Skip to comments."Leaked Images" of Qantas A380 Damage Hit 'Net
Posted on 11/26/2010 8:24:34 PM PST by The Magical Mischief Tour
A "leaked" and unconfirmed PDF document first published by Crikey.com purports to show pictures of the damage done to a Qantas A380 on November 4 when it suffered an un-contained engine failure and shed parts over Indonesia. Photos in the document show a failure that sent debris toward the fuselage, gashes in a wing, serious damage to a flight control drive motor, severed wiring, damage to a forward spar and a large fuel pipe that's torn open. (Click through for images.) The document says the forward spar was "penetrated and is damaged extensively." The photos have not been officially confirmed by Airbus or Qantas. Separately, Richard Woodward, vice-president of the Australian and International Pilots Association said of the damage, "the amount of failures is unprecedented." Qantas grounded its six aircraft fleet of Airbus A380's following the accident but announced Tuesday that it is ready to resume some A380 operations after "extensive checks with Airbus and Rolls-Royce." The airline is not ready to restart its longest A380 flights and Rolls-Royce is still busy dealing with complications the events have imposed on its supply chain.
(Excerpt) Read more at avweb.com ...
It sure looks like a damaged A380.
If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going.
If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going.
Only fly Pratt & Whitney if you want to get to your destination every time.
The gremlin from ‘Nightmare at 30,000 Feet’ has been busy.
Another spin on Rolls-Royce’s old airline slogan “take your breath away”.
CFM isn;t bad either.
isn;t = isn’t
Is this that flight that I read about that had extra pilots on it due to it also being the regular pilot’s annual checkride?
If the Airbus 380 can sustain THAT much damage from the RR engine failure and land safely, it must a pretty damn good airframe. I’ve read how the five pilots on board brought it in successfully — quite a story.
You need to look for RR engines. You want to fly GE engines instead.
"Holy Toledo !"
Anybody looking into aircraft mechanics named Mohammed?
Anytime you cut fuel lines or into a spar, that is seriously bad Ju-Ju.
Lucky they got it down.
Yes, they had a senior Captain aboard observing the plane’s Captain, and an even more senior Captain aboard observing him.
There was considerably over 100 years of experience on that flightdeck because the First and Second Officers were also quite experienced.
* massive fuel leak in the left mid fuel tank (the beast has 11 tanks, including in the horizontal stabiliser on the tail)
* massive fuel leak in the left inner fuel tank
* a hole on the flap canoe/fairing that you could fit your upper body through
* the aft gallery in the fuel system failed, preventing many fuel transfer functions
* fuel jettison had problems due to the previous problem above
* bloody great hole in the upper wing surface
* partial failure of leading edge slats
* partial failure of speed brakes/ground spoilers
* shrapnel damage to the flaps
* TOTAL loss of all hydraulic fluid in the Green System (beast has 2 x 5,000 PSI systems, Green and Yellow)
* manual extension of landing gear
* loss of 1 generator and associated systems
* loss of brake anti-skid system
* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using normal method after landing due to major damage to systems
* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using using the fire switch!!!!!!!!
Therefore, no fire protection was available for that engine after the explosion in #2
* ECAM warnings about major fuel imbalance because of fuel leaks on left side, that were UNABLE to be fixed with cross-feeding
* fuel trapped in Trim Tank (in the tail). Therefore, possible major center of gravity out-of-balance condition for landing.
Qantas A380 Sustained Worse Damage than First Thought By Gerald Traufetter
The exploded engine was scary enough. But in the days following the emergency landing of the Qantas A380 in Singapore, it has become clear just how dangerous the situation was. Multiple systems on the aircraft failed and a disaster was only narrowly avoided.
Rarely had so much flying expertise been assembled in one cockpit. A training pilot was sitting behind Captain Richard de Crespigny, who was completing his annual flight test. Sitting next to them was a third captain whose job was to supervise the training pilot. Together, the Airbus A380 operated by Australia's Qantas Airways had a total of 100 years of flying experience sitting in its cockpit. Four minutes after takeoff from Singapore, that accumulated expertise was suddenly in great demand. At an altitude of 2,000 meters (6,560 feet), engine two of the double-decker aircraft exploded. The loud bang of the detonation had hardly faded away before 53 error messages appeared on the monitors.
Upon reading the matter-of-fact messages, the five pilots realized immediately how serious the situation was. Kerosene was leaking from two of the 12 fuel tanks, which meant that the plane could catch fire at any moment.
"It was unbelievably stressful. But in a situation like that, you have no choice but to keep on going," says Richard Woodward. The captain knows what he is talking about. He also flies the A380 for Qantas, is the vice president of the International Federation of Airline Pilots' Associations (IFALPA) and has looked after the crew since the near-catastrophe almost two weeks ago. "The crew has dealt with this situation extraordinarily well," Woodward reports. "They're like horseback riders who, after a fall, are eager to get back on their horses."
Failed to Activate
The men have given him their accounts of those dramatic moments in the air. There were no warnings before the engine exploded -- no change in oil pressure, no unusual vibrations, nothing. When the explosion occurred, the captain quickly pressed an emergency button that activates an automatic extinguishing system when there is an engine fire. But the system failed to activate. "It was clear to him at that point that there must have been more damage," says Woodward.
One of the training pilots ran back into the cabin, where he saw the holes in the wing caused by loose metal parts from the turbine. As a result, De Crespigny could not dump fuel properly to reduce the weight of the fully fueled aircraft for an emergency landing. He was also unable to pump kerosene from the back to the front of the aircraft, causing it to become increasingly unstable as kerosene escaped.
The incident raises serious questions for both engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce and Airbus. "How could there have been this much loss of function?" asks Woodward.
One of the two hydraulic systems failed and important connecting cables were severed, including those leading to the outer engine one. Although the pilot could still control the engine manually, it could no longer be shut off, so that firefighters had to smother it with extinguishing foam after the emergency landing.
"This raises the question of whether the aircraft is improperly designed," says Woodward. "Apparently certain connections are not redundant; or the two cables are positioned so close together that the shrapnel destroyed them simultaneously."
The aircraft manufacturer is defending itself against such accusations. The aircraft, says Airbus spokesman Stefan Schaffrath, was "controllable until the landing," and the autopilot continued to function. "There are two separate hydraulic and electrical systems," Schaffrath adds. But some of the brakes were no longer working properly. Luckily, the pilots were able to land in Singapore, which has a very long, 4,000-meter runway.
Another dramatic aspect of the emergency landing was that an anti-lock system also stopped working. Three tires burst when the plane touched down as a result, sending sparks into the air. "And that was with two holes in the tank!" says Woodward.
At least the reason for the engine explosion is now clear. Last week, Rolls-Royce identified a defective part in the turbine, which caused an oil leak that led to the fire. Of the superjumbo jets delivered to date, 20 are affected by the problem, including three at Lufthansa. The defective engine part will gradually be replaced.
Qantas pilot Woodward is pleased that his company has made a "very conservative safety decision" to temporarily ground the A380. But he does wonder why the other airlines potentially affected by the engine defect are not taking similar precautions.
Lufthansa points out that it has such short maintenance intervals that dangerous oil leaks are bound to be discovered. But Woodward isn't convinced, saying: "Our plane had just returned from maintenance in Frankfurt, and the accident happened nonetheless." Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan
Moderator, please remove link.
I Screwed up!
Lucky the engine didn’t fall off. That can start a plane spinning due to weight imbalance and then you’re probably done.
yep...no surprise that jet engine components that explosively separate at high RPMs do considerable damage to surrounding structures. I think it is a testament to the engineering of the aircraft that the engine stayed attached to the plane at all. Jet engine turbine blades are made of some of the hardest and toughest substances that man has been able to create. Imagine what kind of force one blade exerts when ejected at 20,000 RPMs, plus...
It wasn’t so long ago that this kind of catastrophic failure would have resulted in the downing of the aircraft and the los of everyone onboard, no doubt. The fact that the wing stood up to this level of damage without complete failure is impressive, and certainly reflects a great deal of thoughtful engineering.
Amazing that the plane landed safely, isn’t it?
Does Quantas still have their 100% no crash record?
Airbus didn't make the engine.
That’s no jet crashes.
If it ain’t a Boeing, I ain’t going.
Qantas has never had a fatal accident in the jet era - since 1951 - and that record remains intact. But it's been operating since 1920, and there were a number of fatal accidents between 1920 and 1951 as well as a plane shot down by the Japanese.
And it's a rare Q word with no U - Queensland And Northern Territory Air Service.
Amazing that the plane landed safely, isnt it?
Yep amazing. I will still never travel in an airbus though
who do you think are the worst insider traders?
Airbus didn’t make the engine
Airbus is lucky the plane didn’t crash. Redundant cable systems failed and the PILOTS were still able to land the huge deathtrap. Redundant systems aren’t much good if they share the same space and are taken out together
Fortunately, there weren't four skin perforations.
“At least the reason for the engine explosion is now clear. Last week, Rolls-Royce identified a defective part in the turbine, which caused an oil leak that led to the fire. Of the superjumbo jets delivered to date, 20 are affected by the problem, including three at Lufthansa. The defective engine part will gradually be replaced.”
“...The defective engine part will gradually be replaced.”
Gradually?!!! Are they kidding?!!!
>Anybody looking into aircraft mechanics named Mohammed?
There were no warnings before the engine exploded — no change in oil pressure, no unusual vibrations, nothing.
Looks like a Moeski to me!!
Qantas Airbus A380 inflight engine failure
Update 4.40 pm - 22 November 2010
ATSB investigators examining the engine in Singapore are expected to return to Australia on Wednesday 24 November. The parts of interest from the failed No 2 engine have been removed. This includes the Low Pressure Turbine (Figure 1) module and the Intermediate Turbine module and drive shaft. The Intermediate Pressure components have been photographed and are being shipped to Rolls-Royce in the UK for detailed examination by Rolls-Royce, under the supervision of the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch.
>> “the amount of failures is unprecedented.”
Actually, no. This is what airline pilots have come to expect of RR engines. Alternative? As they used to say in the old R-2800 days: “More miles per hour with Pratt & Whitney power”.
GE is OK, also.
Yeah, and if the A380 is anything like the 310 or 320, then its a real bitch to work on too! Landing gear has the bird so high off the ground you need a man-lift just to service the damn hydraulics and fuel. I did not think they still used cables... I thought every new aircraft was fly-by-wire and servo-motors?
. . .
Same thing in the Sioux City Iowa accident of a DC-10 in 1989
I worked that disaster while at a meeting in Chicago on aircraft incidents and was flown down to work it through on teh crash team. I worked for UAL then and the experience on that plane was enormous as well. Captain Al Haynes and flight Trainer Denny Fisch (DC10 Trainer) Officer Dudley Dvorak
Here is a link to Cpt. Haynes presentation on that crash.
That it survived to land without any injuries says enough about the robustness of the aircraft.
Rolls Royce needs to do some work.
“If it aint Boeing, I aint going”
I hear that!
That’s why after many A-320 flights i’ve turned to Southwest Airlines pretty much exclusivly.
I’ve flown Airbus planes and they’ve been safe and comfortable. As for the A-380, that behemoth is flown on very long distance routes. If you need to fly for more than 10 hours, the last thing you want is to fly in a cramped plane.
See I told ya' captain, were flying tommrow and there ain't gonna be no engine changes. Those engines were designed by Americans in the 1960s. That means they use a lot of gas, make a lot of noise and are defiantly way over built."
Losing blades is not a big deal, nacelles are required to contain them, it's part of the certification process.
This was a burst turbine DISC, much heavier, no way to contain it. Disc failure is truly a catastrophic failure.
You ARE kidding, right?
This was a Rolls Royce engine failure, a new Trent 900. The Trent family has a known problem with oiling.
A few weeks ago, a BOEING 787 made an emergency landing on a test flight after a Trent failure.
So you might want to stay off Boeings too.