PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   A380 engine failure (SQ) (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/390418-a380-engine-failure-sq.html)

YoDawg 28th Sep 2009 09:00

A380 engine failure (SQ)
 

A Singapore Airlines A380 was forced to turn round mid-flight and head back to Paris on Sunday after one of its four engines failed, the head of the airline's French operations said.

The doubledecker A380 took off from Paris at 12.30 pm with 444 passengers aboard and headed for Singapore, but had to turn round after 2 hours 45 minutes because of the engine problem, airline director Jerry Seah said.

The plane landed safely back in France at 5.45 p.m. and the passengers were sent to hotels as the airline tried to lay on an alternative flight for them.

Seah said he believed it was the first time the plane had suffered such a problem since it had started operating the Singapore-Paris route earlier this year.

The giant jet, built by Airbus, is designed to continue flying with only three engines, but came back to Paris as a safety precaution.

The engines on the Singapore A380s are built by Britain's Rolls Royce Group.
First A380 in-flight failure?

Interesting that they went all the way back to Paris instead of Istanbul or Dubai. Maintenance I suppose.

Dave Gittins 28th Sep 2009 09:49

If BA can make it (almost) across the pond and to LHR, on 3 donks, why can't an A380 continue across Asia on 3 .... even if it needed a fuel stop en route ? :confused:

doc_exe 28th Sep 2009 09:53

I was the controller :) when the A380 J ... requested left turn 180 and .. re-routing to LFPG ...... the aircraft... was on 350 ..after failure ... down to 310....

the PIC ... took this decision in about 20 minutes...

Dave Gittins 28th Sep 2009 10:04

If I understand you they asked for a 180 and a revised plan back to CDG decending from 350 to 310.

Hence my question still stands .. if they were prepared to fly for at least a couple of hours, albeit slower and at a lower altitude and only get back where they started why not push on ?

Dubai isn't a million miles out of the way and at about half distance would be a good place for a refueling stop, and if that wasn't going to work, with plenty of abilities to deal with an A380.

wobble2plank 28th Sep 2009 10:41

Argh, not the dreaded 'three engined' approach!

I'm sure there must have been a slightly nearer acceptable diversion if the beastie was 2.45 hours out!

Or perhaps the airports in the region of North east Mediterranean haven't been sufficiently upgraded to take the weight?

fast cruiser 28th Sep 2009 10:42

Don't think you'll find you can do a refuelling stop once your down to 3 eng!!

Once on the ground thats it unless the engineers can fix the problem!!

MEL:- 4 eng fitted.... 4 required for dispatch!!!!!!!:}

adsyj 28th Sep 2009 10:51

"Please return faulty or defective goods including original receipt to original point of purchase for full refund"

Dave Gittins 28th Sep 2009 11:26

I humbly acknowledge the MEL point .. all 4 must be servicable at the commencement of the T/O roll. :O

DGG

Still wonder why, operationally they didn't use the same flying time and fuel and get half way home rather than have another plane fly all the way back to Paris to collect the stranded Pax.

I can think of lots of possible reasons .. I just wonder if anybody knows the real one

FCS Explorer 28th Sep 2009 11:26

maybe they went back all the way to paris at FL310 to burn of some fuel in regards to landing weight. if you still have 3 of 4, why dump and land at some place where you don't have (your own/proper) maint?

Dave Gittins 28th Sep 2009 11:30

Maybe so ... Do Singapore have maintenance at CDG ?? EK have it at DXB and might even have restored the bird to 4

MPH 28th Sep 2009 12:22

Maybe they should have just landed in TOU and have Airbus solve the problem!!!:rolleyes:

Kelly Hopper 28th Sep 2009 12:23

Lets say go to Dubai, spend 1/2 day on the ground getting engine replaced. Then what? Crews out of duty time, a/c in the wrong place. So in effect the a/c would probably spend a day on the ground only to have to then have it ferried back to Paris as all the pax transfered to other flights.
So most certainly a commercial decision and probably the right one.

Dave Gittins 28th Sep 2009 12:29

Indeed that may be so .. but I simply question whether it is better to have a broken aeroplane, an out of hours crew and 444 stranded pax 6 hours downroute from home in Singapore rather than 12 ?

MyNameIsIs 28th Sep 2009 12:37

What about the problems associated with customs/immigration?

Everyone that is onboard the plane (probably) had no troubles being in the country of origin. Why add to the situation and take people to a country they may not be allowed to enter?
Granted it would be going there because of a mechanical problem and it wasn't planned, but it would still be a bit of a nightmare for some.

Spitoon 28th Sep 2009 12:46


Maybe they should have just landed in TOU and have Airbus solve the problem!!!
But do they have enough hotels in TOU for all the pax???

LHR27C 28th Sep 2009 13:04


Maybe so ... Do Singapore have maintenance at CDG ?? EI have it at DXB and might even have restored the bird to 4
Do you mean EK? Yes, they do have maintenance for the A380 at DXB but they operate a GP7200 powered fleet and this was specifically an engine problem so hardly going to be much help for a Trent-powered aircraft. The decision to return to CDG was undoubtedly the sensible one, with SQ A380 technicians and support available, and probably the closest airport offering Trent 900 support at the time of the incident. Also, 2 hours 45 minutes out of CDG enroute to SIN the aircraft would still be over eastern Europe so I doubt DXB would have been any nearer.

Safety permitting, it is not an uncommon incident for aircraft that need to divert enroute to divert back to their point of origin or at the very least the nearest airport where the airline has a commercial and engineering presence, rather than just land at the nearest airport that could take the aircraft.

Sober Lark 28th Sep 2009 13:09

Dave Gittins, what has happened the new runway in 'New Doha Intl. Qatar'? Hush hush

Dave Gittins 28th Sep 2009 13:25

Serious threadcreep but we are in the process of constructing $13 Bn of new airport and 2 nice long runways (longest outside Denver) are key features.

Back on topic .. appreciate the corrections (yes I meant EK) and the logic as to why RR techs in Paris are a better bet than EK.

leewan 28th Sep 2009 14:02


Maybe they should have just landed in TOU and have Airbus solve the problem!!!:rolleyes:
They could have, but they changed their minds when they realized their warranty cards weren't onboard.:)

SQ does have a maint manager in CDG and trained the engineering staff over there for their 380 ops, so better peace of mind to be diverted there. Saw AOG kit and a spare RRTrent 900 engine ready to be shipped over this afternoon at the freighter stands in SIN.


The doubledecker A380 took off from Paris at 12.30 pm with 444 passengers aboard
Wow, a load factor of 94%. A random sample nonetheless. What economic crisis ?

King on a Wing 28th Sep 2009 14:36

Hasn't any one of you heard of 'contact company via datalink'....???!?
It was in all probability,an executive decision made by the company and not the pilot(s).
Eitherways 3/4 powerplants for the fat girl isn't a mayday or a 'land asap' situation. Like someone rightfully said,burn the extra fuel,get back to point of departure,no customs and/or immigration hiccups AND you dont lose a client along the way. What better decision could one ask for huh...


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:43.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.