Qantas A380 makes emergency landing in Singapore

More from Rolls Royce in today’s FT

More from Rolls Royce in today’s FT
Rolls costs over engine fire put at $500m
Aviation experts estimate the UK aircraft engine maker could face costs of $500m to deal with the consequences of a recent explosion in one of its Trent 900 engines
http://link.ft.com/r/UXDMSS/NSZ0JW/O…10&a2=12&a3=10

Interestingly the FT journalists obviously like the dramatic word ‘explosion’ and continue to use it.

It would seem that QANTAS has suffered an economic impact from this incident.

In the short-term yes, RR may feel this much much longer. 🙁

Should QANTAS receive any compensation from either/both Airbus and/or RR?

It’s rather unprecendented in recent years for an airplane to be grounded so long. The last time I can think of that happening was with the DC-10 in the 70’s. Certainly, one would think that given the protracted development time that this airframe/engine combination would be “mature.” Nothing of this nature happened with the 757, 767, 777, A320, A330, or A340 types.

It is true that QANTAS has been able to continue their LAX-SYD service using trusty old 744’s, but those must have been allocated to other routes which have seen service reductions in the interim. It would seem that QANTAS has suffered an economic impact from this incident.

Today’s FT reports some progress at Qantas with A380 flights

Today’s FT reports some progress at Qantas with A380 flights

Qantas to resume Airbus A380 flights
Qantas is to resume some A380 services from Saturday more than three weeks after one of its Airbus superjumbos made an emergency landing after an engine exploded
http://link.ft.com/r/5F39HH/6VNES5/PPNV6/26S9VJ/9ZJ4FU/XL/h?a1=2010&a2=11&a3=25

Note the dramatic journalistic word “exploded” at the end of the snippet. Yuk

The 707 was closer to the ground as I recall than the DC-8. Thus, because of the reduced engine clearance many commercial operators of the DC-8 chose to do the CFM56 mod, whereas the 707 commercial operators did not. Other factors figured in…..not the least of which was the strong structure of the DC-8. When UPS removed their large DC-8 fleet last year, it was still quite efficient and structurally viable.

Although the 707 series did not lend itself so much to the mod due to the reduced ground clearance of the CFM56 engines, the USAF chose to modify their KC-135’s. (I am purposely choosing not to get into all the 717/KC-135 vs 707 differences, for the purposes of this discussion they are the same IMHO). IIRC, the mod paid for itself in something like 8 years, through reduced fuel consumption. Having said that, the USAF has had a number of engine scrapes through the years, primarily during landings with strong crosswinds and relatively junior pilots. The USAF is, after all, primarily a pilot training organization!:D

It’s not just money that made it possible…the 135s could be done in large part because they were not (and never would be) commercially operated.
The military has a lot more leeway in modifying its aircraft than an airline would.

I don’t know about that.
One thing that did make the 135 program viable was that there were hundreds of them to be modified. Boeing did build a new 707 with CFM-56’s but it did not attract any orders. The one “new build” pure 707 it did do ended up as a presidential aircraft somewere.

Rgds Cking

But unlike the 727s and KC-135s, weren’t the 707-400s built with RR engines and not converted.

The type was converted to use different engines, but not individual airframes, IIRC.

Indeed; that bit was in reply to Post #109.

Please don’t get p****d off with me:( The USAF changed airforce one’s engine from JT-9’s to CF-6’s.
I know thats not fair because it’s military and money was no object BUT… the money is no object bit says a lot. I don’t think that it’s an option for many operators. Changing suppliers mid stream is though

Rgds Cking

It’s not just money that made it possible…the 135s could be done in large part because they were not (and never would be) commercially operated.
The military has a lot more leeway in modifying its aircraft than an airline would.

JT3D’s were the most common engine on a 707, early ones had JT4A’s and BOAC used RR Conways, as did Lufthansa and Air India (these aircraft were all -400 series)

But unlike the 727s and KC-135s, weren’t the 707-400s built with RR engines and not converted.

The type was converted to use different engines, but not individual airframes, IIRC.

right you are. Googles not what it was.

There were many conversions back in the 1990’s to make 727’s Stage III compliant. Here’s the FedEx version;

http://fedex.com/us/hushkit/configuration/

Another modification was to stick a pair of JT8D-219’s in #1 and #3. The Tay conversion was for UPS.

JT3D’s were the most common engine on a 707, early ones had JT4A’s and BOAC used RR Conways, as did Lufthansa and Air India (these aircraft were all -400 series)

A search of the internet in a quiet moment reveals that FED ex reengined there 727-100s with RR Tays.

The 727-200 had JT8s installed -Im sure We were working -200s –
(mostly what i remember was the area either side of the rear stairs swimming in skydrol)

I seem to recall it was JT somethings for bigger JT somethings, but it was many years ago and ive been to sleep since then.

I THINK they were RR Tay’s.
Dee Howard also re fitted a BAC 1-11 with Tay’s. It was at Farnborough for the show one year. I seem to remember that BAe, who held the design authority refused to co operate with the certification process so the project was stopped. BAe were building the 146 at the time and the re engined 1-11 was seen as a competitor. Personaly both aircraft were awful in their own way and I’m glad their both out of my life!

Rgds Cking

10 / 15 years ago we replaced No1 and 3 on 727s I cant remember what we swapped them to though.

The idea was that with the larger 2 engines at max and no 2 at a low setting (1&3 having more thrust than the old 3) would be quieter.

To change out No 2 would have required to much structural work.

Cant think of any others off hand

(excluding the Buccaneer)

Roger, Kicking in progress…:eek:

I forgot about the DC-8 program,:o but the 135s don’t count because they were never civil certified.

Okay…aside from the fuel/noise abatement programs, anyone know if anyone switched a P&W or Rolls 707 airframe to another make…
or if a widebody with P&W/GE/Rolls was converted because a new owner preferred a different brand of engines?

Probably a bit different from DC-3s where airframes were switched from P&W to Wrights or vice versa…but even then, I really don’t know if it was legal for commercial use…at least not without a lot of paperwork.

I don’t know if it has ever been done for the reason that it would not be economic to do so. It is clearly technically feasible, and does involve a “mountain of paperwork” as mentioned.

The nearest I can think of is when Northwest (then Northwest Orient) bought DC-10’s. Everyone else got GE, but NWA loved PW, so Douglas built them some DC-10’s with PW. I think only one or two other carriers got PW on the DC-10’s, but it might have been none. IIRC, the sole difference between the DC-10-30 and DC-10-40 was the engines, but they were installed at the factory and not a re-engine.

Roger, Kicking in progress…:eek:.

With a soft slipper, please;)

a widebody with P&W/GE/Rolls was converted because a new owner preferred a different brand of engines?:.

Please don’t get p****d off with me:( The USAF changed airforce one’s engine from JT-9’s to CF-6’s.
I know thats not fair because it’s military and money was no object BUT… the money is no object bit says a lot. I don’t think that it’s an option for many operators. Changing suppliers mid stream is though

Rgds Cking

I’ve seen 707s with Pratt & Whitney JT3D engines as seen on DC-8s

You are going to kick yourself:o
DC-8’s changed to the CFM-56. I don’t think one entry in the tech log would cover it either:D

Rgds Cking

Roger, Kicking in progress…:eek:

I forgot about the DC-8 program,:o but the 135s don’t count because they were never civil certified.

Okay…aside from the fuel/noise abatement programs, anyone know if anyone switched a P&W or Rolls 707 airframe to another make…
or if a widebody with P&W/GE/Rolls was converted because a new owner preferred a different brand of engines?

Probably a bit different from DC-3s where airframes were switched from P&W to Wrights or vice versa…but even then, I really don’t know if it was legal for commercial use…at least not without a lot of paperwork.

You are going to kick yourself:o
Some 707/KC-135’s and DC-8’s changed to the CFM-56. I don’t think one entry in the tech log would cover it either:D

Rgds Cking

True dat. UPS also changed the engines on their 727’s….removed the old fuel thirsty JT-8s and replaced them with quiet and fuel efficient Rolls engines…