XH558...

[HoHoHo]

FourWheelDrift said:

It doesn't, that's just a normal jet engine sound you hear. This is a howl from a 201 engined Vulcan - from 46s onwards - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYOgsgnZ8dw It's caused by a difference in volume of air in the intake (due to the different sized engines) causing the air to resonate.

That's a brilliant video.

I read somewhere once the Americans were absolutely shocked when they first saw the Vulcan and couldn't believe such an aircraft could perform as it did.

[Ledaig]

Now I was (possibly wrongly) under the impression there were no spare engines left, so how does this latest output from the VTTS stack up?

VTTS said:

During last year's winter service, we discussed the engine management strategy that helps us balance the utilisation on each of our engines. This year, we are continuing with this important activity. The first step was taken earlier this week when one of XH558's Olympus engines was lowered from the airframe.

This one still has some hours left and will be kept fully serviceable as a very reliable spare, while we bring in one of our zero- timed units that can be 'run-in' during the standard anti-deterioration regime over the winter period

Of particular note is the statement " while we bring in one of our zero- timed units.

Have I missed something?

[mrloudly]

Ledaig said:

Now I was (possibly wrongly) under the impression there were no spare engines left, so how does this latest output from the VTTS stack up?

VTTS said:

During last year's winter service, we discussed the engine management strategy that helps us balance the utilisation on each of our engines. This year, we are continuing with this important activity. The first step was taken earlier this week when one of XH558's Olympus engines was lowered from the airframe.

This one still has some hours left and will be kept fully serviceable as a very reliable spare, while we bring in one of our zero- timed units that can be 'run-in' during the standard anti-deterioration regime over the winter period

Of particular note is the statement " while we bring in one of our zero- timed units.

Have I missed something?

I guess this statement was made before they lunched two units?

[Ledaig]

Nope - released today.

[perdu]

mrloudly said:

Ledaig said:

Now I was (possibly wrongly) under the impression there were no spare engines left, so how does this latest output from the VTTS stack up?

VTTS said:

During last year's winter service, we discussed the engine management strategy that helps us balance the utilisation on each of our engines. This year, we are continuing with this important activity. The first step was taken earlier this week when one of XH558's Olympus engines was lowered from the airframe.

This one still has some hours left and will be kept fully serviceable as a very reliable spare, while we bring in one of our zero- timed units that can be 'run-in' during the standard anti-deterioration regime over the winter period

Of particular note is the statement " while we bring in one of our zero- timed units.

Have I missed something?

I guess this statement was made before they lunched two units?

I don't know but wonder if the "zero houred" engine they will be using over winter for anti-det is"zero flight hours left", they must have a couple of THOSE around by now.

I would normally assume the "zero houred" to mean returned to an unused status, we need an expert here for this.

If there are available engines maybe a Chris Evans intervene on the wings could become viable.

[Ledaig]

I hear what you are saying, but the statement..

"This one still has some hours left and will be kept fully serviceable as a very reliable spare,"

implies that what's going in is staying in.

[mrloudly]

What is the life on one?

[aeropilot]

mrloudly said:

What is the life on one?

I seem to remember reading the figure of about 700 cycles....?

[perdu]

Ledaig said:

I hear what you are saying, but the statement..

"This one still has some hours left and will be kept fully serviceable as a very reliable spare,"

implies that what's going in is staying in.

I agree it certainly seems so

Here's hoping

[aeropilot]

perdu said:

Ledaig said:

I hear what you are saying, but the statement..

"This one still has some hours left and will be kept fully serviceable as a very reliable spare,"

implies that what's going in is staying in.

I agree it certainly seems so

Here's hoping

Hmmmmm.......

At the start of the project to restore to flight, they had 8 bagged and tagged 201's. RR would only certify 7 of them for flight.
One of those was removed during the first display season for high debris count. That left six.
We know 2 of those have been destroyed as a result of the infamous silica bag incident....
So...... where has this zero timed spare come from?
Unless, they mean they are fitting the zero timed un-certified for flight engine, just for the winter period to save cycles on one of the others....??

[Ledaig]

Which I could understand except for this:

" while we bring in one of our zero- timed units that can be 'run-in' during the standard anti-deterioration regime over the winter period

Why would you need to run in an end of life engine?

Either the latest email is spectacularly mis-worded, or we do not have the full story.

Edited by Ledaig on Friday 19th October 22:37

[LukeSi]

Hmm so does that mean they have brand new, never used engines? Hmm, surely the spares weren't 0 hour and I thought they were rotating them anyway to increase the life time of them.

Yes they do. They have a couple of engines which were only ever run during testing.

Edited by LukeSi on Friday 19th October 23:18

[perdu]

Ledaig said:

Which I could understand except for this:

" while we bring in one of our zero- timed units that can be 'run-in' during the standard anti-deterioration regime over the winter period

Why would you need to run in an end of life engine?

Either the latest email is spectacularly mis-worded, or we do not have the full story.

Edited by Ledaig on Friday 19th October 22:37

I'm hoping that this is a misunderstanding of the term run-in, does it mean run IN AIRFRAME to keep systems operating but to be replaced later by remaining time engines for next season?

We'll all find out eventually no doubt

Roughly when the next beg.. oops submissions for donations comes out.


I just hope they keep on keeping on.

[Ledaig]

LukeSi said:

Hmm so does that mean they have brand new, never used engines? Hmm, surely the spares weren't 0 hour and I thought they were rotating them anyway to increase the life time of them.

Yes they do. They have a couple of engines which were only ever run during testing.

Edited by LukeSi on Friday 19th October 23:18

I'm not entirely sure if you're asking a question or answering one

Are you saying they have two spare zero houred engines which are airworthy?

[LukeSi]

Ledaig said:

LukeSi said:

Hmm so does that mean they have brand new, never used engines? Hmm, surely the spares weren't 0 hour and I thought they were rotating them anyway to increase the life time of them.

Yes they do. They have a couple of engines which were only ever run during testing.

Edited by LukeSi on Friday 19th October 23:18

I'm not entirely sure if you're asking a question or answering one

Are you saying they have two spare zero houred engines which are airworthy?

Was asking but then found the answer.

Yes, they have 2 zero houred engines which are airworthy. One has only been run once after completion 30+ years ago. The other has never been run what so ever, also 30+ years old.

[aeropilot]

LukeSi said:

Yes, they have 2 zero houred engines which are airworthy. One has only been run once after completion 30+ years ago. The other has never been run what so ever, also 30+ years old.

I don't believe they have two zero time airworthy engines.

They do have one zero time unrun engine, that RR would NOT certify for flight, and a very low time engine that was pulled soon after fitting, due to high debris count.

I still think it is a poorly worded press release (not for the first time) and they are fitting the zero time uncertified engine in place of the highest cycled airworthy one, just for the winter anti-det runs to save cycles on that engine?

[Dr Jekyll]

aeropilot said:

I don't believe they have two zero time airworthy engines.

They do have one zero time unrun engine, that RR would NOT certify for flight, and a very low time engine that was pulled soon after fitting, due to high debris count.

I still think it is a poorly worded press release (not for the first time) and they are fitting the zero time uncertified engine in place of the highest cycled airworthy one, just for the winter anti-det runs to save cycles on that engine?

But there was also an engine withdrawn due to corrosion, which is apparently fixable.

My understanding was:
Eight engines to start with.
One withdrawn due to debris in the oil.
One withdrawn due to corrosion.

Leaving 6.

Two blown up leaving 4 so no spares, unless the corroded engine could be returned to service.

If they only had 7 what were they running with this summer?

Are you sure the eighth engine that RR didn't like hasn't been fixed?

Edited by Dr Jekyll on Saturday 20th October 11:10

[aeropilot]

Dr Jekyll said:

Are you sure the eighth engine that RR didn't like hasn't been fixed?

That would be the only explanation, and not just fixed, but re-certified by RR as well.....

The remaining flying life is still determined by the highest cycled engines though. No point in have one zero time engine and 3 (or 4) with a quarter life left. Trashing 2 completely scuppered their engine cycles management programme.

[marksx]

EDIT - youtube link to a local news article:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pqa70F7Anc

Edited by marksx on Saturday 20th October 12:25

[Stuck In A Lift]

Here is a pic from the VTTS Facebook feed.

I do hope we can convince the PH powers at be to hold a Sunday Service there.

Garlick