Author Topic: engine replacement Updates only  (Read 23328 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline northern monkey

  • Club Member
  • Regular User
  • *****
  • Posts: 208
    • View Profile
engine replacement Updates only
« on: June 14, 2012, 09:22:06 PM »
Is there any chance we could get a quick update by one of our engineers or someone in the know (wink wink) on how the the replacement of the 2 engines are going. I know you have better things to be doing, its just that my finger cant take anymore pressing the refresh button waiting for news  :oops: i understand if you dont have time.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
born in lincoln ..honory yorkshireman

Offline Lew

  • Regular User
  • *****
  • Posts: 229
    • View Profile
Re: engine replacement
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2012, 10:26:11 PM »
As of yesterday both engine's were totally removed and swapping the components were will underway and the paperwork was all being completed. I've posted some photographs in the updates section on here from the last few days, should give you some guidance.

A sterling effort is being made by everyone at hangar 3, I dont think you can put into words the determination of the engineers!

Lew
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline Wizzy

  • Club Member
  • Serious User
  • *****
  • Posts: 550
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: engine replacement
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2012, 10:54:26 PM »
Thanks for the update Lew - it's great to know that things are progressing well!

Good luck to Taff and co, and thanks for all your hard work.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe
  Albert Einstein

Offline ian livingstone

  • Club Member
  • Serious User
  • *****
  • Posts: 276
    • View Profile
Re: engine replacement
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2012, 07:43:19 AM »
I second that.  Thanks Lew (great photos) and all the engineers.

Ian
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline nickwilcock

  • phpBB Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
Incident Report
« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2012, 08:03:29 AM »
When will the findings of the investigation into this very serious incident be released?
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline dee

  • Global Moderator
  • Expert User
  • *****
  • Posts: 4515
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: engine replacement
« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2012, 08:03:45 AM »
Thanks for the pics Lew. Looks a busy environment. Hope your feeling better? x
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
That huge triangle against the sky like some monstrous angel trailing dark clouds of glory

Offline Jumbo Girl

  • Expert User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1149
    • View Profile
Re: Incident Report
« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2012, 09:26:28 AM »
Quote from: "nickwilcock"
When will the findings of the investigation into this very serious incident be released?

When the investigation has been concluded.
 
In the meantime the focus is on getting 558 airworthy again in time for the biggest shows of the season so we can get the funding back on track. We can't do that while heads are rolling, as you so desperately want. I'm beginning to think you don't WANT a flying Vulcan.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
Jumbo Girl

Offline nickwilcock

  • phpBB Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
ENGINES
« Reply #7 on: June 15, 2012, 10:51:15 AM »
No, you misunderstand.

What I don't want is for the world's only flying Vulcan to be compromised by the risk of another serious, entirely avoidable incident.  It is important that the causes and remedial action taken following the destruction of two irreplaceable engines by FOD ingestion are clearly identified and it is not unreasonable that a project which relies to a large extent on public donation should provide its sponsors with a full and frank report.

The neo-evangelical zeal of some supporters does sometimes require something of a reality check, in my opinion.

So far, anyone who dares to infer that serious errors were made is hounded by petulant nonsense implying that those who raise such comments wish to see the project fail.  That is wholly incorrect; we all wish '558 every success and as an ex-Vulcan pilot I wish to see it fly for many years to come.

However, you should accept that doubt will exist in the minds of many unless a full report concerning the incident is published without delay.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline Zero One

  • Club Member
  • Expert User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1676
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: ENGINES
« Reply #8 on: June 15, 2012, 11:00:05 AM »
Quote from: "nickwilcock"
No, you misunderstand.

So far, anyone who dares to infer that serious errors were made is hounded by petulant nonsense implying that those who raise such comments wish to see the project fail.  That is wholly incorrect; we all wish '558 every success and as an ex-Vulcan pilot I wish to see it fly for many years to come.

However, you should accept that doubt will exist in the minds of many unless a full report concerning the incident is published without delay.

Nick
Tell me something as a Vulcan Pilot.. in your pre-flight/walk round, did you check  the intakes for FOD...... as our driver on the Comet does on CWJ open day ?
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
Buccaneer XX900 Crew Chief and Brunty Bears keeper

Offline Jumbo Girl

  • Expert User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1149
    • View Profile
Re: ENGINES
« Reply #9 on: June 15, 2012, 11:05:55 AM »
Quote from: "nickwilcock"
No, you misunderstand.

What I don't want is for the world's only flying Vulcan to be compromised by the risk of another serious, entirely avoidable incident.  It is important that the causes and remedial action taken following the destruction of two irreplaceable engines by FOD ingestion are clearly identified and it is not unreasonable that a project which relies to a large extent on public donation should provide its sponsors with a full and frank report.

The neo-evangelical zeal of some supporters does sometimes require something of a reality check, in my opinion.

So far, anyone who dares to infer that serious errors were made is hounded by petulant nonsense implying that those who raise such comments wish to see the project fail.  That is wholly incorrect; we all wish '558 every success and as an ex-Vulcan pilot I wish to see it fly for many years to come.

However, you should accept that doubt will exist in the minds of many unless a full report concerning the incident is published without delay.

Yes, a serious error was made. It will be investigated and it should be investigated and I am not arguing with your principle.

What I am arguing with is that when anybody asks about the progress of the work, you jump in and start banging on about the investigation. The people on this forum are largely passionate suppporters of, and unpaid volunteers for, 558 and are devoting all spare time, energy and money into raising funds and getting her airworthy again.

If you are expecting an official response on this forum then you are looking in the wrong place. Suggest you write to Michael Trotter and Andrew Edmondson, although I suspect they are both also rather busy at the current time.

This is not, as you put it "petulant nonsense", this is the exasperated response from a volunteer who would rather get off my backside and DO SOMETHING for 558 than sit on the forum whining.

I did have a chuckle at being called a "neo-evangelical zealot" though, especially since I'll tell anyone who'll listen (and a few who won't) that 747s are better than Vulcans  :D

Before you do slate the zealots, please remember that the success of the restoration and continuing airworthiness of 558 is largely down to the "neo-evangelical" attitudes and support from the people on this form and others - including the engineers; people who have worked EXTREMELY long hours at the expense of their personal lives to devote more time than reasonably expected to this Vulcan and until you have walked a mile in their shoes may I suggest you pipe down and try making some friends here instead of enemies.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
Jumbo Girl

Offline johnri

  • Club Member
  • Expert User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
    • View Profile
Re: engine replacement
« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2012, 11:10:08 AM »
Has anyone read "How to win friends and influence people"   :roll:  :roll:

JR
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
I don\'t want a second childhood. I\'m still enjoying the first one.





I\'m retired.
I was tired yesterday, and I\'m tired again today.

Offline wcg

  • Expert User
  • *****
  • Posts: 3688
    • View Profile
Re: Incident Report
« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2012, 11:47:08 AM »
Quote
When will the findings of the investigation into this very serious incident be released?
As you will have read { in the guise of your alter-ego "BEagle" } on the topic on PPRuNe , the AAIB have classified it as being neither an 'Accident' nor { more relevantly to your post here } a 'Serious Incident' , hence the reason that they are not conducting their own investigation.

As to how long........basic AAIB investigations , and publication thereof , usually take about a month or two as a minimum.
Granted this will be an "internal" investigation rather than an AAIB one , but I'd expect it to be roughly the same timeframe , possibly longer { given the difference in staffing levels between the AAIB & the VTST , I'd asume interviewing all those involved will take longer }
I've seen several H&SE investigations into 'simple' workplace { factory } accidents/incidents take upwards of 6 months to be completed , so it's hard to put a timeframe on such things.
Whether or not any interim report is published prior to this is another matter.
I would assume that it is in the Trust's interests to ensure that a full and proper investigation is carried out ASAP ,  if only to satisfy the CAA.

As an aside , posting comments here { & on PPRuNe } using evocative terms such as "neo-evangelical zeal" & "petulant nonsense" when referring to other supporters is only likely to inflame the situation rather than lead to reasoned discussion.

On a different note.....
On PPRuNe , you posted : "I've been a flying supervisor and flight safety officer in my time and am frankly astonished at the naive attitudes displayed by some on various websites discussing this incident.
In 10000 hrs of flying I always had full trust in RAF engineering supervisory processes. They may have been time-consuming on occasion, but were always safe.
"
Did you ever fly any VC-10s out of St Athan post-maint. ??
Just that as I live less than 12 Miles from there & have been a 'scanner-listener' for a good 30+ years , I've heard a good many ground-to-air calls to VC-10s -and , at times , various other aircraft types they've serviced there - involving the fact that various inspection panels { and other parts } had fallen off aircraft during their takeoff runs !!  :o
No to mention various other post-maint. problems such as engine failures , undercarriage retraction failures , smoke/fumes in cockpit , warning-light illuminations , etc.
Which illustrates 2 things ......
1. RAF { latterly DARA } engineering staff and ground-crew aren't infallible & can make mistakes just like anybody else.
2. RAF aircrew can & do miss things during pre-flight { or they fail to carry out pre-flights properly .... which is it ?? }

Incidentally , still awaiting a reply to something I posted in the other topic :
You have posted here { and on the PPRuNe Forum , under the name of BEagle : http://www.pprune.org/7219614-post67.html } that you " had a conversation at the Newark V-force reunion in which the other party expressed grave concerns at the standards of supervision."
Out of interest , did either the 'other party' or yourself raise these concerns with any of the Trust management ??
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
Clive..{ South Wales }{ +868 posts on old Forum }
Now an ex-Club Member & no longer contributing to VTST / XH558
UKAR's trollpikken fforwm swyddogol

Offline nickwilcock

  • phpBB Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
Re: engine replacement
« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2012, 12:08:43 PM »
Quite why you find it necessary to link to my PPRuNe identity, I do not know.  It is the height of bad manners to reveal a 'real' identity in such a way as you should well know.

Yes, I frequently tested the VC10K from Scrapheap Challenge St Athan.  But I always gave both the air test air engineer and the operating air engineer a whole day to check the aircraft before the rest of the crew left Brize.  Until my engineers were totally satisfied with the state of the aircraft, we didn't get in their way.  On the day of flight we carried out a further full pre-flight inspection.  Not once did we have an engine failure, landing gear retraction failure or loose panel.  I've had slight air conditioning smoke due to blocked oilway in a cabin compressor (the VC10 doesn't use engine bleed air for pressurisation) and temporary electrical failures, but generally the aircraft were almost faultless after major servicing.

Items which failed on air test were normally minor and rectified overnight before we flew a second test if required.  Then the aircraft had to remain full of fuel at St Athan for fuel leak mapping - which took a long time - before it was taken to wherever the RAF had obtained a repainting contract.

Incidentally, the 'other party' at Newark had raised his concerns directly on more than one occasion.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline deeleyt

  • Club Member
  • Serious User
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: engine replacement
« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2012, 01:30:13 PM »
@nickwilcock

Can I just point out that this is a bbs, politeness or bad manners do not come in to it.

But can you please not keep banging your gums - you are giving me a head ache.

As you have proved by your comments (repeated) - hind sight is a wonderful thing but a useless tool until it has happened.

We (majority of contributors) are saddened by what has happened, and are well aware of the ramifications of this.

But along with Kings, Queens and Gods we bide our time, and await the out come with all others. So should you, you've said your piece, and I can tell you, we have heard it

SO BE A GOOD BOY AND - SIT DOWN AND WAIT.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline northern monkey

  • Club Member
  • Regular User
  • *****
  • Posts: 208
    • View Profile
Re: engine replacement
« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2012, 01:38:39 PM »
Before we have a small explosion by mr wilcock I would like to thank Lewis for the update and superb pictures. Just what this thread was designed for !!!!
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Guest »
born in lincoln ..honory yorkshireman