dia1

AA71 FRA to DFW was diverted to Glasgow today after an interesting pulsing and shaking experience in flight. (We'll be shipped to LHR tonight and onward tomorrow.) Three pax in J reported their flights DFW to FRA (2 different flight days) had been delayed hours b/c of oil pressure checks in the engine on the same side we lost.
I'm rethinking my preference for 767s.

ESpen36

Could happen to any engine. But I agree that the 763s are showing their age. Hopefully DFW-FRA-DFW will upgauge to 77D when more of the reconfigured equipment become available. Cargo capacity couldn't hurt given US-DE trade agreements and local industry.

millionmiler

DFW-FRA was a 777 long after many routes switched to the 767s. As far as I can remember, for quite a while transatlantic 777s were only going to LHR and DFW-FRA. If cargo was sufficiently profitable it would have never downgraded.

I flew DFW-FRA in F on the 777 more than 50 times so it was a route that at one point I knew as well as any passenger.

At the risk of being simplistic, planes are machines and machines break. 777's have had their own problems as well. 787's and A380's also. I've experienced 3 emergency landings and many more diversions due to passenger health issues. Not fun surely but not the fault of a particular plane model.

JDiver

You're correct. All aircraft engines go through routine and periodic maintenance. Depending on engine time, engines get entirely rebuilt at Major OverHaul time. Aircraft age isn't likely to impact mechanicals much, though it could be some engines are many hours SMOH and are near rebuild time. That could influence reliability somewhat. A MOH on the CF6-80A usually is about 60 days.

Well, mostly correct , as some newer engine types do begin service with poor reliability - one version of the RR engine used to power the A380 did. The original Boeing 747 engines were underpowered and somewhat unreliable. (Off topic,,I can't recall the nature of the problem when my friend Ken Snow was piloting a Boeing 747-121 NYC-LON lost power to all four engines ; he was able to land what at the time was the world'so largest glider at a UK RAF base. I suspect fuel feed issues.

The early GE CF6-80A used in the 767-323ER was a tad long in the core and suffered lower reliability; the newer CF6-80A was shortened, rematches turbine and improved cooling, making for a less flex, significantly higher reliability engines; the newer engines powering the 763 are actually more reliable.

Now, if they had CF6-80C2s, they'd be even better (that's the engine QF uses on its 747-438ER of which QF has 8 and uses on longer flights like DFW-SYD), but - they don't, and the CF6-80A is still considered a very reliable engine.

millionmiler

As I wrote "at the risk of being simplistic"... The overriding comment remains. Planes are machines and machines break. As for "older" machines go, planes remain some of the most reliable.

JDiver

You'll get no argument from me. I've flown on aircraft older than I am, and regardless, mechanical stuff breaks - newer av stuff breaks less often, but it does. Toss in some FOD or birds at takeoff, volcanic ash, etc. it breaks more often.

steve64

Yea. Aircraft age does not in any way = engine age.

In the many operational positions I worked at AA 20-35 years ago, 6 months was spent at Maint Control DFW.
One night I was pulling the work orders for a 757 that was overnighting DFW. The 757 fleet at that time was new and small, so I questioned the work order to remove & replace of of the engines. I was told that the engines only fly "x" hours before being called in for overhaul. "X" hours generally happen within a year (while the aircraft's C check is more like 3 years). To keep new planes from having 2 engine exchanges in one night, they actually do the 1st change at "X/2". From then on, every "6 months" the bird comes back for one engine swap. I knew the engines were changed more frequently than the C Checks, but had no idea it was that often.

Of course "engine change" doesn't mean "new engine". It means "overhauled engine". But seriously, an engine (or any aircraft component) fresh out of overhaul is as good as new.

To the OP....
Without knowing any more than I do, "pulsing and shaking" does not sound like an oil pressure problem. It sounds more like FOD (forieng object damage) the most common culprit being a large bird. As fast as those fan blades spin on today's jet engines, take just a small nick out of one blade and the whole "fan" is seriously out of balance ... major shaking will occur.

LaserSailor

A couple of these were debris ingested from high altitude volcanic ash

JDiver

True, but not that one, not then (1969-70; I cant recall, and as Ken is no longer with us - he was principal celestial navigation instructor with PAA , flew Strats and ended as a 747-200 captain, quite a ride).

Re. Engine MOH (in response to other posts).

TBOH in commercial engines is determined by cycles and by "tach" hours. The engine on a short-haul carrier will typically get pulled for cycles, the long-haul typically for total time / hours, usually.

It's said in the airline industry that since every part can be (and ultimately will be) some engines' only original part is the manufacturer's ident plate.

HRBB

I was on that flight yesterday from FRA to DFW. Most of what I have read is accurate as to what happened. A few things that I need to add to enlighten this conversation as some of you seem to know these topics well:
On May 5th (AA70, 767-323, Tail: N352AA), I was on a flight from DFW to FRA which was delayed 3 hours doe to a oil leak in the right engine, this was announced at the gate so it is not heresy.
On May 7th (AA71, 767-323, Tail: N386AA), as the doors were shut, the pilot announced that the technicians are checking a couple of things... Well this is not a matter of conspiracy but I think one of those couple of things may have been a leaky engine as this seems to be an issue on these engine. Yes there was at least 4-5 very loud clunking noise that came out of the right side of the plane followed by loss of power. I believe that the pilot immediately shut the engine off. Pilot did announce the engine was lost and that we were going to Heathrow which would have been perhaps 60-80 minutes away, in about 10 minutes he informed us that we are going to Glasgow. I am grateful to the pilot as he did all the right things and all the passengers thanked him when we saw him at the Glasgow airport.

I looked up the tail number of this flight and found the following:
AA0071 = N386AA logged @ 10:50 GMT (1716)


Aircraft Description

Serial Number 27060 Status Valid
Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date 06/03/2009
Model 767-323 Expiration Date 07/31/2017
Type Aircraft Fixed Wing Multi-Engine Type Engine Turbo-fan
Pending Number Change None Dealer No
Date Change Authorized None Mode S Code (base 8 / oct) 51070625
MFR Year 1994 Mode S Code (base 16 / hex) A47195
Type Registration Corporation Fractional Owner NO

To those who have said age of the aircraft is not equal to the age of the engine, I agree in principal. But, if two flight on the same type of aircraft within a few days have the same issue then what is the answer to that. Short cuts taken by AA decision makers? Short cuts taken by technicians? 150 people could have died that is my point without getting too technical as to how and why this happens to the same aircraft.
BTW, in talking to some of the passengers on flight 71, they mentioned that they had delays also due to technical difficulties on another dates while leaving DFW to FRA.

We were at 30,000 feet when this happened so it is hard to say that a foreign object such as a bird was the culprit. Can a drone get that high?
To be specific, I was sitting in the front of the plane which is close to that engine, the sound and noise was like I said earlier were similar to clunking. As if gears started to grind, as if someone was hitting the plane by a sledge hammer. The shaking was the result of the clunking.

dia1

"Shuddering" might have been a better description than my original.
Not likely a bird at that altitude. I think I recall the pilot mentioning oil in his telling us what had just happened at the time. (I was a little preoccupied putting a few essentials into a waistpack just in case.) Oil leak was reported as cause in at least one news story.

reeg2

Just bad luck - thousands of 767's out there flying with a stellar safety record. I understand your emotion as you were on the plane, but one must only look at AA's recent safety record as evidence that they're doing what needs to be done. A few flights held at the gate due to a mx problem is not abnormal - these planes fly a large portion of the day and night, so they're tended to when available.

There's likely very little in this except a small dose of coincidence and a small dose of back luck.

HRBB

It's not about emotions, I am stating facts about AA fleet
I agree that many well maintained 767s are flying today; I'm not convinced that AA is in that group of operation. All I am saying is that AA should be held responsible and be watched.
We can't just sweep it under the rug as coincidence and bad luck

EZEMD11

Title: N386AA AA71 FRA-DFW lost an engine today.


Did they find it yet? :P

dia1

Coincidence? Same route, same side, same issue. Seems rather likely that it was the same plane in all three cases.
If so, one might wonder about the decision to not pull it. If not, one might wonder about the routine maintenance protocol.
I'm certainly not going to stop flying AA or 767s but I may stop selecting in favor of 767s now.