Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The Larger The Engine The Larger The Trouble  
User currently offlineRabenschlag From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 1018 posts, RR: 0
Posted (13 years 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 910 times:

maybe thats a bit off topic. but the crash of the AA A306 made me ask myself whether there is a relation between engine size and the potential damage the engine does to the plane if theres a failiure.

sometimes, blades of the fan come off and damage the plane. take the UA DC-10, in sioux city. there the no2 engines blade came off and damaged hydraulic linings causing the crash landing. the larger the engine the larger the damage?

take vibrations that might be caused by the moving parts getting out of balance. the lager the engine the more damage?

take the case that an engine fails during take off. the force pushing the plane in one direction (the spin) will be the larger if the failing engine is larger.

and, of course, if the whole engine falls off the plane, might it cause more damage if it is larger?

im not sure. could it be that large engines are unsafer than small ones?

regards, rabenschlag




9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAFC_Ajax00 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (13 years 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 858 times:

I do not agree, for newer engines are larger and use techniques aqquired from years of experise so theyare very modern and safe.


Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward; for there you long to return
User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 836 times:

Look at the problems GE had with their newly designed GE90 engine for the 777?

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 820 times:

There have been a number of instances of uncontained failures of "small" engines like on DC-9s as well. What HAS changed is engine manufacturers testing the engines to ensure (as much as physically possible) that in case of a complete engine self-destruct, like all the fan blades breaking, that all the pieces remain within the casing. I understand that the 777's engines were designed that way, and that is a huge undertaking, considering the size of the engine.

The A300's engines are of an older generation, so perhaps it wasn't built to contain such failures as well (?)

By the way, the A300 that crashed had CF6-80C2A5 engines. The Sioux City DC-10 that blew the engine had an older version of the same engine, the CF6-6D.

Charles


User currently offlineVS744 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2001, 677 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (13 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 806 times:

If a blade breaks, and the turbines move off centre - i.e out of balance, surely the momentum of this could have caused the engine (still intact) to shake violently side to side until it either ripped off the safety bolts, or the section of the wing?

Thats my theory from now on.

This would explain why:
a) the engine came off
b) the wing was damaged
c) there was no explosion....


User currently offlineB757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (13 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 800 times:

Tedski must really be loving all the anti-GE stuff going around right now.

When I have the time this afternoon, I'll find plenty of incidents involving P&W and RR engines.



"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
User currently offlineMxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 35
Reply 6, posted (13 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 796 times:

I don't agree. Take the case of the DL MD80 series aircraft a few years back that suffered an uncontained engine failure and a piece of the compressor section perforated the cabin and killed two pax sitting in their seats. Larger engines do NOT necessarily mean larger problems!


DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
User currently offlinePenguinflies From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (13 years 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 741 times:

IMO, larger engine is better.

GE and PW produced videos where they blew a random blade-at takeoff power-from the root and how it was contained.

the 777 engines are also derated on some, if not all airframes.

Also isn't a engine failure on an MD-80 easier to fly than a Boeing or Airbus due to the fact that the placement of the engines from the lateral axis lessens the yaw?


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5913 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (13 years 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 718 times:

I don't like GE.

But I will say that the NTSB has said that there is NO evidence of Catastrophic Uncontained Engine Failure- CUEF.

If AA would stick with Pratts, we'd all be happier fliers.

Okay, so that is bullcrap.

I really think that the pylon snapped, and the departing engine impacted the fuselage, causing the glued-on tail section to snap off.

Just a theory.

Randy


User currently offlineBoeing757fan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 705 times:

The 777 engines are the largst, and are by far, more safer than anything else out there.



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...
The Larger The Airline The Worst The Meal? posted Fri Mar 30 2001 19:04:01 by Jm-airbus320
The Day For EDI And The A380 Is Finally Here! posted Fri Aug 28 2009 12:22:14 by Bochora
The Curious Case Of The A340 And The Nose Gear. posted Wed Aug 5 2009 07:16:05 by SU27COBRA
Why Is ATL The Busiest Airport In The World? posted Tue Aug 4 2009 18:40:49 by JetBlue777
Are DL And CO The Only Operators Of The 767-400? posted Fri May 29 2009 13:54:17 by Flaps30
What Is The Youngest 757 In The USA? posted Mon Apr 27 2009 08:31:10 by 727LOVER
The 717...what Was The Point? posted Sat Apr 25 2009 02:19:10 by DocLightning
The Crew DID Buy The Fuel For BN502 posted Mon Apr 13 2009 06:08:41 by Isitsafenow
The Beach Is Just The Beginning: Caribbean 62 posted Mon Mar 30 2009 15:56:59 by Caribbean484
What Are The Blue Planes On The FlightAware Map posted Fri Feb 13 2009 14:11:54 by Contrails15