canada operates the A 330-300 on short, medium and long range flights with a total capacity of 292 passengers."
Now I'm more interested in learning how they lost all their fuel so fast. They were 7,000 lbs over and in less than an hour the first engine cut out from fuel starvation. How did it jettison so much so fast? What audio warnings did they hear or not hear? Any 330 drivers here that can hazard a guess?
Another miracle to indicate that the powers to be was watching over them is in the fact that the leaking fuel (and it must have been gushing) did not flow over any hot elements of the engine causing a fire or worse an explosion.
Whatever created the nightmare, the pilots did an incredible job bringing that bird down safely. 292 people plus the crew get another chance to tell their families and friends that they love them while enjoying dinner at home.
Rmm From Australia, joined Feb 2001, 525 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6464 times:
Thats right and not just the Trent. The following links will show you
how a cfm56-3 (737) leaves the factory and what it looks like with
all the Boeing gear installed. Sorry about the second picture, it was
the only one I could find.
Ceilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6448 times:
What you're takling about is the QEC kit - the engine accessories (gearbox, CSD etc etc) In the case of Air Transat there are very specific rules about using spacers to prevent rubbing between the fuel line and a hydraulic line which was not done. Had they done so, this situation would not have arisen.
Red Panda - you seem to have it in for the Trent for some reason - I can tell you that it's the most advanced and fuel efficient of the three Very Large engines out there (along with the GE90 and PW4000 series) - and its in-service reliability is better as well.
AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6402 times:
Flygirl quote: "Now I'm more interested in learning how they lost all their fuel so fast. They were 7,000 lbs over and in less than an hour the first engine cut out from fuel starvation. How did it jettison so much so fast? What audio warnings did they hear or not hear? Any 330 drivers here that can hazard a guess?"
Funny enough I was wondering the same thing as you, Flygirl. From what I read in the Globe & Mail a few days ago, the last time the crew checked their fuel quantity, they had 7 tonnes more than required on their flightplan. That was only around half an hour before they first reported a problem, and only about 40 minutes before they ran out of fuel. To lose around 12-15 tonnes of fuel in about 30 minutes is definitely a lot. Figuring around 25-30,000 lbs, so at roughly 7.5 lbs per gallon, that's roughly 115 gallons per minute of fuel loss. It's a lot of fuel to lose and not notice. I don't have the pressure specs for that line, but I'm told it's a 3" diameter line, and it's been reported that the crack in that line is around 80mm long (~3.1"). I'm guessing that the newspaper reporting it as a low-pressure line is probably incorrect, but even so, that's quite some leak - just think, dumping fuel takes a half hour. Sadly I think Piche's heroics are going to go through another dragging through the mud, as pilot error will probably be found to some extent when all is said and done.