Posts Tagged ‘Airbus A380’

Rolls Royce faces 3 different engine issues as Singapore Airlines changes engines on 3 A 380s

November 10, 2010

It seems that Rolls Royce are facing  issues with three different engines; the Trent 900 for the A380s, the RB211-524s having Trent features and the Trent 1000.

Singapore Airlines are grounding three of their A380s for engine change-outs as a precautionary measure.

AFP:

Singapore Airlines (SIA) said Wednesday it had grounded three Airbus A380 planes to carry out “precautionary” engine changes following a mid-air engine failure on a Qantas-operated superjumbo. “Based on further analysis of inspection findings as the investigation into last week’s incident involving another operator’s Airbus A380 is progressing, Singapore Airlines will be carrying out precautionary engine changes on three A380s,” the carrier said in a statement.

An SIA spokeswoman told AFP that Rolls Royce had advised the carrier to change the engines after tests showed oil stains on them. “We were advised by Rolls-Royce in particular that these three engines had signs of oil stains,” she said, stressing the issue was different from the problem that affected the Qantas A380 plane last week.

The three planes are now in London, Sydney and Melbourne pending the engine changes, and SIA could not confirm the duration of their grounding nor the cost of replacing the engines.

My simplistic view of what is certainly a very complicated picture is that there are certain operating conditions at which the Trent 900 is subject to oil leaks (possibly because some oil carrying pipes are susceptible to vibration based cracks). These operating conditions are probably when the Trent 900 is being “pushed” close to maximum thrust conditions and Qantas’ method of operation has these engines operating at these conditions for more of the time than other airlines. This mode of operation probably occurs more often at or soon after take-off.

Even though Rolls Royce has said that the issues with the Trent 1000 are entirely different and have been fixed, there remains the issue of whether the Trent based improvements when introduced into the RB211-524 engine also creates a “dangerous” operating zone.

It seems to me that Rolls Royce is wrestling with at least 3 different engine issues:

  1. with the Trent 900 for the A 380’s, especially at high-thrust conditions which Qantas uses more than other airlines,
  2. with the RB211-524 (xT) where the (T) represents the use of Trent features and used mainly in Boeing 747-400’s, and
  3. with the Trent 1000 for the Boeing Dreamliner where some issues have been fixed but where delays are still in the air.

I have no doubt that they are going to get fixed but the direct cost will be high and my guess is that Rolls Royce will have to bear the brunt of the cost with some costs incurred by Qantas for their own fleet. It will need the sale of many Trent 900s before Rolls Royce can amortise all the development and “teething” costs for this engine. It is of some small comfort that the number of engines to be “fixed in the field” is relatively small. The costs for Airbus will be mainly indirect for the loss of reputation and for some lost opportunities. But the A 380’s ability to land safely even after one wing was heavily damaged is not unimpressive.

Damage to Qantas A380 aircraft was more severe than thought

November 9, 2010

The Australian:

New suggestions have emerged that a spectacular engine failure near Singapore last week caused more damage to the plane involved than first thought. The No 2 engine’s violent disintegration ripped a hole through the Airbus A380’s left wing, destroying wiring that prevented the pilots from turning off the No 1 engine and causing a fuel leak. Suggestions have now emerged that there was also significant damage to hydraulic systems that prevented spoilers, panels on the wing that create drag to slow the plane down, from deploying.

 

The wrecked engine after the plane landed in Singapore.

The wrecked engine after the plane landed in Singapore.

 

The suggestions came as the Australian Transport Safety Bureau yesterday interviewed the flight crew of the stricken A380 and performed the first boroscope inspection of the Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine. Investigators are continuing their search for the rest of a turbine disc that broke up in the incident and have set up a schedule for examining a recovered piece that has been sent to Britain for forensic tests.

Inspections of the grounded planes continued yesterday amid suggestions European regulators were poised to issue an airworthiness directive on the checks.

With this amount of damage to the wing it is a tribute to the pilots and to the Airbus A380 aircraft that the landing in Singapore was as smooth as it was and with no injuries at all.

Rolls Royce has said that the issues are specific to the Trent 900 and there are further indications that the issues may be specific to the engines as used by Qantas.

Meanwhile

Rolls-Royce says that the uncontained engine failure on a Qantas Airbus A380 en route from Singapore to Sydney on November 4 “is specific to the Trent 900. We can be certain that the separate Trent 1000 event which occurred in August 2010 on a test bed in Derby is unconnected,” Rolls-Royce said in a statement yesterday. “This incident happened during a development program with an engine operating outside normal parameters. We understand the cause and a solution has been implemented.”

The engine maker added that it would provide a further update on the investigation with its interim management statement on November 12.

Something amiss with the Qantas version of the Rolls Royce Trent 900 engines

November 8, 2010

Singapore Airlines has just announced, according to Reuters, that it had completed engine inspections on all its Airbus A380 aircraft and did not find any issues of concern.

“We have completed the engine inspections on all our A380 aircraft and did not find anything of concern,” SIA spokesman Nicholas Ionides said on Monday.

“The findings of the inspections have been reviewed with Rolls-Royce. Any further checks that may be recommended by the manufacturers will of course be done, and in the meantime we continue with our regular routine checks.”

Meanwhile,

Australia’s Qantas said on Monday it would keep its A380 fleet grounded for at least another 72 hours after discovering problems on three more of the superjumbo’s engines.

Singapore has 11 A 380s powered by Rolls Royce Trent engines while Qantas has 6 Airbus A 380s. The Wall Street Journal reports:

Qantas Airways Ltd. on Monday said its engineers found oil leaks in Rolls-Royce Group Ltd. engines on three of its grounded fleet of A380 jetliners, amid an investigation into the blowout of a turbine that forced one of its double-deck superjumbos to make an emergency landing in Singapore last week. “These engines are not performing to the parameters you would expect,” said Alan Joyce, chief executive of Qantas, in a press conference in Sydney. “The oil leaks were beyond normal tolerances.”

Mr. Joyce added that the Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engines that Qantas operates on its fleet of A380s are designed to provide more thrust and torque, and that this version of the turbine could be at fault. Engineers have identified oil leaks on engines from three separate Qantas A380s, one currently grounded in Sydney and two other aircraft in Los Angeles, he said.

Mr. Joyce said that Qantas uses a different design of Trent engine than those used by Singapore Airlines and Deutsche Lufthansa AG on its A380s.

The problem seems to be narrowing down to either the particular version of the Rolls Royce Trent 900 engine used by Qantas or the particular maintenance regime or procedures applying to the Qantas engines. In either case it should be of some cheer to Rolls Royce that the problem may not – on the surface – be a generic design fault with the Trent engines but something restricted to the engines as used by Qantas.

Qantas A380 fleet to stay grounded for 3 more days as more engine issues are discovered

November 7, 2010

The 3 Trent 900 engines that Qantas had earlier been thought to have been investigating now seems to have grown to 4 engines – 2 in Sydney and 2 in Los Angeles. These engines were tested following a Rolls Royce recommended 8-hour test procedure but have now been taken off the wings of their aircrafts for further investigation.

These are in addition to the Trent 900 which exploded on the A 380 which returned to Singapore and the RB 211-524 on the Boeing 747-400 which also returned to Singapore when an engine failed.

The Herald Sun:

MORE Qantas A380 jet engines are out of service and undergoing further tests, the airline says. Qantas spokeswoman Olivia Wirth said two of the Rolls-Royce built engines were in LA. “There are some engines being subject to further tests, but in line with normal procedure,” Ms Wirth told ABC radio today.

“In Los Angeles, there are two other engines that have been removed and we’ve been inspecting those. But this is, actually, common practice. It’s how you can make sure that you’re doing the right investigation.”

Fairfax newspapers today reported that Qantas had found issues with three more Rolls-Royce jet engines on its grounded Airbus A380 fleet. They also reported that two engines – one in Sydney and one in LA – had been taken off for closer inspection as a result of the eight-hour tests Rolls-Royce recommended.

“Deeper inspection could be for a number of things,” Ms Wirth said.

ABC reports:

Qantas says it has found problems with more of its A380 jet engines overnight, dashing hopes of an early return to service for the massive aircraft.

Steve Purvinis, the federal secretary of the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association, says he is concerned about the “general safety culture” in the airline. But Qantas spokeswoman Olivia Wirth rejects any suggestions the airline is dropping its standards. “The reality is that for the last decade in fact … 80 to 85 per cent of maintenance is done onshore,” she said. “In fact, last year 92 per cent of all Qantas maintenance was done onshore in Australia, so it is simply untrue. In fact, the 747 which was involved in QF6 was maintained in Avalon in Melbourne.”

Ms Wirth says Qantas hopes to have its A380 aircraft back in action in the next three days.

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?

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.