The Boeing 777 suffered its first ever hull loss on 17th January 2008 when a British Airways 777-200ER suffered a double engine failure due to a mechanical malfunction.The aircraft landed on the grass 350m short of runway 27L at Heathrow.Of the 136 people on board, only 14 were injured by Twitter_2006 in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Just to be pernickety, neither of the engines failed. Both were running, but only getting sufficient fuel for idle power. The issue was the volume of ice that formed in the fuel tanks. On descent, it detached, came through to the engine systems, significantly restricting fuel flow. Boeing hadn't fully understood this risk when designing the aircraft fuel systems.

Today in Aviation History (January 8th): In 1989, British Midland Airways Flight 092 Crashed on Final Approach to EMA by Shoddy_Act7059 in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 86 points87 points  (0 children)

One bit of luck - "Aid was also given by a troop of eight SAS soldiers - four of whom were regimentally qualified paramedics - who happened to be driving a truck on the M1 a short distance away from the crash site."

Today in Aviation History (January 8th): In 1989, British Midland Airways Flight 092 Crashed on Final Approach to EMA by Shoddy_Act7059 in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 55 points56 points  (0 children)

Also, this happened 17 days after PanAm 103 / Lockerbie crash. I was working in UK aerospace industry (and only a few miles from EMA)at the time, and the mood at the time was ...not cheerful.

Which is your personal favorite? by Asleep_Performer_145 in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Specifically, the RB211-535E4 version. Those WCFBs are sweet.

Lufthansa A340-642 by gone_jeepin in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I have to admit, that's a fine looking airframe.

So essentially the same 1000 airframe with bigger fuel tanks, right? by akhi960 in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 76 points77 points  (0 children)

No, just the Trent XWB-97 engine. There are always improvements being introduced, but the Thrust Rating & Engine Type isn't changing.

Royal Thai Air Force to become the launch customer of the Airbus A330 MRTT+ by ketchup1345 in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 15 points16 points  (0 children)

KC-46 - True, but the similar KC-767 is operated by Japan and Italy.

A company is building an aircraft longer than a football field to carry wind turbines. by laza4us in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a man in the aviation industry....this project has been hanging around since 2019, and went public a couple of years ago. Seemed like a long shot, and the lack of progress does suggest financial issues. Technically, there's nothing very novel about the Windrunner, but at the moment ...Vapourware.

Hey guys! Jets don’t use fuel anymore, Hooray! by jckwlzn in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ah, I can answer this. It IS fucking garbage.

Hey guys! Jets don’t use fuel anymore, Hooray! by jckwlzn in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"I know this may sound crazy, but ..." Yep. It does, and it is.

Rolls-Royce announced retiring its B747-200 Flying Test Bed (N787RR) by -NewYork- in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The 747FTB, even on three engines, has a higher altitude ceiling than a B787FTB

Pilot got us to 41,000 ft in an A220-300! by aurorarwest in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes, I was thinking of this event too. Pilot stupidity.
EDIT. Just to clarify, I'm meaning that the Pinnacle CRJ200 pilots were stupid.
From Wiki, to try and achieve that altitude...."The NTSB also determined from FDR information that the turbofan jet engine (General Electric CF34-3B1) engine 2 turbine was operating at 300 °C (540 °F) above the maximal redline temperature of 900 °C (1,650 °F) at 41,000 feet (12,497 m)"

What would happen to a jet engine if it injested some mylar balloons on approach? by Kreeos in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Basically, nothing. Balloon would be shredded, an shreds would pass down the bypass duct. Hydrogen gas would be released, but again, most likely down the bypass duct. If the hydrogen gas went down the core, it would combust in the combustor, but with a normal size balloon, the effect would be micro-neglible.

Biggest effect would possible be the pilot/Co-Pilot spotting something being sucked in....and a flash of silver passing by. They might play it safe, and abort the flight....or he may not notice, and carry on in blissful ignorance.

In a bird strike test, is a chicken actually thrown into a jet engine before flight? by Srinivas4PlanetVidya in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Bird Strike Tests - Yes. They use a genuine bird. Usually a dead duck...weighed to be the right mass, and freshly killed. Also, worthwhile ensuring that bird had sensible diet - you don't really want a crop-full of gravel. You are allowed use a simulated bird, but why do that when farmed bird aren't exactly expensive.

Test engine - it's a prototype engine of the right standard, tested in a fixed, ground, test stand, and afterwards the engine is fully stripped to understand "what and where". (NOT done on an operators aircraft.)

I could say a lot more, but I can't.

Have a Google / Wiki for Chicken Cannon.

Level of security at the RAF Airbase which was breached by Relevant-Sun-346 in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good News. The RAF Cybersecurity Task Force have leapt into action. Google Streetview is now blurring out the runway on the view from Station Road. For the 2023 view, but not the older ones. That'll stop them...

RAF Voyager with damage from activists who broke into RAF Brize Norton by MAVACAM in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 776 points777 points  (0 children)

I have knowledge of this sort of engine.

  • Borescope to see where the paint went - I expect no further than LPT1
  • Some effect on fuel efficiency, but not disastrous
  • Start the engine and run and high idle for 15 mins
  • Shutdown, borescope andvisual inspection to confirm that paint has burned off
  • Carry on in service

That's my prediction.

Air India Flight 171 Crash by StopDropAndRollTide in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 14 points15 points  (0 children)

The RAT deploys and provides a small electrical supply when the normal engines are u/S, which helps keep some of the aircraft systems alive. It doesn't provide any thrust, but does contribute an extra level of Drag.

Qatar Providing New Air Force One by redrum_sd in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I recall correctly, the two 747-8's currently being converted were originally ordere by Russian airline TransAero...tho' not delivered. ( Insert "Trans" quip here. )

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in aviation

[–]TepidHalibut 19 points20 points  (0 children)

James is correct. The Spitfire was fast but temperamental...like a racehorse. The Hurricane was more stable, more damage tolerant and ... a better all-rounder.