[HN Gopher] Qatar Airways grounds 13 Airbus A350s as fuselage de...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Qatar Airways grounds 13 Airbus A350s as fuselage degrading
        
       Author : jryle70
       Score  : 118 points
       Date   : 2021-08-07 14:36 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.msn.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.msn.com)
        
       | jacquesm wrote:
       | This could well be interaction between the paint or primer used
       | and the resin/polymer used to make the carbon fiber hull parts.
        
       | naturalauction wrote:
       | Given that the Qatari regulator ordered the grounding and that
       | Qatar Airways is state owned that seems like a pretty big
       | conflict of interest. Especially with Qatar Airways refusing
       | delivery of any more a350s until the problem is fixed (in a time
       | of extremely low levels of international air travel).
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | baybal2 wrote:
         | Well, a good time to say Bravo to their regulator then.
         | 
         | Imagine if the regulator, and the state airline was ran by
         | people half of whom shared the same surname, and it happened,
         | say, in USA.
        
           | dathinab wrote:
           | Except that imagine the issue is non-safety related and the
           | regulator which happens to be related to the Airline company
           | grounded them on requests of the Airline during low traffic
           | times to put more pressure on the manufacturer and maybe
           | profit from higher damage payments.... (Purely speculative to
           | give a point for the next argument.)
           | 
           | I.e. we can't say if the regulator acted correct with safety
           | concern or corrupt until we know what is actually going one.
           | Just because something seems to be "proper safety orientated
           | acting" on the first sight doesn't mean it is and neither
           | mean it's not corrupt...
        
             | bdjddd77 wrote:
             | I'd say this is correct. Qataris have one rule for them and
             | another for everyone visiting or working ( the flippas,
             | Nepalese etc), a friend is quite well connected as part of
             | chemical supplies to oil industry, more like store at
             | origin and broker nowadays, they live by different laws
             | than the mere mortal (like me) passing through. You can
             | live it large if you have the right connections -
             | connection to above - one form of corruption doesn't exists
             | it's systematic so yeah making the regulator act to protect
             | a private contract condition is very plausible in qatar
        
           | akiselev wrote:
           | Qatar has a population of over 2.5 million but only about
           | 300,000 of those are native Qataris. Even if they have
           | different last names, chances are they're somehow related.
        
             | bdjddd77 wrote:
             | This is true, briefly thought I was in manila when doing a
             | hotel stop over, only the hotel manager seems to be a
             | native. Horrible country, but I'll do the gov subsided
             | stopover frequently when travelling back and forth.
        
         | InTheArena wrote:
         | Qatar is bringing A330s out of storage and up-gauging some
         | routes to 77Ws, which have significantly higher fuel-burn (due
         | to more seats, and a older airframe). I doubt this is just a
         | negotiating position.
        
       | belter wrote:
       | "How safe are modern aircraft with carbon fiber composite
       | fuselages in a survivable crash?"
       | https://www.materialstoday.com/carbon-fiber/features/how-saf...
       | 
       | PDF direct link: https://www.materialstoday.com/download/127653/
       | 
       | In Space, but relevant:
       | 
       | "Thermomechanical Fatigue of Unidirectional Carbon Fiber/Epoxy
       | Composite in Space"
       | 
       | https://www.hindawi.com/journals/je/2020/9702957/
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | This has no bearing on this article, it is not about fatigue
         | but about surface defects, not structural defects.
        
           | belter wrote:
           | The mention of cracks was coming from this post:
           | 
           | "A QR A350, A7-ALL MSN 036, a 4 year A350, was being prepped
           | for paint removal from the standard QR livery and repaint
           | into the Qatari World Cup 2022 livery at SNN when IAC
           | engineering discovered that the airframe had premature cracks
           | in the composite fuselage..."
           | 
           | https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1456315&.
           | ..
           | 
           | I am aware of Airbus statement that is only surface related.
           | It is surprising they took the airplane back to Toulouse. So
           | its certainly something more than just a paint issue.
        
             | avs733 wrote:
             | It's not surprising, they wanted more ability to look at it
             | than was available at the paint shop.
             | 
             | If they were comfortable flying it that should tell you
             | something.
             | 
             | This seems like the first time they've encountered the
             | phenomenon so they want to do a deeper investigation to
             | understand it.
             | 
             | This whole thread is akin to saying that if you have to
             | debug your code it must be beyond repair or poorly
             | designed.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | Interesting. I'm curious what the eventual outcome of this
             | will be but it is always very hard to keep track of such
             | stories further down the line, especially if the result is
             | non-spectacular.
        
           | belter wrote:
           | See comment above from InTheArena.
        
           | AceyMan wrote:
           | On the assumption these panels are a component of the
           | pressure vessel--and it would seem that they are--then they
           | very much are structural components. Not in "the wing will
           | fall off" kind of way but in "the whole cabin will
           | explosively decompress" way.
           | 
           | /Acey
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | Yes, they are structural components but as far as I
             | understand the article they are not structurally damaged,
             | though the company is - of course, and as they should -
             | taking the proper precautions to ensure that it _really_ is
             | just a surface issue without affecting the structural
             | integrity of the panels.
             | 
             | I'm quite interested in what the root cause here is,
             | whether it is process related or some formulation issue or
             | an un-anticipated reaction.
             | 
             | As a -small- point of order it is against HN convention to
             | sign your comments.
        
         | InTheArena wrote:
         | The 320s have had composite parts forever. So have virtually
         | every plane since then, The 787, for all it's other faults,
         | hasn't had this issue, and uses a more radical design for it's
         | 787, versus the A350 which still uses stringers and panels,
         | rather then put more load on the CFRP.
         | 
         | But that said, given that Lufthansa is also apparently pulling
         | and repainting it's A350s, there may be some reaction here.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | danuker wrote:
       | > Qatar
       | 
       | Could it be the Qatar weather, typically over 40degC (100degF)?
       | 
       | How much time do planes spend parked there? I would assume more,
       | since the pandemic.
       | 
       | Keeping them in the sun would make them even hotter than the air
       | temperature (which is measured in the shade).
        
       | EMM_386 wrote:
       | This was first reported back in January when a Qatar Airways
       | Airbus A350 was in Shannon for a repaint. When the paint was
       | stripped they found surface coating irregularities. This is
       | apparently cosmetic and not structural.
       | 
       | This was one of the first A350s to be repainted.
       | 
       | Qatar has 53 Airbus A350 aircraft, so why these particular 13 is
       | the question now.
        
         | samstave wrote:
         | Wasn't Qatar one of the first countries to purchase these? I
         | wonder where in the production line these particular 13 came
         | off the line?
         | 
         | It would be interesting to know if these are older or newer in
         | their inventory.
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Are they in a particular sequence or randomly distributed
         | across the 53 hull numbers? If the former it might be a process
         | change somewhere in the paint or resin/polymer formulation.
        
         | InTheArena wrote:
         | The rumor is that some combination of paint, stripper and CFRP
         | led to the actual mesh being exposed. If so, that goes
         | considerably further then cosmetic.
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | Is there a link or some other substantiation to the rumor?
           | I'm quite interested in this (but for an entirely unrelated
           | field).
        
             | InTheArena wrote:
             | It's being talked about on the airline forums (PPRUNE and
             | airliners.net), but no definitive source from what I can
             | see yet.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Ok. This combination is also used in windturbine blades
               | of some manufacturers, it may have substantial impact if
               | it is something structural involving the base material,
               | less so if it is just a rare combination of
               | process/chemicals.
        
         | systemvoltage wrote:
         | If it is cosmetic, that doesn't explain millions of dollars of
         | loss from grounding the aircraft.
         | 
         | Respectfully, this makes zero sense. Is there something more?
        
           | EMM_386 wrote:
           | > Respectfully, this makes zero sense. Is there something
           | more?
           | 
           | Yes, the rumors that are swirling that this may just be
           | something being used as leverage by Qatar against Airbus for
           | contract negotiations.
           | 
           | But those are just rumors.
        
       | JKCalhoun wrote:
       | I've been a long time carbon-fiber skeptic.
       | 
       | Only an armchair materials enthusiast but carbon fiber
       | construction seems to lack the margin for fatigue that aluminum
       | has. It seems to me that when carbon fails it fails
       | catastrophically, while aluminum allows some "give".
       | 
       | Now it seems carbon fiber doesn't have the longevity either? I am
       | aware the aluminum can "work harden" over time and become more
       | brittle as well. No material appears to be perfect but carbon has
       | always felt to me to not be going in the right direction.
        
         | IshKebab wrote:
         | Yeah I worked in NDT for a bit and it's very difficult to test
         | carbon fibre for damage or delamination under the surface.
         | There are techniques but not as good as for aluminium. And as
         | you said they don't have a nice plastic region like metals.
        
           | orra wrote:
           | > [carbon fibre] don't have a nice plastic region like
           | metals.
           | 
           | An amusing turn of phrase, given we are presumably talking
           | about carbon fibre reinforced plastics.
        
             | jeffbee wrote:
             | Metals don't have a "nice plastic region " either. If the
             | parts of your aircraft have been permanently elongated by
             | plastic deformation, you've destroyed it.
        
         | EMM_386 wrote:
         | Keep in mind we have 30-year old A320s flying around using
         | carbon-fiber, so we would seem to be out of the trial-period
         | phase.
         | 
         | This issue appears to be a cosmetic one with regards to the
         | paint layers, not structural (see my other comment).
        
           | walrus01 wrote:
           | there are also a number of enthusiastic road cyclists riding
           | 20, 25 year old carbon fiber frames - if not crashed or
           | mechanically damaged (in a way that would also total beyond
           | repair a thin walled aluminum frame like a cannondale CAAD8),
           | they last quite a while.
        
             | mihaaly wrote:
             | The loads and operating conditions are quite different for
             | bicycles and airplanes.
             | 
             | As I wouldn't use the characteristics of my steel
             | coffemaker to predict the behaviour of an LNG vessel I
             | wouldn't do the same with bicycles and airliners.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | I had one of these until very recently, a first generation
             | CADEX frame (1987, so now a good 35 years old), still as
             | good as new, it went to Germany and is now plying the
             | streets of Berlin.
             | 
             | Unless you smash them up just keep them clean and they seem
             | to last quite long, at least as long as comparable steel or
             | aluminum frames.
             | 
             | The weak points are where aluminum is bonded to the carbon,
             | those spots you need to monitor and if there is any damage
             | at all you should count the frame as lost.
        
               | rorykoehler wrote:
               | When I raced mountain bikes I always found the feel of
               | aluminium frames to deaden after a few years. They would
               | be super responsive at first and then slowly lose that
               | snappiness and with it trail feel as the years went by.
        
             | bobthepanda wrote:
             | road cycling is probably less harsh than a plane cycling
             | through 0 to 30k+ feet multiple times a day, though.
        
           | numpad0 wrote:
           | Apparently A350 are built with Teijin Tenax thermoplastic
           | carbon. Brochures say it cures in one minute, eliminating
           | autoclave. Could be different from normal resin based
           | carbons.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | Yes, and quite possibly they did not factor in the long
             | term differences between interaction of paint and
             | materials.
        
               | avs733 wrote:
               | Why would you think that? You think these aerospace
               | engineers are a bunch of goof offs?
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Because sometimes process optimizations have complex
               | downstream effects.
               | 
               | Aerospace engineers are anything but a bunch of goof
               | offs, which is why flying is as safe as it is. And that's
               | why they pulled the aircraft from service even though it
               | is 'just a surface issue' they want to make sure that it
               | really is just that before releasing them - freshly
               | painted - back into service again.
               | 
               | The history of aerospace quality control is written in
               | blood, not because they are goof offs but because
               | materials science is complex and sometimes the only
               | warning you get that something is wrong is a crash.
               | Avoiding those is what this sort of action is all about,
               | in any other industry they would have slapped some new
               | paint on it and kept going.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Is the paint for anything more than cosmetics/branding
               | purposes? Does it provide a benefit like UV shielding
               | etc? In otherwords, do we use the paint for anything
               | other than ego of corps owning them?
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Some paint is more slippery than the substrate it is
               | painted on for lower air resistance:
               | 
               | https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Surface_Coatings_and_
               | Dra...
               | 
               | Then there is corrosion protection, protection from
               | ablation (especially on leading edges which usually have
               | other protection against this as well), ice adherence and
               | so on. So it is far from just cosmetic, and given the
               | weight of a single coat of paint (500+ pounds on a 777
               | for instance) airlines make sure they optimize for fuel
               | consumption because just hauling 500+ pounds along for
               | the lifetime of the aircraft costs a pretty penny.
               | 
               | Aircraft are fairly regularly stripped and re-painted too
               | (I lived near a special purpose facility in Canada that
               | did this, pretty weird to see a widebody come down in a
               | location that is not near any major airfield, the first
               | time I saw that I thought it was about to crash, but it
               | turned out it was there for a paint job).
        
               | chiph wrote:
               | You want your plane to be mostly white in color to
               | reflect solar heat and reduce the load on the air
               | conditioning packs.
        
               | sandworm101 wrote:
               | White paint also weighs slightly less which, across a
               | fleet, adds up to an economically relevant fuel cost.
        
               | numpad0 wrote:
               | Sounds plausible, if someone told me that this can of
               | paint designed for that epoxy destroys this
               | thermoplastic, I'd just believe it.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | That could be, or it could be a process related issue, or
               | a change in formulation of a paint that performed well,
               | or a change in formulation of the polymer that the fiber
               | is embedded in, there are a very large number of options
               | to choose from.
        
           | throwawayboise wrote:
           | If it's cosmetic only, why the grounding?
        
         | dathinab wrote:
         | It's way to early to speculate about this, as we don't really
         | have information from either side.
         | 
         | The fact that only Qatar Airways seem to have such problems
         | (for now) is also interesting.
         | 
         | The reason could be anything from manufacturing errors with a
         | specific batch of them which happened to have been bought by
         | Qatar Airways to wrong maintenance by Qatar Airways or the
         | planes having been to often exposed to to extreme weather
         | conditions as they are not that unusual in Qatar. And even this
         | "wide range" speculation is not really usable given the facts
         | we (don't) have.
        
           | benhurmarcel wrote:
           | A likely reason for why only Qatar airways reports this is
           | that they are notorious about regularly publicly complaining
           | about "quality issues" in the press during commercial
           | negotiations. It's a trick to pressure the aircraft
           | manufacturer.
           | 
           | That's not to say that quality issues don't happen, they
           | certainly do. But QTR is known to be very quick to refuse to
           | work with their supplier and publish the complaint in the
           | press, instead of working it out like is the norm, especially
           | if it's near a time of contract negotiation.
        
         | yread wrote:
         | I am more worried about fire safety. Fire in CF is difficult to
         | extinguish. How well and for how long does it protect occupants
         | from fire, does it produce poisonous gases and lose structural
         | integrity as it heats up?
        
         | Scene_Cast2 wrote:
         | If anyone is curious about material science, some keywords are
         | "stress strain curve", "plastic vs elastic deformation", and
         | "fatigue limit" (that last one is really cool).
        
           | Someone wrote:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress-strain_curve
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deformation_(engineering)#Plas.
           | .. vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deformation_(engineering)
           | #Elas...
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_limit
        
         | himinlomax wrote:
         | Carbon fiber and other composites are actually much better wrt
         | fatigue than aluminium. In fact they are pretty much immune to
         | it, if you mean the word in the sense it's used in metallurgy.
         | They are however much worse for impact resistance.
        
           | philjohn wrote:
           | Which is why Aluminium drop-handlebars on bikes freak me out
           | - when they fatigue they become brittle and can just snap one
           | day if you put too much weight on them (e.g. out of the
           | saddle sprinting).
        
             | msandford wrote:
             | The only time I've ever had aluminum drop bars go out on me
             | was when the salt brine from sweat corroded the aluminum a
             | lot.
             | 
             | I was on a hill in a mild rain riding next to a friend. I
             | managed not to take her out and stay upright which was
             | great. The cycling team I participated on in college said
             | road bars need to have the tape off and inspected every
             | year. They were right.
        
           | danmaz74 wrote:
           | Does the impact resistance degrade during the expected
           | lifetime of those composites?
        
             | himinlomax wrote:
             | No, except inasmuch as the resin may degrade over time, but
             | that's not just an issue for impact resistance.
        
           | namibj wrote:
           | To elaborate, carbon-fiber reinforced carbon, the expensive
           | ceramic used for very heat-resistant lightweight structural
           | members (like the leading edges of the space shuttle, and
           | some jigs for use in metallurgy furnaces, where it's lack of
           | deformation and low heat capacity is beneficial) can handle
           | something around 20% of it's ultimate tensile strength for
           | millions of full load cycles.
           | 
           | This is, going by fatigue-limited-strength to weight ratio,
           | far better than steel or aluminium. The difference is mostly
           | that it's a brittle ceramic and retains most of it's strength
           | at temperatures where steel can be poured.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Fatigue is not a concept applicable to carbon fiber reinforced
         | materials. Carbon is anisotropic, unlike bulk metals which can
         | be modeled as isotropic. Carbon may suddenly delaminate or
         | whatever, but it doesn't have a cycling limit.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-07 23:01 UTC)