Source: Technical Lessons from QF32
Archives For Rotor burst
The ABC’s treatment of the QF 32 incident treads familiar and slightly disappointing ground
While I thought that the ABC 4 Corners programs treatment of the QF 32 incident was a creditable effort I have to say that I was unimpressed by the producers homing in on a (presumed) Rolls Royce production error as the casus belli.
The report focused almost entirely upon the engine rotor burst and its proximal cause but failed to discuss (for example) the situational overload introduced by the ECAM fault reporting, or for that matter why a single rotor burst should have caused so much cascading damage and so nearly led to the loss of the aircraft.
Overall two out of four stars 🙂
If however your interested in a discussion of the deeper issues arising from this incident then see:
- Lessons from QF32. A discussion of some immediate lessons that could be learned from the QF 32 accident;
- The ATSB QF32 preliminary report. A commentary on the preliminary report and its strengths and weaknesses;
- Rotor bursts and single points of failure. A review and discussion of the underlying certification basis for commercial aircraft and protection from rotor burst events;
- Rotor bursts and single points of failure (Part II), Discusses differences between the damage sustained by QF 32 and that premised by a contemporary report issued by the AIA on rotor bursts;
- A hard rain is gonna fall. An analysis of 2006 American Airlines rotor burst incident that indicated problems with the FAA’s assumed rotor burst debris patterns; and
- Lies, damn lies and statistics. A statistical analysis, looking at the AIA 2010 report on rotor bursts and it’s underestimation of their risk.
On June 2, 2006, an American Airlines B767-223(ER), N330AA, equipped with General Electric (GE) CF6-80A engines experienced an uncontained failure of the high pressure turbine (HPT) stage 1 disk2 in the No. 1 (left) engine during a high-power ground run for maintenance at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), Los Angeles, California.
To provide a better appreciation of aircraft level effects I’ve taken the NTBS summary description of the damage sustained by the aircraft and illustrated it with pictures taken of the accident by bystanders and technical staff.Continue Reading...
A report by the AIA on engine rotor bursts and their expected severity raises questions about the levels of damage sustained by QF 32.Continue Reading...
The recent Qantas QF32 engine failure illustrates the problems of dealing with common cause failure
This post is part of the Airbus aircraft family and system safety thread.
Updated: 15 Nov 2012
Generally the reason we have more than one of anything on a passenger aircraft is because we know that components can fail so independent redundancy is the cornerstone strategy to achieve the required levels of system reliability and safety. But while overall aircraft safety is predicated on the independence of these components, the reality is that the catastrophic failure of one component can also affect adjacent equipment and systems leading to what are termed common cause failures.