I would have thought continuing on to Perth, being only 590nm away would have been a far better option. If passenger welfare was indeed the cause for landing in Learmonth here are some reasons why that does not make sense.
1. From the information we have, the casualties recieved broken bones, perhaps some compounded fractures and lacerations. If you present to a major hospital with these types of injuries over a weekend, you could expect to wait up to 3 days before a corrective procedure is carried out. The exception to this being any sort of head or spinal injury.
2. Head or spinal injuries.
These sorts of things can only be tackled by a major hospital with the latest equipment and techniques. Learmonth base to my knowledge does not have a specialised spinal unit. There is great risk in moving a spinal patient, I would have thought moving the patient once instead of the three hops involved in flying the patient (in a far less stable aircraft) to Perth would have made much better sense.
I think Qantas might have some explaining to do. Logically nothing adds up except technical failure prohibating the aircraft's passage to Perth.
Location: Amidst the dust and the flies, somewhere in Western Australia
Posts: 98
If the 'upset' put enough g's through the airframe for the crew to have any doubts whatsoever as to its prolonged integrity, (And judging from the degree of injuries sustained this would appear to be feasible) then the correct and only decision would be to get it down pdq. Add to that (reportedly) critically injured pax with potentially major bleeds and the crew really didn't have any other choice. But injuries aside, if there is any real doubt concerning structural integrity then I believe there can only be one course of action.
I wish all injured persons as speedy a recovery as possible, and sincerely hope that reports of persons in critical condition are a typical media over-reaction.
Interesting possibilities and it remains to be seen after the DFDR has been decoded. However, in this part of the world at this time of year, in addition to the jetstream, there is a change in monsoons from from SE to W, which can also cause problems. Recall a similar incident sevral weeks ago involving a China Airlines 744 approaching DPS (Albeit further NE) which appears to have involved a substantial reduction in FL as a result of what seems to have been only CAT.
I have had a similar experience in a CX L1011 over the S China sea which hit CAT and dropped 3-4,000 M in a few seconds, involving several weightless passengers hitting the roof with several injuries and missing teeth etc.
"We recommend that when seated pasengers keep their seatbelts loosely fastened, just like we do up here on the flight deck"
Can this please be used as a simple illustration to ordinary travelling folks as to why this is the case?
Of course, there is no protection against being hit on the head by the corner of a flying meals trolley but, unfortunately, I don't see that changing anytime soon.
Qantas again? didnt they just had an incident that forced them to land in PRLL??
Whats the real story this time? Its nice to know that there were no lives lost .
Problem is it's flying on its old trajectory while the surrounding aircraft is being accelerated in some direction, right?
Ya know, any place that has earthquakes anticipates suddenly accelerations up, down, or sideways with a force of more than one gravity will happen.
They keep the San Francisco streetcars down on the ground, with perfectly good pre-aviation technology -- a slot in the pavement.
That could be done right down the middle -- or on either side -- of the walkway.
In fact it's how the seats are attached -- that's how they can snug them up to remove excessive legroom when people are feeling lonely and far apart.
A couple more of the exact same little slots -- barely noticeable underfoot -- in the aisle would let the carts be anchored all the way, and yet easily released when needed.
In the first incident in July, a Qantas 747 jumbo jet flying from London to Melbourne was forced to divert to the Philippines after an exploding oxygen canister ruptured its fuselage at 29,000ft.
Just days later, a Qantas Boeing 767 aircraft had to turn back less than 20 minutes into its flight from Adelaide to Melbourne after underside landing doors failed to close after the wheels retracted.
And in early August, a Qantas Boeing 767 bound for Manila turned back to Sydney after developing a hydraulic fluid leak.
Theyre havin some bad luck this year i guess....
No offense but i think they should start looking at their ac's now before they ran out of luck.
I wonder if they cycled more than one of the FCC's in response to the ECAM message.
Cycling a FCC individually whilst airborne can give quite a jolt to the flight controls. Wouldn't like to try two at altitude!
ES
I was born in San Francisco, I must remind you that the streetcars don't have slots...it is the cable cars that have slots, and the slots allow a grip to latch on to the cable to move the car. but there have been times the grip has ripped loose from the car.
It would be quite easy to serve passengers with hand held trays...double the number of FA's, and have stores located throughout the plane.
I praise the crew for realizing that any suspicion of aircraft problem deserves an immediate landing. IF this airfield was the first place, other than the ocean, then the crew did the right thing by landing there. A nation as large as Australia certainly has the facilities for the transportation of injured patients. The Royal Flying Doctors, God Bless them, has been known to this american since I was a boy of 7, now 52.
I do doubt that the plane lost 4000m. It might have felt that way, but if they lost more than 2000feet, I'd be very surprised.
Captain and Crew of this flight, good job for getting down in one piece. It is very likely that your actions insured that the plane's structure was not pushed that extra distance to Perth.
I hope the plane is thoroughly inspected for stress before any further flying.
Location: not the @r$& end of the earth but can see it from here.
Posts: 324
7strokeroll
depending on the findings of the recorders( ie g forces overspeeds etc) all special inspections will be carried out iaw the appropriate MM.
It must and will happen.
totally agree with you on flt crew actions.I will not 2nd guess what was right at the time.Multiple injuries including crew, possible flt control issues....
You want to be on the deck ASAP at the nearest available , suitable port.
You're right. And yes, the 19th century tech does fail from time to time, and the big wooden pads they use for friction braking aren't the best tech either.
But the slots in the floor the aircraft seats move in sure look solid.
What utter tripe some people post on here concerning the Captain's decision where to land. You have absolutely no idea what the circumstances were apart from what you are concluding from the uninformed drivel from some posters on here, yet you seem well informed enough to sprout that it was the wrong decision.
Shame on you
Do you know the state of the airframe? Do you know the state of the onboard systems?
If you were onboard a potentially compromised airframe would you want to extend your trip just so a better hospital was available, or would you want to get on the ground to avoid a more potentially drastic consequence. You have no idea, so why don't you shutup!
Well done to the crew and no doubt passengers who helped those involved while the crew up front did what they felt was best for the safety of those onboard, including themselves.
No harm in speculating as to causes, but to question the decisions and integrity of those in control, without knowing the facts, is wrong.
This article says they first made a PAN PAN call and declared MAYDAY shortly afterwards, obviously after having assessed the amount of injuries to pax and crew.
I think Qantas might have some explaining to do. Logically nothing adds up except technical failure prohibating the aircraft's passage to Perth.
ah, comfy in your chair there captain? nice and quiet surrounds? piping hot coffee on your computer table? maybe some of your favourite music to relax to?
BANG, you`re on your ass. there's suddenly people screaming, your cup of coffee's now all over you, this music has been replaced with alarms and warning chimes, concerned atc coming over the radio and a worried F.O. overwhelming you with information.
what to do? is the plane ok? was it mechanical, will it happen again? was it weather? how are all the people? should i get it down now or fly on?
ok breathe. checklists please.
OR tell us all how you`d handle the situation. obviously you know best.
was it appropriate for the Captain to make the "Mayday" call???
Who said the Captain made a Mayday call
From the ATSB release, and the ICAO definitions of "Pan" and "Mayday", at a first glance it would seem the calls made were 100% correct
Of interest will be whether is was the ECAM actions that led to the pitch down, or whether the timing was coincidental and the original message effectively led to the small pitch up / large pitch down. We have a directive about Frozen/Jammed controls, and securing the cabin prior any attempt at release. I am not suggesting that I would ever link this directive to an Airbus Flt Ctrl message and carrying out the ECAM actions (e.g. cycling FCCs), but it will be interesting to see if this comes out after this accident Something to ponder from now on...
I believe the skipper made the right choice in landing at the nearest suitable airfield, after all its not as if the tech crew are medical experts. i know if it was me with injured pax and not knowing what airframe damage there might be then the best thing to do is to LAND
From a video on the news this morning from the interior, looks like someone at the front of business or economy went through the roof leaving a hole about 30 cm wide above their seat. Lots of damage done to the interior by the looks of it. Terrible thing, Charlie Q is going to get eaten by the media, with more fuel added to the fire.
ah, comfy in your chair there captain? nice and quiet surrounds? piping hot coffee on your computer table? maybe some of your favourite music to relax to?
Placed in the same situation Johnny Suave Trousers would probably now be Johnny Brown Trousers.
I once lost a large panel off the wing of a 747 departing Melbourne ( no, not Qantas ) no immediate problems encountered but WHY ?? Flap retraction and therefore possible extension problem ? Undercarriage retraction and therefore possible extension problem ? and should I continue over endless desert and shark infested waters to S.E. Asia ? No way, get the Mother -------- on the ground - fast. At the enquiry Boeing were indignant, informed us that a 747 could fly with a hole measuring X x Y ( forget the precise dimensions ) in that area so why had I returned ? My manager asked them what was the Captain supposed to have done, got out and measured it ?
We are all entitled to speculate on what might have happened, but NOBODY has the right to criticise the crew decision - yet, and if necessary only QF have will have a right to do that, too. Wind your necks in and WAIT for some facts.
Armchair "Experts" ? X is an unknown quantity and a spurt is a drip under pressure - there I go again ! ( Sorry )
How dare we second guess if the crew took the correct actions without having ANY idea what actually happened. Mulitple injuries, a very frightening event and perhaps as yet unpublished technical problems. Let's also not forget that the aircraft itself depending on the problem can give the prompt LAND ASAP. The aircraft was safely landed, all injured pax and crew are still alive, seems like a great outcome to me.
Something to ponder from now on...
Linear Mode
