# Chinese Jet repair



## Rayman4449 (Jan 2, 2008)

Got this not long ago. 

***********************************

Anyone planning to fly in China soon?

*For anybody who is not familiar with a jet engine, a jet fan blade should be perfectly smooth.
*
*A pilot for a Chinese carrier requested permission and landed at FRA (Frankfurt, Germany) for an unscheduled refueling stop. The reason became soon apparent to the ground crew: The Number 3 engine had been shut down previously because of excessive vibration, and because it didn't look too good. It had apparently been no problem for the tough guys back in China: as they took some sturdy straps and wrapped them around two of the fan blades and the structures behind, thus stopping any unwanted wind-milling (engine spinning by itself due to airflow passing thru the blades during flight) and associated uncomfortable vibration caused by the suboptimal fan.











Note that the straps are seat-belts....how resourceful!  After making the "repairs", off they went into the wild blue yonder with another revenue-making flight on only three engines! With the increased fuel consumption, they got a bit low on fuel, and just set it down at the closest airport (FRA) for a quick refill.

**That's when the problems started: The Germans, who are kind of picky about this stuff, inspected the malfunctioning engine and immediately grounded the aircraft. (Besides the seat-belts, notice the appalling condition of the fan blades.) The airline operator had to send a chunk of money to get the first engine replaced (took about 10 days). The repair contractor decided to do some impromptu inspection work on the other engines, none of which looked all that great either. The result:  a total of 3 engines were eventually changed on this plane before it was permitted to fly again.



















*And you were worried about lead paint?

No wonder our trains come with such pitiful quality control.

Raymond


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

I sure as **** hope that was a CARGO plane, not a passenger plane! One of those fan blades is actually completely broken off! Wonder if the blades are even legit, maybe counterfieght. Now thats a frightening thought./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/w00t.gif


----------



## Dave F (Jan 2, 2008)

Ooooooohh-Kay then..... 

Next time I fly to China (probably never).. I'll take Quantas.. 




Would you care for another bag of peanuts?


----------



## cmjdisanto (Jan 6, 2008)

I only have a second hand knowledge of these things and it's very old at that but things like this can and have happened more that you think. Not the seatbelt (cargo straps are what they actually are) thing since the engine could not operate with them in place but I have to believe more from a saftey precaution on the ground than anything else but as Ray stated since they were used to hold the fans in stable and to perform the same benefit as if feathering a Prop. It's hard to tell when the damage actually occured yet judging by the photo it's only the first row of intake fan blades that seems to be affected. 

Most of the jets today have a tremendous amount of draw/suction into the engine. The 737-200 when it first appeared several years ago there were instance with the new engine where ramp workers were sucked into the intake while the engine was at ramp idle. Until then there were almost no events like it although I seem to remember hearing about something involving a 747 but the engine was not at idle speed. Ice and debris of all sorts can be left on taxi ways and runways alike and be sucked into the engine before or without anyone realizing it. That is until a vibration appears or warning lights flash.  There's also the organic debris in the form of birds that are always a hazard especially in the airports located seaside. Even though this engone didn't "grenade" most engines are tested by having frozen turkeys shot into them from compressed air cannons while at heavy throttle to determine if the engine will grenade out of the protective housing. Sort of what like happened to the UAL DC-10 back in 1989 just before it crashed in Sioux City. Although that was caused by the fan disk having a microscopic crack that was later found during a metallurgy test.  Yet the outer fan-blades are the most susceptible to damage out of most of those in the engine. Then again what makes it into the inside is usually reduced to small bits due to the many rows of blades that make up the different stages of a jet engine. It happen often enough that I have a set of files that my father owned when he worked for the airlines and these were used to file chips out of the blade edges. You can imaging what a pebble the size of a dime can do to a precision fan blade spinning at 40,000+rpm's(just a guess but I vaguely remember this as one of the numbers) now picture a seagull, duck, goose or other coastal bird. Not to mention the occasional tool left in a landing gear housing or the dust and whatever else can become air-borne around the runway is no exception. From the looks of one of the pics, there seems to have been something rather large that was sucked into the cowling.


----------



## reeveha (Jan 2, 2008)

Now we have US plane makers outsourcing a multitude of parts outsourced to Mexico & China for reason of economics. For example, Boeing is having alot of the Dreamliner "outsourced" to China because of labor costs with a guarentee of orders for planes. Another small plane manufacturers are now "outsourcing" an entire sports plane to China for the reason of keeping the plane "affordable". The problem with that is we are forfeiting quality for the all mighty buck. Things like this makes you want to "duck" whenever a plane flies over.


----------



## CJGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

yet another reason I wont fly....... I'll take a car, boat or train........


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

I can see exactly what the Chineese are doing....they are mimicing what large corperations do here, cut back on matainence costs to keep profits up....at the expence of consumers AND employees!
Neccesity is the mother$*&$%@ of invention!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/w00t.gif

Makes perfect sense....To ANY board of directors AND CEOs' running ANY large corperation for profit!

Ya know there ARE exceptable losses in war and profit!...but we already know this!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/hehe.gif

Next time you fly Chineese....don't forget your parachute!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/w00t.gif


Freefalling in Bellevue
Bubba


----------



## dawgnabbit (Jan 2, 2008)

...engines are tested by having frozen turkeys shot into them from compressed air cannons...


Frozen? I wonder why. Thawed might be more "realistic."


----------



## bobgrosh (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By vsmith on 01/15/2008 7:50 PM
I sure as **** hope that was a CARGO plane, not a passenger plane! One of those fan blades is actually completely broken off! Wonder if the blades are even legit, maybe counterfieght. Now thats a frightening thought./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/w00t.gif


Why would they have seat belts on a cargo plane?


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/airchina.asp


----------



## Rayman4449 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By bobgrosh on 01/15/2008 9:51 PM
Posted By vsmith on 01/15/2008 7:50 PM
I sure as **** hope that was a CARGO plane, not a passenger plane! One of those fan blades is actually completely broken off! Wonder if the blades are even legit, maybe counterfieght. Now thats a frightening thought./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/w00t.gif


Why would they have seat belts on a cargo plane?


My guess is that the maintence folks would have them lying around in the service area where they could grab them.


----------



## Bryan Smith (Jan 2, 2008)

I think a flying object stuck inside the turbine? or alot of birds stuck turbine?

Bryan


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

David F. 
Don't feel too confident about QANTAS either. 
They are now outsourcing some of their maintenance work to overseas. 
Including China. 
All in the name of being "competitive". 

I'd stick to Singapore Airlines. Better looking female flight attendants too.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

This is a fake--check out the link to snopes.com that garrett posted. It's one of those urban myths.

The quality of some chinese stuff is amazing. I have a bass violin made in China, all hand carved, that's extremely well made and plays beautifully. You can buy a chinese made acoustic guitar for $200 bucks that rivals stuff costing 3 times as miuch. But, yes, they also make stuff that's cheap and shoddy. It's a big country


----------



## jbwilcox (Jan 2, 2008)

As soon as I looked at these pictures I thought something was suspicious.

There is no way a plane even in the worst country in the world would be allowed to fly in such a condition.

This is so unbelievable it has to be a fake picture.

John


----------



## lotsasteam (Jan 3, 2008)

According to the PILOT MAGAZINE its very common to get scheduled mainenance done in China for about 1/4th of the regular US Cost!!! 
That means : instaed using a torque wrench a 50 pounder chinese hangs on an made in taiwan wrench!!! 
Next time you get charged a 1000.-bucks for a crown- from your Dentist ask if its made locally or outsourced to a Chinese Lab for US$ 25.Plus shipping!!!! 
Manfred Diel


----------



## cmjdisanto (Jan 6, 2008)

Posted By dawgnabbit on 01/15/2008 9:42 PM
...engines are tested by having frozen turkeys shot into them from compressed air cannons...


Frozen? I wonder why. Thawed might be more "realistic."


Frozen because it would simulate in a worst case scenario what would happen if a large chunk of ice were to build up on the aircraft or in the engine intake, around the coweling or on the spinner of the jet and be released while in flight at a speed of 500+ knots with the engine at High RPM's. If an engine were to grenade at 40,000ft the outcome would not be very favorable to the plane nor the people sitting parallel to the engine. The engine is designed with (or I think now a days most are) a "Damage Tolerant Casing" http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/Spinoff2006/T_1.html. This wasn't the case in the beginning but the jet engines of the past were not designed to produce the power they are today. Faster, more powerful engines means more problems are apt to happen. Good example would be High Performance race engines vs. the everyday "Rambler"./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/blink.gif

I'm getting out of my "comfort zone" in knowledge so in order not to sound like an idjit  I probably won't contribute much more to the discussion./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/unsure.gif


----------



## cmjdisanto (Jan 6, 2008)

In the question of China's practices......and not to sound like a supporter of shoddy stuff.............has anyone ever considered that what we get from China (or any where else for that fact) in the way of quality is exactly what Specs were directed to them by the CEO's and Company leaders in the first place? Obviously it costs more money to do something correctly and to the high level of standard we expect. Granted in the true scheme of things we aren't paying a commensurate price for the quality we receive in most cases but what those companies CEO's and leaders are paying for in production costs or bottom line is. /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/pinch.gif

It's just their way of keeping their profit margin above 70% (hypothetically speaking of course/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/whistling.gif)   After all isn't money and having as much of it as possible no matter what the whole idea?/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/blink.gif


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Spule 4 on 01/15/2008 9:53 PM

http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/airchina.asp

Kalmbach curse again...link activation


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

Spule 
I wondered about this myself, looking closer its true, those "seatbelts' are the straps holding the fan blade assembly to the cradle, I'll bet this was a damaged engine with a good if made up story.


----------



## Rayman4449 (Jan 2, 2008)

I guess that answers that.  If it's been circulated with other airline names, it must be a fake.  

Oh well, it was a good story.


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Regarding the CEO's being the ones writing the specs, etc..  that's not entirely true.  I think the CEOs here don't get involved with the nitty gritty details like that.   Typically, the people on the ground in the shop will make what's on the drawing, or call the Engineer/ supervisor  when there's a percieved issue.  That's just being accountable.  

Doing business in China is a double edge sword.  While most things can be made very inexpensively there,  QA is a constant battle.  It seems like you can send in all the specifications you want, but unless you actually go there and meet with them to enforce the spec,  it won't be made to your spec.  We had some components manufatured at a former Chinese partner of ours.  They didn't manufacture to our spec, but we had to meet deliveries.  Our QA people traveled to the factory in China  and an accomodation was made, and to meet our delivery.  That particular Chinese partner has decided to ignore the agreement they signed not to enter the grinding mill market..  That is the unfortunate downside to doing business there.  You almost have to accept that whatever equipment you sell to them, you can almost guarantee that it will be copied.  It is not all companies, either.  Seems like perhaps only the ones actually owned by the government.  The private companies tend to want to focus on making whatever widgit and sell that, not the machine that makes said widget. 

I think India might be the next China for consumer goods...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About the DC-10....I did a case study of this aircraft during my undergraduate program for a course called Engineering Ethics.  Talk about CEOs leaning on Engineers to get shoddy product to market.  Where is Douglas today?  That was a US company, so lets not be so quick to cast the first stone.  This case study taught me to stand by my principles, no matter the fall out.  The DC-10 was a wide body jet that was rushed to market before all the details could be reviewed and the bugs worked out.  Tts multiple design flaws, and had several disastrous failures in its early life.  The 1989 crash was not purely a failure of the fan blade.  It was also poor design of the redundant hydraulic lines passing in close proximity to each other and poor maintenance by the ground crews that led to the wreck.  You have to give kudos to the pilot, however who had the cohones to fly a jumbo jet with no controls except the two under wing engines. Touch down was a little over 200 MPH, which is slower than terminal velocity or propelled speed to the ground from altitude.  I think almost 50% of the passengers survived, which is a lot better than 0% which was the case of the 1973 Paris wreck of a DC-10.   You can still see DC-10s flying in FedEx and other cargo service.  They are easy to spot, what with their third engine stuck in the middle of the tail.  I like seeing them on the ground.  Any of you 'old timers' remember buttons saying "If its not Boeing, I'm not going"?     

->   Mary Beth hated flying before she met me.  Explaining the physics and details of air travel doesn't help her fear.  Neither does talking about the DC-10 case.  Only thing that works for her is Tanqueray and Tonic!! 


Mark


----------



## cmjdisanto (Jan 6, 2008)

Mark,

My point is to remind folks that we need to look to US instead of pointing the finger and blame at cother countries. Yes there are the good and bad in all yet it is the CEO or Company leaders accross the board who set the level of expectation for the company financially. Hey they're at the helm like a Captain and are responsible for anything and everything that happens as long as they are there. They should also be more accountable and have better understanding of the companies they're running. They remove themselves from  the day to day decisions and put panels or commities in place to find way to cut costs and increase revenues. MOst of the time the only way to do this is reduce quality, cut head count, downsize operations or any number of other things. There is a person here that can attest to the fact that many CEO's care less about the many people their (his) company has and will continue lay off over the course of several years (I think it's close to 55,000 now) than breaking wind. Personally there's a difference to making money responsibly and  just making money. Today, most want to just make money. 

In regards to the DC-10...... I could have gone into great detail about the plane, that incident as well as many others that I heard through the years. My father worked on that particular plane and many others like it. But before anyone goes and makes a smart remark about this info.....he didn't design it. He was merely a Mechanic (and a damn good one) for now close to 51 years with UAL.  He in fact was on a team that the FAA brought in to inspect the entire UAL fleet being stored in Chicago after the 1979 American Airlines Disaster at O'Hare Field to examine engine mounting pylons. But all that is neither here nor there.................................My point was to show nothing more than what can and has happened when a jet engine "grenades". /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/whistling.gif

In summary to the whole thing......The current system, most of the philosophies, business practices, honesty, etc..........It's all broke.and it needs to be fixed. I don't wish to sound all "Biblical" yet we are reaping exactly what we have sown! But I'm only accountable for my actions and maybe some in my family but that's it. Plus last time I checked I wasn't in charge so the rest is up to the people that are in charge and doing many of "the" things.


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

I have a friend, since retired, who did maintenance for a major un-named airline based in Minnesota. Many parts on todays aircraft are forgings and are manufactured with very tight tolerances. But my friend was telling me that when a plane needed a part very quickly(a quick fix until the next airport facility), they would literally "bandsaw a chunk and drill a few holes and slap it on the plane./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/wow.gif


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

Posted By lotsasteam on 01/16/2008 7:23 AM
According to the PILOT MAGAZINE its very common to get scheduled mainenance done in China for about 1/4th of the regular US Cost!!! 
That means : instaed using a torque wrench a 50 pounder chinese hangs on an made in taiwan wrench!!! 
Next time you get charged a 1000.-bucks for a crown- from your Dentist ask if its made locally or outsourced to a Chinese Lab for US$ 25.Plus shipping!!!! 
Manfred Diel


I do know that some dentists have the technology of using a special for that purpose, a 3D ultrasound machine to take measurements of any given tooth...feed that info into a machine that actually sculps the crown to fit pretty much exactly to the tooth the measurements were taken from....needing very little post surfacing...but the rechnology is very expensive....but maybe the chunks of whatever they use as the crown material is made in China...not sure....all I know is that the FRIGG'IN crown is EXTREMELY expensive!!!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/crying.gif


Bubba


----------



## Rod Hayward (Jan 2, 2008)

Years old fake, that was FOD damage and some one thought theyd have some fun... If you look at any engine makers specs, if one fan blade has any deformation, let alone damage its a no fly.


----------



## Duncan (Jan 2, 2008)

A few points need clarification. 

(gonna try and keep this simple for the non-turbine types...) 

Birds are not frozen. The intent of the bird tests are to mimic an "actual" bird strike. Hence a dead bird is shot from a pneumatic cannon into the fan (bladed pice on the front) while the engine is running at max operating/flying rpm. 

The damage to the pictured fan is not likely to have come from a bird alone. 
Looks more like damage induced from a hard surfaced component, such as a piece of inlet cowling or such. If you notice, there is significant damage to the shroud area around the outside area of the fan blades, but not much visible on the stator behind the fan. This points to a more solid (and large) object making its way into the inlet, and stopping at the fan... 

Ice ingestion tests are conducted to determine the damage caused by measured amounts of ice impacting rotating and static components of the engines. They use ice. Good old "hard water"... 

Many other environmental tests are performed on turbine engines during their developmental phases. Blade out, induced imbalance, disk burst containment, etc... 

The straps used to hold the fan to the stator behind it could be for a number of reasons (non-rotation being one of them) and is frequently used as a means to hold shift together until it gets to a repair facility. By viewing the amount of damage done to the blades of the pictured engine, it is not inconceivable to think that the forward bearing and structural support housing are compromised. Nothing like have several hundred pounds of falling out of the front of an engine. 

I'll not get into the spares and repairs aspects of offshoring and outsourcing...


----------



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

1. They do NOT shoot FROZEN turkies through engines during test. That is the "foundation" for a joke regarding the development of the "pick a country's" NEW jet engine that could never pass the bird injestion test (the punch line was like..."You might defroast the turkey before shooting it..."). 

2. The DO shoot defroasted turkies...big ones....20 lbers...through jet engines during development testing...with the engine developing the maximum thrust possible in the test jig...maybe 110% if the test stand can take it. This is the final demonstration that the engine can KEEP RUNNING and keep providing thrust at maximum takeoff power. Believe it or not...there's probably a bird a day injested in the US by jet engines. 

3. The "seat belts" (they're not) are fan restraints. They allow shipment of the engine by strapping the fan to the stable structure behind the fan. It keeps the fan from rotating in the wind...and turning the rest of the engine. I'm NOT sure whether you can legall fly an aircraft with an engine strapped...but it would probably be possible...but certainly not in revenue service I'd think. 

4. The damage you see is most likely from gravel injestion...sure looks like it...or hail...but it would have had to be HUGE hail. Without seeing the engine ON the aircraft, you can't be sure it wasn't hail. BUT...it looks like someone taxied to damn close to pile of 2" crushed rock and sucked up a pile...or two. These things are great taxiway cleaners....


----------



## Dennis Paulson (Jan 2, 2008)

Lowest bid , cheapest price , draws a lot of people .


----------



## Duncan (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Mike Reilley on 01/16/2008 11:53 AM
1. They do NOT shoot FROZEN turkies through engines during test. That is the "foundation" for a joke regarding the development of the "pick a country's" NEW jet engine that could never pass the bird injestion test (the punch line was like..."You might defroast the turkey before shooting it..."). 

2. The DO shoot defroasted turkies...big ones....20 lbers...through jet engines during development testing...with the engine developing the maximum thrust possible in the test jig...maybe 110% if the test stand can take it. This is the final demonstration that the engine can KEEP RUNNING and keep providing thrust at maximum takeoff power. Believe it or not...there's probably a bird a day injested in the US by jet engines. 

3. The "seat belts" (they're not) are fan restraints. They allow shipment of the engine by strapping the fan to the stable structure behind the fan. It keeps the fan from rotating in the wind...and turning the rest of the engine. I'm NOT sure whether you can legall fly an aircraft with an engine strapped...but it would probably be possible...but certainly not in revenue service I'd think. 

4. The damage you see is most likely from gravel injestion...sure looks like it...or hail...but it would have had to be HUGE hail. Without seeing the engine ON the aircraft, you can't be sure it wasn't hail. BUT...it looks like someone taxied to damn close to pile of 2" crushed rock and sucked up a pile...or two. These things are great taxiway cleaners....

Mike,
Look closer at the fan damage...
Leading edge in particular.
See the fold back, and hard anglular impacts?
Not gravel or hail.
Either one of those materials would have passed through the fan, and taken out the stator over the entire circumfrence.
Notice no widespread impacts to the stator.
Also, I would anticipate that there would be greater damage to the spinner from "loose" material.
The straps are 2" wide, and if that's a PW or RR engine, that fan is close to 6' or 7' in diameter....
I'll tell ya some good stories about chicken tests next time you're over...


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT9LwfK8MZ8&feature=related


Birdstrikes happen to the best of them./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/cry.gif


----------



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

That engine came from a DC-10-30 as I recall. I used to get all the Navy aircraft accident investigation reports...and have seen a LOT of FOD damage. This one looks like an engine that injested a LARGE amount of LARGE hard stuff. 

In practice, the wing mounted engines act like vacuum cleaners and suck debris off the runway pretty well. Whatever this one injested...it was big...it was HARD...and there was a LOT of it to get that much coverage of the damaged area. Ergo my guess that someone got too close to a pile of 2" or bigger crushed rock/gravel...the kind that is place UNDER a runway/taxiway being built at an airport before the concrete top is applied. 

It would NOT be surprising that the stator received minimal damage from my experience...as the fan shatters rock pretty well. Now...bolts and nuts and other metalic FOD are another story. Launch bar holdback pins really screw up Navy fighteres. When an F18 injests a bigger metal part...you'll find one fan blade bent/broken/shattered...and a whole bunch of broken blades in the compressor and turbine. 

Now...this also could have been a wheelbarrow or a cargo container or baggage cart..being sucked in. But...if that had been the story, I'd expect more damage to be visible behind the rotor. 

For another good FOD video.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJxl9pfj2mU


----------



## Rod Hayward (Jan 2, 2008)

Recall the Connies at Andersen with the goonie birds painted on the side under the cockpit....


----------



## Duncan (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Mike Reilley on 01/16/2008 2:13 PM
That engine came from a DC-10-30 as I recall. I used to get all the Navy aircraft accident investigation reports...and have seen a LOT of FOD damage. This one looks like an engine that injested a LARGE amount of LARGE hard stuff. 

In practice, the wing mounted engines act like vacuum cleaners and suck debris off the runway pretty well. Whatever this one injested...it was big...it was HARD...and there was a LOT of it to get that much coverage of the damaged area. Ergo my guess that someone got too close to a pile of 2" or bigger crushed rock/gravel...the kind that is place UNDER a runway/taxiway being built at an airport before the concrete top is applied. 

It would NOT be surprising that the stator received minimal damage from my experience...as the fan shatters rock pretty well. Now...bolts and nuts and other metalic FOD are another story. Launch bar holdback pins really screw up Navy fighteres. When an F18 injests a bigger metal part...you'll find one fan blade bent/broken/shattered...and a whole bunch of broken blades in the compressor and turbine. 

Now...this also could have been a wheelbarrow or a cargo container or baggage cart..being sucked in. But...if that had been the story, I'd expect more damage to be visible behind the rotor. 

For another good FOD video.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJxl9pfj2mU

Disagree on the rocks/lack of damage to the stator.  The downstream evidence would be readily apparent.  Rocks and other items of that nature may break up on initial impact, but the resulting impingement through the air/gas path would be very visible around the entire circumfrence.  No significant evidence on the airfoil surfaces of the stator of any FOD.

Agree with large object that impacts the fan, yet the object would have been too big to get past the fan, hence the repetitive strike patterns on the blades, and no significant downstream damage.  Can't spool down quickly enough to avoid prolonged "aggravation" to the first stage fan blades.

That missing piece of  fan blade should have been enough to take out at least three stator vanes, or it finally separated and fell out after the engine reached "0%" N1...

Without an NTSB report, all this is hypothetical, anyway...


----------



## Art (Jan 3, 2008)

While working for Uncle Sam in the USAF the C130 I was on as a Flight Engineer took in a piece of a tree that was about 4" in diameter and not sure how long. This caused us to T-handle the engine while on approach...... Now that goes to show that even USAF pilots can and do make mistakes..... I think we were a bit to low to the ground. Oh well the pilot didn't think so..... 

Art


----------



## Mike Reilley (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Duncan on 01/16/2008 9:29 PM

Without an NTSB report, all this is hypothetical, anyway...


Yep...there's a party on some Thursday in the Phoenix suburbs....perhaps we could drink and discuss this some more then.  Am sooooo looking forward to that trip.


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Actually, since the talk has drifted into older Douglas planes, anyone else ever check out the story of JAL DC-8 JA8032, and the story of Captan Asoh, and his very brief and VERY frank statement in the NTSB hearing?

EDIT:

http://www.airliners.net/articles/read.main?id=1&read_comments=true


----------



## Duncan (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Mike Reilley on 01/17/2008 7:18 PM
Posted By Duncan on 01/16/2008 9:29 PM

Without an NTSB report, all this is hypothetical, anyway...


Yep...there's a party on some Thursday in the Phoenix suburbs....perhaps we could drink and discuss this some more then.  Am sooooo looking forward to that trip.


Yer on, Bud!!!
I, too, am looking forward to spending time wth you and SWAMBO (AKA Marge)...  /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/hehe.gif


----------



## Terl (Jan 2, 2008)

cargo belt straps? /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/shocked.gifHeck I think that they should have used DUCT tape. Would have been better. 

Terl


----------



## puffnstuff (Jan 5, 2008)

Nothing wrong with DC-10's (or MD-11's for that matter).  Great aircraft to fly - ask any commercial pilot who is rated on them.  As to the design flaws, well there was some issues of redundancy. But after several with conversations with Al Haines (the Sioux City accident pilot for UA) he stated that that of all the aircraft he had flown, he still preferred the DC-10.

As to the engine in question - FOD was the cause.  It pays NOT to spool up the engine when there are empty and unsecured containers sitting on the ramp in front of the aircraft.!!!

And Tony, I agree with you over Singapore Girls - not so sure about Singapore's operating record however, Taipei (wrong runway),  Auckland (tail strike) and even a slightly bent A 380 are just some of their 'hiccups'. 

Puff'nstuff


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

Posted By CJGRR on 01/15/2008 9:10 PM
yet another reason I wont fly....... I'll take a car, boat or train........


Me too.  That is why I drive to Marty's


----------



## flatracker (Jan 2, 2008)

Just thought I'd add a bit here, relating to the subject of outsourcing. Years ago, in WOOD Magazine, there was an in-depth study on tools from Taiwan. The problems with the cheaper tools and ones from Delta, were the number of representatives that were there, checking on the quality of the work. It went on to explain how a lot of parts were built in small factories and home workshops. The people who did this work wanted to do a good job, but often had little instruction and not enough overseeing to produce exact specifications for the part. With enough representatives there, the corrections could be taken care of, thus a better product. Of course the cost would have to be up, to pay for the extra expense.

Sort of "ya get what ya pay fer" (most of the time!).


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

OK you guys flyng is not that bad...the pre-flight rig-a-ma-row is the really BAD part!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/crazy.gif

I don't fly much but I have more then a few times and I have always had a pretty good experience!

Look if your going to die you only have a very short time to think about it...so relax grab a bottle and chug-a-lug....to expidite the burning process the alcohol will do just that!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/w00t.gif Let the NTSB have one ****-ava-time identifying just who is who!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/crying.gif

No matter if you fly or not.....when your number is up it is up even if you are in the bathtub soaking!

So eat drink and feel Mary.....if she will let you!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/wow.gif


Bubba


----------



## Rastun (Jan 4, 2008)

I'd have to agree with Duncan quite a bit on this. Definately something hard that managed to stay in the inlet area while the engine was spooling down. Amazingly the seal around the outer edge of those vanes doesn't look like it took as much damage as you'd think it would have.  While a part maybe made onsite to get an aircraft from one place to another as long as it's made to the manufacturers spec it's not a problem. I wouldn't expect you'd ever see that done for a rotating piece of an engine.

For not flying, if they reported half the car accidents leading to deaths in half the manner they report aircraft accidents you'd be scared to get into those too, let alone the statistics on motorcycles.

Unfortunately, most aircraft accidents are caused by pilot error. Not poor maintenance or defective parts. If that engine was in an aircraft and flown that way after the damage occurred the pilot should rethink professions. Neat photos just to see that damage the engine took.

Jack


----------



## ByrdC130 (Jan 4, 2008)

If I'm not mistaken those pic's were from an aircraft that sucked up an emty baggage trailer some years back.  There were accompanying pic's of the trailer stuck in the intake of the jet as well.   With the advent of higher bypass jet engines the whole aviation world has had to learn very quickly that anything from a piece of safety wire to a small truck can quickly become FOD.   I'm an airfield manager and converting from C-130's to KC-135 R's with their big, low hanging vaccum cleaners has really raised awareness of ramp cleanliness and our FOD prevention program  in a hurry!

Bubba I like your philosophy!!


----------

