Archive for the ‘Engineering’ Category

Further Boeing Dreamliner delays and Rolls Royce shares feeling the heat

November 7, 2010

Over 25 million shares were sold on Thursday and Friday as Rolls Royce shares plummetted from 654p to 591p as their problems with the Trent 900 engines for the Airbus A380 and with the RB211-524 engines for the Boeing 747 became apparent.

Further delays of the Boeing Dreamliner which is to use the RR Trent 1000 engines were reported causing speculation that some of these delays were due to delays with the engine.

Boeing Co.  has told several of its early customers that delivery of the 787 Dreamliner will be delayed by as long as 10 months, Aviation Week reported Friday, citing industry sources. Korean Air will receive its first 787 in August 2012, 10 months later than planned. Air India, previously slated to receive the plane in April 2011, will get it in September or October of that year.

Boeing has said it intends to make the first delivery of the plane to All Nippon Airways in the middle of the 2011’s first quarter, according to reports.

Aviation news website FlightGlobal.com reported Thursday that Japan Airlines Corp. had expected to receive its first 787 delivery in March 2011, will now get the plane in June 2011.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=comm&id=news/awx/2010/11/05/awx_11_05_2010_p0-267220.xml&headline=Boeing%20Tells%20Carriers%20About%20More%20787%20Delays

Three more RR Trent 900 engines removed from Qantas A 380’s after testing

November 7, 2010

The Age reports that Qantas has removed three more Rolls Royce Trent 900 engines on A380’s parked in Sydney and Los Angeles after putting them through 8 hour tests recommended by Rolls Royce.

 

Engine trouble: An Airbus A380's Rolls-Royce engine.

Engine trouble: An Airbus A380's Rolls-Royce engine. Photo: Reuters via The Age

 

QANTAS has found issues with three more Rolls-Royce engines on its grounded Airbus A380 fleet that have required their removal from the wings, dashing the prospect of an early return to the skies.

Two of the engines taken off for closer inspection were on an A380 parked in Sydney and one is from a craft in Los Angeles. They were removed after the eight-hour tests Rolls-Royce recommended for each engine after the fleet was grounded.

The airline has one A380 in Singapore under investigation, one in Germany for servicing, one in Sydney and three in Los Angeles undergoing checks in the wake of the mid-air engine explosion last Thursday.

While Qantas will not say what the nature of the engine issues are, or whether the three engines are being examined for the same or different matters, the concern was sufficient to warrant their removal from the wings.
There is a disturbing silence from Rolls Royce and also from Singapore Airlines and Lufthansa who with Qantas use Trent 900’s on their A 380 aircraft.

Does the fault lie with Rolls Royce or with the RR / Qantas combination?

November 6, 2010

Between August 30th and November 5th there have been at least 4 engine incidents involving a Rolls Royce engine causing a shut down of one engine and an emergency landing.

  1. August 30th QF 74, Boeing 747-400, RR RB211-524 engines, returned to San Francisco after one engine exploded, holes found in engine casing
  2. September 28th, SQ 333, A380-800, RR Trent 900 engines, returned to Paris after  one engine failed, two and a half hours after take-off.
  3. November 4th, QF32, A380, Trent 900 engines, return to Singapore after one engine exploded over Batam shortly after take-off
  4. November 5th, QF6, Boeing 747-400, RR RB 211-524 engines, returned to Changi, Singapore after one engine failed shortly after take-off.

Four incidents with engine failure in just over two months is quite out of the ordinary. All incidents involve Rolls Royce engines, three incidents involve Qantas aircraft, two were with Airbus A 380 aircraft and two with Boeing 747-400 jets. All of the incidents were soon after take-off (though the Singapore Airlines incident was 2.5 hours after take-off). Two of the incidents were “uncontained”, catastrophic engine failures (both Qantas) and the other two engine failures involved – by witness accounts – oil leaks and/or fires but no “uncontained explosions”. It is not clear whether in the latter 2 cases the engines were shut down or failed.

  • The proximity to take-off suggests maintenance issues but two different airlines were involved (though it seems that Rolls Royce are still responsible for maintenance of the A 380 Trent 900 engines).
  • Rolls Royce engines are used by many airlines and on many different aircraft types. It appears therefore that aircraft type is not the issue.
  • Rolls Royce engines and perhaps some design fault (since even the RB 211 engines which failed on the Boeing 747s had some Trent features) looks like the prime culprit,
  • the Rolls Royce Trent/ Qantas combination seems particularly prone to incidents.

In order of probability then the engine failure issue would seem to be caused by a Rolls Royce Trent design fault (which has then been introduced also into some of the RB 211-524’s powering the B747-400s), or some fault arising from the Qantas / RR Trent combination, or a maintenance issue specific to Rolls Royce’s maintenance organisation or a more general maintenance issue.

It is a tribute to engineers and engineering and safety standards that these 4 incidents led to no injuries whatever and were followed by perfectly safe landings even after the loss of one engine.

But a little more communication and information from Rolls Royce is called for. Singapore Airlines is also very tight with releasing any information about its incident. It is insufficient and inappropriate for Singapore Airlines to brush it off as a non-event. Lack of information only suggests something is being hidden.

And what of the Trent 1000 for the Boeing Dreamliner?

Discovery’s final mission delayed till end November

November 6, 2010

 

Space Shuttle Discovery approaches ISS for doc...

Discovery approaching ISS:Image by TopTechWriter.US via Flickr

 

BBC News:

The final mission of the space shuttle Discovery has been postponed again because of a fuel leak. After 26 years of service, the vehicle is due to make one last flight to the International Space Station (ISS) before being retired to a museum. Escaping hydrogen detected midway through fuelling left Nasa no choice but to stand Discovery down once more.

The agency is now planning a launch date on 30 November, to give plenty of time to fix the leak. Nasa has simply run out of time in the current launch window, which ends on Monday. There then follows a three-and-a-half-week period of unfavourable sun angles at the orbiting platform that make a docking very difficult because of the heating experienced by an approaching shuttle. The leak occured at the ground umbilical carrier plate, an attachment point between the external tank and a 18cm pipe that carries vented hydrogen safely away from Discovery to a flare stack, where it is burned off. Discovery’s six astronauts had yet to board the spaceplane when the leak was detected. When the ship does get up, she will deliver a storeroom to be attached to the ISS, along with much needed supplies and spares.

Discovery is the oldest of the surviving ships. First launched in 1984, it has since completed 38 missions, travelling some 230 million kilometres in the process. Its commander on the final mission, Steve Lindsey, says Discovery is probably the most important of three remaining shuttles. “It is obviously a very historical vehicle, having flown the ‘return to flight’ test missions after both the Challenger and Columbia accidents,” he said. “It deployed Hubble (and) it’s the fleet leader in terms of number of flights – it’ll have flown about a year on orbit by the time we’re done with it, which is pretty remarkable for a space shuttle.”

After Discovery returns, only the Endeavour shuttle has a firm date to launch, in February next year. Atlantis could fly in June if the budget allows. Beyond that, American astronauts will use Russian Soyuz rockets to get into space until a range of commercial US launch systems are introduced in the middle of the decade.

Robonaut 2, a dexterous, humanoid astronaut helper, will fly to the International Space Station aboard space shuttle Discovery on the STS-133 mission.


More woes for Rolls Royce?: Now a Qantas B747-400 in engine scare

November 5, 2010

BBC news has the story:

A Qantas airline jumbo jet has been forced to return to Singapore because of an engine problem. The Boeing 747-400 turned back shortly after take-off from Changi Airport, airline officials said. It comes a day after a Qantas Airbus A380 was forced to make an emergency landing in Singapore after one of its engines exploded. Qantas grounded its six-strong fleet of A380s and an investigation is under way into what caused the failure.

The latest incident affected Sydney-bound flight QF6, which managed to land safely. “Shortly after take-off the captain experienced an issue with one of its engines,” a Qantas spokeswoman said.

Qantas Boeing 747-400’s are usually equipped with 4 Rolls-Royce RB211-524G-T engines of the type which suffered an in-flight failure in August this year.

 

A Qantas jet was forced to turn back to San Francisco after a hole was blown in the shell of the engine.

Flight QF74 failure of RB211-524 engine in August 2010: Photo: Channel Ten

 

Battle lines are being drawn: EADS + Airlines versus Rolls Royce

November 5, 2010

After yesterdays midair failure of a Trent 900 engine on a Qantas Airways A 380 flight the German press today are unanimous in blaming Rolls Royce (and thereby protecting Lufthansa and EADS). Qantas is also positioning itself and questioning Rolls Royce’s engine design.

Der Spiegel writes:

‘Airbus and Qantas Are Victims’ of A380 Engine Problem

While the incident may be damaging to Airbus, German editorialists argue that the Rolls-Royce engine is to blame.

But I think the airlines (Qantas, Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines) and the manufacturer of the Airbus A380 (EADS) cannot so easily paint themselves as victims and absolve themselves of all responsibility. It is the airlines who pressurise the engine makers and the aircraft manufacturers for never ending improvements in fuel efficiency. EADS can ill-afford to market a plane which does not have more than one engine supplier.

Der Spiegel continues:

Qantas Airways CEO Alan Joyce said on Friday that it did not seem to be a maintenance problem. “This is an engine issue and the engines have been maintained by Rolls-Royce since they were installed on the aircraft,” he told a news conference in Sydney. Joyce confirmed that the engine failure had caused damage to the plane’s wing. “That was part of what made this a significant engine failure,” he said.

The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

“The problem is not that one of the Airbus A380’s engines failed. … What makes the emergency landing such a serious incident is that parts of the debris damaged the wing. … Rolls-Royce, the manufacturer of the engines, now has to ensure that such a thing never happens again, even if this means that the A380 is grounded for a time.”

“Airplane manufacturer Airbus, as well as the airline Qantas, are the victims here. Yet the failed engine will not do their image much good, following the dramatic images of the damaged aircraft that were seen around the world on Thursday.”

“The A380 was two years late coming to the market. The delay cost the company billions, caused an internal revolution and undermined confidence. … Yet, despite all the criticism, one must not forget that the airlines and passengers praise the aircraft: A380 flights, despite somewhat higher ticket prices, are always full.”

The Financial Times Deutschland writes:

“The engine blow-out on the Airbus A380 that forced the Qantas flight to conduct an emergency landing on Thursday is above all a problem for the engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce.”

“The disaster highlights the dilemma that the entire industry faces. … The necessary and correct demand to make modern aircraft with lower emissions is taking its toll.”

“No one would imply that the testing was consciously sloppy. However, it is obvious that when it comes to a flagship aircraft like the A380 there is immense pressure to get it on the runway as soon as possible. Those who demand more tests do not make any friends. The close call shows, however, how much is at stake.”

In the meantime Singapore Airlines has resumed A380 flights following checks of the aircraft’s engines, despite the head of Qantas saying a design fault may be to blame for yesterday’s engine failure on one of the Australian carrier’s A380s.

Shares of Rolls-Royce Group PLC continued to get battered by the market, losing another 2.7% over fallout from the midair failure of one of its engines on a Qantas Airways flight. They lost 3.3% in value yesterday.


Trent 900 vs. GP7200: Competitive pressures getting too hot?

November 5, 2010

There are only two engines suitable for the A 380 – Rolls Royce’s  Trent 900 and its rival the GP7200 manufactured by the General Electric/Pratt & Whitney Engine Alliance.

Nov. 2012- Image updated: from http://www.enginealliance.com/engine_features.html

Engine Alliance GP7200: image http://www.enginealliance.com/

It is highly unlikely that the aircraft industry would ever allow a situation to arise where there was only one supplier of engines. A monopoly is something to be avoided at all costs in any purchaser / supplier arrangement. It follows that for the airlines and the airplane manufacturers that the market (in this case the number of A 380s) be split between the two suppliers such that:

  1. neither supplier gains a dominant market position such that it can dictate the engine price,
  2. each supplier has a large enough market share and sufficient earnings such that their continuation in the market is not jeopardised (for the sake of spares, service, development of new engines and, above all, to avoid a monopoly situation arising by the exit of one supplier).

Trent 900 cut away: epower-propulsion.com

If either engine supplier has an uncompetitive product – whether for price or for performance – the monopoly becomes inevitable and immediately jeopardises the continuation of the market itself. So if only one engine supplier was available, the A 380 itself becomes non-viable.

In this restricted market place, it would seem, a win-win situation should not be impossible. Yet the competition between the protagonists is intense and the technology boundaries are under constant pressure as each supplier tries to gain a competitive edge over the other. Each engine manufacturer knows that he will not be permitted to gain a market-dominant position. But the costs of engine development are so high that every little gain in market share is hotly pursued.

For the airline industry, fuel cost is a dominating cost element and even minute gains in fuel efficiency are well worth pursuing. The intense competition between the two engines for the A 380, is centred around fuel efficiency. The GP7200 is generally thought to have a 1% advantage. It also seems to be the strategy for the U.S. engine makers to constantly maintain this performance gap over their competitor as each tries to improve performance. The Trent 900 has a slightly higher thrust(about 3%) and prices are, of course, a closely guarded secret.

For fuel efficiency therefore it seems that Rolls Royce is playing catch-up. To get a decisive advantage each new improvement must be sufficient to go past the competitor – who in turn will introduce improvements to regain his advantage. But fuel efficiency is not easily gained.

  • Higher temperatures can give improved efficiency but lead to the need for new materials to handle the higher stresses at the higher temperatures,
  • reduced clearances can reduce leakage losses and increase efficiency but require increased manufacturing accuracy and can increase the possibilities of wear
  • more complex designs are devised where component positions can be changed during operation to optimise efficiency at different operating conditions but which increase the possibility of unwanted contacts within the engine.

That this competitive pressure leads to innovation is – I think – beyond doubt. But the Trent 1000 has had an “uncontained” explosion on the test bed. The Trent 900 has had one in flight.

The question that comes to mind is whether the competitive pressure and the quest for fuel efficiency has led to “too much – too quickly” for the Trent ?

Lufthansa grounds one A 380 flight – plans to fly normally today

November 5, 2010

Lufthansa grounded its A380 scheduled to depart Frankfurt for Johannesburg on Thursday while it checked the Trent 900 engines, and instead used an A340-600 on the route, spokesman Boris Ogursky said. Lufthansa plans to fly the A380 from Frankfurt to Tokyo as scheduled on Friday, he added.

Qantas has extended its grounding of its A 380 fleet by at least another day.

Singapore Airlines has “delayed” all A 380 flights for extra engine checks.

The mid-air engine explosion that grounded Qantas and Singapore Airlines A380s was the third emergency linked to the Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine. Two months ago, a Lufthansa A380 had to shut down one of its four Trent 900 engines shortly before landing at Frankfurt due to concerns about a change in oil pressure. Another Rolls-Royce-powered A380, this time operated by Singapore Airlines, was forced to turn back after leaving Paris in September last year because of an engine malfunction.

 

Rolls Royce and EADS shares take a beating

November 4, 2010

London South East reports on the aftermath of Qantas grounding its A 380 fleet and Singapore Airlines delaying all A 380 flights for extra checks of the their Trent 900 engines:

Shares in Rolls-Royce fall 3.2 percent after Qantas Airways suspends flights of its Airbus A380 fleet after the failure of a Rolls Trent 900 engines triggers an emergency landing in Singapore.

Shares in Airbus parent EADS were 3.7 percent down after what is one of the most serious incidents for the world’s largest passenger plane in three years of commercial flight.

‘If it is a design fault on the engines it would be embarrassing because Rolls is the number two engine manufacturer in the world and has a fantastic reputation,’ says BGC Partners senior strategist Howard Wheeldon.

‘These type of things take a fairly lengthy time to investigate,’ he said, adding that ‘it will be costly to address those issues’ if it is a serious fault with the engine.

The intense competition between the two engines for the A 380, the Trent 900 and its rival the GP7200 manufactured by the General Electric/Pratt & Whitney Engine Alliance is centred around fuel efficiency. The GP7200 is generally thought to have a 1% advantage. It also seems to be the strategy for the U.S. engine makers to constantly maintain this performance gap over their competitor as each tries to improve performance.

From Aviation Week:

Of course Rolls-Royce disputes the existence of that fuel-burn performance lead and says its improvement plan for the Trent 900EP (enhanced performance) will lead to more substantial efficiency modifications by around 2013. Still in the early stages, these plans will incorporate advanced technology from the most recent iterations of the Boeing 787’s Trent 1000 and the Trent XWB for the A350.

The core of the package will be the introduction of elliptical leading-edge modifications throughout the entire compression system, including improved high- and intermediate-pressure (HP/IP) compressor blades and vanes. The modification, which also applies to the fan and outlet guide vanes, improves flow interactions by altering boundary layer thickness and increasing laminar flow. The changes are similar to elliptical leading-edge modifications made to the HP compressor introduced recently to International Aero Engines’ V2500 in the SelectOne program, as well as the Trent 700EP. The elliptical feature also is part of the baseline fan design for the Trent 1000 and XWB.

“The package includes tweaks to the air management system, and that also affects fuel burn,” says Crawford. “We’re very confident in being able to achieve the 1% post-2011. The program is already defined, the detailed design is being done and bits are in manufacture. Testing is next year and will cover maturity modifications to upgrade areas we’ve seen on early engines.” These include “potential ‘wear out’ areas we want to address, such as seal segments and optimized tip clearance.”

As with the Trent 700EP, the 900EP enhancement will be offered as an upgrade kit for existing engines. “The modifications are all optional and are completely interchangeable. You will get the full 1% if you install all the parts,” says Richard Keen, Airbus programs marketing director. “From 2011 this will be the production standard for all new Trent 900 orders,” he adds.

With the problems being experienced by the Trent 900 and also with the Trent 1000 for Boeing’s Dreamliner, one obvious question is whether the cut-throat competition for fuel efficiency is leading to a trade-off between efficiency on the one hand and reductions in clearances and compromises on wear considerations on the other.

Update! Singapore Airlines delays all A 380 flights for extra engine checks

November 4, 2010
Rolls-Royce Trent 900 on the prototype Airbus ...

Trent 900: Image via Wikipedia

Update!

After earlier saying they would continue all flights normally, Singapore Airlines Ltd. has delayed flights on Airbus A380 planes after engine trouble forced a Qantas superjumbo to make an emergency landing at Changi Airport. “Our engine manufacturer Rolls Royce and aircraft manufacturer Airbus have advised us to conduct precautionary technical checks on our A380 aircraft, following today’s incident involving another operator’s A380,” Singapore Airlines said in a statement late Thursday evening. “Resulting from this development, Singapore Airlines will be delaying all flights operating our A380 aircraft.”