QF 737 AKL-SYD Turn Back (Insufficient Gas)

[snail]

How did a QF 737 end up leaving Akl with insufficient fuel to reach Syd last week?
Apparently it had to turn back after they realised that they were 4T short!

[RaTa]

Or......could it mean that the forcast changed and they needed the extra fuel for a legal requirement?

[Capt Claret]

Or fuel transfer system failed and 4t bacame unuseable. :\

[Capt Fathom]

The Flightplan says 11,000kgs required. So the captain decides....'let's take 7,000kgs and see how we go'.
Yep. That makes sense!

[DeltaT]

Aircraft departed with only the straight Burn Off fuel loaded is what happened, and the crew did not pick this up.
I think it was along the lines of the provisional fuel not being updated to a final fuel.

[Sonny Hammond]

When we say QF 737, do we mean QF or Jetconnect?

I am guessing QF on that route.

[mjv]

the crew used the burn off figure, but it wasn't the first time:*

[BCF Breath]

QF 44. Big bro. Not the local chaps.....

[bombshell]

I'm begining to think this is a wind up. Unless there has been a schedule change, it's either a 76 or 74 that does the QF44.

[BCF Breath]

I'll check on the Flt No, but it was a -800.

[Woomera]

The Captain said “Thank Christ they’ve stopped
They make a dreadful din
I’ll now complete the exercise
And glide this b@stard in”

With noses flat against the glass
The victims watched in horror
And none of them had any doubt
They’d all be dead tomorra!

:}

I shouldn’t be facetious but I get very sceptical incidents such as that mentioned above - if indeed it was the result of a fuel management error and not a mechanical malfunction - have any safety implications.

Aside from costing the employer extra DOC’s (obviously less than returning a perfectly serviceable 744 back to Sydney a few days ago), to err is human and we all know there is absolutely zero chance of the crew blindly flying on until the tanks run dry!

Woomera

[mjv]

I know it's hard to belive (for some),

but
-it was a 737-800
-it was from AKL-SYD
and it was neither a communication problem nor a technical malfunction!!

the crew had plenty of ground time (45min delay outbound).

take it easy

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

It was a human error.

It was not that they only loaded Burnoff.

..and when they discovered the error, they did the correct thing and returned.

[Roadrunner]

A few years back a certain quadrapuff operator loaded trip fuel on a charter from Darwin to Brissy I think it was. Hard to believe, however, **** happens.
They turned back too I guess.
We should remember to look at the figure at the bottom of the column, not at the top, eh.

:ok:

[Capn Bloggs]

That's if there IS a column, roadrunner...

An old Ansett WA spud C and T told me once: always have a look at the plan to make sure you have enough fuel on board...

And of course, trust no-bloody-one, not even (especially!) your own captain!

[amos2]

Well, let's have a think about this shall we?

It's really totally impossible for a professional crew to depart A for B with burn off fuel only, if all the checks are done correctly!

There are numerous checks and double checks to ensure an airplane doesn't run out of fuel between A and B!

And the reason for this is that if an airplane does run out of fuel en route, all the poor sods down the back, as well as the crew, are probably going to die!

This is not a good thing!

This thread has to be wrong, in respect to a professional Capt and First Officer, as well as a Lame, as well as a load controller, as well as a refueler and a few other people, not picking up the lack of "normal fuel" for a flight from A to B.

This nonsence, from some uninformed people that "we all make mistakes" and that we are all "human" is just that.

Nonsence!

If you believe that, go get another job, like selling used cars. Aviation can do without the likes of you!

If, however, I am wrong and and the aircraft did depart with burn off fuel only, then all I can say is, God Help Us All, don't ever fly with Qantas!!!

[Kaptin M]

Awww, c'mon Amos, you've got no sense of adventure!!!

This isn't the first time that a RUMOUR wrt QANTAS and low fuel have been mentioned in the same sentence.
Anyone else recall the story doing the rounds, about 10 years ago, of the QF 767(?) that arrived overhead Perth, in the wee hours, to find it totally enveloped in fog.
As the story goes, the crew hadn't taken much more than the basic requirements, and so had NOWHERE else to go.
After holding for some time - hoping that the fog would start to dissipate - they were reaching the critically low level, and so decided that a controlled ditching seemed to be the only alternative to a Gimli glide........................until "someone" suggested that they plug in all 3 auto pilots and make an auto land :ok:

I wonder if the QF pilots on the flight under discussion had jumped through the QF selection hoops that we've been hearing are just soooooooooo wonderful, lately :rolleyes:

[Romeo Tango Alpha]

The Gimli Glide and the Air Transat A330 into Lajes in the Azores SURELY must rank as some of the better glides in history! :ok:

Canucks make good glider pilots it seems! :p

[amos2]

I'm trying to be serious here, Mate!...

but I must admit, M... you break me up with that story that I remember very well! :p

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

Amos, read what I said.

The fuel they departed with was NOT the burnoff fuel. They departed with the correct fuel order, except that it was the correct fuel order for the sector they had just completed, Syd-Akl. That was the error and that was the reason it wasn't picked up until after departure.

There were reasons for it (there always is), but it was an error nevertheless.

Kaptin M, that story was a 747 and like other stories, there was a lot more to it than what you just mentioned.

[amos2]

OK! Borg, so what were the reasons?...

non application of SOPs?

Is this acceptable to you?

Just asking!

[Kaptin M]

Well, like every good RUMOUR, the FACTS will emerge s-l-o-w-l-y - directly in-proportional to the RUMOURS!!
But in the interim...amidst all of the speculation...a lot of pertinent, good discussion will evolve - even if NOT directly related to the topic!

So T_C_O_B, the crew suddenly came to the realisation that they had uplifted fuel for a sector that would experience jetstream headwinds, instead of jetstream tailwinds - at altitude - making a severe difference in the TRIP fuel:{ ............at altitude!!

Of course, once airborne, the "on ground calcs" NOW become subject to "inflight calculations" - something cunning operators take advantage of regularly!

BUT, Winter jetstreams across Oz/N.Z. are notoriously extreme! So one can only ASSUME that this crew must have given it their BEST shot (with their recalculations) before deciding on a SAFE return.

Let's NEVER understate/underestimate THAT!!

A SAFE return for ALL involved.
THAT is what the job of a PROFESSIONAL pilot is ALL about, imo.

Accountable - by all means - REGARDLESS of cost!

Care to cast any more light on the PH incident, T_C_O_B?? This is the first time that I have heard it was a 74 (and not a 76).
Apparently - according to RUMOUR - the pax all had their life jackets on, in readiness for a swim.

[Icebreaker]

Pete Conrad & Yorik Hunt (self proclaimed superior race) are very quiet on this thread:confused: :}

[Yorik Hunt]

Actually, I hadn't been watching the thread ice. But now I am, I can tell you that I have never, and nor has Pete to my knowledge, claimed that we are 'superior beings'. Your own paranoia simply interprets it that way. Dont blame us for your own psychological shortcomings.

Kapt, I don't know much about the 747 / 767 ??? incident, but the fact that YOU can't even describe what the aircraft type is means that YOU really haven't a clue, have YOU?

But I have heard that the 737 crew are embarrassed, as you would be. But no one has suggested that in an airline as big as QF that mistakes don't happen. They do. And your point is?

All that I can say is that the point that you are trying to prove is not valid simply due to two incidents. If you have the tumerity to critisise me with regards to my campaign against Jetstar, then you turn around and begin your own against QF, then you must wear your own critisism.

What little respect I had for you is now gone.

[Icebreaker]

Haha...that's one.....and the other?:8

[Wizofoz]

Yorik,

I have never, and nor has Pete to my knowledge, claimed that we are 'superior beings'.

So you"re NOT better than Jetstar pilots. Is that what you're saying?

But that would make you.... ARRR Now I understand...



Oh, dear, not again.............. :{

Woomera

[Kaptin M]

Please clue me up then, Yorik :O The "guts" of the Perth event are - I believe - as described. The story doing the rounds at the time, and it came from QF pilots :eek: was that the aircraft that almost ditched due to fog, was a 767.
An event such as that one would have to be common knowledge within QANTAS pilot ranks, and is generally known about outside.
If it was a 747 instead of a 767, who gives a flying f:mad:k - the moral of the story is, that in the long run the crew made a GOOD decision!

...my campaign against JetstarBut Yorik, J* is a QANTAS Group company. Let's hope that your superiors don't find out who you really are, running a campaign against your own Company!
And contrary to your perceived opinion, I am NOT running any "campaign" against QANTAS, nor QF pilots. In actual fact, I am a QF FF, which means that QANTAS is my preferred choice whenever I and my family travel as full fare pax!
(And quite frankly, I don't give a rat's @rse whether I have your respect or not, if telling a few basic FACTS upsets you.)

[Yorik Hunt]

Banging my head against a brick wall would be easier than attempting to discuss anything with you, Kapt. Shall I cite emergency exits as an example? You just won't understand, despite the facts being under your nose.

Firstly, I'm not aware of the facts of the 'Perth' :ooh: :ooh: incident. Nor are you as far as I can tell. But it sure as hell seems that you are attempting to say something about QF pilots and using this as an example. Don't even bother telling me you aren't, because you aren't that clever. If you think they made a good decision, then why bring it up? It doen't gell with your story?

My campaign with Jetstar seems quite well documented on these threads. I'm absolutely certain that the company (read QF GROUP) is well aware of the feelings of 100% of QF pilots with regards to Jetstar. And that is that they are being paid too little for what they are doing, that they are acceptable on one pay level and not another, and that this renders their operation dubious. I will guarantee you that ALL QF mainline pilots feel this way. Whether they feel constrained in saying so, or whether they will take it to the degree that I do is doubtful.

But know this - the company is aware of my feelings already - because I reflect the views of many.

telling a few basic FACTS

Kapt? Where exactly are your facts from your previous posts? They are simply rumours - you can't even name the ac type. If you aren't running any campaign against QF, then shut up. Your contributions count for zero. You seem a bitter twisted individual who still lives in '89.

Wiz. A very sad post from you. I haven't stated I'm better. Unlike adama who has stated that they in fact ARE! But try this on for size - have any pilots from Jetstar been rejected by QF? If so how many? And for what reason?

[Icebreaker]

Oh superior race Yorik (Mcgutz),
I like the thought of you "bashing your head against a brick wall"
:D :D :D

[Kaptin M]

My campaign with Jetstar seems quite well documented on these threads.....they are being paid too little for what they are doing, that they are acceptable on one pay level and not anotherSo the purpose of your "campaign", Yok Hunt is to RAISE the pay level of J* pilots - admirable indeed!

If you think they made a good decision, then why bring it up?Obviously lateral thinking isn't one of your strong points, Yok Hunt, however QF fuel policy might be one common thread joining the Perth incident (of which apparently The_Cutest_of_Borg IS aware, but is one area where you admit ignorance) - the type is not particularly relevant, but the FACT that is WAS a QANTAS aircraft IS.
That the incident happened was no great secret at the time, so perhaps you should do a little research, and show a bit more interest in your Company, and that way you might then be able to speak with a little bit of knowledge (a very little) on which to base your arguments!

Where anything to do with 1989 EVER entered into this discussion, I have no idea - you seem to be clutching at straws, Yousillik Hunt that bear no relativatity to the discussion to date.

...have any pilots from Jetstar been rejected by QF?Who cares! But I do know of at least 2 in QF now, who were previously rejected by other airlines.:eek:

[Yorik Hunt]

When you say clutching at straws, Kraptin M, you seem to be grabbing at a few yourself. '89 has everything to do with every comment YOU put on this forum. You clearly still have the screaming sh1ts with QF for their role (or lack thereof) in '89. And YOU will go to impossible lengths to put them down, won't you?

that way you might then be able to speak with a little bit of knowledge (a very little) on which to base your arguments!

You fool. You don't even know what aircraft type it was. Surely YOU should follow your own advice before commencing an argument!:mad: :mad:

YOU are a sad, sad person.

[Kaptin M]

You clearly still have the screaming sh1ts with QF for their role (or lack thereof) in '89.I defy you to show just ONE single post of mine, where I have ever made a comment remotely indicating that, Yousillik Hunt:cool: And YOU will go to impossible lengths to put them down, won't you?No!
But you make quite a good job of making a fool of yourself............regularly, and unassisted.:p

Any more straws you want to grasp at?

[Yorik Hunt]

Oh dear. It just goes on, doesn't it.

In every post where you have decided to critisise an airline, it is QF. You clearly have a problem with them. You are clearly bitter and twisted about '89. Don't deny either. 2+2=4.

Oh and don't bother replying. You are a very boring animal.

Go back to arguing about emergency exits. It suits you better.


http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/ksm0492l.jpg

:E :E :ok:

Woomera

[Kaptin M]

So using the Yousillik Hunt theory of, "And that is that they are being paid too little for what they are doing, that they are acceptable on one pay level and not another, and that this renders their operation dubious.", pilots who are paid more than other pilots are safer :hmm:

On around USD20k per month + bonuses, the Sillik Hunt's formula must put JAS, ANA and JAL mainline pilots almost at the top of the tree, on a world basis.
Somewhere after them would come some of the US airline pilots, and then CX A-scalers.

You, Yorik, must be an awfully long way down the list, using YOUR philosophy.

You appear to have some nagging hang up about 1989 on this thread, Yousillik. I suggest you have the man in the white coat give you a Bex, a cup of tea, and that you have a lie down in that padded room again.
At least we know that while you're on the keyboard, the skies are a SAFER place!:ok:

[slice]

I have had the Perth story related as well. However as told to me the fog was completely unforecast and the AC being a 763 is a little streched on the NRT-PER route payload/range wise ie with a fullish load you don't have alot of fuel to play with on a 9.5 hr sector, especially when planning for alternates from Perth. Does anyone recall a story in the old crash comics about a Cathay 707 that wound up in Meekertharra due to PH fog back in the 70s ? And of course there is the MMA F28 that flamed out on the landing roll in Fitzroy Crossing in 68.

[Cactus Jack]

This has to be one of the most childish exchanges that I have witnessed yet on PPRUNE. You are as bad as one another. In fact Krappin M, we are aware of Yorik's capabilities as a stirrer, or Magutzup as some have suggested, but why do you feel it necessary to sink to his level....

For all of our sanity, cut it out.

[FlexibleResponse]

amos2,

Impossible? No! This also happened at CX many years ago on a Convair 880 if I remember correctly.

I have also had a crew member recommend a burnoff only figure to me at the planning stage on at least three occasions as well.

Be careful!

[Pete Conrad]

Icebreaker...? whats there to be superior about? I'd shut your trap if I was you. The person who speaks holier than thou can just as easily have an incident himself one day. You, as a human being have never made a mistake have you?

Kap...you have to take a chill pill dude, seriously, you'll end up vapour locking the way your going.

[stiffwing]

The QF incident was Sin-Per 747 classic. unforecast fog at Perth. Proceeded to DPA (essentially a PNR) based on Learmonth which equated to about Top of descent Perth. Returned to Learmonth with not a lot of fuel and ditch headings were definitely discussed. The complicating factor was that the pilot was undergoing command training so under the circumstances could not really proceed to Perth "illegally". The non - precision approach minima at YPLM was significantly infringed. Ask on mahogany row for more details...

[Icebreaker]

...and Pete makes two :} hahaha

[Ralph the Bong]

Sorry to contradict you on this one Stiffwing, but there WAS a B767 (Kap correct 1st time) that auto-landed in Perth.

The Learmonth incident was a different issue and to my mind was competently handled. There have been many similar events such as the YPLM incident that many carriers over the years have faced.

The crux of the matter is that sometimes the WX can change without warning and that crews must select alternatives that will result in a safe outcome.

However, the Autoland option in the the Perth incident was suggested by an individual who was not an operating crew member.

[Feather #3]

You guys don't have a long enuff memory; old BF pioneered autoland in the B707 in the early '70's in similar circumstances.

MRU-PER if I recall.

G'day ;)

[Kaptin M]

But amazingly :sad: the "sprogs" in the QF system - Yorik Crunt and his mate, Pete Conrad, are ignorant of these events.

WHY?

Isn't the idea SUPPOSED to be one of openly admitting and DISCUSSING past events, and trying to LEARN from them, rather than committing them over and over again, because they've been shoved under the carpet to save face??

[Watchdog]

Kaptin,
whilst these guys CLAIM to be QF drivers, I wouldn't be taking such as gospel. Maturity levels shown by these two, and others, on this forum suggest otherwise.
I'd be very surprised if all QF drivers don't know about such, and maybe even discuss same in CRM courses.

[Pete Conrad]

Kap, I'm not ignorant of any event that I could learn about, and has safety issues that can be applied in day to day operations. I am well aware of the events being discussed here Kap, I don't feel an obligation to put my slant on it, I know the facts as I've read them, along with QF1 etc etc.

I gain info and discuss issues with people that I have respect for in this industry, and from people in the know. Many issues, and safety aspects, are, as you would know openely discussed on flightdecks in CRM, EP courses etc.

I don't feel that debating issues like this on pprune with you, a confirmed QF basher, is worthwhile.

Watchdog you don't even deserve a mention.

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

Ralph, there seems to be some confusion over the Perth incident. The 747 I alluded to happened over 20 years ago, and followed the events that stiffwing mentioned right up till he said it landed in LM. As far as I was aware they landed, autocoupled in PER.

I have never heard of a 767 having a similiar incident. What time frame are you talking of?

[Feather #3]

Guys,

There have been multiple "sudden unforecast fog" incidents in PER involving QF over the years. Until they are able to better forecast [try a 44degC day with almost zero humidity to 50m in fog at 0400 the next day!!:uhoh: how do you forecast that??:confused: ] fog in PER, it will continue!

To my certain knowledge there have been the B707 mention by me, the LM diversion and [ahem?!] letdown [aren't radio altimeters wonderful!], and a B747 autoland [happened but no ASIR by any party] at PER itself. No doubt more by QF and other operators [AN at BNE; sorry - don't mention the war! :O]

Install Cat III and the debate is over. Equally, one supervisory chap from the old days [well known for his fuel conservation philosophies] said on the QF network PER is the one place we should ALWAYS carry an ALTN.

What this has to do with the subject of the thread is beyond me.

G'day ;)


Beyond me too!!! :{

Woomera

[Yorik Hunt]

Nothing at all, Feather. It has to do with Krappin M's campaign against QF. Keep on Kraaaapppin, M.

[Pete Conrad]

I have no doubt that if it was a Polynesian aircraft in this thread, Kap would of been quiet.

Like his mate assdama, they can sit back and type one liners heckling others, but can't handle it in return.

Never let the facts stand in the way of a good story hey boys?

[Weapons_Hot]

Woomera

Correct me please but aren't those verses you quoted (2 July) from "The Port Moresby Gliding Club", which goes back to 1979 when Kumul 2 (a BE200) was turned into a glider (I think Wes Guy was the glider captain)?

Maybe someone like Chimbu C might be able to post the entire poem (with the appropriate background information).

[Fris B. Fairing]

Weapons_Hot

You obviously have fine taste in aviation literature. My apologies for pre-empting Woomera and Chimbu Chuck but you shouldn't be denied this classic any longer:

The Port Moresby Gliding Club

A group of young enthusiasts
Met at a local pub
To talk about a common love
The Port Moresby Gliding Club.

Their membership was very low
The running costs were high,
They needed some dramatic act
To catch the public's eye.

"I've got a good idea" said one
"Been planning it all day,
I'll try it out tomorrow
When coming back from Lae."

The flight to Lae was wonderful
The aircraft right on track,
They had no reason to suspect
The drama coming back.

Their business done, they climbed aboard
One had a bulging bilum
The Captain chuckled to himself,
"The last ten miles will thrill 'em".

This trick will have no impact
If I fill her up with fuel,
I'll take enough for top of climb
And glide in from Mount Yule.

They flew along as smooth as silk
With not a single jolt,
But as they got to Galley Reach
Both donks groaned to a halt.

The Captain said "Thank Christ they've stopped
They make a dreadful din,
I'll now complete this exercise
And glide the begger in."

A glider is a lovely thing
You see them everywhere,
Some metal, others wood and glue
But never a King Air!

With noses flat against the glass
The victims watched in horror,
And none of them had any doubt
They'd all be dead tomorra.

He held her on the centre line
He called the tower and said,
"For Christ's sake make me number one
I'm landing straight ahead."

He put it down right on the keys
and made sure he was clear,
Then smilingly he turned and said,
"I think we need a beer."

The Aero Club looks very nice
Looks like its just been painted,
But there was no-one to answer him
The bloody lot had fainted!

Wes turned and looked him in the eye
He said "Thank Christ that's ended!
It really won't surprise me
If your licence is suspended!

Those passengers we've got on board
Look like they're in a trance,
But now you must excuse me
'Cos I think I've shat my pants!"

When Joe Wal heard it on the 'phone
His hands flew to his head,
His eyes stood out like organ stops
"Damn me" was all he said.

But when heard the details
Of this history making flight,
His eyes lit up with interest
And he thought of it all night.

For Joe has always longed to fly
Although it made him dizzy,
But this bloke here could show him how
On days he wasn't busy.

So Joe signed up on the spot
They headed for the pub,
Now Joe's the latest member
Of the Moresby Gliding Club.

Sir Julius picked up his 'phone and heard
A voice known far and wide,
"This Grumman that arrives next month
- I wonder how that glides?"

PS. I suspect there is another version. I came by a copy not long after the incident but subsequently lost it. This version isn't exactly as I remember it!

[Obie]

Ah, yes!...

this is what makes aviation worthwhile!!!

:ok:

[zzoott]

Back to the thread itself for any of you so called experts there are may variaions to any fuel load ordered by the captain but there is only two that really count, legal and flight fuel. Does the fuel load meet legal requirements prior to engine start because after start all variable reserve is considered to be used. Planning under most airlne SOPS will impose additional restrictions maybe not found in azzie regs. Note that it is not unusual to depart an airport and not meet the legal requirements to the destination(this does happen on the 737) by flying to a DPA and having a nominated alternate at this point, using infligt replanning to make destination legally.No one would or should (unless they are a complete moron)leave the gate without flight fuel plus reserves as the FMC would bring up a warning to this effect. This said the person that returns because he/she does not have enough fuel for whatever reason sould be applauded as should the person that makes a missed approach because they are not stable etc etc. Professionalism is about the safe operation of any aircraft, recognizing that we are all fallible. To be able to admit that we make mistakes withoout fear of loosing our jobs (as it is in QF) is good policy and can only lead to a better pilot as it allows others to learn from our mistakes

Rember to err is human

[Three Bars]

zzoott,

How refreshing to read a constructive, balanced, rational and considered post instead of the usual :mad: we read here!