RB.211- The Engine That Sank and Then Saved Rolls Royce
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2021
- To get 73% off with the NordVPN 3-year deal plus 4 month free click on the link here: nordvpn.com/curiousdroid
Coupon code: curiousdroid
In the early 1970s, Rolls Royce one of the most famous names in aero engineering went bust all because of just one project. Yet that same project went on to transform Rolls into the 2nd biggest engine maker in the world today. The project was the RB211 3 spool high bypass turbojet engine and this is the story of how and why it failed and how it was spectacularly resurrected by engineers that were brought out of retirement and started a line of engines that leads the world today.
Sponsored by NordVPN nordvpn.com/curiousdroid
Written, researched and presented by Paul Shillito
Images and footage : Rolls Royce, Lockheed, VC10.net, Boeing, Aircraft Engineers Toolbox
A big thank you also goes to all our Patreons too :-)
Eριχθόνιος JL
Abrakodabra Kobra / 25%
Ai
Alistair Brown
Andrew Gaess
Andrew SMITH
Brian Kelly
Cameron Elliot
Carl Soderstrom
Charles Thacker
ChasingSol
Collin Copfer
Dom Riccobene
Dragoncorps
Etienne Dechamps
Florian Müller
George Bishop II
Henning Bitsch
Henri Saussure
inunotaisho
james t early
Jim Early
Johan Rombaut
john edwards
Jonathan Merage
Jonathan Travers
Joshua Rea - Dawn Aerospace
Ken Schwarz
László Antal
Lawrence Brennan
Lorne Diebel
Pyloric
Sergey Massazhenko
SHAMIR
stefan hufenbach
Steve J - LakeCountySpacePort
Tawn Kramer
Vincent
Will Lowe
Music from the RUclips library
Battle of 1066 by Patrick Patrikios 
Наука
To get 73% off with the NordVPN 3-year deal plus 4 month free click on the link here: nordvpn.com/curiousdroid
Coupon code: curiousdroid
Sup
Nope, not helping you spread this cancer around youtube. Sick to death of being unable to find any decent youtubers that don't resort to this garbage.
Thanks! My current accounts subscirption was just about to run out.. so now made a new one with the sweet deal :P
Sir Droid, there's a mistake: NordVPN only offers 2-year deals, not 3-year ones.
Please don’t push Nord. I know they give a awesome commission but the product is total rubbish.
Rolls had to get back all the retired management staff that ran the factory during WW2 to get all their problems sorted and train new management so they knew what they were doing. Its in Stanley Hooker's book "not much of an engineer". The old boys came back and saved the day...........
I wonder if History will repeat its self. Warren East has used covid 19 to shed all the older engineers, and was quoted in the press stating he wanted a younger engineering staff. I don't know if I or my fellow ex-colleagues that were told to jump or be pushed, will want to save the day.
Big established companies want experienced engineers but they don’t want to spend the money to train them. Dealing with this brain drain today in my aerospace company, as the veterans retire, die off or get laid off and the junior engineers are expected to pick up the slack.
Wonder if Boeing will end up doing the same
@@cissysprinkle8005 there is an abundance of everything in the world today..........except for one thing. Leadership.
A lot to be said for Sage experience.
It's good to see engineers get the credit for their work. It's a far cry from some companies where engineers are stifled by restrictions from PR and Marketing
It’s interesting, from CPU chips to Aerospace, seems more engineering background = better company performance product wise.
@@AaronShenghao I think the correlation is that in those industries, all that matters is product performance, and its objectively measured by the customer, rather than subjective. In many other industries, reputation and brand image counts, but not for silicone or engines.
Looks like they tried to do it without them and went broke in the process.
Sandy Monroe is also very critical of MBAs in key leadership roles in engineering heavy businesses.
Your pfp is legendary sir.
“Not much of an engineer” has been my go to book for decades. Sir Stanley’s autobiography and is fascinating.
I read it… a brilliant book.
Watched this. Read your comment. Ordered the book. Can't wait to read it
@@johnsutcliffe3209 I’m sure you will enjoy it. Another example of Britain punching way above its weight.
Excellent book
@@altair1983 My fav read in the last 10 years
It goes to show that having the right people and leadership that understands the domain is key.
Intel is a great example of how bad leadership can greatly hinder a global corperation.
@@m.streicher8286 intel, boeing, usa car manufacturers...
Actually, more and more big usa corperations suffer from the same problems at the moment.
If you get a chance, take a look at a book titled The Phoenix Project. Be sure to see it all the way through no matter how aggravating it may seem in the middle.
Are*
Boeing needs to take note….
I find it weirdly satisfying how important a single engineer or team of them was. Like not only time and money matters, but still - masterminds behind it
In the US they called him Kelly Johnson at Lockheed - P38 Lighting, U2, SR71 (aka A12) , C-130 even in the F-117 'Nighthawk' in partial retirement.
But his '14 Rules of Management' (that became KISS) demonstrate his competence in the People Domain as well.
Experience is so very important.
Many companies do not treat the brains behind their products well.
Usually, that does not end well.
Boeing itself has recently (re)discovered that.
One heck of a story. Never underestimate an old engineer.
And sadly, they just don't make them like that anymore.
Great video! I spent 42 years at Rolls-Royce, 29 of them in Civil Aerospace. Thanks for a video which is accurate... so many so-called factual videos contain lots of inaccuracies. Not this one. For info, I was a performance engineer on the RB211-535E4 and was with it from development in 1982 until I changed jobs in 1987.
My dad was at Royces from 1973 to 2010, he was quality inspector at Derby works.
Awesome, thanks for sharing
Our older engineers that worked for the company are always welcome in the facilities here. It pays to listen to the older men who have been there and done that.
This goes for any domain
Why make the same mistake twice?
Todays youth amazes me political-wise cause of their arrogance over certain subjects, and willingness to outright dismiss people whove "been there, done that". Oh well, history doomed to repeat itself im afraid
@@nicosmind3
Bitchute is really good but „normal“ videos are rare
Odysee is much more „friendly“ so i think its gonna be the leader in a year or two
I'm retired now, but I found the managers that came from working on the shop floor were good managers. OK, you could not "bullshit" them, but they understood the problems.
@@russcattell955i My own words about that are: "there are two kinds of engineers: the "Desk-only" types, and the "Get your hands dirty with some grease, frequently enough". In my own experience with 42+ years at an engineering company, too many of the "Desk type" lack a good enough connection to the industrial reality, and if allowed to rise into management, they invariably cause damage to the enterprise.
As long as salaries for engineers dedicated to pure engineering are kept lower that those on the more administrative roles, there will be fewer and fewer true engineers and designs will continue to go down in quality and reliability.
I enjoyed this talk so much! What a fascinating history RR has. As a 72 year old great to hear of old folks saving the day.
Research & development is a field where experience does count.
Me, too!
I started at RR in 1987 and I'm still there today. I've worked as a fitter on the 535E4, 524G, Trent 500, 700, 800, 1000, MT30 and currently XWB 84K and 97K. I wouldn't want any other job in the world. Great video Paul.
Excellent engine and rather reliable on the TriStar, best 8 years of my working life on that combination.
ruclips.net/video/8FTWXhJzl4s/видео.html👈
The Tristar is my all time favourite jet, with the DC-9 my second, QANTAS is still flying the 717 from Sydney to Tasmania.
My Dad worked on this project in Derby during the 70s. I remember the crisis, and him working all hours and weekends.
He continued working for Royce’s building the successors to the RB211 until retirement in the late 90s..
My old man was on the same project at Derby
My favorite engine. They have a very distinct growl when sitting infront of them on airliners.
I think it was Bill Bedford the Harrier test pilot said something like, " everyone always goes on about IK Brunel being a genius, Stanley Hooker definitely was ".
I agree . Both were great men of their time and no one remembers them today . A sad reflection of our society
@@davidrussell8689 I dunno, IK Brunel is pretty well known (considering); one J Clarkson did a very good job of explaining why he was Great, and that programme got a lot of attention judging by the result in the subsequent popular vote - IK came second only to Churchill, beating Darwin and some sailor chappy called Nelson... Nelson would be spinning in his brandy barrel were he to find that securing Britain's survival during the long and bitter Napoleonic war was not going to make him as "Great" as someone else who built railways and couldn't even launch a ship properly!
Stanley Hooker is less well known, and that is a pity because his personal input to the development of the Merlin played a truly significant role in making that the Engine That Won the War.
What I find fascinating though is the respect Hooker expresses in his book for Frank Whittle. He said that it'd taken him a long time to fully appreciate some of the tiny and easily dismissed design details Whittle had put in that, as it happens, were actually quite critical. This, from a chap who definitely knew his way around compressor design, saying Whittle knew a little bit more...
So yes, Hooker was a genius, but Whittle was pretty phenomenally good himself, and unusual as pioneers go because not only had he got a good idea he really did know how to make it work as well as possible.
@@abarratt8869 "Standing on the shoulders of giants", amazing how many problems got solved with a slide rule, insight and a really good cuppa.
@@askianvan Yep the Trouble shooting Qualities of a cup of tea.
@@abarratt8869 AFAIK what made Frank Whittle so good was that everybody in the "turbine science establishment" thought that turbines were a solved problem. Whittle had different ideas, and pushed his ideas for _years_ through thick red tape.
I always feel so sorry for how Whittle was treated - practically kicked out of his own company in the end.
When you stood next to a British Airways 747-400 when maximum take off thrust was applied you thought you had gone to heaven. The RB 211 remains a magnificent bit of engineering. Blood, sweat and tears went into those beauties.
Congratulations, Paul! 1 million subscribers!
It’s amazing how even just an engine can have such an interesting story behind it.
Older, experienced engineers are legends.
ruclips.net/video/8FTWXhJzl4s/видео.html👌
A picky point. I was actually a university apprentice with Rolls Royce from 1969 to 1973. Within the company and the town of Derby the company was always referred to as "Royces" not Rolls
Yep.
My Dad always called them Royce’s. He worked at the Derby plant on the RB211.
Yes. But nobody outside of Derby calls them that.
frank... Who really cares ????
@@wilburfinnigan2142 anyone with an interest in the company, I’d imagine. It’s something I never knew.
Such a nice looking factory but why in Derby?
Few things give me greater joy than watching Curious Droid. I've learned more from his videos than all the years at school.
I clicked Like button even BEFORE Curious Droid video started! Because it's Curious Droid!!! Love your work!!!
So does a lot of people.
Because of [any channel] does it.
I flew the 757 with the RB211-535. Great engine and gobs of thrust especially when it was needed.
I'd heard that the RB211 was toned down a fair bit for the 757; sounds like they didn't tone it down quite as much as all that!
@@abarratt8869 - Correct, the RB211-535C (B757 variant) provided around 12,000 lbf less thrust than the equivalent 524 model at the time - however two of those mounted on the B757 airframe still gave it a humungous amount of power in reserve. Have a look for videos of the RNZAF B757 displays to see what they're capable of!
@@abarratt8869 Yes but because of the 757s design it gives it the highest TWR of any subsonic airliner ever
I worked at a company in Derby for 12 weeks in 2001 developing the software for a test rig for some of Rolls Royce’s turbine engines. Sadly, I never got to visit RR and never saw an engine up close. Thanks for the history.
It's amazing that being just one year late was considered a crisis and a scandal at the time. These days, new aircraft are regularly five or more years delayed, with the engines often being a big part of the delays, and then they have design or production flaws that take years to iron out.
These companies learned how to take advantage of the DOD and can eternally survive due to subsidies no matter if they deliver a product or not. But thats just the defense sector. The private sector will sour fast with delays like Lockheed Martin regularly gets away with
50 yrs from now, MAX - plane that nearly sunk and then saved the Boeing, except there would not be many people to praise
@@MilanRegec well... it's a plane that caused grief and pain...
@@MilanRegec That is a much less heroic story. That is the story of a company that cut corners, only to discover there were consequences, first of all for the people that trusted them.
We used the RB-211 to pump natural gas in SW Ontario,had to learn most of the maintenance from the manual. Still we kept them running. First stage compressor and HP 3 were removed for this application. Seemed like a good unit!
@No One So a two-spooled, three-spool engine? I presume these were configured as gas generators pushing a free power turbine?
@@mikecowen6507 Sorry, but I've only just seen this. As I was second in command of the little team that designed the Industrial RB211, I can tell you that we turned a three-spool turbofan into a two-spool gas generator by removing the fan and the 3-stage LP turbine.
They don't call them "the greatest generation" for nothing...
Slow build up with a thunderous ending.
You produce the best technical docs on RUclips. No silliness, no smirking, no pretension. Thank you for the model. A few others could take the hint.
Your taste in shirts draws my attention so much. The colors and patterns are very expressive.
This shirt is especially "expressive". Probably the best one yet.
i think 'the shirt' is Batik from Indonesia?
I think everyone loves his shirts. Shirts used to make up a lot of the comments, but seems like people have gotten used to them.
I remember years ago (1990s) reading about one specific RB-211 that Cathay had had on the wing of a 747 (I think) for some incredible number of hours, and was still beating fuel efficiency specs. This was in Cathay's in-flight magazine.
When an airline is writing about a single engine it owns in its own magazine, that's a notable accomplishment.
Someone got the clearances just right maybe ???
@@scottallpress3818 possibly, but I gather it also has quite a lot to do with the three spool designs (like the RB211) being a fair bit shorter than an equivalent 2 spool design. The shorter engine can be stiffer, meaning that bearings, tip gaps and seals aren't having to cope with quite as much engine flexing, and so can wear less. Whether that counts or not I couldn't say - maybe combustors burn out quicker than bearings wear anyway, etc.
According to a former Rolls-Royce engineer who commented on a previous video, it's important that the name be hyphenated as seen in the newspaper headlines and on the plant buildings in the opening shots. Just thought I'd mention it, thanks for another interesting video and congrats on 1M subs!
Oh yes, it's a capital offence to miss out the hyphen - and in the name Rolls-Royce in the classic monogram, the Os must be circular.
Great story, very smart to call in the engineers with the longest careers and most design experience - when all else fails call in the most learned people you can to get the fastest results. Good work and congrats to those gentlemen that proved being retired doesnt mean you cant do the job anymore but rather can do it better than any of the new guys.
I have just been reading "Not much of an engineer" and it is a little spooky. I started at Royces in 1969 as an undergraduate apprentice. There were about ten eager young men interviewed on the same day and where - The Midland Hotel in Derby - same place that Stanley Hooker was interviewed. We even got a very nice feed. I was there in 1971 when the firm went bankrupt. I remember hardened engineers and highly skilled machinists being in tears. Because of the reputation of the place they would have been snapped up by other companies so they were grieving for the loss of "their" company. I remember the subcontractors who ran things like coffee machines and the canteen coming round and putting labels on their stuff so that it could not be claimed as an asset by the receivers. Equally I remember one of the RR directors leading a team of people round putting labels on things to claim them as property of RR. In the end the company was bailed out by the government and things returned to normal.
After graduating I worked pipework design and this happened in a large office to the left of the main gates as you came in off Nightingale Road - the same space that Stanley Hooker started although it would have been a drawing office in his time.
I have not been back to Derby since about 1980 and when I look on Google earth I can see that although the front office (as it was called) with Rolls Royce in big letters on the front on Nightingale Road is still there the main works (as they were called) behind that edifice have been totally bulldozed. I can see the gate at the end of the main office where I was told off by a commissionaire for riding my motorbike up the main yard (he expected me to push it) and I can see the area to the left of the gate where Stanley Hooker and later myself worked is flattened concrete with weeds growing through. What would those proud engineers who could make anything think of the state of the place now?
That site has been sold and as far as I'm aware will have houses built on top of it soon, the front building is being kept as it's listed, but it has been outside of RR for a very long time now, everything has been moved to Sinfin and Raynesway. The midland hotel is however still going strong.
Mr. Hooker, much like Alan Turing I hold you in the absolute highest of regard as a forefather of the modern age which I in 2021 am shamefully taking for granted.
Why alan turing?
@@hodb3906 We have him to thank for whatever device you typed that on.
@@andie_pants right. I thought you were going to say for cracking the enigma code at first. Which is of course the polish, not turing.
A great company with a tremendous history. I have been riding on commercial flights since I was a child. As I will be 70 next year, that means I have been a passenger on about everything the various airlines have flown (starting with the Lockheed Constellation, DC6/7, all the way through the jet age). The only commercial aircraft I have not flown on is the A-380. My favorite remains the L-1011 with their RR engines. As an American citizen, I am very proud of the accomplishments of P&W and G.E. No matter, Rolls Royce is an industry leader and the aviation world is better off that they survived this crisis and now are a critically important important supplier of engines in today’s market. Job well done!
that three spool design is awesome. everytime i pushed a 757 out i could hear each of the three spools spinning up. was always such a treat.
I manufactured parts for RB211 & next to my machine was a complete RB211 engine/nacelle off a Boeing 747. This was used at various airshows
I'll always remember watching the 757s take off from Boeing Field of a summer evening outside the 2-66 building at Plant 2. They positively leapt into the sky, where other planes merely flew. Good times.
For international travel, though, it was faster to take 747s and 777s (cruise speed 550 MPH) versus 757s and 767s (500 MPH). 50 MPH less on a 10 hour flight adds up to an extra hour in the air. It gets even worse with a headwind (say, flying west from Europe to California).
If a 757 can leap into the sky, why would it have a lower cruise speed?
They all leap into the sky when they're empty. I flew on the first commercial 757 flight in the UK...I was sorely disappointed by the take-off performance, but marvelled at the fuel efficiency, compared with something like the 720B.
@@w6wdh since you are clearly not an engineer nor a pilot I would simply point out to you that top speed is governed by many things, not just engine power.
@@stevewhite3424 You didn’t answer my question. What was it about the 757 and 767 that limited their airspeed?
Take-off power is set so that you don’t need to adjust throttle position if you lose an engine. So twins always take off more promptly than triples or quads.
This is the BEST engine for the 757-200 ! Many Atlantic crossings and safe flights over mountainous terrain under my belt thanks to these great engines.
I don’t even need to watch this to know it deserves a Like
Yup
I had a good 22 year experience, working for Rolls-Royce North America.
The Rolls Royce RB-211 was used on the Lockheed L1011 TriStar, Boeing 757, 747, 767.
The body ages, but the mind remains strong. Seasoned veteran engineers are an asset in any task
Just because people are old and retired, they are still able to have massive input to make things better
Well done
L1011 was my favourite aircraft it's shame there's only one left
MichaelKingsfordGray Yo it's this guy again! The "You're a coward for using a username guy". Good to see you're still active, my guy.
@MichaelKingsfordGray I just read your about me wow. You have an active vendetta against original usernames in RUclips? 🤣🤣 not my fault Google fucked us allover in the RUclips comments section. Damn even curious droids demographic even has crazy weirdos That or you just a major boeing fan boy
@MichaelKingsfordGray oh I misread I thought I read invertile. Sure i can be pretty childish at times but damn least my issues aren't as deeply seeded as yours. Good luck with your personal battles anyhow
@@fuckingwebsite1what's the last one, and is it active?
@@mikhailjairnisbett441 I'm not sure but I think it had a mission within the last year its called the star gazer
Worked on the 22B , and the 535-E4.
Best years of my career
As an American, I've always been impressed with the UK's aeronautical engineers. From their plane designs during WW II to their engines of today.
My father had a small jig and tool business up to 1980 from 1948, I worked with him in the 60s and to 80 on various projects one of which was the RB 211 (the RB standing for Rolls Royce Barnoldswick who designed the engine, not in Derby but at the office on the border of Lancashire and Yorkshire near Skipton). We had with the engineers at RR many traumas in creating the tooling for the fan blades from carbon fibre - to exotic alloys and titanium. I remember the devastating shock of the the bankruptcy and the saving of the company by Ted Heath. We had many inputs into other famous projects over the years but I think that the input into the RB 211 eventually gave us the proudest moments in the end. Kind regards
The Trent engine core is such a great machine that it is used on everything from aircraft, ships, and land based power plants (both fixed buildings or mobile trailers).
Dale L yet Boeings largest problem on the 787 is the RR engine version !!!! Thank God they also offer the GE engine on it also !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 how so?
@@glennoc8585 The RR Trent 1000 program has been plagued with numerous durability issues with compressor and turbine blades which caused many B787 to be grounded
@@glennoc8585 Where have you been ???? RR Engined 787's have been grounded off and on for years !!! The problem has not been solved, keeps rearing its ugly head !!! NO problems with the GE engine used on 60% of the 787's !!! Thank god for that !!!
@@benoit9849 Absolutely !!! They have been a problem for years !!!
Unfortunately the engine delays held up the TriStar and gave the DC-10 an advantage to take some orders and Lockheed went from having a more advanced civilian aircraft to leaving the civilian market. I understand the realities of how the governments intervened but Lockheed deserved to win but got crushed through no fault of their own without even an acknowledgement.
They continue to do well with defense projects but they were collateral damage in the civil market.
Having worked on L1011 and DC10 aircraft I can say that the DC aircraft were far more reliable. The RB 211 engine always had issues like several uncontained failures. Eastern had at least two, one tail and one wing and Delta had one tail engine. The other l1011 issues were also with the apu, and many electrical issues. The airplane always leaked fuel and hydraulic fluid. It was difficult to work on. Engine changes were common. We got so good at it that a wing engine change was considered an easy work shift. Gearbox changes were also common. The DC 10 had none of these issues even with its troubling crashes. It is a wonder that more l1011 aircraft did not crash.
a shame given that the Tristar was a better and safer aircraft.
@ Ian Miles
The L1011 was a safer aircraft because of low production numbers, low utilization, and pure luck.
Lockheed had the same problems with poor cargo door designs. Just look at the C-5 cargo door that blew up over Vietnam.
The L-1011 had a centre engine fan blow up and shrapnel hit every one of its four hydraulic systems. Only luck kept the fourth one intact.
No DC-10 ever lost control of its horizontal stabilizer. The L-1011 that did managed to land because of pure luck.
Only 250 made. Late into service, retired early, terrible dispatch reliability because of its overly complex systems.
Hey.. the Tu-114 was safer than the L-1011… but for the same reasons. Very few of them and they hardly flew.
The DC-10 is still flying safely every day.
@@Bartonovich52 Quite hilarious just how wrong you are, you’re clearly talking about United Airlines flight 232 which involved a DC10 experiencing a catastrophic blade failure in the tail mounted engine which led to loss of all hydraulics. So yes, a DC10 has indeed lost control of its horizontal stabilizer before. I’m also curious as to when the L1011 ever ran into issues regarding a design flaw with the cargo door?
@@mattk2800 - Respectfully, I think they're talking about Eastern 935 : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_Flight_935
I do think @Bartonovich52 is incorrect in other assertions though. Yes, Eastern 935 suffered an uncontained engine failure (though of the fan shaft rather than the fan disc as was the case for UA232), but to put the successful recovery of the aircraft down to luck alone is misleading in my opinion. The fact that the TriStar was designed with four redundant hydraulic systems as opposed to the DC-10's three meant that the TriStar's design had a greater level of redundancy built-in, and as such could be considered objectively safer. Of course, the simple fact is that no amount of redundancy is completely foolproof given sufficient physical damage.
Lockheed may have build the C-5, but again, comparing the C-5 cargo door to that of the L-1011 is "apples-to-oranges", and in any case, the C-5 cargo door failure was caused largely by botched maintenance.
I get the feeling that @Bartonovich52 might have an attachment to the DC-10, which is fair enough - once the design flaws were fixed, it became a good and reliable aircraft - just as over time the L-1011's dispatch reliability became at least as good as its competitors (though it suffered from a glut of dodgy parts in the mid-'80s, apparently). Neither aircraft entirely shook those reputations though, which is somewhat unfair.
For my money, I don't really see the point in trying to claim that either aircraft was objectively better than the other. They were designed to solve the problem using fairly different approaches, so a direct comparison is pointless in my opinion. Lockheed went all-out on technological innovation, taking a risk on delays in the hope that the end product's USP would be having a decade's lead on the competition - I don't think it's fair to call the systems "overly complex" - they allowed the aircraft to do things that other widebodies simply could not. MD on the other hand went with a more traditional approach, largely scaling up existing technology with a focus on beating Lockheed to market. Of course, as it turned out later this pressure led to rushed development, errors in communication between MD and their subcontractors and arguably some corners being cut*. Lockheed's unusually thorough "belt-and-braces" approach to failsafe design (even if this caused delays) was probably caused in part by their previous experience with the L-188 Electra; in which unexpected design problems caused the loss of two aircraft when the type was new in service, which delivered a blow to the airliner's reputation from which it never recovered, in spite of a thorough redesign and exhaustive testing programme. The irony is that the exact same thing happened with the DC-10.
Additionally, the only reason the DC-10 is still flying is because its comparative simplicity and greater range made it a more suitable candidate for cargo conversion.
* - The most infamous example of which was the Applegate Memorandum - a memo from a senior engineer at Convair (the subcontractor for the DC-10 cargo door) which essentially proved that Convair knew about the cargo door failures likely leading to the loss of the aircraft well before it entered service, but the memo either never made it to MD, or it was ignored.
I have an RB-211 fan blade next to my fire place. It's about 2.5 feet tall and I wanted that one in particular because of the awesome story behind that model!
Thanks for the video! My Dad worked for Rolls Royce building parts for the RB211, it was a major pride for him that he had done so. One of the problems that RR had was due to arbitrary strikes called by various unions.. throwing a spanner in the works for many companies.
@5:32 - You KNOW you're doing some serious metrology when you break out a magnifying glass.
Hopefully RR documented how to make great engines from these retired guys. Its's all very well bringing these guys back, but ultimately they have to selflessly pass on their knowledge thru superb internal documentation. Companies who don't recognise that are doomed. Staff who resist that are dooming the company. Easy to read explanations of how and why things are done the way they are is a worthy pursuit that is oft deemed an overhead by myopic morons.
Training the Young Blood is EVERYTHING! (anybody can read a book)
Yes. The F1 rocket engine is a prime example. Modern engineers admit they couldn't build one even though the have examples to copy because the nuances weren't written down.
@@johnsutcliffe3209 Nonsense, they could not only build an F1 if they wanted to; they'd build a better one since materials and other technology have advanced. An F1B design was even floated a few years ago by Rocketdyne. This myth of "lost knowledge" surrounding the Saturn V keeps going for some reason.
Rob, they seem to be doing OK, they provide the engines for the V22 Osprey and the US Military issued a reqest for a replacement engine made in the USA, but so far as I am aware, it still has the Rolls-Royce AE 1107C fitted :-)
@@RCAvhstape Indeed.. You hear this argument thrown around willy nilly about all sorts of things. A couple of the recent ones I've heard are that our modern concrete/cement is inferior to the Roman's and that despite having cranes and modern mechanized equipment, we couldn't build a pyramid equivalent to the Great Pyramid of Giza. Total bs...
I still have my 1978 copy of "The Jet Engine" a must read for all engine apprentices in my day. I still read sections of it for fun and to refresh my memory!
I've watched many of your videos, but this one left me pleased more than most. I guess I am a sucker for a "we almost died, but we're still standing" story.
We had one of these at my aviation college I went to outstanding engines really a technolical marvel at the time
Congrats for reaching 1M subs!!! Very well deserved!!!
Hey, from this video I learned my Dad, a "Conway" who started as an engine mechanic in the Connie area at the Kansas City TWA overhaul base, may have worked on a "Conway". And for some reason, I have always remembered the JT9D. I have his "Certificate of Inoculation" for "Jet Turbinitis" dated on 6/7/1960 and signed by "A. Turbine Wheel" and B. Burner Can".
Every generation of managers needs to learn the same old lessons:
- You can't just replace experienced engineers with cheaper ones.
- Throwing more people at a project to save it, only makes things worse.
Love RR turbofans. So interesting to see how Lockheed played a major role in Rolls' future at the time. Cheers.
I rode on both the L1011 TriStar and Boeing 757.
Yep, much beer owed. Lockheed sticking with RR through those bad times led to some great times.
It's going to be interesting to see what the future holds. RR seems to be the only company putting big effort into truly advancing large turbofan engine performance. They look like being the first to deploy a large GTF (P&W have done very well with their smaller one), their CF blades are looking like a step up from GE's, they've been looking at variable pitch fan blades, and doing a lot of fundamental improvement in the engine cores too.
They need only one of two of these to make it successfully into production to set their engines clearly apart from GEs large engines.
That might start making it difficult for GE (who don't appear to be spending anything like as much on R&D) to keep up in the market. RR might then dominate. Which would be an interesting position to be in...
@@abarratt8869 - As I understand it, the TriStar project poached the engineers who designed the Trident's Triplex control and Smiths auto-land systems as well, making the TriStar the most technologically sophisticated airliner in the world at the time, and a lot of pilots of that era considered it to have the best handling characteristics of its day.
I've definitely read some claims that sticking with RR was what caused the TriStar to be a commercial failure when compared to the DC-10, along with the fact that Lockheed ultimately abandoned the civil airliner market as a result. The truth is more prosaic though - neither the TriStar nor the DC-10 were a commercial success, objectively speaking. With 20/20 hindsight, the airliner market in 1970 could barely support three competing widebody types, with the airlines making large orders on the basis of a continually expanding market. As it turned out, the major US airlines all overextended themselves to some extent, with the 1973 oil crisis and subsequent financial turmoil brutally exposing this overly optimistic approach.
It also later became apparent that McDonnell-Douglas's pressure on their engineers and subcontractors to beat the TriStar to market led to rushed development and corners being cut, with tragic results.
@@frankdenardo8684 At the same time.
What an amazing topic. Great story. I didn't even know I wanted to know about this engine.
Nothing pleases me more than looking out the window during a flight and seeing RR on the engines.
As someone who was at work, saw the gates closed on the morning of 4th February 1971, and lived through the bankruptcy, I can say that this is a fairly accurate (if somewhat simplistic) version of the events.
In terms of the problems and delays to the RB211-22B programme, which resulted in the bankruptcy, are you aware that Boeing was on the edge with the 747? The JT9D had major development problems too, which delayed the aircraft programme. There were finished 747s on the field at Seattle with concrete blocks hanging under their wings.
Imagine taking a battleship engineer who worked in the 1930s out of retirement to perfect a missile cruiser in the 1960s.
Given how many early missile cruisers were rebuilt WWII ships, I’m sure it happened!
Good luck finding that kind of dedication nowadays… instead we now have many iconic companies (Boeing for example) being savaged by mediocrity, short-sighted penny pinching accountants, employees engaged in CYA while being on an eternal hunt for cash and benefits instead being concerned with pride and perfection in their craft… all mashed up against the pressures of ever better efficiency, lighter weight, cheaper maintenance and last but not least.. board room and investor expectations of profit above all else.
and toss in woke diversity for the sake of it and we have a dysfunctional mess
What the actual ass is CYA? Please splain thanks. :]
I think as the workers see that companies have zero dedication to their workers when they toss out people with 15 20 years tenur out on the street without a second thought they might think why should they be dedicated to the companies?
Stfu about workplace pride. That day Boeing turned over a 841.9% returns year over year, and then had the audacity to cut company contributions to Healthcare AND forgo annual raises, they lost any right to expect loyalty. That's like a serial unfaithful husband complaining when his wife leaves him...
You know the average "investor" is us, right? Our 401k and 403b fund that company. Maybe you lend your entire retirement account to fortune 500 companies for free, but most of us want a return in exchange for risking our long term planning and ability to retire... This is what happens when you infest schools with communist academics...
Awesome, I spent 40 years in the UK Titanium industry making mostly involved in the making of the Titanium Fan Blade blanks for the RR E4, 524G, then the various Trent engines T500, T600, T700, T800, T900, T1000 plus the XWB, additionally for P&W, GE and others. I count myself lucky to have been close to so many of these top engines and developments.
Thanks for the history lesson. Brought back a lot of memories from the late 1990’s. I was the project manager on a natural gas pipeline expansion where we installed RB211’s at 11 different locations from Montana to Minnesota to drive compressors. That’s a great engine and RR is a class act.
Must say, your videos are allways super exciting, but this one for me is in the best, thank you very much
Earliest ever!
Interesting stuff, Paul - thanks, I always enjoy your content!
I’ve flown both the RB 211 on the 747-400 and the Trent 725 on the A330-200, both fabulous engines that never missed a beat.
I was 10 when Rolls Royce announced receivership.. I remember my father doing his nut and proclaiming the british government were being self centred in maintaining their own wages instead of working on a bail out for Rolls Royce ( which they did ). I never realised then why my father was so invested in a company like Rolls Royce, he was after all a non medical worker for Humberside Health Authority in Hull at the Royal Infirmary. It all fell into place when I overheard my father and grandfather discussing ( and there was a lot of cussing ) our very unbritish government seemingly not doing anything to keep a great british company Alive. "Rolls Royce is a British Institution" I heard him say " and during World War Two, It was Rolls Royce that contributed to the downfall of Hitler ". I was in no position to argue with him, neither would I have. Several years later, I had the opportunity to have my picture taken standing in front of an RB211 during a school trip. That picture became a conversation piece at a great many family gatherings and had pride of place on the bookshelves next to our lounge room fire. My father never missed an opportunity to grab that picture, wave it in the face of a relative and then loudly proclaim what an amazing and very british company Rolls Royce was. No one ever dared to contradict him. Thank you for bringing back so many fond memories and thank you for this very enlighting footage.
Keep the aero engine vids coming!
"Old age and cunning beat youth and talent every time"
This is one of the most iconic engines in the history of commercial aviation. The RB211 and the JT8D are absolute *legends* of the industry and coincidentally, they both make arguably the coolest sounds in the jet engine world
It’s sad to see the loss of many manufacturers in the EU and US. Rolls with the Merlin, and other designs made such a huge impact. I’m glad to see they could pull it through.
Alternative title: How Frozen Chickens Brought Down one of the Saviours of the UK in WW2.
The leading edge was strong enough to be used as an axe, according to the story recounted in Wide Body - the story of the 747. The impact strength on the upper surface of the blade was much lower.
The chicken hits the leading edge, not the upper surface.
In order for the bird to hit the leading edge, the engine would have to be producing negative thrust.
@@Bartonovich52 these 2 sentences don't make sense.
Fans blades are set at an angle and the upper aerodynamic surface faces the oncoming air. The chicken is more likely to hit that surface than the leading edge. The hyfil fan blade was designed the withstand impacts on the leading edge, but could take impacts on the broad upper surface. From what I remember the hyfil blades had a beefed up leading edge, butbthe u bidirectional fibres at the root were the cause of the failure of the struck blade(s).
The story I'm thinking off is the one were the sales rep from RR hit the conference table that Joe Sutter and buried the the leading edge of the hyfil blade about an inch into the wood to show its strength.
Naw, GE replaced the Test chicken with a frozen one.....;^)
Excellent - interesting, unexpected and well presented. Classic Droid!
My Old Man worked long and hard on the RB211 programme, going as far back as 1968 when He was sent to California on Royce's behalf for several months. He specialised in fan blade stress for much of his career ("Bill and Ben the Stress Men").
He ultimately became Project Director on the Trent.
He died in 2020.
Has to be said, I’ve been enjoying this channel for so many years, I’m absolutely delighted it’s reached 1m subscribers. Well done!
I own property about 3 miles from the GE engine testing facility, so whenever I visit I get to hear the mighty GE turbofans at work lol, it's not that bad with the noise abatement they have but when the wind is right, ready for takeoff 😳
Nantgarw?
@@paulsengupta971 No, I'm in the USA their facility is in southern Ohio.
pelagic6 I live close to the end of the runway of one of Boeing test sites and I must say the new 777X is a quiet plane, with its GEn X 9 engine as with the 737 Max with the CFM Leap 1B engine !!!!
@@pelagic6 Ah.
My heart skipped a beat... I clicked immediately as soon as I saw this. Also, my wife is mad at me right now. I think she said something about... something or whatever.
Calvin Maclure My wifes always going on about something or whatever also. And she seems to be mad at me alot too! Women eh?
@@terryboyer1342 For the most part, they just don't understand the joys of high-bybass turbofans and their makings ;)
I was a manufacturing engineer for Boeing in the late 90's. I recalled that the first customer for the 757-300 had specified the RB211 for their initial plane's effectivity configuration on the order.
I love hearing these stories. Never underestimate the underdog.
love these.
I had a future idea for a video on the Buick V-8 engine used in Range Rovers and other vehicles made by British Leyland
Yea.. I'll second that mate....
I have quite a few of the things down the shed.! lol.!
Seconded. Thirded, actually! Good call.
Another stellar video. My son has taken several turbo machinery classes in his Masters of Mechanical Engineering program. He found that he likes CFD (computational fluid dynamics) and thermodynamics. Maybe one day he’ll see for himself if the modern techniques can keep up with these old salts from WW2!
Another fantastic film! Thank you Paul. Your research, writing and presentation are always engaging and informative. One of my favourite channels
i hope that one day i become so great that i get called out of retirement at 70 years old :(
RR pointed fingers squearly at 1011 project! Ushakov LPL is at least 30s standards futuristic!
A great documentary on the engine and how a group of retired engineers who came out of retirement and saved the company and the engine . Wonderful stuff .
Thanks for this Paul. I have fond memories of the L-1011 and the RB.211. As a plane spotter in the '80s and '90s, you could always tell the L-1011 -- the RB.211 had a very distinctive start-up noise. Oh the memories.
The nordvpn logo is the best hairstyle of al time (is a Oversimplifeid reference)
ruclips.net/video/8FTWXhJzl4s/видео.html👌
I did the same thing 🙂
Paul - you look like you’ve lost weight, better looking than ever.
It must me all that disco dancing.
Yes, i lost about 10kg
@@CuriousDroid oh!
Thank you for answering my comment. I feel privileged.
One of the best and most enjoyable of Paul's videos, and that's saying something. I particularly like the human side of the project, especially, bringing back the old engineers to help out. There's definitely a movie in here somewhere. Keep up the good work!
Paul, another great presentation, Thanks. You're the complete opposite of most utube presenters, who seem desperate to make a huge drama out of the the most mundane item. Your vids are well paced, authoritive and always informative.
Thank you for this video - I really enjoyed it. Now, if only they could have resurrected those engineers to fix the Trent 1000 :)
Especially a fuel pump guy!
The Britons could use a feel good turn around story about now.
Bringing back the smart and talented 70 year olds!! Love that. Our modern day companies need to take note. God bless.