G'Day all, on my last trip I managed to borrow a digital camera from a friend, so I've taken lots of random photos hehe.I'll post them up here as I get time.This lot occured after landing in Perth and recieving a REV ISLN light, and IDLE DISAGREE on taxi in.http://www.users.on.net/roope/KIF_0455.JPGAs you can see the left engine is still in reverse. After a few attempts at cyling the reverse thruster nothing happened, so we were forced to shut down still in reverse.It turned out that the outboard half of the cowl had returned to forward thrust, but the inboard half was still in reverse, resulting in the reverser being locked out.http://www.users.on.net/roope/KIF_0463.JPGBad shot of the status page showing L REV ISNL VAL. This picture also shows you how this screen has been used as both the upper EICAS and Nav display, the screens are rotated to prevent the images from becoming too burnt on.http://www.users.on.net/roope/KIF_0456.JPGhttp://www.users.on.net/roope/KIF_0465.JPGThe high tech warning labels in place while the engine was being looked at. (You cant run the flaps with the engine cowls open or the slats will bump into them...)http://www.users.on.net/roope/KIF_0540.JPGThe locked out reverser, there are 6 points around the cowl where it is secured like this, to prevent the engine from being able to get into reverse.http://www.users.on.net/roope/KIF_0547.JPGThe offical INOP label! Its a crappy pic but it says L ENG REV.http://www.users.on.net/roope/KIF_0528.JPGThose not quite square panels are the 'blocker doors' that pop up and block the airflow from exiting out the back of engine, forcing it through the reverse thrust vents once the cowl had 'slid' back.

That second picture could really be used in training to show exactly why you should dim the screens! (But don't the brightness knobs break when you dim the screens so often? ;-))And that's a very high tech "INOP" label! Yellow arrow pointing to a CRT screen... Hmm. :-)Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing

Looks like those outstation engineer guys haven't found the supply of "Don't Touch" labels in the Tech Log, HP? Perhaps you should start charging them for using your notepads? :-hahApparently they also couldn't find the parts to fix it! The Sydney guys had that honour (As co-incidence would have it, I was assigned the aircraft, but, fortunately for me, the Engine/Airframe guys were given the task of fixing the reverser. When I walked past on my way to/from the cockpit, it looked like they were changing the Centre Drive Unit).The Centre Drive Unit, by the way, converts bleed air (pneumatic) power to rotary mechanical movement and powers the 3 ballscrew drives attached to each reverser sleeve half. The reverser halves can be driven seperately, but, if one does not move, safety interlocks will not allow you to go above "idle" reverse on that particular engine.The Do Not Operate plates attached to the cowl indicate that the three ballscrew drive units have been locked in place for safety reasons. The CB's should also have been pulled. The message shown on the lower EICAS is a common sight during ground maintenance as we pull the reverser CB's for safety during extended stopovers.Cheers.Ian.

Very nice pics HPbut a question: what does the "Rudder Ratio" stand for? no-sync of the rudders upper and lower part?Thanks in advance ... :)

HiOOO nice! I like the pics HPSOV.Ian they look like the same Dont touch labels we have!!! lol.Hope the covered the hyd pump swithces with one too.Did they fix it or is it Deferred? :))Cheers Stu.

The rudder in the 767 is all in one piece...Rudder Ratio changes alters the deflection of the rudder based on speed.Slow speed=full deflection, high speed=less deflection.This is to prevent over-stressing the airframe. It also means you dont need to alter rudder input during changes in speed like you would in a light twin.

Actually, I was quite surprised at how much rudder movement limiting there is on the 767. At max speed, the rudder is only allowed to move +/- 2 degrees (compare this to a 747-400 which allows +/- 5 degrees). At slow speeds, a maximum deflection of 26 degrees is allowed on the 767 (32 degrees for the 747-400).Just wondering what the pilot sees on his trim indicator at high speeds (At maximum trim, does the pointer stop moving a few millimeters away from neutral or is speed factored into the display and shows full pointer deflection at full trim at all speeds?) Trim, by the way, is limited to 67% of full rudder deflection. With only 2 degrees deflection, I'd be surprised that this would be effective enough during (single) engine failure???Cheers.Ian.P.S. Sorry Stu, I've already forgotten the registration of the aircraft... so can't tell you whether the reverser was fixed or not.

Interesting one Ian!As far as the trim indicator goes, it will display up to full deflection at any airspeed. The rudder ratio changer must then work its magic.And 2 degrees doesn't sound like much at all! However must obviously be enough at high speed. I dont suppose there is any way that it could allow more in the case of an engine failure? (I doubt this, but its not the kind of thing they would tell us in the manuals were it the case).

>Interesting one Ian! >As far as the trim indicator goes, it will display up to >full deflection at any airspeed. The rudder ratio changer >must then work its magic.That would have been my (semi-educated) guess, too, HP. I notice that the trim is marked in Units, rather than degrees. Interestingly, though... 15 units (full trim deflection) is pretty close to 15 degrees at low speeds (if my calculations are correct).Full manual deflection at low speed = 26 degrees.Allowable trim is 67%.67% of 26 degrees is 17 degrees (not far from 15 degrees).>And 2 degrees doesn't sound like much at all! However must >obviously be enough at high speed. I dont suppose there is >any way that it could allow more in the case of an engine >failure? No mention of this in my books about this also, but I'd say it would be unlikely. The rudder is quite large, and considering slightly out of flush spoiler panels can cause the airplane to turn, I'm sure 2 degrees rudder would have a very much larger effect.BTW, I checked through all our 767 records and found the registration of the 767 with the thrust reverser problem. After 10 days there have been no further reports, so it looks like the Center Drive Unit fixed the problem :-)Cheers.Ian.

>BTW, I checked through all our 767 records and found the registration >of the 767 with the thrust reverser problem. After 10 days >there have been no further reports, so it looks like the Center Drive>Unit fixed the problemCould it be possible, that the aircraft is in service for some time without fixing the problem completely?There has been an interesting thread at PPRuNe:http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=67244 According to the statements it seems normal to use an aircraft for some time with a disabled reverse thrust on one side. Is this specific company policy or maybe it depends on the type of aircraft (f.e. not for a 767)?

>Could it be possible, that the aircraft is in service for >some time without fixing the problem completely? Absolutely. It is standard operating procedure for all airlines to defer rectification until time and parts are available (where regulations permit). Various time limits apply as per these regulations. Depending on the defect, the aircraft may have to fixed before departure, however. For other defects, the aircraft may be allowed to fly back to main base for rectification. Others can be fixed within a day or two, others in 10 days, etc. Some airlines have 120 day time periods for non-so-critical items! There is a guide book carried on every aircraft called the Dispatch Devition Guide (DDG) or Minimum Equipment List (MEL) which tells you if you the aircraft can fly with something not working properly.In the case of the reverser, rectification was carried out quite quickly, even though it was not necessary to do so. Since that rectification (about 10 days ago), the problem has not returned. Some airlines seem to stretch out rectification as long as they can... Their logbooks are absolutely filled to the brim with deferred items (A real pain to read through). Some defects are easier to analyse than others because the defect is evident all the time (in the air and on the ground), others you can be chasing for months because they only happen intermittently and never on the ground. In cases like this, you change the most likely component to cause the problem. If the problem is still evident on the next flight, you change the next most likely component... and so on. Of course, if the fault is serious, you have to make sure that you do everything possible to reproduce the defect on the ground.Some faults only happen on every second flight because of the way the airplane systems are designed. They have two "channels" and automatically switch from one channel to another channel every time the aircraft lands. This generally makes faults easier to diagnose.Not fixing a defect straight away, can result in serious problems if the flight crews are not careful. There was a recent case where, I believe, there was an Autostart defect on a 747-400 here in Sydney (not Qantas I'm glad to say ;-)). The crews flying this aircraft had to make manual starts as a result. Unfortunately, one flight crew slipped up and pulled the start switch and turned on the fuel straight away, thinking that they were using Autostart (The Autostart switch was deactivated, however). With the engine rotors barely turning (no airflow through the engine) and fuel and ignition applied, it sent the EGT's to over 1000 degrees on startup. They were too late switching off the fuel and, as a result, the engine had to be completely replaced (This takes half a day in most cases... assuming that there are spare engines available). I don't think that the passengers would have been very impressed. I haven't tried doing this in PIC, but I'd imagine you'd have some kind of problem starting the engines.Anyway, hope this helps.Cheers.Ian.

With all the fancy engine control acronyms (ECA for short) like EEC and FADEC I was under the impression that there was some sort of protection against things like this? Like not allowing any fuel flow below a certain N2 percent for example. There isn't any protection at all?Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing

"...I was under the impression that there was some sort of protection against things like this? There isn't any protection at all?"I guess the philosophy here is that if you are doing things manually, the pilot knows best and, because of this, some of the automatic safety features are overridden. I'm sure the pilots have some degree of comfort knowing that they can indeed override a malfunctioning automatic system. But there are always surprises. I learned yesterday, from the 747-400 wiring diagrams, that even the CF6 start switch (manual) circuit runs through the EEC (unlike the RB211) on it's way to the start valve. This may be, however, because you really don't want to start up a FADEC engine without the engine control working properly (It would be like starting up a car without throttle or valve control). Engine protection does exist in various forms for both start and normal ops, depending on the type of engine. Pilots may have to monitor different parameters for each engine type during start....noting here that even during Autostart, it's the pilots' responsibility to make sure that the automatics are working normally.Hope this helps?Cheers.Ian.

>Hope this helps?I still think it sounds a little stupid that you can ruin a perfectly good multi million dollar jet engine by flipping a switch a few seconds too early. But of course in the case you mentioned the pilots should have been aware of the autostart being inop?Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing

"I still think it sounds a little stupid that you can ruin a perfectly good multi million dollar jet engine by flipping a switch a few seconds too early. But of course in the case you mentioned the pilots should have been aware of the autostart being inop?"Looks like the story I got was a little different from what actually happened, Martin (I found out yesterday what actually happened... or perhaps something closer to the truth):There was a problem with the engines and an engine (test) run was carried out by maintenance staff. For some reason, engineers like to start engines without autostart selected (not sure why). Unfortunately, the Autostart switch was not returned to the ON position after the engine run. The flight crew failed to spot this during their preflight checks (and the Captain has taken responsibility for this). Some pilots expect to find their aircraft in a specific state after maintenance has been carried out, but even so, preflight checks should be performed to ensure that the aircraft switches are in the correct positions (at least the ones in the cockpit). Another puzzling thing is why the crew didn't spot the AUTOSTART EICAS msg (which appears when the Autostart switch is selected off).Anyway, one engine was completely "cooked" and another redlined (but was ok). A ground engineer on a headset at the nosegear warned the flight crew that there was no N1 rotation during engine start, but they appeared to ignore him (possible language barrier?).The airline in question won't be able to supply an engine for another few days, so it really has been an expensive mistake (having an airplane sitting on the ground for so long).Yes, it is a bit of a worry that things can go horribly wrong with just one switch not in the right position... but I guess that's why the pilots get paid the big bucks ;-)Cheers.Ian.