Qantas Emergency Landing at Sydney

[Jorocketoz]

Does anyone have any information on why the Qantas flight bound for Manila made an emergency return to Sydney today at 3pm local time?

[vme]

ABC reports spoiler hydraulic leak.

[moa999]

Qantas flight leak scare - Travel - smh.com.au (http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/qantas-flight-leak-scare/2008/08/02/1217097598327.html)

low in the sky


lol

Qantas can't get a break at the moment

[aussiepax]

A Qantas spokeswoman said Qantas flight QF19, a Boeing 767-300 with 200 passengers on board, "landed without incident after the captain became aware that the aircraft had a hydraulic leak".

"On inspection, engineers determined that fluid was coming from the spoiler actuator that was not evident before departure," the spokeswoman told AAP.

"There was no safety issue at any time."

Qantas plane in emergency landing | The Daily Telegraph (http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24117427-5001028,00.html)

[parabellum]

Sounds a lot more like a turn back for technical reasons followed by a precautionary landing, certainly no emergency:confused:

[pacplyer]

Exactly,

This whole thread should be deleted. This is a non-event. American airlines have several of these "events" every few weeks. You don't see those in the papers.

The press is jacked-up to report every burp at Qantas now.

I'm going to appeal to the moderators to kill this ridiculous thread. Pressuring crew/staff to continue pressing to destination to prevent an incident is detrimental to airline safety imho.

Thanks,

pac

[Falcon124]

"Pressuring crew/staff to continue pressing to destination to prevent an incident is detrimental to airline safety imho."

Ummm - who's been saying that crew/staff are being pressured into continuing on to avoid an incident???


Otherwise, I totally agree that QANTAS is under the microscope after the HK/Manilla incident. This and the ADL->MLB flight would normally not even make the papers (or be a few pages in).

Still, I don't think the thread should be deleted - an incident occurred and is being discussed. There's heaps of threads in this section that should be pulled if we're weeding out "common incidents" :)

[pacplyer]

O.K. Mr Falcon,

You have a point. If you think it's important to agonize over a routine airline event like it's really something; then that's up to you.

You want to allow a thread to go on that screams "Emergency Landing at Sydney" then I have lost respect for you.

Yes crew are pressured.

At the very least, the original poster should re-name this thread as "Hydro failure at Sidney" not something that is untrue: another "EMERGENCY!" at Qantas.

I am not a corporate toady as you can verify by my posts at the "Qantas 744 depressurization" thread.... but this report is below the belt imho.

pacific plyer

[Falcon124]

"You have a point. If you think it's important to agonize over a routine airline event like it's really something; then that's up to you."

I don't know about agonising, but at least it comes up and gets discussed - like so many other threads in R&N that really are about "dealing with the sh*t that happens when you fly" - things break, deal with it. Report it, discuss it, learn from it, move on.

"Yes crew are pressured. "

I don't doubt it it may be happening - was it an influencer in this case? Unknown. If it is happening, it's yet another hole in the cheese, so what is the aviation community doing to expose it and have the hole filled?

"At the very least, the original poster should re-name this thread as "Hydro failure at Sidney" not something that is untrue: another "EMERGENCY!" at Qantas."

Yeah, thread topic could be toned down, but one thing to consider, did the crew declare an emergency and get priority landing? If so, it is the 3rd one in a month for QANTAS.

"I am not a corporate toady as you can verify by my posts at the "Qantas 744 depressurization" thread.... but this report is below the belt imho."

*IF* the Adelaide crew declared an emergency and *IF* this crew did as well (sorry, I can't state 100% that they did) then that's 3 close together. While only the first was a full blown, "holy crap" situation and the others comparatively "easy," it certainly does raise some eyebrows.

Are declared emergencies a frequent thing?


NOTE: I'm not trying to have a go at you and can respect the position of "don't kick 'em when they're down" - I also agree that the Oz press are blowing things all out of proportion at the moment (typical sensationalism :( ). I don't agree with pulling the thread (change the title if an emergency was NOT declared) and I was wondering how the "pressuring" applied to this incident.