CaptJackG Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 Subject: Qantas: Engine Problems Mean its A380s - - - By Brett Snyder December 16, 2010 You'd think that the Qantas A380 saga would be winding down by now, but you'd be wrong. Qantas is still struggling with the fact that it can't operate the A380 to the U.S. because the engines simply can't handle it. This means that things continue to get worse for engine-maker Rolls-Royce, and I imagine legal bills have only started to pile on. Rolls needs to get this thing under control, because right now Qantas is in a bad place. While Singapore and Lufthansa both use the Rolls-Royce Trent 970, Qantas had to use the 972 to get 2,000 pounds more thrust for its operation. There actually isn't much of a difference in the engines at all, but one is rated to give a little more power. For Qantas, that little bit extra is really important. Qantas has re-started flights from Sydney to places like Singapore on the A380, because it doesn't need full thrust to operate that route. However, the prize has always been flights to Los Angeles, and that's a different story. At nearly 7,500 miles, Qantas needs every bit of thrust to get off the ground at LAX with a full passenger load and a lot of fuel. And that full thrust requirement is apparently why Qantas is having bigger engine problems with this airplane than anyone else. Any time you use full thrust, you put more stress on the engine. Engines are supposed to handle that just fine, but not in this case. Qantas has now found that it can operate no more than 75 flights at top thrust before it needs to replace an engine. That's ridiculous, considering each engine can cost $10 million or more. And it leaves Qantas with a huge problem. Rolls-Royce had suggested last month that Qantas operate the engines with less thrust. That suggestion is completely worthless since it would mean Qantas could carry a mere 80 passengers on the LA to Sydney route. The airline might as well just operate a 747 at full capacity for a lot less cost with a lot more passengers. If it can't carry a full load on the A380, that airplane is worthless. The funny thing is that Qantas didn't even want the more powerful engines in the first place. It opted for the same ones as Lufthansa and Singapore originally, but then Airbus announced the A380 would weigh 5 tons more than planned. That pushed Qantas to order the higher-thrust engines in order to make the airplane viable on the LA route. So now Qantas is stuck between a rock and a hard place. It has A380s on the property but it can't fly them where it wants without needing a multimillion dollar engine change every few months. Rolls-Royce is going to have to fix this problem or Qantas is going to have to find an alternative. The silver lining for Qantas is that it's not going to be responsible for any of the cost here. Rolls-Royce and Airbus (to a lesser extent, if any), however, are going to have to open up those wallets. For Qantas, however, it would much rather just have an airplane that functions properly. Instead, Qantas now has to go through its peak travel season without the ability to use the A380 to the U.S. Quote
JensenPark Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 what engines do other Airbuses use? http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-11/airbus-wins-biggest-order-ever-validating-decision-on-jet-engine-upgrade.html I assume this is only an a380 issue? or is it Airbus wide? Seeing you the big jet pilot in the group - I appreciate you input. Surely Qantas is the not the only carrier with this issue? Not that I'm too lazy to google it...I want to hear from someone who deals with this stuff intimately (not that kind of 'intimately'...though with you lot, you can't be too sure). Quote
Crash Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 what engines do other Airbuses use? http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-11/airbus-wins-biggest-order-ever-validating-decision-on-jet-engine-upgrade.html I assume this is only an a380 issue? or is it Airbus wide? Seeing you the big jet pilot in the group - I appreciate you input. Surely Qantas is the not the only carrier with this issue? Not that I'm too lazy to google it...I want to hear from someone who deals with this stuff intimately (not that kind of 'intimately'...though with you lot, you can't be too sure). I think that RR designed that engine for the 380. I might have worked on that wing! Quote
Rattler Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 That's it, I blame the Dogz! Better warn our lawyers of an impending lawsuit.....ANGUS!!!! Quote
Crash Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 That's it, I blame the Dogz! Better warn our lawyers of an impending lawsuit.....ANGUS!!!! It wasnt me I never done it I was on internals and trailing edge equipping. Quote
Blairgowrie Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 Hard to believe that RR and Airbus can't fix the problem. Quote
Kimosabi Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 I suppose they can't get them fitted with the Trent 890 or 895 instead? How many A380's are in Qantas fleet? Quote
BadAim Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 In the end it would probably be cheaper for RR and airbus to reequip the Quantas A 380's with a different engine that has both the extra thrust and the needed longevity (if one exists) but large corporations are rarely that smart. They'll stall and mickey mouse things and stall some more until they've turned it into a much bigger problem, then spend millions more than they had to and lose customer confidence when it finally blows up in they're face. The Corporate world never ceases to amaze me. Quote
BadAim Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 what engines do other Airbuses use? http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-11/airbus-wins-biggest-order-ever-validating-decision-on-jet-engine-upgrade.html I assume this is only an a380 issue? or is it Airbus wide? Seeing you the big jet pilot in the group - I appreciate you input. Surely Qantas is the not the only carrier with this issue? Not that I'm too lazy to google it...I want to hear from someone who deals with this stuff intimately (not that kind of 'intimately'...though with you lot, you can't be too sure). The problem only applies to Quantas on the LA route because of the amount of fuel they have to carry to get the 7500 miles to Sidney. The standard engines don't have the trust to get off LA's runway with that much fuel (I assume LAX's runways are shorter than Sidney's) so they use a slightly more powerful engine than standard. In the future please try to pay attention Kelly, I know your busy downloading porn, but there really is no excuse. Quote
1. DDz Quorum Sid Posted January 13, 2011 1. DDz Quorum Posted January 13, 2011 The problem only applies to Quantas on the LA route because of the amount of fuel they have to carry to get the 7500 miles to Sidney. The standard engines don't have the trust to get off LA's runway with that much fuel (I assume LAX's runways are shorter than Sidney's) so they use a slightly more powerful engine than standard. In the future please try to pay attention Kelly, I know your busy downloading porn, but there really is no excuse. Naff all to do with me.....Jeez, us UK Dogz are responsible for a lot of stuff but I have Nothing to do with it. Honest...guv'nor Quote
2. Administrators Jabo Posted January 14, 2011 2. Administrators Posted January 14, 2011 Wasn't me either, I just do phones... Jabo Quote
2. Administrators fruitbat Posted January 14, 2011 2. Administrators Posted January 14, 2011 unless there made from delta wood, nothing to do with me either.... Quote
1. DDz Quorum Friar Posted January 14, 2011 1. DDz Quorum Posted January 14, 2011 I have spoken to Sister Ellen on the Engineering course and she has confirmed the rumors about some "Super Blower" being used was nothing to do with her. Quote
.png.3326d5bbcb89fe2bcd3937259933ad13.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.