SInGAPORE_AIR
Topic Author
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:07 pm

All Nippon Airways has reportedly grounded 5 Boeing 787s due to faulty Rolls Royce Trent 1000 engine parts.

Two flights ex-HND had to be cancelled yesterday.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/20120722_07.html
Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:12 pm

Bad news for RR  

And also somewhat of a setback for NH. Which flights were cancelled?
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:19 pm

Last thing boeing wants is a repeat of the A380 RR failure.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
phxa340
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:22 pm

Problem identified. Problem being fixed. Sounds like faulty parts not a faulty design. I don't really see this a setback , just another small bump in the road to what has been a pretty good EIS so far.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:26 pm

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 4):
Problem identified. Problem being fixed. Sounds like faulty parts not a faulty design. I don't really see this a setback , just another small bump in the road to what has been a pretty good EIS so far.

That is true. We haven't seen anything drastic and good thing for NH getting it taken care of when they discovered the issue.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
B6JFKH81
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:35 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:27 pm

Welcome to "teething issues" of a new aircraft type. It's going to happen. Good catch by the crews involved, and I'm sure it will be rectified soon through incorporation of various service bulletins on the engines and/or components. Best wishes to NH on a quick operational recovery from this matter.

5 out of the, what, 11 that they have? I wonder if these are early-built ones or whatnot and what the actual component is which is experiencing the corrosion issue mentioned. Also wondering if JL is experiencing this with any of their aircraft.
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22953
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:28 pm

Sounds like a precautionary move on NH's part and not a sign of any imminent flight safety risk with the Trent 1000s.
 
phxa340
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:29 pm

Quoting B6JFKH81 (Reply 6):
Also wondering if JL is experiencing this with any of their aircraft.

Considering JL has GE's on their planes , I would guess not.
 
B6JFKH81
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:35 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Sun Jul 22, 2012 11:18 pm

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 8):
Considering JL has GE's on their planes , I would guess not.

UGH....completely forgot that, thanks phxa340.   
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
 
AngMoh
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:48 am

Explanation of the issue:

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...pon-787-flights-on-temporary-hold/

Just a part of developing new technology. Annoying? ... definitely. Poor design? ... no way. Durability testing did it's job here.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11747
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:59 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):

Sounds like a precautionary move on NH's part and not a sign of any imminent flight safety risk with the Trent 1000s.

In particular with the explanation:

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 15):

Explanation of the issue:

Thank you:

"A specific gear showed corrosion due to an issue in the surface treatment at the time of production, which led to damage to the gear box. Certain 787 engines within the ANA fleet have gears produced using the same process, that may possibly lead to corrosion."

So pulled due to a poorly manufactured gear. Sadly this happens.
The Japanese are the most likely customers to catch this. Pratt had to improve their Thermal Barrier coating process and JAL would not accept yellowed parts (a normal color for the coating, but it could be bleach white). Pratt starting bin selecting parts for JAL and eventually figured out how to have an always white part. (Note: I'm not sure if the fix went into production.) The Japanese airlines want to find inconsistency to resolve issues before they happen. That is great, unless it becomes public.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 15):
Poor design?

   Poor manufacturing quality control. Good catch. Some QA agent earned their pay.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 4610
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:21 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17):
Poor manufacturing quality control. Good catch. Some QA agent earned their pay.

This seems to be a growing problem with RR. Wasn't poor manufacturing quality control the reason for QF 32?
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:26 am

Quoting poLOT (Reply 16):
This seems to be a growing problem with RR. Wasn't poor manufacturing quality control the reason for QF 32?

I'll bet you if there was a serious incident with an NH flight with the 787 on the level of the QF flight, I'm sure the FAA or IATA would be slamming the books down on Rolls Royce. Maybe they should now given this.

But at the same time, all of the other Trent models seem to be doing well, no?
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 4610
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:30 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 17):
I'll bet you if there was a serious incident with an NH flight with the 787 on the level of the QF flight, I'm sure the FAA or IATA would be slamming the books down on Rolls Royce. Maybe they should now given this.

I don't really think this is worth any slamming of books down on RR. Note that I am not suggesting that RR are unsafe or anything, and I am sure that GE and PW also have their issues as well.

By the way, what caused the the Trent 1000 to blow up on the test stand a few years back? I can't find anything about it other than the initial news reports.
 
col
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:13 am

787 and RR make great headliners, way, way, way beyond they really need to. Quiet news day in Japan me thinks.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:23 am

Quoting poLOT (Reply 13):
I don't really think this is worth any slamming of books down on RR. Note that I am not suggesting that RR are unsafe or anything,

Well if it becomes a repeated problem, you'd think that people would be raising eyebrows. Systematic engine failures are not to be messing with. I recall that PW engine failure on an MD80 which killed people from flying engine parts piercing the fuselage. We don't need that, or another QF32 to happen, which is why I commend NH for doing this.

Quoting col (Reply 14):
Quiet news day in Japan me thinks.

indeed:
"Porn star draws crowds of crazed chinese men"
http://www.japantoday.com/category/e...ed-chinese-men-like-few-others-can
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
imiakhtar
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 3:35 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:30 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 12):
or IATA would be slamming the books down on Rolls Royce

What's IATA got to do with anything?  
Whatever happened to Leon Trotsky?
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:34 am

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 16):
What's IATA got to do with anything?

Or someone in international regulations. I'm none too familiar with that stuff (and I should be)
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
CM
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:17 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:41 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 12):
IATA

I'm pretty sure you mean EASA?

In this case, the problem was detected and reported by RR without an incident. That's how the system is intended to work when bad parts make it into flying airplanes. The defective part was made by a sub-supplier to Hamilton-Sundstrand, who makes the Trent 1000 gearbox for RR. That part supplier changed a manufacturing process without properly informing RR. I doubt the regulators are going to take too dim a view of RR's handling of this.
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3786
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:26 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 2):
Last thing Boeing wants is a repeat of the A380 RR failure

I would say first and foremost ANA and RR would be the parties for which the last thing they want is a repeat of the incident on the Trent-900 engine on the QF A380.

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 3):
I don't really see this a setback , just another small bump in the road to what has been a pretty good EIS so far.

I completely agree with this.

Quoting B6JFKH81 (Reply 5):
Welcome to "teething issues" of a new aircraft type. It's going to happen.

It does, and luckily safety protocols keep flying and people safe.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 9):
Explanation of the issue:

Thank you very much for posting this. Good that RR discovered the issue themselves and informed all involved appropriately.  .
 
Ps76
Posts: 1015
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:43 am

Hi!

It is interesting. Thanks for the explanation link AngMoh. I wonder how it works regarding lost revenue from cancelled flights. I expect ANA has enough aircraft to still keep most of their booking commitments with other aircraft. But what happens if there are a significant number of cancelled flights and people that need to be flown back home etc. Does ANA pick up the tab? Do they make Rolls Royce pay or is it like when you buy a car and you've made the decision and bought the item so now you are resposible on your own. Do airliner engines even come with a guarantee and three years free servicing or anything. Or is the cost of cancellation and flying back stranded passengers covered by some insurance that ANA purchases against such events?

Anyway sorry if I'm a little off topic.

Many thanks.

Pierre
 
brightcedars
Posts: 751
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 6:18 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 12:38 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
Poor manufacturing quality control. Good catch. Some QA agent earned their pay.

And perhaps another one needs to be shown the door...
I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:03 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
"A specific gear showed corrosion due to an issue in the surface treatment at the time of production, which led to damage to the gear box. Certain 787 engines within the ANA fleet have gears produced using the same process, that may possibly lead to corrosion."

So pulled due to a poorly manufactured gear.

No, it wasn't a problem with the gear itself, the problem is with whatever the gear was coated with to prevent corrosion of the gear.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
Poor manufacturing quality control.

On the part of RR, yes.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
The Japanese are the most likely customers to catch this.

Actually, NH did not find this problem, RR did, who reported it directly to Boeing, who then informed NH.

Quoting CM (Reply 18):
the problem was detected and reported by RR without an incident.

I don't know if it is "without an incident". RR has had a lot of trouble developing the Trent-1000, and it is already into its 3rd PIP, the package-2 engines is the latest version. Don't forget that RR had a Trent-1000 explode on the test stand a few years ago, making the (then) B-787 developement program even later than it should have been. That engine incident probibly is responseable for about 1 year of the B-787's 3 year delay. Although the cause of the engine explosion is probibly unrelated (directly) to this gear corrosion problem.
 
CM
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:17 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:18 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22):
I don't know if it is "without an incident".

An "incident" is an ICAO Annex 13 defined term: http://www.iprr.org/manuals/Annex13.html#defs

Quote:
"Incident: An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which a person is fatally or seriously injured, the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure or the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible."

No incident has occurred.

[Edited 2012-07-23 09:19:29]
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19630
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:28 pm

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 3):

Problem identified. Problem being fixed. Sounds like faulty parts not a faulty design. I don't really see this a setback , just another small bump in the road to what has been a pretty good EIS so far.

Having to ground half of your fleet is more than a "small bump." Admittedly, on the grand scale of things, this is also not a huge bump (a-la A380 uncontained engine failure).

It appears as if the replacement parts are readily available and will be installed very soon.

I wonder what wrinkles will appear with the GEnX?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:14 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22):
That engine incident probibly is responseable for about 1 year of the B-787's 3 year delay.

None of the flight test planes stopped flying over that issue, no production planes were held up over that issue...how do you ascribe 1 year of delay to it?

Tom.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 2728
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:15 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22):
No, it wasn't a problem with the gear itself, the problem is with whatever the gear was coated with to prevent corrosion of the gear


These gears generally do not have corrosion resistant coatings. The gear's corrosion resistance comes from highly controlled alloy compositions, surface treatments, and lubrication - both quality and quantity. Coatings generally don't last on high-pressure faces of gear teeth.
However there are a plethora of things that can go wrong in the gear production process, from raw material composition to final machining and surfac etreatment that could introduce factors that introduce corrosion increasing factors.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22):
RR has had a lot of trouble developing the Trent-1000, and it is already into its 3rd PIP, the package-2 engines is the latest version. Don't forget that RR had a Trent-1000 explode on the test stand a few years ago, making the (then) B-787 developement program even later than it should have been


Gears in AGB (Accessory Gear Box) have little to none relation to performance output. That is 99.5% driven by pas path components. AGB have negligible effect on gas path performance.

The Trent "explosion" (which wasn't really an explosion, as much as a sudden release of excessive kinetic energy), had no relation to gears. AGB is a completely different area of expertise than what happened with the test bed mishap. That was a bearing cavity sealing problem, allowing oil to escape and catching fire, which melted a shaft connecting the turbine to the compressor. The unloaded turbine then went into humongous overspeed which subsequently disintegrated catastrophically.

Anyway, no matter how it's being looked at, it's another dent in Rolls Royce's reputation. The QF 380 incident was directly related to production quality control (not a design error). They can not afford too many of these things going on.


Rgds,
PW100
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19630
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:41 pm

Quoting PW100 (Reply 26):
Anyway, no matter how it's being looked at, it's another dent in Rolls Royce's reputation. The QF 380 incident was directly related to production quality control (not a design error).

Indeed. This is an embarrassment for RR more than it is a safety problem for anyone. What I wonder is how this didn't show up in all the hours of engine testing both on- and off-wing. How is it that this only showed up shortly after EIS?

Quoting PW100 (Reply 26):
The Trent "explosion" (which wasn't really an explosion, as much as a sudden release of excessive kinetic energy),

One might reasonably argue that all explosions are a sudden release of large amounts of kinetic energy; it need not be caused by a chemical reaction. A supernova is generated mechanically and not chemically. But that's a different (non-av) thread, I suppose.

Would you classify the Trent 1000 test-bed uncontained failure as a design fault, a quality-control fault, or something else?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
WarpSpeed
Posts: 314
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:22 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:58 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
How is it that this only showed up shortly after EIS?

There was a subsequent change in the production process at Hamilton Sundstrand. Once the issue was identified, the process was corrected.
DaHjaj jaj QaQ Daghajjaj !!!!
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 2728
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:40 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
Would you classify the Trent 1000 test-bed uncontained failure as a design fault, a quality-control fault, or something else

I'm not familiar with the characteristics of that failure, so really I have no idea. I don't think that data is in the public domain. It was previously discussed here:
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/4900648/

Rgds,
PW100
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:33 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
What I wonder is how this didn't show up in all the hours of engine testing both on- and off-wing. How is it that this only showed up shortly after EIS?

Manufacturing defects are usually found by process audits, not by in-service failure. As soon as the supplier picks up the issue they issue a Notice Of Escapement (NOE), which triggers the capture/control process.

All Things 787 has posted that 3 of the 5 ANA birds are back in service; HS/RR seem to be pretty on top of the fix.

Tom.
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:25 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
Would you classify the Trent 1000 test-bed uncontained failure as a design fault, a quality-control fault, or something else?

This was operator error, the engine was being operated outside of its design parameters.
BV
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:57 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22):
That engine incident probibly is responseable for about 1 year of the B-787's 3 year delay. Although the cause of the engine explosion is probibly unrelated (directly) to this gear corrosion problem.

Do you believe that Boeing took a year off from the 787 program when RR had an engine problem? There are other suppliers of engines for the 787....

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 24):
Having to ground half of your fleet is more than a "small bump." Admittedly, on the grand scale of things, this is also not a huge bump (a-la A380 uncontained engine failure).

This is the reason why launch customers get so deep discounts. They have to live with not receiving a mature product and must, therefore, accept the teething problems. But they have been compensated.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 2083
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:40 am

all of this is precautionary work , with a new design this is pretty normal, Rolls CAN'T lat what happened to the A380 Trent Engines happen to the 787's
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11747
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:25 am

Quoting poLOT (Reply 11):
Wasn't poor manufacturing quality control the reason for QF 32?

Sadly yes. I could have flared that joint better than what was delivered. To say the least, I'm *not* allowed to flare production joints...

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 12):
I'll bet you if there was a serious incident

This wasn't and the risk would be low. Still annoying and RR would want to catch it to maintain ETOPS.

Quoting brightcedars (Reply 21):
And perhaps another one needs to be shown the door...

and perhaps that persons manager too...   I wonder who the vendor was? RR doesn't make gears. It would have been outsourced.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22):
Actually, NH did not find this problem, RR did, who reported it directly to Boeing, who then informed NH.

Really?    Good for RR.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:48 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 34):
Really? Good for RR.

Yeah really good catch for them and it's a good thing that it didn't escalate
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3642
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:57 am

Quoting abba (Reply 32):
There are other suppliers of engines for the 787....

When the customer has bought RR, that's what the plane is built for.. yes it is possible to convert.. well at least that was in the original plan.. and it would have been the first time because normally it takes a strut change and instrumentation change or re calibrations..

Plus even if the customer said change, there were not any unsold engines in the other vendors line.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11747
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:11 am

Quoting WarpSpeed (Reply 28):
There was a subsequent change in the production process at Hamilton Sundstrand. Once the issue was identified, the process was corrected.

Uh Oh... a United Technologies company.  

I told you a vendor was at fault.  
Ok, I'm HIGHLY amused how much kit RR buys from Hamilton Sundstrand. I was talking about this with a friend last week...

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:34 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 36):

Sure. However, Boeing did not need to take a sabbatical year even if RR didn't have the Trent redy ón time. At least they could have produced the frames for the LeapX. To claim that one of the three years that the 787 was late is due to RR is less than credible!
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:59 pm

UTC shares have falled as well, seeing that the fault was with the gearbox made by their subsidiary.

Interesting, the GEnx is unaffected as its gearbox is made by Italy's Avio!

Serves RR right for choosing a US supplier  
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4820
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:16 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22):
That engine incident probibly is responseable for about 1 year of the B-787's 3 year delay.

Can you offer even a shred of evidence to support this ridiculous statement? 

While I'm here I might remind those with short memories that in the late '90s (?) Cathay grounded their entire A330 fleet because of a gearbox issue in the Trent 700. (The gearboxes were manufactured by Hispano-Suiza if I remember correctly.)

The success of the A330 and the Trent 700 and Cathay's evident confidence in both seem not to have been too badly affected by the event.

Similarly, this ANA/Trent 1000 story will quickly be forgotten.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6670
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:22 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
What I wonder is how this didn't show up in all the hours of engine testing both on- and off-wing. How is it that this only showed up shortly after EIS?

I guess the testing done on and off the wings are in a more controlled environment, no one is claiming that no testing was done so...........

Quoting abba (Reply 32):
Do you believe that Boeing took a year off from the 787 program when RR had an engine problem? There are other suppliers of engines for the 787....
Quoting abba (Reply 38):
Sure. However, Boeing did not need to take a sabbatical year even if RR didn't have the Trent redy ón time.

Unfortunately for Boeing the whole production process in place was geared towards delivering the frist frames with RR power, including testing.

Quoting abba (Reply 38):
To claim that one of the three years that the 787 was late is due to RR is less than credible!

True, but to claim that that the failure of the first engine to power the 787 did not create any delays is also a stretch.

Testing may have continued as happened in real life, but did anyone expect Boeing to deliver a production model until the engine issue was sorted out?? Thankfully for RR and GE, Boeing had a number of other issues which created additional delays, of course we may never know if Boeing also attempted to take advantage of those delays to spend time and effort elsewhere.
 
jumpjets
Posts: 1111
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:17 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:25 pm

I suspect that RRs response to the issue will be as important a factor as the issue itself.

They 'shilly shallied' [to use my 90yr old father's expression] over their response to the QF A380 engine incident and I believe lost a degree of credibility in the eyes of the public let alone the airline industry. This time the 'incident' whilst it seems much more minor seems to be tackled head on by RR and I suspect is likely to be perceived as 'one of those things' that happen with new hi-tec products and wont have a lasting effect on RR or the 787 generally.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6670
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:46 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 40):
Similarly, this ANA/Trent 1000 story will quickly be forgotten.

Hopefully, folks here still seem to remember the issues with the original GE-90 and the PW's but that's for another thread.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3642
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:47 pm

Quoting abba (Reply 38):
However, Boeing did not need to take a sabbatical year even if RR didn't have the Trent redy ón time. At least they could have produced the frames for the LeapX. To claim that one of the three years that the 787 was late is due to RR is less than credible!



If the engines are not available, and the customer doesn't want to pick up the cost of switching (remember the customer buys the engines not Boeing) and the LeapX isn't in production and wouldn't get the plane off the runway... then you have a delay. While KC135Topboom stated it as an absolute (he does that), I would say that the engine problems and resolution were part of the 3 year delay.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:50 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 41):
Testing may have continued as happened in real life, but did anyone expect Boeing to deliver a production model until the engine issue was sorted out??

The engine issue was sorted out *before* the engine let go on the test stand. As others noted, it was a procedural error. If you run an engine outside it's operating range, guess what...it doesn't work the way you expect it to.

Tom.
 
PresRDC
Posts: 512
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 1999 5:00 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:08 pm

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 39):
UTC shares have falled as well, seeing that the fault was with the gearbox made by their subsidiary.

This will not be a major driver for UTC's stock price.

The whole market was down yesterday and UTC also announced the sale of its Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne business to GenCorp (for US$150M less than UTC paid for it in 2006).
 
ferpe
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:06 pm

There is some additional info on the incident, with that at hand (and if it is correct) I am surprised that fault was handled the way it was. Here from AW:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....l/avd_07_24_2012_p01-01-479326.xml

"The particular issue affected the crown gear assembly and was caused by a change in the chemical etching process used to make the part. The endurance engine, one of several units running alongside a “fleet leader” program engine to detect issues ahead of in-service discoveries, revealed the change could lead to pitting in the part and a reduced service life."

Here a picture I had handy on the T900 (the T1000 has the same principal drive and gearbox), it shows the drive taken of the compressors and led down to the underslung gearbox:

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/ferpe_bucket/trent900u6cu.jpg


The gears in question are the angeled green ones leading the power from the compressors down to the gearbox, if it is the top one or bottom or both which are effected (which can be as they probably use the same process for both ends) is not said.

Now note the words "pitting" and "reduced service life". Anyone with mechanical engineering knowledge or who have maintained his old cars for a while knows that this is not "really" a serious condition. It means the surface of the gear gets scruffier so your wear increases and it might wine a bit after a while. In no way does it mean the gear stops working for long long long time. Actually this is way less urgent to fix then the A380 wingcracks yet ANA did ground the aircrafts without even a visual check if they had any corrosion as I understand it (and the A380 continue flying until a good time to fix the issue). To me this sound like a knee-jerk reaction, I would assume only a Japanese airline would react like this. To ground the new fleet for a possible long term wear issue seems weird to me, I would have scheduled visual inspections at an appropriate time and changed the gears at a maintenance occasion.

Anyone who knows better why they reacted like they did? Was it a RR or B recommendation to change these gears on the double? In such case we don't talk about a risk of pitting, it must be more serious stuff.

[Edited 2012-07-25 14:09:34]
Non French in France
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:14 pm

Quoting ferpe (Reply 47):
Anyone who knows better why they reacted like they did? Was it a RR or B recommendation to change these gears on the double? In such case we don't talk about a risk of pitting, it must be more serious stuff.

The inboard ("up") end of the crown gears is in very close proximity to the engine mainline bearings; those are *hyper* sensitive to oil contamination. If there's a shared oil sump in there, or really any risk of pitted material from the crown gears getting to the main bearings, that would be a reason to not even turn the engine (and obviously ground the aircraft).

However, changing out a shaft that deep in the engine couldn't be fast, and All things 787 said they've already got 3 of 5 back in service, so I don't think it's that gear.

The overall point being, it may not be the life of the faulty gear that's the issue...it may be what the metal bits from the faulty gear will do to other parts of the engine.

Tom.
 
ferpe
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: ANA Reportedly Grounds 5 787s Re: RR Engine Parts

Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:31 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 48):
The overall point being, it may not be the life of the faulty gear that's the issue...it may be what the metal bits from the faulty gear will do to other parts of the engine.

Thanks, makes sense. I just so happens I have a picture of the T900 oil systems as well  (how could that be, was there some trouble in this section? At the area where the black arrow is?   ).



This is the T900 seen from the underside and it seems the engine, gear drive and gearbox share the same oil system, one can see the oil feeds to the crown wheel areas. Then your comment around the pitting makes 100% sense, it is contamination of the oil system which is the issue, not the gears and their function. Any damage to any of the main bearings is VERY expensive to fix so then it makes sense to be cautious and get this under control immediately.

[Edited 2012-07-25 14:36:03]
Non French in France

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aircellist, eicvd, Fiend, Google Adsense [Bot], kgaiflyer, khi747, KLDC10, laxman, MEA-707, miaami, mildaiv, PhoenixVIP, qf002, StTim, teahan, thijs025, United1, xiaotung, Yahoo [Bot] and 274 guests