cobra27
Topic Author
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:57 pm

Engine Reliability

Sat Apr 17, 2010 10:50 am

I think the PT6-44 (not sure the version) has a failure an average every 250 000 hours. Thats preety good record considering thay you may have other things that can damage the engine (like contaminated fuel, mechanical damage, bad servicing...)
PT6 reliability is well known, but I think big trubofans are even better, 777 lost a handful time in millions of flight hours.
Does anbody have any info (no mater which engine, can bo O-235, Rotax, Trents, Walters, Kuznetsov, CF6, CFM56...)?
 
411A
Posts: 1788
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2001 10:34 am

RE: Engine Reliability

Fri Apr 30, 2010 6:28 pm

Quoting cobra27 (Thread starter):
Does anbody have any info (no mater which engine, can bo O-235, Rotax, Trents, Walters, Kuznetsov, CF6, CFM56...)?

With an older type, yes.

B707-320B, owned by American Airlines had one JT3D-3B on wing for 22,000 flight hours, approximately.
A couple more data points.

Pratt&Whitney R2800CB16 radial engines used on the DC-6B, UAL had an FAA approved TBO of 3,300 hours.

Prinair, of Puerto Rico, flying re-engined deHavilland Heron aircraft (four TCM I0-520 engines) had an FAA approved TBO of 4,000 hours, with a top overhaul at 2,000.

If you privately own many (but not all) turbine powered general aviation aircraft, operated under 14CFR91, there is normally no stipulated engine overhaul period...however, the FAA does mandate hot section inspections at a specified period.

[Edited 2010-04-30 11:39:50]
 
LMP737
Posts: 4800
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: Engine Reliability

Fri Apr 30, 2010 6:53 pm

American had a CF-6 on one of it's 767's that stayed on wing for 40000 hours.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Engine Reliability

Fri Apr 30, 2010 7:59 pm

IIRC, FI (Iceland Air) holds the official Guiness Book of World Records record for engine time on wing: 56,000 hours for an RB-211 on a 757...  

Not too suprising, because, as I understand it, the RB-211 is very underworked on the 757 (i.e. the bird is way overpowered).
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
HMUcfm56
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 11:30 pm

RE: Engine Reliability

Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:29 pm

"TUIfly CFM56-7B Engine Logs 40,000 Hours On Wing Without Removal" (02/2010).
Won't be on wing longer than 48.500 hrs due to LLP replacement.

Source:
http://www.cfm56.com/press/news/tuif...+hours+on+wing+without+removal/512


The article also mentiones a CFM56-3 with more than 40.000 hrs.
 
cobra27
Topic Author
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:57 pm

RE: Engine Reliability

Sun May 02, 2010 10:03 am

Yes 60000 hours for jets is not uncommon anymore, I think even high cycle CFM made it to 60000 hours. It is a quite a reliability for commercial engine. But Lycomings and military jets don't come close
 
mrocktor
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:57 am

RE: Engine Reliability

Mon May 03, 2010 5:51 pm

Reliability and time on wing are two different things. For instance, if the engine gets removed for a planned major overhaul that counts against time on wing - but not against reliability.

Typical third generation turbofans (that meaning late 80s technology and more recent) beyond the 1 in 1 million failure per flight hour rate for the engine proper. Bringing in the related aircraft systems (fuel, control, ice protection, etc.) drops that closer to a 1 in 100.000 flight hour IFSD rate for any reason on these engines.

When talking about such extreme reliability it is not very useful to discuss numbers more precise than orders of magnitude.

[Edited 2010-05-03 10:52:05]
 
cobra27
Topic Author
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:57 pm

RE: Engine Reliability

Mon May 03, 2010 7:19 pm

Quoting mrocktor (Reply 6):
Reliability and time on wing are two different things. For instance, if the engine gets removed for a planned major overhaul that counts against time on wing - but not against reliability.

Yesm, relaibility was the issue, those engine failure checklist are almost not needed

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests