[Peetwo]

Jetstar probed over engine shutdown

Jetstar aircraft seen at Sydney International Airport, Sydney, Friday, Aug. 12, 2016.

• Mitchell Bingemann
  
• The Australian
  
• 6:11PM August 12, 2016
  

[/url]
Reporter
Sydney
[url=http://twitter.com/Mitch_Hell]@Mitch_Hell[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/4c134add4c3a9e4881f7841b69d9ac85/?esi=true&t_product=the-australian&t_template=s3/austemp-article_common/vertical/author/widget&td_bio=false[/img]

Update: In comments from the two short Binger articles on the Jetstar Guam incident, Mitchell has copped a bit of a pizzling from the likes of serial Australian Aviation section critic 'Mick', e.g.

Mick
5 days ago

@Mark  Haven't you been following this breaking story, Mark?!   It's an investigative effort of Watergate-like proportions.   Through his investigation Mitchell has managed to not only "uncover" widely available public domain safety information on the Dreamliner, he's also managed to invent a new word - incidences (having offered three separate corrections over four days, I swear on all that is holy and sacred that if he uses "incidences" again I will fair dinkum do my nut!).

It's riveting stuff. 

I am just a little miffed though that I haven't rated a by-line given I wrote this in Comments on the original news story 5 nights ago;
"On a more serious note, this would be the 19th or 20
th engine shut down inflight incident with the B787 Dreamliner in its relatively short in service history.   This is a very similar incident to Jetstar flight JQ25 from Cairns to Tokyo Narita back in December 2014 which was forced to divert to Guam due a decreasing engine oil quantity indication.  And no, it's not the same aircraft. 
...    Most of the engine problems with the B787 have been with the General Electric GEnx-1B engines and almost invariably related to either oil quantity or pressure indication issues.  In some respects the GEnx is a less complex engine than the other engine option for the 787, the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 (2 shaft low/high pressure V. 3 shaft low/intermediate/high pressure), but it seems to have an unhappy knack of throwing up these oil problems."

Some of this criticism is somewhat justified, as loose reporting in such a specialist area, full of many armchair experts & big egos, can very quickly lead to the demise of even the most seasoned of aviation journalists. However at this point in time I think Mick is being a little unfair and I do question ulterior (i.e. Troll) motives. Surely it would be just as easy for Mick to not even respond to what he obviously feels is substandard aviation reporting? 

I also would like to take to task this comment from Ian & Mick:

Ian - ..Are you trying to imply the ATSB only decided to investigate because of your article?

Mick
5 days ago

@Ian  I was thinking the same thing, Ian.   I doubt whether young Mitchell is familiar with either the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 or Transport Safety Investigation Regulations 2003, specifically Section 2.3 Immediately reportable matters 
(3) (k) a mechanical failure resulting in the shutdown of an engine; and
(3) (n) malfunction of an aircraft system that seriously affects the operation of the aircraft. 

Mick quotes the TSI Act & regs when it was never contended by Binger that this incident was not reported to the ATSB. What was in contention at the time (& ignored by Mick) was that it took more than five days for the ATSB to decide to investigate.

Okay now compare that response to this ATSB opened investigation yesterday:

Engine shut down involving Airbus A330, 9M-XXD, 445 km SE of Alice Springs Airport, SA, on 16 August 2016
 
Investigation number: AO-2016-101
Investigation status: Active
 

• Summary
  

The ATSB is investigating an engine shut down involving an AirAsia X Airbus A330, registered 9M-XXD, 445 km SE of Alice Springs Airport, South Australia, on 16 August 2016.

During cruise, the flight crew received a low oil pressure warning from the right engine.

The engine was shut down and the flight crew diverted the aircraft to Melbourne. There were no injuries and the aircraft was not damaged.

As part of the investigation, the ATSB will interview the captain and gather additional information.

A report will be released within several months.
 
General details

Date: 16 Aug 2016
 
Investigation status: Active
 
Time: 23:20 CST
 
Investigation type: Occurrence Investigation
 
Location   (show map): Alice Springs 445 km SE
 
Occurrence type: Engine failure or malfunction
 
State: South Australia
 
Occurrence category: Incident
 
Report status: Pending
 
Highest injury level: None
 
Expected completion: Dec 2016 
 
Aircraft details

Aircraft manufacturer: Airbus
 
Aircraft model: A330-343X
 
Aircraft registration: 9M-XXD
 
Serial number: 1066
 
Operator: AirAsia X
 
Type of operation: Air Transport High Capacity
 
Sector: Jet
 
Damage to aircraft: Nil
 
Departure point: Sydney, NSW
Destination: Kuala Lumpar, Malaysia
 
 
 


Last update 17 August 2016

 
Moving on: To Mitchell's credit he has not been deterred by the constant diatribe, by Mick and his fan club, that the Jetstar Guam incident is a non-event, & therefore a non-story. In the Oz today:

Engine shutdown risk for Jetstar Dreamliner fleet

• Mitchell Bingemann
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 18, 2016
  @Mitch_Hell
  [img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/4c134add4c3a9e4881f7841b69d9ac85/?esi=true&t_product=the-australian&t_template=s3/austemp-article_common/vertical/author/widget&td_bio=false[/img]
  

Planes in Jetstar’s Dreamliner fleet are flying with a known ­engine problem that could trigger a mid-flight engine shutdown such as the one that recently forced one of its Boeing-787s to divert to the Pacific island of Guam.

The Australian understands Jetstar has been working on the engine issue, which can lead to a loss of oil pressure, since March and has made repairs to 11 of its 24 General Electric-made GEnx ­engines, meaning about half the airline’s Dreamliner fleet could be operating with the problem.

A Jetstar spokesman said the figure of 11 repaired engines was “not correct”, but declined to ­reveal whether the airline had ­repaired more or less than the quoted number.
A service bulletin issued early this year by General Electric to operators of Dreamliners fitted with the GEnx engine said the issue related to a problem with the “transfer gearbox”.

It recommended operators of the Dreamliner modify a “dampened radial gearshaft” to prevent “induced resonance failures that have caused approximately eight in-flight engine shutdowns and oil loss events across the world.”

“A resonance-induced failure means a component of the ­aircraft engine developing an ­uncontrolled vibration,” said Marcus Diamond, a safety and technical consultant at the Australian Federation of Air ­Pilots.

Jetstar — which operates a fleet of 11 twin-engine Boeing 787-8s — confirmed the service bulletin had been issued to the airline but declined to share ­details of it with The Australian.

“Jetstar has been working closely with GE on the service bulletin,” the Jetstar spokesman said. “We are well progressed on our fleet and will have all aircraft engines completed months ahead of the recommended timeframe from GE.

“We are continuing our invest­igations into the cause of the engine issue with GE on the aircraft that diverted to Guam.”

Service bulletins alert operat­ors to known issues in aircraft components, but the instructions are optional and not as serious as “airworthiness directives” that mandate airlines to make modifications by a specific deadline.

The General Electric-issued service bulletin said modifi­cations to fix the known fault should be completed between November 30 this year and March 31 next year, depending on the model of engine. Jetstar is on track to complete the modifi­cations on the affected engines by the end of November.

The engine issue also affects Dreamliners operated by airlines such as Air Canada, Air India, China Southern, United Airlines and Etihad Airways that fly from Australian airports.
General Electric says it continually monitors and analyses the performance of the GEnx ­engine fleet. “Based on the engine fleet’s service history, we are not aware of operational issues that would hazard the continued safe flight of aircraft powered by these engines,” a spokeswoman said.

“As a relatively new engine in commercial airline service, the GEnx by any statistical measure (dispatch reliability, engine remov­als, in-flight shutdown rates) is exhibiting outstanding reliability powering the 787.”

Last week, Jetstar was forced to divert to Guam a one-year-old Dreamliner flying from Japan to the Gold Coast, because of an oil pressure problem with one of its GEnx engines. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is invest­igating the incident.

And as is becoming routine, Mick is back and ironically he mentions the AirAsiaX inflight engine shutdown incident as a further attempt to discredit Binger:  

Gordon

1 hour ago

@Henry Read Mick's post above. I am an aircraft operations layman, but Mick sounds like he knows what he's talking about.   I'm betting this reporter from the Australian does not and the whole thing is a beat up designed to scare people unnecessarily.

Mick
42 minutes ago

@Gordon   It is a beat-up, a shameless beat-up.   Meanwhile, real aviation news, like the inflight shut-down of an engine on an AirAsia X A330 out of Sydney on Tuesday, goes unreported.

To put this in context this is the post chain, which includes the 'Mick' post to which Gordon refers Henry to:

arlys

3 hours ago

All aircraft who fly in this country, have to meet strict guidelines. A new aircraft like the B787, will always have shakedown problems, but having already flown close to a million miles, safely, its something the Engineers have decided needs attention, and will do so promptly, and efficiently, in this country. The B787 passes a ETOPS which allows it to fly 330 minutes from a landing field, suitable to its type, the normal ETOPS is 180 minutes, which means this aircraft can fly on one engine safely for a extended time officially.

---

Mick
2 hours ago

As Arlys points out, these engines are required to meet Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards (ETOPS).   The ETOPS inflight shut-down (IFSD) requirement is no more than 0.02 IFSDs per 1000 engine hours, which is the same as 20 shutdowns per million hours.  To be clear, that means, on the average, one inflight engine shut-down every 50,000 engine hours.   The General Electric GEnx engine exceeds that reliability requirement by more than a factor of six.  Its reliability is at or about on a par with more "mature" engines such as the CFM CF6-80C2 (Airbus A300, Airbus A310, Boeing B767), the General Electric GE90 (Boeing B777) and the Pratt and Whitney PW4000 (Airbus A300, Airbus A310, Boeing B747). 

Service bulletins are issued by airplane and airplane engine manufacturers all of the time.   The fact that this matter is being dealt with via a service bulletin and not a directive indicates that it is not a time critical matter.   And some context for the "... failures that have caused approximately eight in-flight engine shutdowns and oil loss events across the world.", there are well over 1,000 GEnx engines currently in service around the world (it's one of the fastest selling airplane engines of all time) and it has accumulated around 7 million operating hours;  so the failure rate associated with the dampened radial gearshaft is about 0.0011 per 1,000 engine hours!

Regrettably while The Australian follows what seems to be becoming standard practice of flogging old stories to death, real aviation news just seems to pass by unobserved and unreported (well, by The Australian anyway). 

For those interested, on Tuesday, 16 August, the crew of an AirAsia X Airbus A330-300 operating as Flight D7-221 from Sydney to Kuala Lumpur was forced perform an inflight shutdown of the starboard Rolls Royce Trent 772 engine after receiving a low oil pressure warning.   The airplane was some 340 kilometres south east of Alice Springs at the time and diverted safely to Melbourne.   There have been four incidents involving RR Trent 772 engines on Airbus A330-300s in less than two months, on three occasions the engine has been shutdown in flight. 

Mick
52 minutes ago

A correction to my post above.   The requisite in-flight shut-down rate for ETOPS 330 is less than 0.01 IFSDs per 1000 engine hours, which is the same as 10 shutdowns per million hours (less than 0.02 IFSDs per 1000 engine hours as stated above is the ETOPS 180 requirement).   The General Electric GEnx is therefore more than three times more reliable than the requisite standard. 

 
So is this developing story worthy of MSM coverage; or (as Mick alludes) is it just another - 'nothing to see here, move along' - beat up incident that should not have been given oxygen? 

I agree that such stories should not be sensationalised, however the MSM has an important role to play within a State's aviation safety investigation & administration. For far too long Oz MSM has buried it's head in the sand on major airline aviation incidents & accidents all because it is simply too hard to tackle an area so heavily protected by obfuscating bureaucracy and enshrouded in 'mystique of aviation safety' issues.   

Therefore I applaud Mitchell for having a crack at this one, he is not always going to get it right but provided he sticks to the facts as presented he will begin to garner an informed industry readership while keeping the relevant authorities on their toes...
    

MTF...P2

Ps I know it is a different world in aero-engine technology and stringent requirements etc. but I cannot go past some strange parallels with the attempted embuggerance of Jabiru aircraft, over their thru-bolt fractures and subsequent in-flight engine failures - just saying...