Author Topic: Engine Damage Update  (Read 17342 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Too_Much

  • phpBB Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Engine Damage Update
« Reply #15 on: May 30, 2012, 08:34:07 PM »
even if theres only 1 engine after the 2 knackered ones are replaced can the ones used in 1 of the taxiable vulcans be used if needed?
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline weeping-willow

  • Regular User
  • *****
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
Re: Engine Damage Update
« Reply #16 on: May 30, 2012, 10:28:42 PM »
I think I'd better stop reading the thread about this incident on UKARse, there's a certain member on there who is really winding me up. In fact he's not the only one, I honestly didn't realise that there were so many perfect people in the world, people who have never ever made a mistake. I'd hazard a guess that if their lives were scrutinised we'd find that they had made the odd mistake here and there. Humans are after all only human.

Best wishes to the team who I know will be doing their very best to get her back in air asap.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
If you\'re not living on the edge you\'re taking up too much room.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/weeping-willow/


Offline scampton61

  • Club Member
  • Serious User
  • *****
  • Posts: 352
    • View Profile
    • http://www.underthefloor.co.uk
Re: Engine Damage Update
« Reply #17 on: May 31, 2012, 07:25:17 AM »
Quote from: "Too_Much"
even if theres only 1 engine after the 2 knackered ones are replaced can the ones used in 1 of the taxiable vulcans be used if needed?

No, XM655 has 301's, not 201's like 558, and in any case none of the engines would be certified as airworthy by Rolls.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline mechanic33

  • phpBB Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Engine Damage Update
« Reply #18 on: July 28, 2012, 10:18:29 PM »
has the possibilty been looked at rr or a company that rr would accept to overhaul these engines?also i presume that fitting different engines would not be allowed?
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline Gully

  • Global Moderator
  • Serious User
  • *****
  • Posts: 846
    • View Profile
Re: Engine Damage Update
« Reply #19 on: August 01, 2012, 12:20:52 PM »
Quote from: "mechanic33"
has the possibilty been looked at rr or a company that rr would accept to overhaul these engines?also i presume that fitting different engines would not be allowed?

Regarding overhaul - yes. RR do not have the tooling to undertake the work themselves and do not licence 3rd parties to overhaul the aviation Olympus - the marine and power generation variants use very different materials.

Fitting different engines - a design modification that would have to be enacted via Marshalls (the design authority) and CAA (probably at great expense!). Given the airframe fatigue limitations, unlikely to be worthwhile IMO.

Gully
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
Vulcan To The Sky Club Secretary

Offline deeleyt

  • Club Member
  • Serious User
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Engine Damage Update
« Reply #20 on: August 01, 2012, 09:15:32 PM »
A brand new Vulcan - Just like the USS Enterprise - XH558A - To boldly go where no B2 has goon before. Just ordering up 10,000 meters of carbon fibre. Not sure which engines to use, and how would the wing design translate into Carbon fibre.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline bloodline

  • phpBB Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Engine Damage Update
« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2012, 07:05:32 PM »
Quote from: "Gully"
Quote from: "mechanic33"
has the possibilty been looked at rr or a company that rr would accept to overhaul these engines?also i presume that fitting different engines would not be allowed?

Regarding overhaul - yes. RR do not have the tooling to undertake the work themselves and do not licence 3rd parties to overhaul the aviation Olympus - the marine and power generation variants use very different materials.

Fitting different engines - a design modification that would have to be enacted via Marshalls (the design authority) and CAA (probably at great expense!). Given the airframe fatigue limitations, unlikely to be worthwhile IMO.

Gully

I can understand Rolls Royce being unwilling to certify the Olympus 200 series for flight... Just too much risk for such a large company... Regardless of the PR benefits the Vulcan can bring...

Regarding Marshalls, no harm asking them to run a feasibility study into re-engining the Vulcan? It would make a good project for some junior members of staff and give a much clearer idea of cost and options available. My thoughs are around the RB199 or something ;)
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »