Narrative:

Temperature 33 degrees C. On takeoff, about 10-15 KTS prior to V1, the left engine reached maximum temperature, so I pulled the power back 2 degrees C on egt. At about 400 ft AGL, the right engine reached maximum (940 degrees C), so the copilot pulled it back also. We wrote up the problems and informed our maintenance coordinator by ACARS, but never received an acknowledgement. When less than 100 NM from our destination (slc), we called the local maintenance on VHF. They hadn't heard about our problem, but said it wasn't uncommon. The local mechanic borescoped the engine per maintenance manual procedures but said #2 maintenance coordinator didn't think it was required since the temperature didn't go over the limit. On takeoff from slc, the left engine again reached maximum and we pulled it back. I see 2 problems: the ge CF6 engines are having problems and the maintenance coordinator doesn't think that reaching maximum egt is a problem. In the past, we had problems in slc with overtemps and investigations revealed the compressor blades were flattening out as well as growing under stress, but blade camber wasn't one of the things checked on overhauls. It appears to be a problem again. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the captain stated that this problem of high egt's on takeoff first showed up about 5 yrs ago. All of the events were out of slc, ut, when the flts were using maximum takeoff thrust for departure. The airline got together with the manufacturer of the cf-6-50 engines, the engine on his B767- 300, and they ran a test on the compressor blades. They found that the compressor blades were growing in length and that their camber was also changing. Before this discovery the overhaul base was only checking the blades for growth in blade length. Now the camber needs to be checked. This is not being done during engine overhaul and the problem is once again becoming evident. It is thought or alleged that the company middle and upper management is not aware of this problem even though some other departments are. Reporter was counseled to report this problem to his fleet manager and chief pilot for their actions. It was suggested that the engine manufacturer be sent an FYI for their input and perhaps an alert sent to other airlines for their information.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR B767-300 CREW EXPERIENCES A HIGH EGT READING ON BOTH ENGS OUT OF LAS AND A HIGH READING OUT OF SLC. PIC HAD THE ENGS BORESCOPED AT SLC AFTER THE MAINT COORDINATOR DIDN'T THINK IT WAS NECESSARY. RPTR CONCERNED WITH THE COMPRESSOR BLADES LOSING CAMBER UNDER STRESS, CREATING HIGH TKOF EGT TEMPS.

Narrative: TEMP 33 DEGS C. ON TKOF, ABOUT 10-15 KTS PRIOR TO V1, THE L ENG REACHED MAX TEMP, SO I PULLED THE PWR BACK 2 DEGS C ON EGT. AT ABOUT 400 FT AGL, THE R ENG REACHED MAX (940 DEGS C), SO THE COPLT PULLED IT BACK ALSO. WE WROTE UP THE PROBS AND INFORMED OUR MAINT COORDINATOR BY ACARS, BUT NEVER RECEIVED AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. WHEN LESS THAN 100 NM FROM OUR DEST (SLC), WE CALLED THE LCL MAINT ON VHF. THEY HADN'T HEARD ABOUT OUR PROB, BUT SAID IT WASN'T UNCOMMON. THE LCL MECH BORESCOPED THE ENG PER MAINT MANUAL PROCS BUT SAID #2 MAINT COORDINATOR DIDN'T THINK IT WAS REQUIRED SINCE THE TEMP DIDN'T GO OVER THE LIMIT. ON TKOF FROM SLC, THE L ENG AGAIN REACHED MAX AND WE PULLED IT BACK. I SEE 2 PROBS: THE GE CF6 ENGS ARE HAVING PROBS AND THE MAINT COORDINATOR DOESN'T THINK THAT REACHING MAX EGT IS A PROB. IN THE PAST, WE HAD PROBS IN SLC WITH OVERTEMPS AND INVESTIGATIONS REVEALED THE COMPRESSOR BLADES WERE FLATTENING OUT AS WELL AS GROWING UNDER STRESS, BUT BLADE CAMBER WASN'T ONE OF THE THINGS CHKED ON OVERHAULS. IT APPEARS TO BE A PROB AGAIN. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE CAPT STATED THAT THIS PROB OF HIGH EGT'S ON TKOF FIRST SHOWED UP ABOUT 5 YRS AGO. ALL OF THE EVENTS WERE OUT OF SLC, UT, WHEN THE FLTS WERE USING MAX TKOF THRUST FOR DEP. THE AIRLINE GOT TOGETHER WITH THE MANUFACTURER OF THE CF-6-50 ENGS, THE ENG ON HIS B767- 300, AND THEY RAN A TEST ON THE COMPRESSOR BLADES. THEY FOUND THAT THE COMPRESSOR BLADES WERE GROWING IN LENGTH AND THAT THEIR CAMBER WAS ALSO CHANGING. BEFORE THIS DISCOVERY THE OVERHAUL BASE WAS ONLY CHKING THE BLADES FOR GROWTH IN BLADE LENGTH. NOW THE CAMBER NEEDS TO BE CHKED. THIS IS NOT BEING DONE DURING ENG OVERHAUL AND THE PROB IS ONCE AGAIN BECOMING EVIDENT. IT IS THOUGHT OR ALLEGED THAT THE COMPANY MIDDLE AND UPPER MGMNT IS NOT AWARE OF THIS PROB EVEN THOUGH SOME OTHER DEPTS ARE. RPTR WAS COUNSELED TO RPT THIS PROB TO HIS FLEET MGR AND CHIEF PLT FOR THEIR ACTIONS. IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT THE ENG MANUFACTURER BE SENT AN FYI FOR THEIR INPUT AND PERHAPS AN ALERT SENT TO OTHER AIRLINES FOR THEIR INFO.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.