Talk:Rolls-Royce Trent 900: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 08:56, 8 November 2010

Aviation: Engines Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft engine task force.

Airbus A380 Failure

A Trent 900 suffered a failure today on an Airbus A380. Judging from the photo in the news stories such as this one, my guess is that the engine threw an HPT or LPT blade, but we'll wait and see what the official word is. This incident may warrent a mention in the article if RR takes any action, like grounding the engine or redesigning a part, but I think we can wait and see before posting anything. -SidewinderX (talk) 11:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I read that this morning as well, grounding the Qantas fleet is a fairly notable action. As you say we don't know what caused it yet so we should hang on (it may take a while to determine the cause).Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 12:09, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I agree. Btw, seems like they got lucky that it threw whatever failed outboard of the cabin... -SidewinderX (talk) 12:57, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the AfD on the incident, only you noted that the problem was with the engine, not the aircraft. The incident has been noted in the A380 article and when we better know what the cause was we can move some of the info over here (assuming that it wasn't a birdstrike, FOD or something similar). It looks like the failure was contained (as it is designed and tested to do) even if it did loose some cowling panels. Speculating on the cause would be just that at the moment. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 13:04, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

needs updated

Rolls Royce no longer has the market share on A380. PW/GE has 144 Order verse 84 for RR.

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 :::I saw the AfD on the incident, only you noted that the problem was with the engine, not the aircraft. The incident has been noted in the A380 article and when we better know what the cause was we can move some of the info over here (assuming that it wasn't a birdstrike, FOD or something similar). It looks like the failure was contained (as it is designed and tested to do) even if it did loose some cowling panels. Speculating on the cause would be just that at the moment. Cheers [[User:Nimbus227|Nimbus]] [[User talk:Nimbus227|<font style="color:#2F4F4F;">(Cumulus <font style="color:#708090;">nimbus <font style="color:#D3D3D3;">floats by)</font></font></font>]] 13:04, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
+==[[needs updated]]==
+Rolls Royce no longer has the market share on A380.  PW/GE has 144 Order verse 84 for RR.