QANTAS 744 Incident SIN-FRA 9/3/06

[ALPHA STRIKE]

Apparently a Qantas -400 suffered a tyre failure during the take-off roll at Singapore on the 9th MAR. Cabin crew noticed the vibration & loud "bang" prior to rotation. 15mins after the event the cabin crew managed to notify the cockpit crew. S/O dispatched to the offending area. No further follow-up action sought from the Skipper. Aircarft continues to Frankfurt. Half way into flight, hydraulic leak detected. Aircraft lands with blown tyre. Damage to Port Leading, Trailing edge and aircraft fueslage. One 3m gash(As big as 2 Fridges)to the fueslage with some ribs missing. Aircraft was swiftly moved to a remote bay. Just wondering, was this well handled?

[Crossbleed]

booze+boredom=silly post.
'night.

[Going Boeing]

Alpha Strike

Why did you post this? It is an event that every airline that flies long range heavy aircraft suffers from time to time. It did not take 15 mins for the cabin crew to communicate with the flight deck. The Tech crew heard the event and got the appropriate "tire pressure" EICAS message. All other indications were normal so they elected to proceed to destination. Mid flight (6 hours later) there was a loss of some hydraulic fluid from #4 system which was switched off to conserve remaining fluid. #4 System was switched on prior to approach into Frankfurt so the approach and landing were made with all systems operational. Significant damage was found to fairings aft of the wing on the right hand side and to Hydraulic pipes. The damage to the leading edge wing filet was caused by stairs driven by contract staff in Frankfurt. No fuselage skin areas were penetrated by the tyre fragments - ie there were no pressurisation problems. Lufthansa ground engineers did a great job repairing the aircraft and it is now back in service.

PS Your reporting has about the same amount of research as Steve Creedy from the Australian (don't take that as a compliment).

[*Lancer*]

With only the usual, straight forward symptoms of a single tire failure and no other indications of a problem (eg airframe vibration), would you choose to dump 100 tons of fuel, or land overweight?

The aircraft always gets towed to a remote gate in Frankfurt. They don't leave a 747 parked at the terminal all day - anywhere in the world!

[Wizofoz]

Just wondering, was this well handled?

Sounds like "Yes" to me!!

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

ALPHA STRIKE

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: China
Posts: 1

Gotta be a journo on a fishing expedition...:hmm:

[Capn Bloggs]

has about the same amount of research as Steve Creedy from the Australian

That's a bit harsh: Steve is normally pretty good. As for Alpha Strike...

[chemical alli]

why post such dribble yes it was handled in a professional manner from the tech crew, cabin crew, and maint staff as we would all expect so some things are better left unsaid .be aware of who reads this forumn cheers

[Elroy Jettson]

Soon they will be able to divert to their new maintenance facility in central china where a 5 yuan a month worker will fit a 'near new' retread, and apply some 'hundred mile an hour' tape to the busted fairings while whistling strains of I still call Australia home comrade!

Now thats world's best practice for ya! :}

[Fliegenmong]

Elroy - Priceless mate, best laugh I've had all day

[ACMS]

Howdy all, I don't like Monday "morning quarterbacks" however lets look at this

loud bang, vibration and report from cabin crew.

Eicas msg "tire press sys" ( or similar ) the indicator for that wheel would have showed a pressure very close to zero as opposed to blank if the guage had failed.

I think I would have spoken to ATC regarding a RWY inspection, then dumped Fuel and come on back. Seemed little doubt what had occured and you never know what other damage this caused.

We had a very similar scenario on the 777 sim only about 1 year ago.

cheers.

[Hugh Jarse]

We had a very similar scenario on the 777 sim only about 1 year ago
Umm, you blew a tyre in the sim?:8 Sorry, couldn't resist.

So, are you guys upset because it was reported here? Or is it the standard of reporting?

If it's the former, I think you're getting a bit precious boys :{ :{

Everyone else gets a caning on here, why not QF?

[Silverado]

The aircraft arrived in Sydney today, and is now in the process of having the temp repairs, permanantly repaired. It will receive donor fairings and support structure from VH-EBU in Avalon. The temp repair of the fibreglass fairings with large sheets of ALCLAD with external stiffeners, looked quite out of place, however sturdy for the journey home. The damage was quite extensive, with replacement body landing gear doors required before it departed Frankfurt, as well as a TE flap torque tube and the hydraulic tubes already mentioned. The BLG strut mounted door fitted is ex VH-EBU also.
It would interesting to know if any drag penalties were imposed for the flights home due to the ALCLAD stiffening angles in the airstream?

[hbomb]

It seems to me as a frequent QF passenger (and don't DARE call me slf) that this thread is entirely legitimate. Indeed it is part of why PPRUNE is here. Wiith that same perspective and on the basis of the above posts, I would have preferred a return. There are enough examples of serious damage associated woth blown tyres to warrant prudence. If you don't know, find out asap.

[Capt Fathom]

All the armchair experts at it again. Hindsight...what a wonder toy to play with!
Have a good hard think now, and put yourself in the position of the crew. Well you can't can you, because none of us were there!
There are arguments for returning, and arguments for continuing! Flightcrew deal with these scenarios on a daily basis.
I'm sure there was a lot of pondering going on over that first hour or so...and probably throughout the remainder of the flight.
As professionals, we'll all try our best!! But that's obviously not good enough for some!

[Going Boeing]

Silverado

No fuel penalties were applied and fuel burn was slightly less consumed than on the flight plan.

[Keg]

Hmmm. Let me see. Aircraft goes shudder, wheel goes bang. Cabin crew report it. Crew request a check of the runway and rubber found but no other debris (or runway checked and no debris found....it doesn't matter either way). Check all other indications. Normal. One tire shows flat. No adverse vibration through airframe, no visible signs of damage after inspection by crew. All other system diagnostics show normal. No fuel leaks or hydraulic leaks evident by the instrumentation.

Option 1: Continue on with diversion airfield at KL, BKK, Calcutta, Bombay, etc, etc (essentially every hour or so all the way to FRA) or dump 100 plus tonne of fuel and come back to find 'yep, you blew a tire'- something we knew already.

Gotta say that without some indication (not just EICAS but other reports of fluid leaks, obvious physical damage, aiframe vibration, etc) that all is not right with the world, then I'm probably going to keep going- comfortable with the fact that I have a LOT of options along the way.

Just another day at the office.

Hbomb, threads are only 'legitimate' in cases like this if they are accurate and sensible. The original comments were not accurate and yours are certainly not sensible! :E

[Capt Claret]

Aw c'mon Keg, you've got to admit that the skipper would've been better off making a PA and getting a show of hands for and against continuing. :p

[Keg]

Absolutely Clarrie. To be honest, I'm horrified that it didn't happen. The real problem I guess is with Boeing. They need to add a Non normal checklist for 'tire failure' and include in it 'consult with passengers as to whether to continue or dump fuel and return'. :rolleyes: :yuk: :E

[Redstone]

A show of hands Capt!!!! I think a secret ballot would be the more democratic way to resolve the situation. CSM to act as returns officer, pettitions for recount to go thru sub comity (door 4 galley) and a 2/3 majority required in a majority of a/c zones required for motion to carry.

[mrpaxing]

csm's are biased. cant use them as returning officers. they would think its a union ballot. call for a doctor and in case non onboard consult medlink, much better idea.:ok:

[HotDog]

Been there, done that. No big deal. http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/6885/threadseperation25lj.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Capt Fathom]

One 3m gash(As big as 2 Fridges)to the fueslage with some ribs missing.
You must have a pretty small fridge ALPHA! :8

[Taildragger67]

Would've thought IFE could handle such a vote now and the results could flash up on the EICAS.

Indeed, with today's uplink capability, punters on other aircraft nearby could also be polled to see if they want a potentially dangerous aircraft in their midst.

The results could be ACARSed back to Ops and immediately published in the early-edition newspapers.

Everyone's a winner.

[numbskull]

Hot Dog is showing one of his archive photos from the 1970's.

I saw the damage on its return to syd and it was significantly larger hole that resulted in approx 5-6 wing to body fairings replaced in syd(basically all those fairings in that photo were rooted) . This is in addition to a T/E flap torque tube and a couple of gear doors and brake lines that were replaced in FRA.

Despite the damage I agree with the crews action to complete the flight. It was mostly superficial and nothing would have been achieved by dumping fuel and turning around, there were plenty of alternatives if a problem did present itself.

[HotDog]

[QUOTE=numbskull]Hot Dog is showing one of his archive photos from the 1970's.
QUOTE]

Yes numbskull, it's certainly not the worst tyre burst incident we ever had but the only one I have a photograph of. We suffered similar damage as you have described when we lost a tyre during a MTOW take off from Dubai. Advised by tower but decided to keep going to destination without further incident. As I said, not neccessarily a big deal. Incidentally, my logbook shows the picture is from 1993 after T/O from Delhi. (HKG/DEL/DXB.)

[Capn Bloggs]

Keg,

no visible signs of damage after inspection by crew

How much do you Qaintarse guys get for each EVA?

[BelfastChild]

To the precious dear thing who dared us not to call him/her SLF - is punter okay?

[Jungmeister]

I presume the costs don't come into it when the captain makes his decision.
Early in the thread 100 tons of fuel was mentioned. Would it be necessary to actually dump that much to reach an acceptable landing weight?
What is the cost of 100 tons of Jet fuel?
J

[Going Boeing]

Jung

The aircraft probably departed at MTOW (397,200kgs) and the max landing weight of that particular aircraft is 295,700kgs. Therefore, 100 tonnes sounds like it's on the mark. Can't help you with the price of fuel in litres or kilos. :cool:

[VC9]

For those of you advocating the dumping of 100 tonnes of fuel, what are the environmental costs of such action? Surely we need to take some environmental responsibility as well as safety and cost.

[HPSOV L]

Actually this is quite an interesting topic. Even our own (major overseas airline) manuals give conflicting advice>

From Boeing FCTM (condensed):
If the crew suspects a tire failure during takeoff, advise ATC for runway inspection. Crew should consider continuing to destination unless there is indication that other damage has occured. This will provide an opportunity to reduce weight normally and provide opportunity to plan and coordinate arrival when workload is low.

From Company Ops Manual (condensed):
Crew should be reluctant to continue the flight as damage may not show up immediately and the aircraft's condition may deteriorate during continued flight.

So there you go: you're damned if you do and damned if you don't!

[Capt Claret]

Cash price of a litre of JetA1 at YPDN is AUD$1.13, so AUD$113,000 less whatever discount the airline gets.

[hbomb]

Perfectly BC. But I strongly object to gratuitous condescendsion or disparagement and if you've read these columns for a while you'll know both are institutionalised in that phrase.

[amos2]

So, let me get this straight...
we have a high speed, heavy jet transport aircraft operating from A to B with anywhere between 150 and 450 bods on board.
On T/O at A we blow a tyre!
The crew decides that because they have plenty of alternates en route they should continue the flight to B...even though B may be 8 or 10 hrs away!
This decision is made because the crew has considered all options and is convinced that they have all bases covered. In other words..."they know it all".
But, what if they're wrong?
Keep it simple guys!...go back and land at A!
Basic airmanship...
that's not too hard is it?...
or is it?
:sad:

[HPSOV L]

As I mentioned above Amos, Boeing actually recommend continuing if there is no indication of other damage at the time of the event.
Which there wasn't.
Mind you what would they know?
Not saying its right one way or another, but it seems to come down to opinion really doesn't it?
No matter how loud you shout.

[Bazzamundi]

What a load of crap. Nobody can criticise unless they have all the facts. Nothing ever gets blown out of proportion here now does it?

With a blown tire, the risk is still the same on landing be it Singapore, Frankfurt or wherever. And what were the conditions at these airports at the time? Don't think I would be going back to Singpore if the a/c is heavy with a wet runway.

If I was on the way to the states I think I would push on to somewhere nice, burn the fuel normally and look forward to a stay in somewhere like Samoa, Hawaii. I am sure the punters would vote for that if it was put to them. Not sure the company would be impressed though. Ashgabat may be an interesting place to see, the weight should be down enough by there, but don't know how the punters would vote for that one.

[Elroy Jettson]

VC9, is there an ecological difference between dumping it, or burning it? :confused: If it vapourises before it hits the ground, is there a difference? It doesnt come out like a canadian fire bomber, with a result like the exon valdeze. It actually does vapourise into the atmosphere, just like the exhaust fumes if you burnt it. The only difference is you get to spread the exhaust fumes over a much larger area, and usually much closer to the ozone layer. Neither result is very environmentally friendly.

[VC9]

You dump the fuel, land, sort out the problem, then refuel and depart to destination. You have then put 100 tonnes of extra pollution into the atmosphere. Get my drift?

[Pass-A-Frozo]

If you are on the East coast of Australia, and your Landing Ground Roll is short enough, divert to Hamilton Island :}

[Turbo 5B]

Hot Dog is showing one of his archive photos from the 1970's.
I saw the damage on its return to syd and it was significantly larger hole that resulted in approx 5-6 wing to body fairings replaced in syd(basically all those fairings in that photo were rooted) . This is in addition to a T/E flap torque tube and a couple of gear doors and brake lines that were replaced in FRA.
Despite the damage I agree with the crews action to complete the flight. It was mostly superficial and nothing would have been achieved by dumping fuel and turning around, there were plenty of alternatives if a problem did present itself.
On the funny side of this, I noticed a bunch of replacement wtb fairings had arrived from avalon from VH EBU ? to replace the damaged ones.
Funny because they wont fit. Despite being told by one of the most experienced and repected composites leaders that they were wasting their time they did it anyway and lo and behold the screw holes dont line up.:=

[Taildragger67]

On the funny side of this, I noticed a bunch of replacement wtb fairings had arrived from avalon from VH EBU ? to replace the damaged ones.
Funny because they wont fit. Despite being told by one of the most experienced and repected composites leaders that they were wasting their time they did it anyway and lo and behold the screw holes dont line up.:=

"What? Boeing have built more than one type of 747? Ah that's right, the recent ones have got those little thingies on the end of the wings. The crafty so-and-so's... "

Sorry - please forgive my cynicism.

[BelfastChild]

Aw c'mon hbomb - SLF is a term of endearment. Even the passenger forum on PPRuNe is called SLF. Anyway, getting off thread here so better stop before I get a wee rap on the knuckles from Woomera....

May as well put in my 2 cents about the topic. Don't see what's wrong with continuing onto FRA if the plane can still fly. Biggest problem with a blown tyre is with landing - and that will be the same whether you go back or keep going. I don't see any reason why the captain should have turned back, and obviously he didn't either........but there are always the arm chair pundits who think they can do it better than those who are there

[Howard Hughes]

For those of you advocating the dumping of 100 tonnes of fuel, what are the environmental costs of such action? Surely we need to take some environmental responsibility as well as safety and cost.
About the same as burning it! 1 tonne of burnt fuel = 3 tonnes of greenhouse gases.....:ugh:
Think about it!!

Back on topic though, seems like a job well done to me, I certainly would have done the same.:ok:

Now about my 74 DEC Mr Dixon.;) :}

[amos2]

I'm rather pleased that I travel by car these days!...:8

[Keg]

Biggest problem with a blown tyre is with landing - and that will be the same whether you go back or keep going.

Actually, it's easier if you keep going. Going back means dumping to probably not much below MLW. Going on to destination means being another 30-50(ish) tonnes lighter! :eek:

Amos, so are we! :E

[BelfastChild]

Originally posted by Keg
Actually, it's easier if you keep going. Going back means dumping to probably not much below MLW. Going on to destination means being another 30-50(ish) tonnes lighter
!

Agreed Keg. Sorry, should have made that point myself - mea culpa.....

[ALPHA STRIKE]

Amazing what happens when you put a loosely based thread on d Prune!
The intention was not to bag the QF boys, the intent was to generate some thought provoking discussion! I totally agree with comments "loosely based & Monday morn. 1/4 backs". Was quite rushed when I posted!!:zzz:
Though having read some(I mean some!) of the threads, I have become more INFORMED!! As for HPSOV L , he hit the nail on the head. What would YOU:ok: DO in that scenario?

[The Messiah]

amos2

Please explain to me the danger and the lack of airmanship in continuing to destination some 12-13 hours down the road, landing @230-240t approx with only 1 out of 2 dozen tyres blown and the destination expecting your arrival with time to prepare, compared to returning for a landing @285t (MLW) approx with minimum prep time.

[Il2Sturmovik]

i am not an aviation professional, so im not trying to tell people how to do a job or being critical. im just interested in the comment by hpsovL, Is there some operational procedure that needs to be corrected or cleared up amongst the pilots?. i know the procedure was followed according to Boeing, and all went well. however what if some damaged did occur that made the aircraft deteriorate to a critical point, thus ignoring the company ops manual?

HPSOV L

From Boeing FCTM (condensed):
If the crew suspects a tire failure during takeoff, advise ATC for runway inspection. Crew should consider continuing to destination unless there is indication that other damage has occured. This will provide an opportunity to reduce weight normally and provide opportunity to plan and coordinate arrival when workload is low.

From Company Ops Manual (condensed):
Crew should be reluctant to continue the flight as damage may not show up immediately and the aircraft's condition may deteriorate during continued flight.

So there you go: you're damned if you do and damned if you don't!
I also would like to add that the concorde crash a few years ago, i know the aircraft designs in question are significantly different,and totally different set of circumstances lead to the failure. It just sounds like alot of damage could possibly occur, from these tire problems on T/O? im not an expert as i said im just observing what i have seen.
i would have to agree with some of the posts, and the company ops manual. to return the flight just in case anything serious has happened that doesnt show up straight away. if iwas on the flight and heard the vibration etc, i would notify the crew, but still relax and try to enjoy the flight, im sure the captain will sort it out. :)

[eman_resu]

Aw c'mon Keg, you've got to admit that the skipper would've been better off making a PA and getting a show of hands for and against continuing. :p

Bad idea, as there could be very little knowledge in the cabin.

It would be better to limit the poll to Gold or Platinum members, as they have most flying experience....... (Come to think of it possibly not platinum as I've never met a sober one yet )

In fact the IFE could be tuned to discard votes from Silver or below. Would get rid of all these silly manuals on the flight deck anyway.