NTSB Orders Inspections on All Boeing 747-8 Cargo Engines
Boeing 747-8 (photo: Wikipedia/Boeing)
A Third Boeing Jet…a 787…Found to Have Possible Engine Shaft Crack
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has ordered checks of all GEnx engines for cracks on Boeing 747-8 cargo planes in an urgent bulletin released Friday.
The NTSB also said that all 747-8s should be grounded until the inspections take place.
The Seattle Times reports:
‘The agency said GE has used a field ultrasonic inspection method to inspect the fan midshaft on all in-service and spare GEnx-1B engines, used on the 787 Dreamliner. The similar but smaller GEnx-2B engines on passenger versions of the 747-8 have also been inspected, the NTSB said, but approximately 43 GEnx-2B engines on 747-8F cargo airplanes that have not yet been inspected.’
GE says that fewer than 10 planes need to be inspected, and that task should be completed by early next week.
The first engine issue took place when a GE engine had a failure on a 787 during a runway test in North Charleston, South Carolina on August 9th and the second was an AirBridgeCargo 747 that lost thrust on takeoff three days ago.
Now the NTSB has revealed a third problem:
“A GEnx-1B engine installed on a Boeing 787 that had not yet flown was found to have an indication of a similar crack on the fan midshaft.”
The extent of the possible crack has not been released but the investigation in ongoing.
Category: Airnation
We knew this was coming. Thank god for the NTSB. Unlike the FAA, the NTSB seems to act very quickly and do the right thing.
There is something wrong with these engines and they need to be fixed!
Lol I said something yesterday about it that it was going to happen again. So good luck to Ge on this matter because these customers are going to be upset with this flaw.
Yepp, we knew this was coming for sure.
I have NO sympathy for either GE or Boeing. This is what happens when manufacturers “rush” new designs and push the envelope of what’s attainable. Boeing had been delaying the 787 because of GE, and apparently it should have been delayed some more.
No sympathy from me. These little flaws are just the beginning.
Chris did you get fired from Boeing? You call all the long delays a rush? Well I’m betting GE gets the problem fixed and Boeing keeps selling planes.
Scott, Boeing had the 787 built before GE had the engines completed. You don’t think GE was rushing?
BUT OF COURSE IT WILL BE FIXED BUT GE HAS BIG PROBLEMS
BETTER GET ANOTHER ENGINE MAKER
The new manufacturing slogan is “WE DON’T HAVE TIME TO DO IT RIGHT BUT WE ALWAYS HAVE TIME TO DO IT OVER”
Ain’t that the truth Bill!
Lol yes I do blame Ge more on this matter then boeing but did boeing really test these engines to the limit because if they did maybe they would have noticed these issues. I dont think the 787 is a bad plane but it does have it issue. What really makes me wonder is about the A350. I have a feeling that aircraft is going to have multiple issues when it comes out. Im also wondering what is going to happen to the deliveries of the ge 787 because they are already delayed enjoy but this is going to delay more of them including air india. So far this is the deliveries that are due to come up.
http://nyc787.blogspot.com/
You know what? I blame Boeing just as much as i blame GE. It was Boeing that went to GE with the desire for this engine, and they should have built the plane AFTER the engine was completed and fully tested (which clearly it hadn’t been).
This is what happens when designers push the envelope and take risks. The world didn’t NEED the 787 right now, it’s been functioning just fine with the 767 and A330. Boeing and GE should have taken their time.
To save a dime, Boeing and GE tried to squeeze as much power from this power plant as they could, and as a result we are seeing these issues.
No sympathy. Give me a 767 or A330 with an engine i can depend on. I’ll pay the $20 premium on each ticket for the extra fuel burn. I want to be safe.
Thats what I thought. Thats dry film coating nor the lubracation is not going to fix this issue. Its more like the steel is like a carbon fiber material and its not withstanding the pressure of reving so much. I wanna know thou how this issue has happen not just on one but two brand new never flown engines. I wonder if this may be more then a manufacter issue but also Ge not inspecting the engines while the are building them.
On that other note when did Ge design a new steel and why hasn’t anyone heard of it before untill now.
CHINK CHINK STEEL HAS NEVER BEEN UP TO QUALITY STANDARS SO WY WOULD THEY BE NOW
ITS BOEINGS TURN TO WAKE UP
Is that where GE gets their metal from (China)?
Well if it wasn’t a shaft crack what else could it be to make it look like it was the same damage. I mean come on if they look like the same damage then it must be something causing them to come apart. Also this is not all boeings fault here for saying Boeing needs to get on the stick. Yes they went to Ge for the engine but Ge gave them a time frame that was to fast and Boeing say okay that will work but if you can make it faster then please do so. But being Ge gets it parts from who knows were in the world lol its there fault for not checking the parts fully before sending the engine to Boeing and saying oh wait this problem has a issue lol. What do you think Chris.
Opps. I meant engine has an issue.
William, i agree to some extent. I have no idea what happened to this engine, but any premature failure is undoubtedly a result of poor manufacturing. Either a defect in the material (isolated incident) or an engineering error. I’m not sure where GE gets their metal from, but i doubt the place of manufacture has anything to do with these issues. GE tells their metal manufacturers the exact specs for their metal, and GE is ultimately responsible for ensuring that their materials are correct.
This is what happens when aircraft and engine manufacturers push the envelope of what’s reasonable. They rush designs and things like this come up. Back in the day, an aircraft manufacturer took the best engine already available and made the plane as big as it could be to fit the engine. The 747 came so late because Boeing was waiting for the engines. The same is true for the 707 and the DC8 (which use the same engines). They took the best engines available at the time and went to work building the aircraft. Now, the aircraft is built and engine manufacturers are stuck with the task of making an engine that will fit the aircraft. It’s risky…
Well yes I totally agree with you. This is what happens when you rush things. Things break and dont work right but what the airlines and the air manufactures need to reliaze is that the plane is going to be good if you rush it but if you take time and put it together and fully test it and take your time then when it comes out you will have a awesome plane. They need to slow down and build a plane like they use to and not force a engine to the max when its not ready to. Why else do you think the Dc-8 and boeing 707 took off and are like tanks. Because they built them slowly and the right way the first time.
Unfortunately, it’s just the cost of doing business. Boeing needed orders for the aircraft, so they told their customers that the project would be completed earlier than it really would be. Even with the delays, Boeing made more money “hooking” their customers earlier. If they took their time, customers would have looked elsewhere. It’s all politics…
Aircraft of the past were designed by engineers using a slide-rule and who wrote plans on pieces of paper. When in doubt, they over-built something. Today, computers tell “engineers” the absolute minimum amount of strength a certain part needs to have based on simulations. In some cases, the computers are wrong (citing the A380 wings for example). It’s all to save weight and money. It’s sad…
Its not just the A380 wings there is a memo going around someplace that the rivets holding the nose on are bad as well. I dont know how much truth there is to that but its just because they over stepped there boundries. Thats also why I said airlines need to wake up and figure this out as well to not rush things. The better things are built the longer and stronger they last lol. But yes I agree with you thats the cost of doing business. Money is what anyone wants in the world and they will do anything to get it. Cheaping parts on a aircraft is not the way to do it thou.
This is the nose rivets that im talking about.
http://airnation.net/2012/02/19/easa-airbus-rivets-a380-nose/
I had no idea about the nose rivet issue. I do know however that during flight testing of the A380, the landing gear door flew off near mach .85! I don’t believe there’s ever been another commercial aircraft in existence that’s had parts come off of it during flight testing. Evidently the flutter was more than the engineers expected (what a surprise), and the door needed to be re-designed.
I wish aircraft of today were being designed to “last”, but they’re not. There’s a constant battle between weight and strength. The more weight you have, the longer life the aircraft will have, but during this long life fuel economy will suffer. The politicians of the aircraft industry figured out that it’s cheaper to fly a lighter aircraft with a short life span and good fuel economy, over a more well-built aircraft with a longer lifespan with poorer fuel economy. The days of seeing aircraft flying 40 years after manufacture is gone…
Even if these “weaker” aircraft result in incidents and crashes, it’s still the cost of doing business. What’s a crash every 10 years? If it saves the airline billions in fuel, you get the idea…
I heard about the landing gear door but didn’t they blow some tires do to the weight of the aircraft thats why they went back to take more weight off. As for aircraft off the top of my head that had parts that came off. I have a hunch there was another aircraft but off the top of my head im not sure where i heard or saw it from. Btw did you hear about that engineer from boeing that got fired or laied off the said that the 787 isn’t say. He was saying it woudl shadder on impact lol.
Indeed, in fact several people from Boeing expressed their concerns with the composite materials used on the 787 fuselage. I visited the Boeing factory last year and we were given the privilege to meet with several Boeing engineers (and also some retired ones that worked on the 737 project in the 1960s). They gave me a piece of the composite skin to play with, and i could instantly tell it’s not ideal for an “impact”. It has absolutely no flexibility like aluminum. I have no doubt that it’s strong, but it doesn’t bend. In a crash landing, the skin will refuse to crease, transferring all the energy to the main structure and of course the passengers. My prediction (which is shared by many other professionals) is that the composite fuselage of the 787 will crack open like a glass beer bottle upon a crash landing. The composite skin is very brittle. Light, strong, but brittle.
Do you know if the aircraft you’re thinking of was recent? I found this video a long time ago concerning an “incident” that happened to a B52 bomber about 50 years ago. Practically the entire vertical stabilizer fell off and the plane still landed safely. You’ll never believe this…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wclfY0Meruw
Now THIS is engineering.
Lol I belive it can happen if you have people who know what they are doing. I mean aircraft are built do a good degree but some aren’t. I remember northwest 255 losing a hydralic pump and having to land without a bottom rudder back in 2002 i think and the Dynasty 006 which landing in SFO with have of its tail damaged. Then you have Japan 123 which woudl have landed if they would have kept the speed up I think. So sad people had to lose there jobs to a failure to fix the bulkhead the right way.
As for the aircraft that I think it was an older model. I am guessing sometime in the 80s but im not off my head sure. I guess its time to look it up lol.
Lol dont get me wrong I totally agree with you. Ge and Boeing should have taken there time and made sure it was safe but they both wanted money in there pockets so they were trying to rush there production for safety if you can call it that and profit. I would still love a 707 maybe ever a 747-400 over one today. Yes they have new designs which look nice but they dont need them really. Make planes for safety and then after such if you can make a profit go for it but dont try to make money off of it because sooner or later your gonna lose the battle. The same goes for the A380 airbus didn’t have the knowledge in my mind to build a double decker but yet they did it and they are losing the batter with all of there issues they have to refix on the plane.
This gives a little more insight into the issue here as well.
http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120915/PC05/120919412/1165/defect-found-in-boeing-ge-engine-not-isolated
“As a result of findings to date, GE has introduced changes in the production process that address environmentally assisted cracking, including changes to the dry-film coating applied to the mid-shaft, as well as changes to the coating lubricant used when the retaining nut is clamped to the mid-shaft,” the statement said.”
Are they really suggesting this as a “fix”??
“The shafts are made of high-strength steel, and [GE] likely developed what they thought was a better type of high-strength steel. And it’s biting them.”
Ha!
Hey Chris get a load of this. Air India is back at it again and say they are not taking anymore 787s untill the problem is fixed but Boeing is stated that the deliveries for the Ge 747-8(I and F) and the 787 are slowing down to do the engine issue.
http://nyc787.blogspot.com/
I don’t doubt it. Air India is trying to get more money out of Boeing probably.
Lol if i was boeing after all this mess i would just reconfigure the planes and sell them to some other airline and so air india that they mean bussiness with selling the planes.
Hey either Air India wants there planes or boeing told them they are going to start charging them storage while they are in South Carolina because they are taking deliver of another 787 today lol.
http://nyc787.blogspot.com/
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AIC170
JUST GOT A SET A\OF BRAKE DISKS FOR MY AUTO MADE IN CHINK LAND THEY WERE THE ONES AUTO PARTS SAID WAS RIGHT BUT GUESS WHAT NO FIT THE CALIPERS CHINK CHINK GET IUSED TO THIS SOUND BUT BE CAREFUL IF YU FLY WITH GE ENGINES
Are you aware that GE is a USA company?