They say don't ask and don't tell. But you have to see this. Don't ask where we got this.
"For anybody who is not familiar with a jet engine, a jet fan blade should be perfectly smooth. You might want to think twice the next time you fly on a Chinese Airline.
A pilot for a Chinese carrier requested permission and landed at FRA, (Germany) for an unscheduled refueling stop. The reason became soon apparent to the ground crew: The Number 3 engine had been shutdown 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 windmilling (engine spinning by itself due to airflow passing through 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."
Posts
85 comments:
What is this? Just guessing but is it a CFM-56-5c from an Airbus A340?
I had been much happier, if I had not seen this...
Without evidence this can be just tell-tale...
These photos have been making the rounds via e-mail for a while.
This is not surprising. It's characteristic of the way the Chinese do things. They care only about the part they think matters, and they do nothing about anything else. The Germans care about their own people, and also about workmanship, so they're twice careful about what flies over their own country. I don't blame them.
Those 'seatbelts' arent really seatbelts at all - look closely and you'll see its a friction-type lock on a tiedown strap.
Also, wouldnt the crew calculate their fuel consumption and allow for drag, and plan a non-emergency landing accordingly?
Wouldn't flying in this condition invalidate their carriers insurance?
I'm sorry, but without names, dates, aircraft type or any other verifiable identification - this remains just another redneck BS-mongering chainmail.
I agree, some of the previous comments appear to have been made from being presumptious and naive.
With all the money pouring into the Chinese economy? I don't think they'll have problems buying anything. A good portion of the mortgages and bonds here in the U.S were purchasd by the Chinese. The majority of our foreign debt is owned by guess who? In the form of bonds and their portfolio in U.S currency? Is way into the billions, approaching a Trillion(s).
The photos, I would imagine? Are either from an isolated case if that, at best or secondly? About as genuine a hoax that could be fabricated, so Americans don't leap frog in droves to go where the real money is, to acquire 15% raises for skilled labor that is desperately needed in a booming economy.
I also say don't take my word for granted, in a few more months? A couple of Chinese built "SUV's will be entering into the U.S Automotive market soon. We'll all get a chance to see if whether or not they can afford to buy engine parts on the open market or if this is just propaganda. If we read our history of the world? We all know they just happened to be one of the oldest civilized dynasties left on the planet.
No, those are *chinese airline* seatbelts to hold your ass down while the pilot makes some "adjustments" to compensate for engine failure.
do you really believe this story...?
Not unless I know which airlines, aircrafts, I don't believe this story. More likely a hoax of someone who's jealous of Chinese success. Beside wouldn't something like this get publish in newspaper or magazine a long time ago? All I can say is that it's a setup to make Chinese airlines look bad.
If you like these photos you should see what they call 600 mile an hour Tape !
Basically heavy duty tin foil with duct tape like stickum that they use to temporarily patch up cracks and minor damage done to the aluminum skin of the planes, So they won't have to take them out of service for repairs until they are due for an overhaul !
Tom Buyea, Miami, Fl.Former aircraft mechanic
This is actually a true story. The bad thing is this happened awhile back, around 10 months ago. Lufthanssa mechenics where the ones who grounded the plane initially. (the power of licenced mechs). People are are too quik nowadays to shout conspiracy even when the truth is staring them in the face.
It looks as though this engine experienced a bird strike or similar condition. take from an insider these things do happened.
Who really thinks you can go to china and recieve a pay increase over what you make here? Wake up people things are about to hit the fan. China is now too expensive, Vietnam is the way to go now!!!
Lord help us!!.
To the naysayers, I live in China, this is exactly the type of thing they do without even thinking twice. Doubters can question the photos all they want, and indeed this set may be fake, but you can be SURE there are countless examples of just this sort of incompetence. I'm certain not a single member of the average Chinese ground crew would give this kind of shocking malfeasance a second thought. The crew probably got extra lunch boxes for their "ingeneuity". This is how the Chinese economy operates, with no regard for human life, believe it. It really doesn't matter how much money the owners of the airline have, they fly private planes, and you can bet they don't give a damn who lives or dies on their aircraft as long they get paid.
"Lord help us"? Ha!
I received these photos by email three years ago. The carrier named is Taiwanese, not a Mainland outfit, and it operates Boeing 747s, not A 340s. The craft had one entirely airworthy engine plus two more that were, um, "working", despite the abomindably chewed up fanblades. Either aircraft can fly on one engine only. In short, the safety standard was acceptable for military aircraft in combat situations but of course substandard for routine passenger hauls in peacetime.
Sure you intelligent people don't believe these stories, do you? A couple of photos with no reference point at all and you can say this is rescued from the WTC 911 site or from a hijacked plane in Israel... Telling stories is free!
Sounds like the "yellow danger" is looming around... again ;-)
Anonymous said...
600 mile an hour Tape...
When I was in the USAF (a long time ago) we called duct tape 'speed tape'; it was used to cover small cracks in aluminum, in non- structural areas, after they were stop-drilled. During the SEA dustup, KC-135 tankers flew 3 and 4 missions a day, offloading fuel (up to 120,000 pounds per mission)to fighters. Turnaround time was tight, so speed tape was used to get through the cycle. Then maintenance did repairs.
This again. These same pictures have been going around for years.
Apparently the gist of the story is true, though I don't believe the carrier, a Taiwanese airline called Mandarin Airlines, flies long-haul anymore.
Here's an article that addresses some of the myths about Chinese carriers:
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2005/02/11/askthepilot123/index_np.html
When I worked for Canada 3000 Airlines I got to poke around the hangar. I made friends with most of the mechanics and the hangar manager. At one point they had taken apart and engine because of a hairline fracture in one of the fanblades. A HAIRLINE FRACTURE grounded the plane. The mechanic told me that it had to be replaced because it would eventually break off and it could rip through the wing, engine or fuselage. Now thats scary when looking at the extent of the damage to this engine.
There is no way this engine could operate at all. It would fly apart in seconds. To suggest that this engine was being used is stupidity.
Looking at these photos and reading this story, I am not really shocked at all. I do not have the experience to know what they should look like and the normal wear & tear that is permitted but this looks serious. Comments are made that this is a hoax or old news. OK, even if that is so, why would anyone care to put the belts on the blades if they did not intend to use it? Why were the pictures taken?
Bottom line is this, the population of China is such that they DO NOT encourage having children. What is one plane full of people going to do to their population? If they are dead, that is a few less people to worry about having more kids. I know that sounds stupid to some, but I do not have faith on their value of other human life. That is just the way I see it.
I think this story is true and worth others seeing!
Who I am: I am now a Commercial pilot. To save up the money to fly, I worked at TransCanada Turbines.
By looking at the pictures I know this: that engine hit something much worse than a bird; to do that kind of damage it would have had to be metal...like a small plane or FOD. They would have secured the engine (seatbelts are legal securing devices surprise surprise and as long as you know the proper numbers securing an engine for ferry is not a problem) and then they would have been ferrying (critical crew only) the plane to FRA for maintenance. China is not as out to lunch as some people think. They still have to follow ICAO rules or they would not be allowed to over fly other countries.
It annoys me that some dummy would post only half the facts on the story.
You guys should do your research. The Chinese flight industry is one of the safest in the world. They rarely have accidents, much fewer than any other country in the world. Clearly, these photos are falsely advertised.
"You guys should do your research. The Chinese flight industry is one of the safest in the world. They rarely have accidents, much fewer than any other country in the world. Clearly, these photos are falsely advertised."
Um. No. Do a search on the most dangerous airlines in the world, and read for yourself. Chinese airlines have some of the worst accident rates.
(Note: Whether or not these pictures are accurately represented, on the other hand, I don't know.)
Now I know why I don't fly...
Cite sources or this is another dell keylogger-esque hoax
It's official: communism doesn't work.
I know that there are some excellent examples of Chinese workmanship. And I have also worked with junk from American manufacturers. But there is a certain lack of mechanical knowledge and conscientiousness among manufacturers in some developing countries. I bought a Chinese-made hasp to help me lock a shed. After I installed it, I gave it a good pull and it came apart in my hand. It's not a Communist thing, it's a lack of education and responsibility.
Not sure I believe this story, but the Aircraft in the background is wearing an Air China paintjob.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/05/27/taiwan.plane.company/index.html
I dont think their safety record is as good as you think. Perhaps you should read before you comment. Just a thought
Oh my god....
Sure it sounds funnier and/or cooler if you present the images with a story, but how gullable do ypu really have to be to beleve this s**t?
Think of what you are seing here - closeup-photos of a broken engine.. so what? Engines on planes get busted up all the time, and before they are repared the mechanics document the damage.
What you/me/we are seeing is an engine that obviusly has been hit by something mid-air. The rest is just a fabricated story to make the images look "cooler"
Ignoring the inuendo and political overtones, I wonder if this engine had flown through a severe hail storm? The amount of damage suggests something like that, or perhaps it ingested stones from a runway edge?
I too saw these pictures a long time ago. Without other data, all we could say is the engine is so badly damaged it would vibrate like hell.
If I hadn't seen similar things myself I would never have believed this either. But I'm sorry to say, this is most probably a true story.
I'm in China now. They have a decent track record for safety, but you'll never know if you heard all the facts. As far as the pictures, I saved them the first time I saw them, over 10 years ago.
Hey after we pick sides here let's have a game of bombardament.
Chinese people don't "do things" in any particular way. They are exactly the same as Americans, Norwegian, Iranians or anyone else.
Anyone saying that Chinese people are stupid, cheap or that this is "characteristic of the way the Chinese do things" are just ignorant, stupid and racist.
From my own experience, Chinese offer the same, or better, service than Americans. I love China and I love USA. But some people are plain stupid. In both of those countries.
I can believe it. I've flown many times on domestic Chinese flights, half the time the seats are not even bolted down.
This does not surprise me.
According to airsafe.com China has the second worst rating in the world for airline safety, second only to old Soviet Russia.
See for yourself.
I work for an aero engine manufacturer (I'll let you guess who) and these photo's were shooting around on our internal e-mail at least two years ago, the story was the same except it was an Indian freight plane that was involved.
"I work for an aero engine manufacturer (I'll let you guess who) and these photo's were shooting around on our internal e-mail at least two years ago, the story was the same except it was an Indian freight plane that was involved."
So its a hoax then.
1. Earlier someone said China's airlines have very bad safety history. It was a misunderstanding. The link the poster provided was for "China Airlines" which is a Taiwanese airlines. (Just search this on wikipedia) China Airlines DOES have horrible safety record, but as you know, Taiwan and China are politically separate, of course are also governed by two different air safety agencies.
2. China and Taiwan do not train their own pilots. Most of the developing countries do not have such capability to train their pilots, in fact, even JAL trains their pilots in USA. In other words, no matter what country, air safety is an international issue and people take this very seriously. Most pilots in China and Taiwan are hired from America/Europe, because their airlines industries are quite young, and their own pilots haven't gained enough experience.
3. If such thing was true, we certainly would have heard about this.
4. It is impossible to have a turbine rotating at such a high speed with unbalanced object (such as that seatbelt). At that speed, a minor imbalance will cause disintegration.
5. It was most likely like someone earlier suggested, ferried to German for maintenance. They probably flew the plane with 3 engines, with that one off.
This story is BS!!!!
Air China is a Taiwan flagship airline, Not china!!
There is an old joke
Mao telegraphs to Khrushchev - "Need some food"
Khrushchev telegraphs back - "Have to wait. Tie your belts"
Mao - "send some belts"
[http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/05/27/taiwan.plane.company/index.html
I dont think their safety record is as good as you think. Perhaps you should read before you comment. Just a thought]
"China Airlines" is the main airline of Taiwan. The Mainland's major airline is called "Air China".
Don't be so quick to just say look at what the Chinese are doing. An English 747 had an engine fire on departure at LAX and they tried to fly to London so they wouldn't have to give the passengers thier money back. Its legal to fly a four engine aircraft on three if the operators country allows it.
I have been flying with domestic chinese airlines many many times. Point is that every time the pilot and co-pilot have been western europeans or australians and the people travelling is often a lot of european/american people, and not a single time have people even considered that any lack of service or maintenance, causing an accident, could occur.
"It's official: communism doesn't work."
China Airline is a Taiwanese carrier, supported by TW government.
It's funny how americans blames everything on communism, and conviently forgets that communism itself is a western invension.
It is rediculous to see that a consuktant sompany who is specailzed in travel and aviation industry posts this kind of junk message on its own blog.
It will not hurt China, but this IAG companies itself. It at least that this company does not have any common knowledge about travel and aviation.
What's the big deal?
As a youngster I drove out from Cal to NY in the winter in an open TR3 and in PA the engine started vibrating badly (worn rod bearing). In the snow on the turnpike I found an empty milk carton, drained the oil, dropped the pan, removed the offending piston, tied a piece of leather around the bare crank journal with baling wire to maintain the oil pressure, and slapped it all back together. Meanwhile a highway cop in full patent leather uniform and tricornered hat marches up outragred: "you can't do that here!". Now the engine was really out of balance and shaking like a 6.2 earthquake. Got into Manhattan, looked under the hood. The starter motor was hanging by the cable, the generator was missing 2 of 3 bolts and the crankshaft was bent. I removed the plates, abandoned her right there. You don't need a car in New York.
"Air China" vs "China Airline"
Here we go, Air China along with an assortment of other airlines such as China Eastern, China Southern are all state companies owned and operated by the government of China and are consider to be "Chinese Airlines." As of today, China still has a single party authoritarian communist government. The government works quite well for the communist party and most people who are affiliated with it. For the other Billion or so peasants. . . well. . some pigs are just more equal than others. . .
China Airline is a Taiwanese carrier with a very questionable safety record back in the 90s. Like it's former majority owner, the Taiwanese government, it has since reformed itself and joined the more democratic and transparent side of the world. Taiwan, being an isolated democratic country has been moving away from its former association with China, yet some of the remnants are still plainly visible.
The paint scheme on the plane is question does not resemble either of the two Taiwanese international carriers or their subsidiaries.
Taiwan has come a long way in it's democratic reform and industrial quality. One of the oddest plane in the world, Dreamlifter, is being modified in Taiwan to ferry components for Boeing's 787 Dreamliner. Blue Marlin, the salvage ship used to lift and transport USS Cole back from Yeman was also built in Taiwan.
As much as I dislike the Chinese government, the pictures themselves do not tell us anything meaningful other than the fact that the turbine of an damaged engine was held down with straps. It's could have been a display unit for all we know.
I also doubt if the story is true. Most companies are profit driven, whatever a replacement engine may cost, it is still less expensive than the lost of a plane. . . . It's true, safety and quality are more often overlooked in China than in other more transparent nations, but it's kind of hard not to notice a damaged engine turbine fasten with straps.
You know, People who don't know their asses from their elbows when it comes to aviation, or more particularly, Gas Turbine Engines should refrain from polluting the environment with both Verbal and Mental Diarrhea, and not do even more damage to an already suffering industry thanks to 9/11. I think I might know a little something about situations such as the pictures and lackluster narrative describe, therefore, I will take some time and educate the "Aviation Illiterate" who seem to be brainwashed by some fool with a digital camera and an ISP. Before you ask, I am an FAA Licensed Airframe and Powerplant Mechanic, formerly employed by a US Flag Carrier. I posess an FCC General Radio-Telephone License and am well versed in Avionic Systems and Repairs. I have worked as an Engine Overhaul Mechanic at an Major FBO, I have worked at a Major Engine manufacturer as an Engine Mechanic, and am currently employed as an Engineer at a Major Engine Manufacturer.
Now fasten your seatbelts and prepare for take-off:
Firstly, I believe this is a CF-6, I am not sure what series, most likely from a 747 or DC-10. I would presume it was a 747, since this was engine #3.
And I quote:
"The Number 3 engine had been shutdown 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 windmilling (engine spinning by itself due to airflow passing through the blades during flight) and associated uncomfortable vibration caused by the suboptimal fan."
- Tough guys back in China... What the hell is that supposed to mean? If they were ferrying the aircraft to a repair facility, then, this practice happens more than you think. Thats why aircraft have more than one engine. A 747 has four engines, and can fly quite happily on three, sometime even two depending on the circumstances.
"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!"
- No, they are not seatbelts. They are straps which have adjustable tension. The fan was quite visibly strapped to the 1st stage inlet guide vanes so that it would not "windmill" and cause more damage to the core of the engine. How would it cause damage? Engine spinning but not running = no oil pressure, and no cooling or lubrication.
"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. "
- Picky Germans? Anyone would take a closer look at this, not just a German. Standards are in place for just this reason, as well as the FAA, JAA etc...
"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). "
- Once again, they are not seat belts. Yes, then fan blades are in unairworthy condition.
"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."
- Inspections aren't usually "impromptu". Get your terms straight. What constitutes an engine not "looking all that great". Where they dirty? Bird poo-poo on them perhaps??? How about some facts?
"The airline operator had to send a chunk of money to get the first engine replaced (took about 10 days). "
- You would'nt necessarily need to replace the whole engine, just the fan, depending on how the core of the engine looked.
Now, answers to some of the blog posts:
"What is this? Just guessing but is it a CFM-56-5c from an Airbus A340?"
- CF-6 I believe....
"Those 'seatbelts' arent really seatbelts at all - look closely and you'll see its a friction-type lock on a tiedown strap.
-CORRECT
Also, wouldnt the crew calculate their fuel consumption and allow for drag, and plan a non-emergency landing accordingly?
- TRUE
"Wouldn't flying in this condition invalidate their carriers insurance?"
- Not necessarily, if the aircraft is type certificated to fly on three engines.
"I'm sorry, but without names, dates, aircraft type or any other verifiable identification - this remains just another redneck BS-mongering chainmail."
- VERY WELL SAID !!!!!!!!!!!!
"No, those are *chinese airline* seatbelts to hold your ass down while the pilot makes some "adjustments" to compensate for engine failure."
-Another example of Verbal and Mental Diarrhea. :-)
"I received these photos by email three years ago. The carrier named is Taiwanese, not a Mainland outfit, and it operates Boeing 747s, not A 340s. The craft had one entirely airworthy engine plus two more that were, um, "working", despite the abomindably chewed up fanblades. Either aircraft can fly on one engine only. In short, the safety standard was acceptable for military aircraft in combat situations but of course substandard for routine passenger hauls in peacetime."
-Thank You, someone else who knows what they are talking about!
"When I worked for Canada 3000 Airlines I got to poke around the hangar. I made friends with most of the mechanics and the hangar manager. At one point they had taken apart and engine because of a hairline fracture in one of the fanblades. A HAIRLINE FRACTURE grounded the plane. The mechanic told me that it had to be replaced because it would eventually break off and it could rip through the wing, engine or fuselage. Now thats scary when looking at the extent of the damage to this engine."
- It depends where the hairline crack is. But all in all, not likely. Sorry :(
"Who I am: I am now a Commercial pilot. To save up the money to fly, I worked at TransCanada Turbines.
By looking at the pictures I know this: that engine hit something much worse than a bird; to do that kind of damage it would have had to be metal...like a small plane or FOD. They would have secured the engine (seatbelts are legal securing devices surprise surprise and as long as you know the proper numbers securing an engine for ferry is not a problem) and then they would have been ferrying (critical crew only) the plane to FRA for maintenance. China is not as out to lunch as some people think. They still have to follow ICAO rules or they would not be allowed to over fly other countries.
It annoys me that some dummy would post only half the facts on the story."
- Very well said, except for the part about it having to have hit something metal. I have seen birds, ironically Canadian Geese, cause damage such as the pictures.
"4. It is impossible to have a turbine rotating at such a high speed with unbalanced object (such as that seatbelt). At that speed, a minor imbalance will cause disintegration.
- Straps can be used to lock the fan in place to prevent rotation.
5. It was most likely like someone earlier suggested, ferried to Germany for maintenance. They probably flew the plane with 3 engines, with that one off."
-Correct-a-mundo!
Questions? Comments?
Name-calling???
;-)
This is nothing but black propaganda. This story is just another one of those demonization process against the chinese. The person writing this is a congenital liar.
Consider this, with engines such as those shown, at takeoff power with only 3 engines working will definately swing the aircraft around on the runway. Only a handful of pilots in the world are qualified to despatch an aircraft on 3 engines. They have to be specially trained. Even then, the load of the aircraft has to be greatly reduced to as light as possible, so as not ro present a danger to the test pilots delivering the aircraft. Lower weight = lower thrust therefore lesser swing tendency and more controllability. With the kind of weight limitations, it just cannot justify any worthwhile payload$.
With all these considerations it will make commercial flights useless, besides being dangerous and illegal.
JANEs actually rate chinese carriers [ not to be confused with Taiwan ] as one of the safest in the world. Those comments slurring the chinese like "incompetence"... that's the way chinese do things...etc etc, are actually from deep rascism.
What I have written above can be easily verified with Boeing or Airbus. One should be more discerning before posting such a shallow and vicious report.
IAG's credibility as advisor in travel business is certainly highly questionable and with an agenda that is anything but truthful.
Why would one assume that those pictures are from Chinese and not from say of Lufthansa Airlines?
Engines get damaged all the time when they fly through hailstorms or suck in foreign materials.
Beleive me, if a person were to stand in front of a jet engine such as those shown, the person will be sucked in.
Okay, listen up. Until 2 days ago I was the quality manager for an FAA repair sttion that repaired fan blades for GE, CFMI, PWA and Honeywell. What you are looking at is a Pratt and Whitney JT9D1 engine (only fan blade I know of that has inner and outer shrouds). Also the moment weights written on the airfoil are in line with the JT9D1 fan blades. Notice the engine is not installed on wing. Very possibly it did have a bird strike in the air which cause the outter airfoil of one of the blades to let go. That probably caused a lot of the damage to the outer airfoils and the case.
The Chinese have visited our shop every 2 years and are very through in their audits. If they are not happy with what they see they will pull your certification.
If only engines were built to the same extreme standards as nose-cones. Don't forget nose-cones can punch through 6 reinforced concrete walls and still remain completely recognisable, whereas engines are largely obliterated.
anonymous FAA Licensed Airframe and Powerplant Mechanic, formerly employed by a US Flag Carrier. You outta get your facts straight before you blast everyone. This is NOT a CF6 -6, -50- -80A, -80C2 engine. It is a Pratt and Whitney JT9D1. You can tell this by the number of shrouds on the airfoil. 2 on the concave and 2 on the convex for a total of 4. A CF6 (any model) only has 2. One on the concave and one on the convex. Also the blades weight is written on the airfoil (3XXX.X). This is the blades moment weight in Inch/Ounces. A CF6 would be noted as 12X,XXX and this is in gram/inches.
As far as the hairline fracture on the blade...absolutely would ground that engine. I have seen where a hairline crack did cause major damage to an engine. This is why Pratt & Whitney requires an eddy current inspection be performed on the blade leading edge during the overhaul. Also why the blade is inspected using an ultra sensitive flourescent penetrant during the overhaul process.
Most people do not realize that a fan blade can be repaired and overhauled. That if there is a tear on the edge you can machine that area out and using an electron beam weld process weld in a patch. The blades on this engine are visably beyond any allowable repair limits and would be scrapped out.
[Engines get damaged all the time when they fly through hailstorms or suck in foreign materials.
Beleive me, if a person were to stand in front of a jet engine such as those shown, the person will be sucked in.]
I think this happenned some lmonths ago in the US. A member of a ground crew sgot sucked-in an engine and was killed.
This shouldn't surprise anybody. If you fly 3rd world airlines like Taca, any Chinese airline, African or Middle Eastern one you will have to expect this. The maintenance is bad, and the pilots are worse.
The chinese pilots have a bad habit of flying right into mountains or trying to land with the ILS turned off. Oh well, at least you don't feel it.
In the picture with engine and airframe, you'll see the paint scheme is grey underside, white upside, with thick and thin blue "cheat lines". If you do an image search for Air China at
http://www.airliners.net/search/?
...you'll see that clearly the aircraft right behind the engine is one of their birds. And Air China is clearly the Communist national mainland airline.
Now, I'm no AME, but I do recall seeing that in the 80's, turbines were tested for balance on a machine which could easily detect a paper match taped to one side of the turbines. Think about that, it could detect the weight of a single match. Loosing huge chunks out of the main discs would require an immediate engine shutdown, be it on takeoff or in flight.
I suppose a modest distance ferry flight is possible, even likely, for one damaged engine. But I don't see any pilot approving flying a 4 engine plane when 3 of them have significant blade damage. He's taking his own life in his hands, never mind his pax. And either he or the First Officer will do a walkaround before starting the engines. Nope, I don't see that happening outside of maybe the old Aeroflot of the 60's and 70's.
Communist China may have trouble sometimes bringing itself to Western style standards, but they ARE trying very hard. I've flown Air China, Hainan Air and one other who I forget. Air China was ok, but Hainan airlines it was a totally brand new 737-800 back in 2002. You don't buy that expensive an aircraft and then go cheap on maintenance... that's a guarantee of airline and financial failure...whether it's Communist or Capitalist.
Bottom line: IMO it was a birdstrike on takeoff, perhaps a flock of multiple seagulls, and the pilots dealt with the situation just as any top flight western airline would have. I'll also bet that they made several phone calls to the manufacturer if they flew on 3 for maintenance ferry flight.
exactly where does it say that this engine is from a Chinese airline? As far as I am concerned, these photos could from anywhere...Air France maybe?
Air France? Mon dier! France is #1 in the world for maintannce.
For those who don't belive in chineese blatant careless behavior :
ca. 100.000 mortal industrial accidents in 2005
This is a lie.
Actually I might add I was the flight engineer who saw these engines when we grounded the plane. A bloody death trap just waiting to fall from the sky.It was a United flight. Yep, good old US of A crap. Dont let the conspiracy theorists divert you from the truth, those straps were American ingenuity and no one elses!
just a few observations...
The engine is not attached to the wing... notice items under the wings are reversed. I am not sure what you call them. And the engine is being supported.
If the engine is not attached then the plane in the background may or may not be the plane that it was attached too.
All comments about it's origin or the damage done to it are pure speculation without further evidence.
How many American Aircraft are maintained in china or asia..........many
Of those how many recieve authorized FAA or Manufacturer training. your guess????
Of those, how many have the required backgroud checks that are required by U.S. Maintenace Technicians. Very few
This is GREAT!!! It looks to me like a picture of an engine that has sustained some sort of strike-damage. Bird, Hail, Snap-on Wrench set, etc., it's not important. So, it's been removed from the aircraft and attached to a transport dolly with the front fans secured FOR TRANSPORT. A common sight in any maintenance facility. Nothing more.
Why don't you idiots get a life? Like one person stated: "that engine could have been secured for ferry flight only". If you look at the picture closely the engine is not coweled and sitting on an engine stand facing the rear of an airplane. The damage is consistant with a compresser turbine failure. As a person holding a private pilot license, it is unthinkable to depart with a load of cargo or passengers on board with a nonfuctional engine. I believe this is taken out on context!
Come on - this pictures are being emailed around for at least years now...
Do not make anything up, especially not very general comments about a country with over a billion of people. The idiots in this world are evenly shared and no counry is better or worse than another country (Ihave been to China as well as to the USA).
Spreading this type of false information against any person or company is illegal and can get you a lawsuit for your trouble. Authorities can obtain court orders to identify those spreading this type of information. Count yourself lucky if you don't here from a law firm.
this is not poor maintenance, just a bird strike in normal operation, then engine has been removed, straps or seatbelts mentioned are merely to hold turbine blades during transport, and photo depicting the damage sustained - someone with imagination has thought, woudln't it be funny to say its how chinese fly. the plain could not have taken off like this safely, and would never have done - certainly would not be flying passengers around hoping no one would notice as the compression would be entirely variable.
- conclusion -
pci taken by maintenance crew of a "ooh look at the damage this suffered after a bird strike".
Story connected to it above? total fabrication. Hear of many chinese flight crashes lately?? if maint was this poor they'd be falling out the skys all over the place.
I would not let the Chinese do any maintenance on aircraft. They will screw plates and pins into anything, hoping it will work. They like to cut corners and big boggers. They don't keep to Aviation rules and procedures.I won't even let them repair my push bike. Money comes first, safety last. Named and Shamed to China's Aviation.
On the other hand, we must not jump into conclusion. All the rotor blades work independently to obtain high compression, this would tear the attached belt into bits as the torque ratio is very high, hence causing a lot of vibration and flutters even on the ground before take off. So, I reiterate my comments as to No Fault Found on the Chinese Aviation. Bird strikes are quite possible. As for belts are used for maintenance purposes. My appologies.
On the other hand, this is not possible as the belts would hold outer rotor from inner rotor blades. Engines will breakup on the ground as they spin at different rate to get high compression. The aircraft would have a hell lot of trouble moving from standstill. Cracks on fan blades are caused by stone chippings or birds - typical findings. Appologies to Chinese Avaition.
from the pictures, the plane in the back dose not resemble Air China. the two blue lines on air china is evenly space apart throughout the length of the fuselage. in the little portion of the fuselage shown you can tell that the top blue line is strait and the bottle is tilted. my prediction is that the two lines converge later on. also the air china's engine housing is full grey in colors. in the picture the plane in the back have a blue engine housing. this might be another airline.
im sorry to be the bearer of the bad news, it is a truth.
if you took a look at some of european carriers Tech. log's, you will probably see that all airlines have quite crazy going's on.
however, i couldnt help but notice. . . .is'nt this one of their better jumbo's?
I'm an A@P mechanic whos worked on aircraft turbofan and turbojet engines for 14 years. Flight control mechanic 2 years. Aircraft and engine fuel system mechanic 16 years. Instructor 4 years including 1 year engine overhaul. I have a BS degree in Aeronautics. IMO the engine in question has had a part of the shroud on the fan blade come apart and come forward of the engine. It then caused all the damage seen. Notice the stator blades behind the fan are not damaged. This tells me the crew (or even the ground run up operator) shut down the engine in time to prevent further damage and that the shroud part of the blade did not get caught behind the fan blade. We can be sure that the matal that came off the blades went down the engine. That probably caused some more damage. Most of the air going past the fan blades is for cooling the engine. Only 25 percent goes to the core of the engine. We don't know the amount damage to the core here.
If this were a bird strike which it could be you'd see some blood smears and feathers. We don't but that could have been cleaned up and the engine may be going into a can in this picture.
I think fan blades coming apart and damaging a wing and the fuel tanks in the wings as rare. Most engines fan areas at the 1st stage are forward of wing fuel tanks which is mostly the entire wing. Depending on the flight path of the seperating blade also it would have to come into contact with the wing at a certain deflection or just travel harmlessly into space til it hit the erath. The turbine blades are more suseptable to seperate and come apart and go thru the engine case and into a wing tank as the turbine blades are under the wing area and not forward. The engine case at the hot section is built up also.
I would fly the aircraft if the manufacturer said it was o.k.. Of course not with pax. I would not want to fly over populated areas either.
I doubt the story about flying with passengers after shutting down engines and then continuing on. The problem with flying with an engine out is that you have to worry about what could happen next. Like another engine problem or any number of things which would cause a chain of events leading to a crash. There are a lot of factors to take into account before just taking off witha known engine damaged and not secured. Flying on with passengers is a no brainer. A@P mechanics have seen a lot worse.
They should have used DUCT TAPE instead ... it would have saved them some money.
In responce to the the last post from teh aircraft mechanic, I have seen a video in my gas turbine class of the destructive examinations that these engines go through, including intentionally shedding a blade with the engine operating at full speed, and to pass the test the blade must not pierce the casing of the engine. A blade piercing the wing of an aircraft or fueselage is not likely. I'm not sure who mandated these tests, it could've been an FAA requirement and not a foreign one, but I can imagine an international flight would have to pass similar standards.
What a cheap shot.
Just what all the China critics need.
A. The writer used a pic of the head of plane in the ware house, who knows is it a wreaked engine going to be thrown away. Those damages could be done after the dis-order the plane, the seatbelts maybe just used to hold the parts in position while transfer with trucks.
If the so called China Air does such a bad just taking care of their air planes,why write does show the pics of their planes in the airport???!!!! Wouldn't it be more convincing??
B. On the earth, there are only air companies names Air China and China Airline.
Air China is in main land China, China Airlines is in Taiwan.
Here are these two air companies websites: http://www.china-airlines.at/
http://www.airchina.com.cn/en/index.jsp
The writer even can not name the company right, which one do you think he is talking about??
My opinion:
Biased critics, cheap shots.
Who ever believed this kind of lies, I have to say you needs to educate yourself more.
These photos have been around longer than 2007. Here's a link to a snopes.com forum where they've been discussing them: http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=4901
The straps are clearly tie-down straps and not seatbelts.
as an aircraft engineer for 30 years i can tell you this those are pupose made straps for stopping the fan of a pratt and whitney jt9 turbofan engine form windmilling and are used for 3 eng ferry flights to get the aircraft to a repair facility all above board and legal in fact you will find the proceedure in the aircraft maintainance manual
I met the head of an outsource maintenance service company for Air China (the airline in question); (I don't have the name of the company on hand, as his business card is in my other home, but..). Funny thing, his company is German and he is German. Air China at least, does not do their own maintenance, but the "perfect" Germans (according to your article) do it. So, if the plane had bad maintenance, then your German theory is wrong. If they have good maintenance, then your whole basis for this article is wrong.
The guy professed to me at dinner, that Air China maintenance is above and beyond the requirement set by the US FAA. Makes sense since they are an international Carrier.
I am however, not convinced China cares that much about quality. Could also be the fact their planes are fairly new, considering the recent economic boom of China has resulted in massive aircraft orders. The American Airlines plane I just flew on the other day was almost 20 years old....
check our www.airsafe.com to get real stats on Chinese airlines. China has a whole has the lowest total body count of all countries. Who knows why. If the plane didn't get you the milk might.
1. the fan blades are secured to each other, but also the inlet guide vanes... these VIGV's (variable inlet guide vanes) are static and do not rotate, therefore the fan will not rotate!
2. does it really matter what F£$^&£G airline it belongs to? this happens all over the world, aircraft are permitted a certain degree of ADF's (Acceptable Deferred Faullts) and are commonly granted "one flight only" authorization to return to their Home Station or a recognised aircraft maintenance facility...
3. read before you post... this aircraft flew with the engine "fitted" and "secured" to prevent "windmilling" therefore reducing the drag effect co-efficient! Lots of people on here think that the engine was running but that is not physically possible...
My experience:
I cant even be bothered to justify my experience....
Too many people claim to know more than the person before, what I will say though is that the Riggers and Sootys on here are the only ones making any sense!!
I am familiar with this incident. The aircraft ingested FOD into 1 engine (The type of FOD is unknown). The fan was secured using seatbelts, (as a pilot earlier pointed out is quite legal), to reduce drag from that engine. The aircraft was then ferried(non-revenue flight) to germany for repairs. Everything accomplished was legal and approved. This sorta of thing happens more often than you think.
Post a Comment