Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumbos

[johnny333]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

I have nothing to do with SIA nor have an agenda. There is a misrepresentation of facts that needed clarification. SIA is a big orgainsation and has many groups each with a differing roles within the organisation. Engineering too has many sub-divisions and in this case just to make it simple, the aircraft itself and powerplants which by itself, both has different departments. In this respect, here in this discussion is about the performance of the people in SIA Engineering. One just cannot shoot from the hip and blame SIA Engineering about other problems within the SIA Organisation which has nothing to do with the subject. Again I stressed we are not discussing the whole of SIA nor SIA Engineering but those who are involved with the RR engines, including the RR personnel themselves.

In any organisation when there are problems it can be traced to the top management.

If as you say, you have nothing whatsoever to do with SIA, then how can you defend if all you have are opinions

 

[johnny333]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

What the SIA does and the reaction of public towards that has nothing to do with the work and performance of SIA Engineering.

.

Don't know about you but I'm criticising SIA because of how they handled the engine problem, compared to Qantas.

SIA seems more concerned about the bottom line then the safety of their passengers & crew compared to Qantas.

By the way, I don't work for or have any connection to Qantas

 

[Windsor]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

In any organisation when there are problems it can be traced to the top management.

If as you say, you have nothing whatsoever to do with SIA, then how can you defend if all you have are opinions

Let us just say that whoever decides whether there is a need to ground an aircraft depends on SIA Engineering in consultations with RR, and not with the top management. Only the top management of SIA Engineering and not SIA decides on this issue. So blame SIA Engineering if you want to.

 

[Windsor]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

Don't know about you but I'm criticising SIA because of how they handled the engine problem, compared to Qantas.

SIA seems more concerned about the bottom line then the safety of their passengers & crew compared to Qantas.

By the way, I don't work for or have any connection to Qantas

I have responded (see above), and yes everyone has a right to voice their opinions. If you say I am trying to defend SIA so be it. I am trying to explain why it appears that SIA took a longer time to ground their aircraft and the group within the SIA organisation responsible in making the decision to ground the aircraft and remove the engines for inspection.

No, I did not imply your affiliation with Qantas, but I had been more or less asked why I am "defending?" SIA. Therefore I have to dispel that notion by making the statement.

By the way when you mentioned "seems more concerned about the bottom line then the safety of their passengers & crew "compared" to Qantas." let me state that the Pilot too can refuse to fly the aircraft if he believes it is not safe. I guess no one in their right mind would pilot an aircraft at the risk to his own life.

Let's agree to disagree and leave it as it is.

 

[/ASIA\]

Rolls-Royce 'To Replace Entire A380 Engines'


Rolls-Royce 'To Replace Entire A380 Engines'

5:57pm Monday November 15, 2010
Sarah Gordon

Rolls-Royce will temporarily replace entire engines suffering from oil leaks on the stricken Airbus A380s, an aviation regulator has claimed.

Qantas has grounded all its A380 aircraft since the engine fire

The official said the firm will completely remove the faulty engines and replace them with new ones while it fixes the leaking part. The engine-maker will then swap the old engine back in again. The anonymous source claims to have been briefed about the operation by Rolls-Royce and several of the airlines involved. However, Rolls-Royce has declined to comment on the alleged plans. One of Qantas' A380 planes - the biggest in the world - was forced to make an emergency landing on November 4, after leaking oil in one of the four Trent 900 engines caught fire.

We are taking our normal and extremely conservative approach to safety and will not operate our A380 fleet until we are completely confident that it is safe to do so.
​

<cite> Simon Rushton, Qantas spokesman
</cite>
The blaze partly disintegrated the engine on the Sydney-bound plane and experts say fling debris then caused further damage to the wing, causing the pilots to lose control of the second engine. The plane managed to return to Singapore and land safely, but fears have been raised about how close the fully-loaded aircraft came to disaster. Qantas immediately grounded its six A380s and reported suspicious oil leaks in three engines on three separate planes.

Rolls Royce Share Price 6-Month Chart

The aircraft, which normally operate on Qantas' most profitable routes between Australia and Los Angeles and London and Singapore, remain grounded despite financial pressure to put them back into operation. Replacing all the engines would delay their return to the skies still further. But Qantas spokesman Simon Rushton reassured passengers: "We are taking our normal and extremely conservative approach to safety and will not operate our A380 fleet until we are completely confident that it is safe to do so."

Airbus has confirmed Rolls-Royce will equip the engines with software which will enable them to shut down before an oil leak can cause disintegration. Singapore Airlines, which grounded three of its 11 A380s after checks found oil leaks in three Trent 900s, said two are back in service after engine changes and that work was continuing on the third. The release of the Airbus A380 aircraft was originally delayed by three years, but is now used by several major airlines and both Virgin and British Airways have placed orders.

 

[scroobal]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

You got into this discussion I presume to add value. Obviously you are struggling.

Once again, its a simple question - why did Qantas find the oil leaks while SIA took a few days after claiming that all was fine. Both were of the Qantas engine issue at the same time.

Don't need a lesson on maintenance cycle.

I don't understand the finger pointing nor harsh words like evade, gallivanting, but to provide some info, aircraft go thru' a series of checks (maintenance checks) throughout their operating life. In this case it is not the aircraft but the powerplants which are replaced after a certain number of operating hours. It is unusual to take down any engines before their maintenance cycle has been completed for thorough inspection unless there is a directive from the manufacturer.

 

[Windsor]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

You got into this discussion I presume to add value. Obviously you are struggling.

Once again, its a simple question - why did Qantas find the oil leaks while SIA took a few days after claiming that all was fine. Both were of the Qantas engine issue at the same time.

Don't need a lesson on maintenance cycle.

It is pretty obvious you prefer to be obtuse and refuse to see the answer. Lockeliberal has mentioned it too. If you need an answer in one sentence, there is none. Suffice to say, no airline ground their aircraft despite knowing a major incident took place until concrete evidence confirms it was not an isolated incident but a major fault/design flaw.

The report you posted mentioned similar problems faced by SIA which is not true. SIA had oil stains and the problem is not related. SIA took the precautions to ground the aircraft after consultations with RR. Furthermore, Qantas is in possession of the damaged engine and have assess to witnesses involved. As these are complex machines it is like looking for a needle in a haystack and Qantas has the advantage.

In the past one month Qantas had 3 (from reading the news)international flights disrupted due to problems and just 2 days ago another B747 had engine failure. It can be due to bad luck or some other problems plaguing Qantas.

 

[johnny333]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

I have responded (see above), and yes everyone has a right to voice their opinions. ....

Organisations like the PAP have a a culture of never accepting responsibility for failures. We've all heard the lame excuses: an act of god, lazy Sporeans, world events, ....

Let's not forget that SIA is a GLC with political appointees. I bet the same culture exists among SIAs upper management.

Everyone has a right to voice their opinion, including SIA. I haven't heard anything from SIAs that re-assure me that SIA is world class.

 

[scroobal]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

You are struggling to answer a simple single question - why did SIA takes days to find the same problem that Qantas found after the same incident?

Nobody is talking about grounding or maintenance cycle. The way you came out with your first post gave the impression that you knew a legitimate reason for the about turn by SIA after a few days.

If you do not know the answer, just be gracious and honest and say you have no idea.

It is pretty obvious you prefer to be obtuse and refuse to see the answer.

 

[Papsmearer]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

It is pretty obvious you prefer to be obtuse and refuse to see the answer. Lockeliberal has mentioned it too. If you need an answer in one sentence, there is none. Suffice to say, no airline ground their aircraft despite knowing a major incident took place until concrete evidence confirms it was not an isolated incident but a major fault/design flaw.

The report you posted mentioned similar problems faced by SIA which is not true. SIA had oil stains and the problem is not related. SIA took the precautions to ground the aircraft after consultations with RR. Furthermore, Qantas is in possession of the damaged engine and have assess to witnesses involved. As these are complex machines it is like looking for a needle in a haystack and Qantas has the advantage.

In the past one month Qantas had 3 (from reading the news)international flights disrupted due to problems and just 2 days ago another B747 had engine failure. It can be due to bad luck or some other problems plaguing Qantas.

I think now, new info has come to light with regards to the original accident. I believe Quantas revealed that the mid air explosion in the engine was so bad that it disabled the second engine as well as blew out parts of the wing panel. The second engine was shut down in flight, meaning the capt. landed the plane on 2 engines, with no power to one wing at all. I can only conclude that it was pure luck that nothing worse happened. The shrapnel could easily have damaged hydraulic lines, and if the engine had been mounted inboard instead of outboard, I am sure the cabin would have been punctured resulting in catastrophic depressurization.

What u failed to differentiate and what Quantas realised is that the engine malfuction by and of itself probably does not justify the grounding of its entire fleet. But the collateral damage to other parts of the plane was so bad in this case that, clearly, it does not warrant the risk to continue to fly it. If the explosion in the engine was contained in the engine, I think Quantas would have continued to fly their fleet. Quantas looked at the entire sequence of events before deciding to ground its fleet. SQ and RR looked at just the one event i.e. the engine explosion. Bottom line is Quantas realised what a close call they had. I find it amazing the you, RR, SQ and Luftansa would not see this.

 

[Windsor]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

I think now, new info has come to light with regards to the original accident. I believe Quantas revealed that the mid air explosion in the engine was so bad that it disabled the second engine as well as blew out parts of the wing panel. The second engine was shut down in flight, meaning the capt. landed the plane on 2 engines, with no power to one wing at all. I can only conclude that it was pure luck that nothing worse happened. The shrapnel could easily have damaged hydraulic lines, and if the engine had been mounted inboard instead of outboard, I am sure the cabin would have been punctured resulting in catastrophic depressurization.

What u failed to differentiate and what Quantas realised is that the engine malfuction by and of itself probably does not justify the grounding of its entire fleet. But the collateral damage to other parts of the plane was so bad in this case that, clearly, it does not warrant the risk to continue to fly it. If the explosion in the engine was contained in the engine, I think Quantas would have continued to fly their fleet. Quantas looked at the entire sequence of events before deciding to ground its fleet. SQ and RR looked at just the one event i.e. the engine explosion. Bottom line is Quantas realised what a close call they had. I find it amazing the you, RR, SQ and Luftansa would not see this.

Any uncontained engine blowout is very serious of course. Qantas was very lucky and so were those people on that flight.

 

[Windsor]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

You are struggling to answer a simple single question - why did SIA takes days to find the same problem that Qantas found after the same incident?

Nobody is talking about grounding or maintenance cycle. The way you came out with your first post gave the impression that you knew a legitimate reason for the about turn by SIA after a few days.

If you do not know the answer, just be gracious and honest and say you have no idea.

In what way was my first post an indication that I knew a legitimate reason for the about turn by SIA?

As stated in previous posts, I have no affiliations with all parties and am not privy to inside information. My posts was a viewpoint of an outsider, not an insider. The race to discover the actual cause of the turbine disc failure is not an issue, which you are concerned about. There could be many plausible reasons for the time taken by SIA which we can debate until the cows come home. I for one will not want to fly any A380 as I have no confidence with the aircraft or engines. However, I have full confidence with the capabilities of SIA Engineering.

 

[johnny333]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

The saga of the A380 continues. At US$350 million a pop it's going to cost RR plenty of $$$.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/nov/18/airbus-qantas-rolls-royce-engine-replacement

50% of Airbus Rolls-Royce engines need replacing, says Qantas


After explosion, Trent 900s are stripped from new aircraft on production line to keep airline planes flying


Around one in two of all Rolls-Royce engines in service on Airbus A380 aircraft are to be replaced after one broke apart during flight earlier this month, Australia's Qantas Airways said today.

A Qantas A380 flying from London to Sydney with 466 people on board was forced to make an emergency landing after a stopover in Singapore two weeks ago, when one of its four Rolls Royce Trent 900 engines blew out.

The airline has since grounded its six A380s since the incident, while its, rival Singapore Airlines, with 11 Rolls-Royce powered A380s, hashad to cancel several flights in order to remove some engines and replace them.

"We've been talking to Airbus and Rolls-Royce and we understand that the number [of engines to be replaced] is around 40," Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce told reporters.

"We've already replaced three, and there could be more."

There are 37 A380s, which have a list price of $350m each, in operation worldwide. Some 21 of those are powered by the Trent 900.

Airlines have sought to replace existing engines with newer versions since the emergency landing on 4 November.

Joyce declined to confirm an Australian newspaper report on Thursday that his airline's six A380s were likely to remain grounded until December or later.

But he did confirm Qantas wanted Airbus to replace some of Qantas's existing Rolls-Royce engines with new engines from aircraft still in production on the assembly line. The problem with the Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine is thought to develop over time, so the new engines should not present safety issues and will give Rolls-Royce time to come up with a permanent solution. Airbus has orders for almost 200 further A380s.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11782579

Rolls Royce 'may replace up to 40 Airbus A380 engines'

Damaged engine on a Qantas A380 Airbus at Changi airport, Singapore (4 Nov 2010) Rolls Royce has said a specific component in the engine was to blame for the fire

Up to 40 Rolls-Royce engines on Airbus A380 superjumbos worldwide will need to be replaced, according to Australian airline Qantas.

Qantas Chief Executive Alan Joyce was speaking two weeks after a Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine on an A380 exploded in mid-air, forcing an emergency landing.

Qantas has grounded its six Airbuses since the incident.

The Trent 900 engines are used on A380s operated by Qantas, Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines.

Between them the three airlines operate 20 A380 planes, each of which has four Rolls-Royce engines.

Mr Joyce told reporters at Sydney airport the airline had already replaced three engines on its planes.

"We've been talking to Airbus and Rolls-Royce and we understand that the number [of engines to be replaced] is around 40," he said.

Investigators believe an oil leak inside the engines may have caused the fire on the Qantas flight from Singapore to Sydney on 4 November.

Rolls-Royce has said the engine failure "was confined to a specific component" which led to an oil fire and loss of turbine pressure.

The plane was forced to return to Singapore shortly after take-off.

All 459 passengers and crew were unharmed but analysts said it was the most serious incident in the three-year history of the Airbus plane.

 

[scroobal]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

I honestly thought you knew something the way that you wrote. This is a good lesson for you to position posts to seek answers if you have no clue what is happening or nothing to offer. We all try to learn from such incidents.

To SIA's credit, it has now formed a task team to learn from this. They have been damaged by the way they handled it and they have had avalanche of criticism internally as well. The engineering prowess claim has been badly hit by this.

Singaporeans and I guess asians have tendency to save face and thus will respond positively hoping that things will turn right or they can fix it behind the scenes. This is clearly a gamble and on this occasion it did not pay. This Qantas incident occurred in Singapore and we saw the damage to the wing. Even an imbecile will know that safety is the central factor.

The U-turn is symptomatic of how we have grown up over the years. When the first floods engulfed Orchard Road, the PUB Chief gave a confident press conference and blamed it on rubbish clogging one part of Stamford Canal. An immediate clean-up was ordered. When it happened again, he was silent, the old man came out a few weeks later and blamed the changing weather pattern.

These "leaders" take such an approach because we have too many idiots and clowns within us that can't handle criticism and immediately accuse others of finger pointing. The intention is not to solve the issue but bury it and hope things will go right.

Those who built up SIA in the earlier years are upset and hurt by what had happened. Of all the Singapore entities, SIA has always been a risk taker and have always stood its ground. SIA staff are proud of this and for 3 decades refused to join NTUC thought they had the most vociferous unions. If we can't look within and come out with an honest assessment, we will be doomed. Only to led by morons and supported by half arsed voters claiming that no finger pointing is allowed.

In what way was my first post an indication that I knew a legitimate reason for the about turn by SIA?

As stated in previous posts, I have no affiliations with all parties and am not privy to inside information. My posts was a viewpoint of an outsider, not an insider. The race to discover the actual cause of the turbine disc failure is not an issue, which you are concerned about. There could be many plausible reasons for the time taken by SIA which we can debate until the cows come home. I for one will not want to fly any A380 as I have no confidence with the aircraft or engines. However, I have full confidence with the capabilities of SIA Engineering.

 

[Orion]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

In what way was my first post an indication that I knew a legitimate reason for the about turn by SIA?

As stated in previous posts, I have no affiliations with all parties and am not privy to inside information. My posts was a viewpoint of an outsider, not an insider. The race to discover the actual cause of the turbine disc failure is not an issue, which you are concerned about. There could be many plausible reasons for the time taken by SIA which we can debate until the cows come home. I for one will not want to fly any A380 as I have no confidence with the aircraft or engines. However, I have full confidence with the capabilities of SIA Engineering.

The average life span of a SIA airplane is just 2-3 years before they sell off the problematic airplane away.

Im surprise you have full confidence with a team that never work with any aging planes before.

 

[Windsor]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

The average life span of a SIA airplane is just 2-3 years before they sell off the problematic airplane away.

Im surprise you have full confidence with a team that never work with any aging planes before.

Are you sure about that? Listen up ok? SIA was the first to perform Section 41 Modification on B747-200 after Boeing. Those aircraft they did were their own and these were more than 20 years old. You have no idea about SIA and their history. Please read up Section 41 Mod and what was stated and will know what I am talking about. Then post back and confirm here.

 

[neddy]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

that is nothing. if SQ change the engine to GE, then i salute them.

RR, just another british company to die. the problem is gov dun help industries.

not like france or italy.

The UK govt has been subsiding RR. And that is where the problems lie.
The worst thing you can have is govt involvement in Business.
The UK is gone, 50% income tax killed the golden goose.

 

[aurvandil]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

What can be seen thus far is that QUANTAS has decided to go beyond the recommendations of both Airbus and Rolls Royce, whereas Lufthansa and SQ have decided to follow their directives. is one necessarily safer or better PR wise, but that is a very different issue from one one action being dangerous and another being safe.

It is hard to understand how the situation can be described as "safe" when

1) there are mutiple incidents of failure in a short period of time
2) it now emerges that almost half of all the engines need to be replaced.



Warning over 'superjumbo' engines

http://www.google.com/hostednews/uk...0lBmhAuzq2KijFvuQ?docId=N0132661290043786395A

Up to half of the Rolls-Royce engines of the type which disintegrated on an Airbus superjumbo this month may need to be replaced by the three carriers in Australia, Singapore and Germany, Qantas's chief executive have said.

Australia's Qantas, Singapore Airlines and Germany's Lufthansa fly A380s powered by four giant Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engines, with a total of 80 engines on 20 planes.

Qantas chief Alan Joyce said that Rolls-Royce had indicated that up to 40 of them may need to be replaced.

 

[Windsor]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

Such reports from the media are at best half-truths or left a lot of details, which does not really help but tend to do more damage. These engines are made up of a few modules and they are interchangeable. Separating the modules, the engineers can replace the problem module with another module but not necessarily the entire engine. Also, replacing the engines may not be the case, as it can mean that the rectified spare engines available will be put on the aircraft and those on the aircraft removed. Upon removal the engines will be brought to base workshop and undergo maintenance plus the problem module rectified. After which these engines will be put back into service and those on other aircraft undergo the same process, and so on and so forth, until all engines are replaced with rectified ones.

The impression given by the media is that all 40 engines out of 80 (why not all 80?) may be replaced, may mean to readers that new engines will be put into service. Then the old engines will be scrap? If an engine cost for example US$35 million, that will mean scrapping a lot of money. As it is, RR already has a problem fulfilling new orders, so how an they produce 40 engines on the fly?

The lack of information and terrible PR from RR is not good for SIA, one of the largest if not RR's largest customer. The reputation of SIA will be badly affected by this saga as they operate 5 RR engine models, the only customer of RR with all RR models. Ditching Pratt & Whitney and switching to RR may be a fantastic deal (an offer SIA could not refuse), but may be a decision SIA may regret if RR screws up. SIA is in between a rock and a hard place, and have their hands tied. The ball is in RR's court to make good and resolve the issue otherwise it will be their downfall. SIA made RR from being the 3rd largest engine manufacturer to being 2nd after GE and P&W relegated to 3rd. Anything bad to befall on RR will be very bad for SIA too.

It is hard to understand how the situation can be described as "safe" when

1) there are mutiple incidents of failure in a short period of time
2) it now emerges that almost half of all the engines need to be replaced.




Warning over 'superjumbo' engines

http://www.google.com/hostednews/uk...0lBmhAuzq2KijFvuQ?docId=N0132661290043786395A

Up to half of the Rolls-Royce engines of the type which disintegrated on an Airbus superjumbo this month may need to be replaced by the three carriers in Australia, Singapore and Germany, Qantas's chief executive have said.

Australia's Qantas, Singapore Airlines and Germany's Lufthansa fly A380s powered by four giant Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engines, with a total of 80 engines on 20 planes.

Qantas chief Alan Joyce said that Rolls-Royce had indicated that up to 40 of them may need to be replaced.

 

[lockeliberal]

Re: Now Singapore Airlines is forced to change Rolls-Royce engines on three superjumb

Dear Scroo

I hope this post will help settle some of the technical and operational issues that you have touched upon. Please understand that as far as possible I will try to differentiate between what is known to me personally about the technical issues at hand and secondly what is informed speculation. Lastly I claim no special insider knowledge just a position as an aviation nut case who has known people on the inside.

1. Checks on Air Frames and Engines are as far as I know divided into A' B C checks and D Checks. These are industry standard protocols an apply across air frames and engines. They are in essence differentiated by the amount of time needed to complete each check and the amount of work needed to replace parts.

2. Checks on engines apart from A Checks have to be done in a hanger. Engine Maintanence and inspection is both rigourous and methodical to ensure that no mistakes are made when it comes to safety. Lax and or poor maintanence or non standard by the book maintanence have been the cause of accidents in the past. I refer you to air crash investigation on you tube.


3. Quantas in the words of a senior executive has been extremely conservative when it came to the issue of the A 380 and the oil leaks.

4. The investigation of Rolls Royce has been quite quick in ascertaining and reporting that it was the oil leaks which were at fault for the Quantas Incident. PLease understand that an engine is an immensely complicated piece of precision technology, In so much as we now understand that oil leaks is a cause, that was not apparent when Quantas first reported the oil leaks. For example did the turbine crack hence causing the oil leak hence the fire and hence the explosion and hence the blow out, or did the oil leak cause the fire and hence the turbine crack failure and hence the blow out. If the oil leak happened where was the problem ? Oil gear box, oil pump etc etc etc. A thorough investigation by rolls royce would examine all possibilities based on the damaged engine and even that takes time.

5. Oil stains even as found by Quantas or oil stains by itself might not be indicative of a cause. Engines in service suffer performance and fuel burn degredation from their brand new specs. Oil stains in itself depending on specified area might not be indicative of cause and just excessive wear and tear which on a brand new engine is not a cause for alarm but just a cause for investigation,

6. The reason why Quantas was able to detect it faster was that they had I beiieved stopped the planes from flying and brought it into a hanger for a comprehensive strip down when the incident first happened or " extreme conservativesm. " SQ and Lufthansa had done a line check without taking it out of service. When Rolls Royce knew more and started suggesting to look for specific issues, a more comprehensive check ensured.


7. In all cases Rolls Royce has taken over the maintanence of the engine on behalf of the operators under the total care package.


Locke