Discussion
MartG said:
Vieste said:
Saw her at sunderland few years ago jesus it was loud.
Me too. Just after it had passed where I was sat it did a steep pull up, and there was a mini tornado on the beach, presumably caused by vortices from it. You can just about see the sand in the air in the pic below
XH558 
From their website today -
Engine Damage Update
May 30, 2012 by Ian Homer. Posted to category: General
Wednesday 30th May
The technical team spent yesterday (Tuesday) investigating the engine damage on XH558, to determine its cause and to start assessing the timescale and cost of rectification.
We have already established that both engines No.1 and No.2 on the port side are sadly beyond repair, both having suffered blade damage and the effect of excessive heat.
The primary cause of the damage has been determined to be ingestion of silica gel desiccant bags. The most likely sequence of events was that material was ingested by No.1 engine, which surged and suffered LP compressor blade failure. Debris was then sucked into No. 2 which then also failed.
All relevant agencies and technical authorities have been informed. “We have been greatly reassured by the support from industry colleagues, and would like to thank all those who have offered help,” said engineering director Andrew Edmondson.
We would also like to place on record our thanks to all at Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield for their swift and professional reaction on Monday, whilst also apologising to those affected by delays or diversions.
In accordance with normal procedures, a formal investigation into the incident has been opened, chaired by the Chairman of the Trust’s Safety Review Committee.
The technical inspection has so far showed that no airframe damage was sustained, with damage being limited to the engines. The next step is to replace the damaged engines with two from the Trust’s remaining stock. Timescales for a return to flight are not yet clear – we will of course update the web site with progress and give details in the e-newsletters each week.
“We are deeply sorry that this incident has happened, and at this time in 2012. The additional unplanned costs are clearly very worrying as resources are, as ever very tight” said the charity’s chief executive, Dr. Robert Pleming. “We are actively working on a plan to recover our Jubilee season schedule and we will share this with you as soon as practical via the newsletter, Facebook page, Twitter feed and the web site.”
With many thanks to all for continuing to support Vulcan XH558.
The Vulcan Team
Sounds like human error.
Engine Damage Update
May 30, 2012 by Ian Homer. Posted to category: General
Wednesday 30th May
The technical team spent yesterday (Tuesday) investigating the engine damage on XH558, to determine its cause and to start assessing the timescale and cost of rectification.
We have already established that both engines No.1 and No.2 on the port side are sadly beyond repair, both having suffered blade damage and the effect of excessive heat.
The primary cause of the damage has been determined to be ingestion of silica gel desiccant bags. The most likely sequence of events was that material was ingested by No.1 engine, which surged and suffered LP compressor blade failure. Debris was then sucked into No. 2 which then also failed.
All relevant agencies and technical authorities have been informed. “We have been greatly reassured by the support from industry colleagues, and would like to thank all those who have offered help,” said engineering director Andrew Edmondson.
We would also like to place on record our thanks to all at Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield for their swift and professional reaction on Monday, whilst also apologising to those affected by delays or diversions.
In accordance with normal procedures, a formal investigation into the incident has been opened, chaired by the Chairman of the Trust’s Safety Review Committee.
The technical inspection has so far showed that no airframe damage was sustained, with damage being limited to the engines. The next step is to replace the damaged engines with two from the Trust’s remaining stock. Timescales for a return to flight are not yet clear – we will of course update the web site with progress and give details in the e-newsletters each week.
“We are deeply sorry that this incident has happened, and at this time in 2012. The additional unplanned costs are clearly very worrying as resources are, as ever very tight” said the charity’s chief executive, Dr. Robert Pleming. “We are actively working on a plan to recover our Jubilee season schedule and we will share this with you as soon as practical via the newsletter, Facebook page, Twitter feed and the web site.”
With many thanks to all for continuing to support Vulcan XH558.
The Vulcan Team
Sounds like human error.
"The primary cause of the damage has been determined to be ingestion of silica gel desiccant bags. The most likely sequence of events was that material was ingested by No.1 engine, which surged and suffered LP compressor blade failure. Debris was then sucked into No. 2 which then also failed."
<snip>
"“We are deeply sorry that this incident has happened, and at this time in 2012. The additional unplanned costs are clearly very worrying as resources are, as ever very tight” said the charity’s chief executive, Dr. Robert Pleming. “We are actively working on a plan to recover our Jubilee season schedule and we will share this with you as soon as practical via the newsletter, Facebook page, Twitter feed and the web site.”
i hope they can get her back in the air, but surely that would mean any further engine failures would definitely be the end?
<snip>
"“We are deeply sorry that this incident has happened, and at this time in 2012. The additional unplanned costs are clearly very worrying as resources are, as ever very tight” said the charity’s chief executive, Dr. Robert Pleming. “We are actively working on a plan to recover our Jubilee season schedule and we will share this with you as soon as practical via the newsletter, Facebook page, Twitter feed and the web site.”
i hope they can get her back in the air, but surely that would mean any further engine failures would definitely be the end?
Edited by MonkeyHanger on Wednesday 30th May 17:46
From the Flyer Forum - the poster was busy doing his own walk-round, hence didn't get footage of the initial engine surge (some irony there, perhaps) - but the second one was a hell of a bang.
YouTube - Vulcan XH588 Incident 28/05/12
YouTube - Vulcan XH588 Incident 28/05/12
mcdjl said:
Eric Mc said:
From their website today -
The primary cause of the damage has been determined to be ingestion of silica gel desiccant bags.
The Vulcan Team
Sounds like human error.
Unless someone was trying to keep the runway dry...oppps!The primary cause of the damage has been determined to be ingestion of silica gel desiccant bags.
The Vulcan Team
Sounds like human error.
I know nothing technical at all however I assume that the silica bags would be similar to those that you used to get in new camera bags, etc & which I still have in my 30 year old binocular case.
If so who, I wonder, forgot to remove them before 558 went out assuming that they were in place on 558.
As I said my technical knowledge is non existent so no offence meant if I'm way out in my assumption/question.
If so who, I wonder, forgot to remove them before 558 went out assuming that they were in place on 558.
As I said my technical knowledge is non existent so no offence meant if I'm way out in my assumption/question.
Tyre Tread said:
It seems the death of XH558 may have been exaggerated. 
I wouldn't say that.It does depend on that all important engine that was removed as a precaution some time ago. The first one removed was confirmed as trashed at the time, but the 2nd one has always had a ? against it as to whether it is repairable or not. With these two additional ones wrecked, they now have 3 out of the original 8 engines confirmed as trashed, so even if they risk continuing flying the rest of this season with only 4 (all in the a/c) with possibly no other engines left, there can be no further engine rotation, so her remaining time as a flyer is now very much reduced......to the point of being almost unviable.
aeropilot said:
I wouldn't say that.
It does depend on that all important engine that was removed as a precaution some time ago. The first one removed was confirmed as trashed at the time, but the 2nd one has always had a ? against it as to whether it is repairable or not. With these two additional ones wrecked, they now have 3 out of the original 8 engines confirmed as trashed, so even if they risk continuing flying the rest of this season with only 4 (all in the a/c) with possibly no other engines left, there can be no further engine rotation, so her remaining time as a flyer is now very much reduced......to the point of being almost unviable.
From what I heard there was always a possibility of both the removed engines being repairable.It does depend on that all important engine that was removed as a precaution some time ago. The first one removed was confirmed as trashed at the time, but the 2nd one has always had a ? against it as to whether it is repairable or not. With these two additional ones wrecked, they now have 3 out of the original 8 engines confirmed as trashed, so even if they risk continuing flying the rest of this season with only 4 (all in the a/c) with possibly no other engines left, there can be no further engine rotation, so her remaining time as a flyer is now very much reduced......to the point of being almost unviable.
Remaining time was very limited by airframe life anyway, how much further are you suggesting it's now reduced?
Dr Jekyll said:
aeropilot said:
I wouldn't say that.
It does depend on that all important engine that was removed as a precaution some time ago. The first one removed was confirmed as trashed at the time, but the 2nd one has always had a ? against it as to whether it is repairable or not. With these two additional ones wrecked, they now have 3 out of the original 8 engines confirmed as trashed, so even if they risk continuing flying the rest of this season with only 4 (all in the a/c) with possibly no other engines left, there can be no further engine rotation, so her remaining time as a flyer is now very much reduced......to the point of being almost unviable.
From what I heard there was always a possibility of both the removed engines being repairable.It does depend on that all important engine that was removed as a precaution some time ago. The first one removed was confirmed as trashed at the time, but the 2nd one has always had a ? against it as to whether it is repairable or not. With these two additional ones wrecked, they now have 3 out of the original 8 engines confirmed as trashed, so even if they risk continuing flying the rest of this season with only 4 (all in the a/c) with possibly no other engines left, there can be no further engine rotation, so her remaining time as a flyer is now very much reduced......to the point of being almost unviable.
Remaining time was very limited by airframe life anyway, how much further are you suggesting it's now reduced?
The airframe life was potentially extendable with a known/approved mod, albeit expensive to do. I would say now, that with possibly no more engines, it will be a race between the remaining FI & cycles left on the highest time engine of the 4 left..........assuming if they do only have 4 left, they are prepared to risk flying her with no spares....?
aeropilot said:
One definately wasn't from what I heard, but there is still a ? over the other. The fact though that there's been nothing forth coming about it by now would suggest to me that it too is trashed.
The airframe life was potentially extendable with a known/approved mod, albeit expensive to do. I would say now, that with possibly no more engines, it will be a race between the remaining FI & cycles left on the highest time engine of the 4 left..........assuming if they do only have 4 left, they are prepared to risk flying her with no spares....?
Is there any point having the world's last airworthy Vulcan if it never moves under its own power again though?The airframe life was potentially extendable with a known/approved mod, albeit expensive to do. I would say now, that with possibly no more engines, it will be a race between the remaining FI & cycles left on the highest time engine of the 4 left..........assuming if they do only have 4 left, they are prepared to risk flying her with no spares....?
davepoth said:
aeropilot said:
One definately wasn't from what I heard, but there is still a ? over the other. The fact though that there's been nothing forth coming about it by now would suggest to me that it too is trashed.
The airframe life was potentially extendable with a known/approved mod, albeit expensive to do. I would say now, that with possibly no more engines, it will be a race between the remaining FI & cycles left on the highest time engine of the 4 left..........assuming if they do only have 4 left, they are prepared to risk flying her with no spares....?
Is there any point having the world's last airworthy Vulcan if it never moves under its own power again though?The airframe life was potentially extendable with a known/approved mod, albeit expensive to do. I would say now, that with possibly no more engines, it will be a race between the remaining FI & cycles left on the highest time engine of the 4 left..........assuming if they do only have 4 left, they are prepared to risk flying her with no spares....?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff