QF32? - A380 Emergency Landing at Changi

[Montague S]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nat...-1225965414988

interesting article.

[Peter Agatsiotis]

Yep, saw the morning news and they were on about the first paragraph of the article 'only 80 passengers on the Pacific route - great for pax, 2 rows each!'.


This can only get ugly and RR have a lot of explaining to do.

[Stuart Trevena]

Hi All,

With all that has gone on with the RR Trent 900 Engines, why doesn't Qantas look at the GP7200 Engine by Engine Alliance.
The is the same engine that EK uses, and has the same specs, regarding Thrust - 70,000lbs as the Trent 900's.

What are your thoughts

Stuart

[Nigel C]

Who's to say the Engine Alliance units don't have an underlying problem waiting to be exposed?

I presume, but happy to be corrected, that there'd be a bit of work needed to change engine types, such as software changes, the physical act of changing the engines (can they be clean swapped? I wouldn't think it would be straightforward?), the actual cost involved in acuiring new engines, staff retraining in engine management and maintenance etc.

[Grahame Hutchison]

I think that the Qantas version of the Trent 900s have a slightly higher power rating of 72,000lbs thrust, used for take off only on the long Sydney/Melbourne to Los Angeles route. The GP7200 might not cut it with the same loads.

[Montague S]

I don't know anything about engine settings etc, but I would have thought that the A380 would need more power taking off from SIN to LHR, than from say SYD to LAX, why? because of the stifling heat that comes with Singapore.

is it really a thrust issue? or is it the fact that SYD-LAX is over water?

[Ray P.]

Originally Posted by Grahame Hutchison

I think that the Qantas version of the Trent 900s have a slightly higher power rating of 72,000lbs thrust, used for take off only on the long Sydney/Melbourne to Los Angeles route. ...

That's almost correct. I believe QF's Trent 972Bs are rated at around 80 000 lb thrust as opposed 76 000 lb on the other operators' Trent 970/Bs. The engines are essentially exactly the same, but software programming allow the engines to operate at a higher thrust rating. This would possibly make QF's 972B engines more vulnerable to the current issues in comparison to the 970/B engines. Interestingly, the GP7270 used by the other operators appears to have less thrust (74 000lb) than even the Trent 970/B, so probably isn't a viable option for QF as has been suggested.

[Philip Argy]

This may be an oversimplification of the situation, but:

1. As I understand it, LAX has shorter runways than SIN. As Qantas is the only airline operating fully laden A380s across the Pacific from LAX, the high take off weight requires thrust settings above those used from other airfields, and Rolls Royce specifically assured Qantas that those special requirements could be met with the modified version of the Trent 900 that Rolls Royce manufactured for the Qantas A380 fleet.

2. Now that Rolls Royce is asserting that the current Trent 900 engines used by Qantas cannot be safely used at the required thrust settings out of LAX, Qantas has the option of reducing the aircraft weight to accommodate Rolls Royce's revised thrust limit, or abandon the route. Since it would reduce the passenger load to 80 pax, it's little wonder that Qantas has taken A380s off the route until engines with the requisite level of SAFE thrust usage can be obtained.

3. As a result of Rolls Royce's conduct, it is now the subject of a legal claim by Qantas for misleading representations and for breach of contract.

4. As a Qantas shareholder, I am truly shocked by Rolls Royce's conduct, at least to the extent to which it appears from publicly available material.

[Montague S]

maybe they need to think about using the A380 via AKL? SQ will start using their A380 to LAX via NRT in late March.

[Philip Argy]

I want a direct flight when I travel thanks very much!