AF66: explosion of a GP7200 reactor on Airbus A380 over the Atlantic

[Gaston]

Anyway, the 20% rule is only valid for a constant wind while in spectacular videos, it is almost always gusty winds.

Indeed, gust and vortex detection systems are starting to be installed at some airports (for the moment, I believe that these are only tests).

[Christophe]

Yes it is the gusts which are the most dangerous as I have just indicated ... in fact there is worse than a downwind gust: it is the downdraft gust (downward wind) ... fortunately quite rare. ..except in case of Vortex precisely ...

So for the Vortexes yes I would like to believe that this is only tests ... but for the weather wind (including gusts therefore), I think that all the major airports in the world have multiple probes, right?

[Christophe]

More info on the accident in recent days but I found this http://www.air-cosmos.com/vol-air-franc ... sse-101491

Funny to have to remove a reactor from a museum to bring back the damaged A380 ...

Are gp7200 so rare or long to manufacture? All the more surprising that you don't need a functional reactor since it won't be connected ... it's just structural ...

[Did67]

What I find a little strange is that without knowing what happened, we keep letting these devices fly ...

While when Boeing experienced a problem (admittedly identified) on the lithium batteries of its 767 (787?), They were all grounded while waiting for the change!

If I understand correctly, the majority are equipped with Rolls-Royce. Except those of Air France?

[Christophe]

If I understand correctly, the majority are equipped with Rolls-Royce. Except those of Air France?

Not really because according to wiki: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_Alliance_GP7200

Customers

Air Austral
Air France
Asiana Airlines
Emirates
Etihad Airways
ILFC
Korean Air
Qatar Airways

And if we reconcile with the number of A380s per fleet:

Main customer
• Emirates (97)
• Singapore Airlines (18)
• Lufthansa (14)
• Qantas (12)
• British Airways (12)
• Air France (10)
• Korean Air (10)
• Etihad (10)

Without further verification (because a fleet can, perhaps, be equipped with 2 engines? But that would not be very logical ... level training and safety of flying personnel) we can conclude that the GP7200 dominates the A380 ...

I think that there was no nailing on the ground because the breakdown is so serious that it can only come from an external element ... impact with an OTNI or UFO (since not identified for the moment) ...

ps: Wiki article https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vol_66_Air_France is still very laconic ...

[Gaston]

What I find a little strange is that without knowing what happened, we keep letting these devices fly ...

While when Boeing experienced a problem (admittedly identified) on the lithium batteries of its 767 (787?), They were all grounded while waiting for the change!

Only after the second incident involving the same battery.

If I understand correctly, the majority are equipped with Rolls-Royce. Except those of Air France?

The authorities considered that this problem having appeared on only one specimen of the engine and that this engine already had a certain number of hours of flight, the probability that other engines of the same type undergo the same defect was sufficiently limited .

[Gaston]

By the way, it seems that you need to charter an Antonov 124 to transport the replacement engine.

[Christophe]

Is that so? It does not fit into the hold of the A380?

If the accident recurs too often, hey bin aviation regulations may impose the presence of a spare reactor in the hold, like auto spare wheels!

Ok I'm leaving...

[Gaston]

Is that so? It does not fit into the hold of the A380?

No, there is no 'cargo' A380.

[Did67]

Only after the second incident involving the same battery.

Ah OK. I did not know. Thank you.