pygmalion
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Fri Apr 29, 2016 7:39 pm

Quoting Ncfc99 (Reply 49):

And when all that inventory delivers after the six month delay, we will see the profit figures looking good. Booking the profit in six months instead of now, annoying but hardly 'major'.

All airplane contracts contain penalties for missing the contracted delivery month and more for missing the contract delivery quarter. So moving the deliveries out 6 months is not free. Even if the penalty is only .5% or 1% its not chump change. And I really doubt QTR will waive it. How much profit do you think they make per frame?
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:12 pm

I was under the impression that airlines purchased the engines more or less directly from the manufacturer - and paid for them separately. That would mean that it is more of a problem between the airlines and the engine manufacturer than it is between Airbus and the airline...
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1686
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:55 pm

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 32):
Beside the 777 family, there is probably not a single program in the last 20 years, which did not have some problems...

Wasn't the 777 way over-budget because they threw money at the problems to ensure a on-time delivery? I have a vague recollection of it being mentioned that they spent more than double the original estimate, please correct me if I am wrong though.
 
pygmalion
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:20 pm

Quoting abba (Reply 51):
I was under the impression that airlines purchased the engines more or less directly from the manufacturer - and paid for them separately. That would mean that it is more of a problem between the airlines and the engine manufacturer than it is between Airbus and the airline...

No. The airline contracts with the builder for a delivered airplane with an included engine package. That airframe is certified with that engine and many of the airplane systems are fully integrated with that engine package. The airline will often have very lucrative spares and maintenance contracts with the engine suppliers for fleet support and even "power by the hour" where they will lease the engine after selling the engine back to the engine company at delivery but the base contract with the airframe includes the engines.
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sat Apr 30, 2016 10:00 am

Quoting pygmalion (Reply 53):
No. The airline contracts with the builder for a delivered airplane with an included engine package. That airframe is certified with that engine and many of the airplane systems are fully integrated with that engine package.

Yes. Airlines contract for a delivered, flyable aircraft.

No. That doesn't preclude some airlines and leasing companies from handling the engine acquisition in-house, specifying an engine to the air frame manufacturer, but negotiating prices, T&C's, and other packaging, including finance, direct with the engine OEM.

A & B only want to know which engine, and that delivery matches with air frame production.

Boeing tried, and still do, take a heavier handed approach with GE exclusive arrangements, which is beneficial for all but the largest operators like LH, EK and IAG group.

In the past, airlines with mega buying power have only directly sourced engines for WB aircraft, but occurring increasingly with NB.

Interesting to see if LH and QR have purchased direct, and owe Airbus for PW delays, and in turn PW owes them.
 
Oykie
Posts: 1860
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sat Apr 30, 2016 11:32 am

Quoting CARST (Thread starter):
The A320neos can't be delivered because there are major problems with the engine, there are cooling problems which apparently lead to overheating. P&W expects to find a solution until the middle of the year.

I am confident that PW will find a solution as you say for the neo, and that in a few years, this delay will just be a distant memory. While this is troubling, the engines performance seems to be beating expectations, and that was my biggest worry as the PW6000 on the A318 and the PW4098 also missed out on performance. As PW now exceeds their perfmance targets this overheating on startup, seems like an easier fix. Troublesome at the moment, but no complete showstopper.

Quoting CARST (Thread starter):
The A350 production ramp-up is going very slow because their are problems with the delivery chain (sounds like a "smaller" 787 outsourcing problem). But sadly they don't share any details with us.

It is sad that the delaying part of one of the most advanced machines built humans are a toilet seat. That being said, with all the years of experience humans have with toilets, I am sure this hiccup will also be solved  
Quoting CARST (Thread starter):
The A400M has engine problems, too. The gearbox has cooling problems and this leads to a lot of wear of all parts related to the gearbox and connecting parts.
Quoting TheRedBAron (Reply 1):
A400 the Engine is the trouble
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
Now, the A400M is interesting. I hadn't heard about that. Is this going to be a tougher one to solve?

The A400M will take time to solve. It is my understanding that the engine selection was too heavily influenced by politicals pressure rather than from an engineering perspective. MTU Aero Engines, Snecma, Rolls-Royce, and Industria de Turbo Propulsores has been "forced" to collaborate on building an engine for the A400M. The collaboration started of as Aero Propulsion Alliance and later just Europrop.

Fixing an engineering problem with political influence will take time. If Airbus was allowed to freely choose an engine, the A400M would have not been in this kind of trouble.

Quoting CARST (Reply 3):

Of course Airbus is blamed for this. They sold the a/c to the airlines or air-forces. If they have a problem with one of their suppliers it can't be the customers problem.

But in the case of the A400M, it is the countires buying the airplane, that has used so much political influence that is making it harder to deliver the airplane.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 6):
The A350 production ramp-up is bang on schedule. Airbus is building exactly the number of A350s they expected to. Interior fittings - seats and toilets from Zodiac is the issue and has been known about for a long time.

  
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3955
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sat Apr 30, 2016 4:55 pm

Quoting Ncfc99 (Reply 22):
Is it an Airbus issue. Do you know how the contracts are split? If the airlines have separate contracts in place and paid the interior and engine suppliers direct, which is becoming more common, at what point does it become the airline supplier issue rather than an Airbus supplier issue?

If one recalls that at major airshows and other press releases, the airlines select and buy the engines separately from the airframe.. Yes the contract is for a complete airplane which includes the installation and testing of the engines.. Historically the engines are bought by the customer separately (including spare engines) and recently where there is only one version offered, the OEM sometimes have been the direct buyers.
The contract for a complete airplane also includes installation and testing of ALL the BFE.. the OEM only receives and installs them. Where late BFE/SFE delivery affects the production plan is in things like lavs and galleys that must be installed prior to certain production tests and installation of interiors. Likewise there are some flight deck BFE items that will prevent engine run, taxiing, etc. Seats are a lesser problem because they are install only and that can be done away from the production line (like on the field)

Quoting Stitch (Reply 41):
Alcoa delivered fasteners per their production schedule. The issue was Boeing refused to accept that schedule and went with a production schema that assumed Alcoa would deliver fasteners sooner and in larger quantities than Alcoa said they could meet. So Boeing ended up waiting because they were ahead of the delivery schedule, not because Alcoa was behind the delivery schedule.

Of course the ME screwup of missing the deburr and clean requiring removal of many fasteners and replacement with oversizes didn't help Alcoa's production capabilities.. One thing that few realize is engineering drawings historically did not list a quantity required by fastener part number, they generally just showed a "+" where the fastener was required and the fastener type, head type, and diameter , the length was determined on assembly ( preordered by best guess of the material stack thickness) and the actual fastener numbers were counted manually.. This historically lead to undercounting which was compounded by zero waste allowance (dropped or damaged fasteners). Supposedly the newer computer drawing systems minimized the guesswork.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6891
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sat Apr 30, 2016 5:16 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 56):
the airlines select and buy the engines separately from the airframe..

  

Whatever the commercial arrangements, no-one should be in any doubt that the financial impact will ultimately end up at the engine OEM's door.

It is Pratt that have screwed up here, not Airbus.

Rgds
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3955
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 4:38 am

Quoting astuteman (Reply 57):
It is Pratt that have screwed up here, not Airbus.

good to see your name again

anyway, while I agree with your post, I wonder why the flight test program didn't pick up the deficiencies that are now surfacing.. such tests as flying the test birds out of airports at the extreme edge of the engines capabilities.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1686
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 7:33 am

Quoting astuteman (Reply 57):
It is Pratt that have screwed up here, not Airbus.

Unfortunately this will not be reported this way. I also don't think the OEMs will throw the engine suppliers under the bus if its not a serious delay either as they are pushing the efficiency more than the airframe is for the NEO.

With regard to taking the blame in public, it may just be that the OEMs can take the publicity hit better than Pratt can in this case. Who is responsible financially will be determined by contracts we will never see, but the delay will be on Airbus. The other side of the coin is, if the A320 is beating expectations it will read as the A320neo being great, not the Pratt engine. So Airbus will take the hits for Pratt now and hope that the engines deliver. If that happens Airbus will take the plaudits.
 
spacecookie
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:57 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 7:44 am

Quoting StTim (Reply 47):

I really can't understand why Airbus run into to this problems with the a400 choosing a newbee engine company who is not capable to make the engine work.

Why not choose RR?

I think we can include the a380 in the mayor problem list, sales struggle.
 
art
Posts: 2930
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 8:18 am

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 60):
I really can't understand why Airbus run into to this problems with the a400 choosing a newbee engine company who is not capable to make the engine work.

Politics - from flightglobal, 2003...

Quote:
The US Congress and United Technologies (UTC) are outraged at EADS's selection of Europrop International (EPI) rather than Pratt & Whitney Canada (P&WC) to power the Airbus Military A400M transport. They claim the decision was politically rather than price-based after Airbus had earlier stated the PW180 offer was 20% cheaper.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...blasts-a400m-engine-choice-165396/

[Edited 2016-05-01 01:27:06]
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 2207
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 8:41 am

Quoting astuteman (Reply 57):
Whatever the commercial arrangements, no-one should be in any doubt that the financial impact will ultimately end up at the engine OEM's door.

True.

It's worth bearing in mind that part of the quid-pro-quo for the large launch customer discounts, is that contracts for early deliveries (first 6-12 months or so) of a new aircraft type almost always come with wider delivery windows and smaller penalties for missed targets.

I suspect that, compared to the huge revenues that P&W are likely to generate from the A320neo program, any penalties payable for these delays, to the relatively small number of frames due for delivery so far, will be trivial.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13966
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 8:43 am

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 60):
I really can't understand why Airbus run into to this problems with the a400 choosing a newbee engine company who is not capable to make the engine work.

RR is part of this, the engine itself seems to be doing fine, from what I have seen it is gearbox issues. And with all due respect, no one else has built a gearbox like that before. The P&W had an unproven gearbox as well. It is not like Airbus has been let down significantly by P&W a number of times in the past like the A318 and A340, and now issues with the A320neo.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 1:01 pm

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 60):
I really can't understand why Airbus run into to this problems with the a400 choosing a newbee engine company who is not capable to make the engine work.

?newbee?

Creating a special purpose company is the established method here.

( same done for the Tornado ( Turbo-Union Limited ) and Eurofighter ( EuroJet Turbo GmbH ) engines. And those don't show any "newbee" problems either.

Quite a lot coop instantiations around:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo-Union_RB199 ( at the bottom open the "Joint development aero engines" enumeration.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
webuser
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:19 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 3:04 pm

Quoting LH748 (Reply 40):

Lockheed also had major issues because of the Rolls Royce engine they selected for their L-1011 TriStar.
 
spacecookie
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:57 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 4:09 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 63):
Quoting WIederling (Reply 64):

They are new to making this type of engine, they have software issues from the very beginning until now, people died in Seville because of this.

Now we got gearbox issues.
 
billreid
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:04 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 8:43 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 18):
Having a structural design issue in the wing-body join is a major problem. Having the plane grounded due to a battery design issue is a major problem. I am not sure having late deliveries for toilet doors qualifies as a major problem (and I don't see them qualified as major in the news piece quoted either).

True. But you don't address the A320 and A400 engine problems which is very very severe. Reality is the A320NEO has a costly problem and the A400 has been a disaster since day one. Will the A400 ever make money?
On the flip side Airbus could make tons of money from Germany as Merkel has failed to meet the 2% NATO guideline.
Airbus could book close to 200B in orders if the guideline was complied with. The alternative is Airbus becomes a Russian company in the near future. This has already been agreed upon between Putin and Trump. (LOL)
Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8498
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Sun May 01, 2016 9:10 pm

Quoting billreid (Reply 67):
True. But you don't address the A320 and A400 engine problems which is very very severe.

I agree calling the M400 engine problem severe, but the A320-271N? It is not a safety related problem, the false errors produced by the software is a nuisance and the 3 minutes start delay is excessive, but it is not unknown that engines have to be turned a while before starting, if solutions are in place by the end of Q2 or beginning of Q3 iwould not call the A320neo problem very very severe.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13966
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 2:45 am

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 66):
They are new to making this type of engine, they have software issues from the very beginning until now, people died in Seville because of this.

Seville was not caused by a software issue, it was caused by a people not following the prescribed maintenance procedures. They did not load and test the software per the maintenance procedure. That is like saying a computer is broken because you did not follow the instructions to load the operating system.

Quoting billreid (Reply 67):
But you don't address the A320 and A400 engine problems which is very very severe.

I disagree Bill. No new technology will ever work 100% perfectly out of the gate, we see that all the time. Anyone who expects that is living in an unrealistic world. What is important is the system and processes are in place to capture these issues, resolve them, and implement the fix. Airbus has been upfront in their press release on the issues it faces, and I am sure they are working hard on resolving them.

What is interesting with Airbus seems to have matured to a more robust development cycle with fewer issues than the powerplant manufacturers have.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Unflug
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:25 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 10:07 am

Quoting CARST (Thread starter):
German tech news website heise.de (which is quite reliable) reports about major problems with Airbus three major aircraft programs.

I do speak German. This is what is actually written in the article about the A320neo and A350 problems:

Beim modernisierten Mittelstreckenjet A320neo bremsen Probleme mit der Triebwerkskühlung die Produktion. Probleme in der Lieferkette gibt es auch mit dem neuen Großraumjet A350.

In English:

Problems with engine cooling slow down production of the modernized medium range jet A320neo. Problems with the supply chain also exist for the new widebody jet A350.

Where do you see "major problems" reported in these 2 sentences?

Quoting CARST (Thread starter):
(which is quite reliable)

Heise is a rather reliable source for IT news.

Quoting CARST (Thread starter):
I think they might all be known, but perhaps you get some new details from this news piece.

Well no, nothing new. Probably not surprising: the author of the article is a cultural scientist usually writing computer news (http://www.heise.de/ct/entdecken/?redautor=Andreas+Wilkens).

[Edited 2016-05-02 03:13:18]
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 3793
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 10:15 am

Quoting bigbird (Reply 38):
Where does Airbus store all of the undelivered planes. I would assume that LDE is one. I am sure that TLS and HAN have quite a few but the ramps must be getting full. There must be at least 25 to 30 A320 NEO s that have come off of the production line.

As far as I know all NEO's are stored in TLS and XFW exclusively, no airframe has been transferred to another airport (so far).

PS.: sorry for nitpicking, HAN is Hanoi
 
art
Posts: 2930
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 10:21 am

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 71):
As far as I know all NEO's are stored in TLS and XFW exclusively, no airframe has been transferred to another airport (so far).

Not too surprising if they don't have engines!  
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 3793
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 11:51 am

Quoting art (Reply 72):
Quoting N14AZ (Reply 71):As far as I know all NEO's are stored in TLS and XFW exclusively, no airframe has been transferred to another airport (so far).
Not too surprising if they don't have engines!

I knew that someone would answer this   .... BUT: in case of the A380 Airbus uses so called "pusher-engines" to transfer the A380s for outfitting and painting to XFW, where the "final" engines will be installed.
 
fcogafa
Posts: 1180
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:37 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 12:14 pm

I would class an issue that has delayed introduction at least 6 months and created a stockpile of airframes a 'major problem'
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 1962
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 12:59 pm

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 73):
n case of the A380 Airbus uses so called "pusher-engines" to transfer
the A380s for outfitting and painting to XFW, where the "final" engines will be installed.

An article about it: http://www.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-52954020101116
Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky. Il Drago Ruggente
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 3:00 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 58):
I wonder why the flight test program didn't pick up the deficiencies that are now surfacing..

Hi Kanban, To answer your question, I have looked up a thread called "A320npe No Pratt Engines. What Next? Pt2"

Sorry that what follows is a bit messy, but . . . .

Egerton Reply 110, posted Tue Feb 16 2016 06:16:55 your local time (2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8212 times:

The discovery of the rubbing of the compressor blades was quickly discovered during flight testing on the A320neo. If my memory serves me right, it was whilst dealing with this rubbing issue that the non heat treated seal rings came to light. So:
1. When these engines were being flight tested on a Pratt test bed 747, how were they attached to its pylon?
2. How are all the various other models of Pratt GTF engines attached to the respective new pylons of their newly designed aeroplanes?
3. How were each of these other models of GTF attached to the the Pratt 747 flight test pylon?
4. Are the big castings used in Pratt neo engines identical to those used all GTF engine models?

Egerton: Reply 114, posted Tue Feb 16 2016 17:02:05 your local time (2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7597 times:

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 113):
looking at pictures of the Pratt 747 it is clear that the GTF pylon bears no relation at all to the final mounting on the A320neo

Thanks BoeingVista. That now leaves 3 other questions to be answered before we can make final judgements.
Meanwhile, is the theory that the GTF was not air tested properly by Pratt with the correct pylon provisionally confirmed?


Egerton: Reply 121, posted Wed Feb 17 2016 02:55:01 your local time (2 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 6518 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 116):
If we believe Leduc the A320 engine is the first one to be core mounted

1. Thanks Rev. Sorry but I have not seen this comment from the Pratt chief. Are you able to source this for me? Thanks.

2. Am I correct in thinking from the pics exhibited by BoeingVista, it can be said the 747 pylon installation concept shown was not the same as the installation concept manufactured by Airbus and installed within their pylons for the A320 Pratt neo?

3. I am not much bothered which came first, the chicken or the egg (the engine's casting or the Airbus pylon). I just want to be sure it was the case that the 747 flight testing did not cover the (seemingly) necessary tasks involved with certification of the installation of the engine on the Airbus wing.

4. Do I take it that your comment the first opportunity to test it was on the A320 itself is you agreeing with my suggestion that it has been visually confirmed that the 747 was not flight testing the engines actually supplied to Airbus?

Sorry to be a pedant, but any possible misunderstanding needs to be dealt with before we move forward.


Egerton: Reply 121, posted Wed Feb 17 2016 02:55:01 your local time (2 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 6518 times:

We are all using shorthand. The particular shorthand "fan mount" or "core mount" has been used by the Pratt chief. RR used to "fan mount" its big engines, then changed to "core mount". These phrases are just shorthand to describe complex and important engineering details.

The underlying point being made and now I suggest confirmed is that the Pratt 747 test bed was not flight testing the engines actually supplied to Airbus. Thus the 'rubbing' that is causing Pratt some difficulty and which is currently being assigned to temperature differentials may have other causes. For instance, it might be that the engine case comprising castings surrounding the core may need some re-design to take the loads imposed by the Airbus pylon mounting.

It has transpired that the first opportunity to test the Airbus pylon/engine mount was on the A320 itself.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3955
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 5:54 pm

Quoting Egerton (Reply 76):

thanks for the clear summary

I'm amazed that Pratt's test pylons weren't closer to the production pylon (strut).. Has Pratt now got a production pylon on it's test rig?
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1737
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Mon May 02, 2016 10:54 pm

There are 3 AD's out on the 350 as far as I know.
1. Aileron - Electro-Hydrostatic actuator Inspection/Replacement that had an effective date of 21/12/2015, which was modified with a reissue date of 19/4/2016, because of software changes which change the procedures required
2. Engine - Compressor /shaft attachment inspection because apparently these can be misaligned in production.
3. Thrust reverser AD effective date 22/4/2016 where it was found that 2 out of the 3 locking mechanisms had failed and that this could result in in flight deployment of the thrust reverser. An event such as this brought down a Lauda Air 767. As was pointed out above this is 750 Total Cycles, not TT, but on the other hand it is only 50 cycles from the effective date.

It never ceases to amaze me that AD's are required for aircraft with huge numbers of fleet hours under the belt , so not surprising that new aircraft require a few.

Ruscoe
 
spacecookie
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:57 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Tue May 03, 2016 7:50 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 69):

Seville was a software related issue.
Since the program had problems with the enegine software from the beginning, now we got the software related incident...
I would not call this coincidence.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21362
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Tue May 03, 2016 8:13 pm

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 79):
I would not call this coincidence.

So you can't accept that the software could be constructed properly but installed improperly?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
spacecookie
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:57 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Wed May 04, 2016 11:56 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 80):

Can you assure me that there is no problem with the software ?
Software and software installation failure is nothing related?

Sounds for me like the af447 incident.
Recent air Asia crash,

Both pilot error known failures from the pitot and software issues.
This kind of things should not happen.

I don't work for Airbus or Boeing so I don't defend there failures(in this case it I sent even a Airbus problem..)
 
User avatar
Grizzly410
Posts: 220
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 8:38 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Wed May 04, 2016 12:40 pm

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 81):
Software and software installation failure is nothing related?

As much as propeller and propeller installation are. If you install prop #1 on engine #2 and vice versa on A400M you may have a problem even if you are using two perfectly build and designed propeller.
In order to be old and wise, one must first be young and dumb.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13966
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Wed May 04, 2016 12:44 pm

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 81):
Software and software installation failure is nothing related?
Quoting spacecookie (Reply 81):
Sounds for me like the af447 incident.
Quoting spacecookie (Reply 81):
Recent air Asia crash,

All 3 have the same common element, a simple failure of humans to follow published procedures in safety critical situations.

Seville - human error in not following the prescribed maintenance procedure with the installation of software.
AF447 - human error not following the QRH procedure for unreliable airspeed.
Air Asia - human error for not following prescribed maintenance procedures following 4 resets of the same system, unauthorized persons conducting maintenance procedures, maintenance procedures not written into the aircraft logbook.

When I was learning to fly IFR, my instructor instilled in me that that IFR does not mean instrument flight rules, it means I Follow Rules. All of the rules and procedure pilots follow when flying IFR are there in part from the people who were flying before the rules were written paid with their lives. My instructor said those rules must be followed, many old and bold pilots have written the rules with their blood.

Basic discipline not following rules will kill people in aviation, maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, do you know when ? The memoirs of Captain Gann, titled "Fate is the Hunter" should be in my view required reading for anyone with a safety critical job in aviation.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Wed May 04, 2016 1:03 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 83):

It would have been nice if errors in proceedings could have been exposed without a full crash.

I do know from experience that this can be difficult to impossible in some cases.
But with the rising importance of software and version mismatch this will need future work.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21362
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Wed May 04, 2016 10:21 pm

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 81):
Can you assure me that there is no problem with the software ?

I can assure you that there will be a problem with the software IF it is not installed as directed, and that's what is known to have happened in the case we're discussing.

Quoting spacecookie (Reply 81):
Software and software installation failure is nothing related?

I can assure you that there will be a problem with the software IF it is not installed as directed, and that's what is known to have happened in the case we're discussing.

Honestly, folks, the procedures were written for a reason.

Quoting WIederling (Reply 84):
It would have been nice if errors in proceedings could have been exposed without a full crash.

I do know from experience that this can be difficult to impossible in some cases.
But with the rising importance of software and version mismatch this will need future work.

As you indicate, not everything can be detected. Also, in some cases it simply is economic tradeoffs, you have to draw a line at how much time and effort goes in to "idiot proofing" things. The proper trade off certainly can be to write detailed procedures with the expectation that they get followed, especially in a "relatively" low volume, professionally maintained product such as a military airlifter. All the "idiot proofing" checks need to be designed and tested, they aren't free. You can quickly end up in a spiral of idiot checks for the idiot checks and chew up all kinds of resources in the process.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
bigbird
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:38 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Thu May 05, 2016 2:29 pm

Of the monthly production rate for the A320 right now what percentage of them are of the NEO variety? I would suspect that before this problem is fixed and they can resume deliveries that there will be more than 50 aircraft in the backlog.
bigbird from georgia
 
bigbird
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:38 pm

RE: Airbus Major Problems With A320neo, A350 And A400M

Tue May 17, 2016 4:00 pm

Any update on the situation and how many NEOs have and actually been built thus far and sitting around engineless?
bigbird from georgia

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos