QF31 Syd-Sin 6th November 747 with 5 engines!

[vt01]

Had an interesting flight up to Singapore yesterday. We carried a spare engine up on the left wing between the fuselage and number 2 engine (I think the engines are counted on the left wing first).
I've seen pictures of this before but never been on a flight carrying one.

Flight was slower and also constant vibration which the captain announced as the result of carrying the extra engine. Didn't look big enough to replace the damaged A380 engine..

Once I figure out how to get the photo off my phone I'll post it..

 

[NM]

Flight was slower and also constant vibration which the captain announced as the result of carrying the extra engine. Didn't look big enough to replace the damaged A380 engine..

That engine was not for the A380. It was for the 747-400 that returned to SIN operating QF6.

The A380 spare engine cannot be carried in the same manner. It needs to be sent on a cargo flight. I assume it will be transported to SIN at RR's expense.

 

[KitKat]

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qantas/Boeing-747-338/0635769/L/

link to pic on airliners.net, showing similar ferry duties
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/9/6/7/0635769.jpg
am not very good with the links...

 

[Worldtraveller8888]

Interestingly, the 'fifth pod' arrangement described here can only be done with the 744's Rolls Royce engines, and not with the GE ones fitted to the 744ERs.

One of the few good things about the RR over the GE's!

 

[ReLoad]

Thats awesome!

So, I'm thinking that when QF retire their 747's they will hand em over to JQ and instead of engines they will make extra seating pods.

 

[ejb]

In this situation are the pax told about the spare engine. I could imagine a few worried looks if anyone noticed the engine not working on the wing.

ejb

 

[markis10]

In this situation are the pax told about the spare engine. I could imagine a few worried looks if anyone noticed the engine not working on the wing.

ejb

I believe its standard practice to tell them, its also noted on the flight plan in case any air traffic controller decides to pick up the binoculars and thinks they are seeing triple. Note its not a complete engine, the blades are removed and carried onboard.

 

[ReLoad]

I believe its standard practice to tell them, its also noted on the flight plan in case any air traffic controller decides to pick up the binoculars and thinks they are seeing triple. Note its not a complete engine, the blades are removed and carried onboard.

I wonder was that aircraft's load or cargo capacity modified in any way to load balance the aircraft? - Ok everyone we are only sitting on the right side of the plane today, hehehehe.

Likewise I wonder what the fuel cost would have been for all that extra drag on the plane.

 

[NM]

In this situation are the pax told about the spare engine. I could imagine a few worried looks if anyone noticed the engine not working on the wing.

ejb

Given its quite an unusual situation, and affects performance somewhat, it would be normal practice for the Captain to explain the situation to the passengers. The flight will be a little slower than normal and probably feel some extra vibrations/buffeting at times.

 

[ejb]

I believe its standard practice to tell them, its also noted on the flight plan in case any air traffic controller decides to pick up the binoculars and thinks they are seeing triple. Note its not a complete engine, the blades are removed and carried onboard.

Given its quite an unusual situation, and affects performance somewhat, it would be normal practice for the Captain to explain the situation to the passengers. The flight will be a little slower than normal and probably feel some extra vibrations/buffeting at times.

Thanks for that. It would be a strange look.

Is it only 747's that can do this or are other planes capable of carrying spares?

ejb

 

[markis10]

Thanks for that. It would be a strange look.

Is it only 747's that can do this or are other planes capable of carrying spares?

ejb

Its about the only modern aircraft that has the facility, previously 742/747-100, Tristar and DC10 all had a V-Pod capability.

 

[NM]

Thanks for that. It would be a strange look.

Is it only 747's that can do this or are other planes capable of carrying spares?

ejb

In additional Markis10's comments, it was an option available from Boeing on 747 models. I believe it may also have been possible on B707, DC10, DC8, VC-10, L1011 TriStar aircraft. It has proved valuable to Qantas when they need to replace an engine at a foreign port.

The reason for Boeing including the 5th pod option was that to carry a spare engine in the cargo hold of a regular passenger 747 required a significant amount of dismantling which added considerable time to the preparation process at both ends of the ferry flight.

The GE and P&W engines can be quickly broken down (split) into small enough sections for carriage inside the cargo hold, but the RR engines cannot fit into the cargo hold without a lot of time and effort dismantling into small enough sections. So it seems most common for RR engines to be ferried o the 5th pod mounting.

And for an interesting twist, the B720 test aircraft often sports various engines on its 5thy pod. But in its case its not under the wing but on the starboard side fuselage and used for engine testing purposes.

 

[JohnSydney2000]

I experienced this on one of my QF107 jaunts to the big apple last year. Quite interesting to look back from 2A and see a 3rd engine. They removed it in LAX....we had a somewhat lighter load LAX-JFK. John.

 

[samh004]

While questions are being answered I thought I'd add, does anyone know why the only option was for 1 spare engine, as surely 2 would balance things out? Other than the obvious reply that if 2 engines had gone it'd be a miracle

Also, considering the RR troubles and the fact they aren't easily disassembled for transport, the performance benefits must be astounding for Qantas to remain a customer.

 

[PineappleSkip]

While questions are being answered I thought I'd add, does anyone know why the only option was for 1 spare engine, as surely 2 would balance things out? Other than the obvious reply that if 2 engines had gone it'd be a miracle .

How much does an engine weigh? How much does a 747 weigh? I wouldn't think it would be a drama.

The need to ferry one spare engine is rare, so the need for two would be extremely rare I guess.

 

[medhead]

While questions are being answered I thought I'd add, does anyone know why the only option was for 1 spare engine, as surely 2 would balance things out? Other than the obvious reply that if 2 engines had gone it'd be a miracle

Not that I know the answer but a second spare would also increase the drag possibly having a significant impact on performance. Plus I assume there would be a need to strength the wing (or the area that attachs the pod) that will carry the second spare pod which would add weight for all flights and decrease performance as well.

 

[markis10]

If the need arose for two engines it would be cheaper to charter a cargo operation, and the need for two is so rare it makes no sense in engineering for it. As it stands not many airlines have taken the V-Pod option, I would suggest QF have because of the geographical remoteness of their home base, where the bulk of the spares are held.