PDA

View Full Version : Fumes force Qantas flight to land


niceneasy
19th Aug 2006, 03:13
August 19, 2006 - 10:24AM

A Qantas flight bound for Melbourne was forced to land in Darwin after fuel odours were noticed in the cabin.

QF30, carrying 241 passengers from Hong Kong to Melbourne, had to be diverted to Darwin about 5pm yesterday, a spokesoman for the airline said.

"As standard operating procedure, the captain shut down one of the engines and diverted to Darwin," a Qantas spokeswoman said.

"The aircraft was met by engineers and the aircraft remains there at the moment."

The spokeswoman said she did not have information about the cause of the odour, but spare parts were being flown to Darwin.

The passengers, stuck at the airport due to a shortage of accommodation in Darwin, were due to fly out early today.

AAP

Ejector
19th Aug 2006, 04:06
So would that be considered an engine failure?

pakeha-boy
19th Aug 2006, 05:17
no.... just like it said....the Capt shut it down....cmon mate:ugh:

frangatang
19th Aug 2006, 05:57
I thought sexism was now banned and a spokeswoman was illegal.Are they not all spokespeople these days, and as for humankind!

murgatroid
19th Aug 2006, 07:38
Wouldn't standard operating procedure have the Captain fly the aircraft and the F/O be directed to shut down the engine?

Hugh Jarse
19th Aug 2006, 10:10
Depends whose sector it was as pilot flying, Murgatroid.:E

RELEASED
19th Aug 2006, 11:14
arh the beginning of outsourcing is already paying dividends,watch this space

Capn Bloggs
19th Aug 2006, 13:16
the Captain fly the aircraft and the F/O be directed to shut down the engine?
If anything, it'd be the FO flying the aircraft (with the AP in, of course!) and the captain shutting down the donk. I'm not gunna trust a lowly FO with my engines! :E

Ejector
20th Aug 2006, 04:35
Well that donk was no longer producing any trust, it had been shut down due to a malfunction by company policy. QF had an engine failure, no other way of saying it.:ugh: :mad:

Tempo
20th Aug 2006, 05:16
Ejector,

you are absolutely right. The engine 'failed' to produce thrust after is was shutdown.

Get it....

Columbia
20th Aug 2006, 05:20
As it was a 747-400, they only had 3 good engines left!!!:ok:

Capt Claret
20th Aug 2006, 06:37
According to that well informed paragon of world journalistic excellence :yuk: :yuk: The NT News of Sat Aug 19th; According to a police report two of the planes four engines had failed.

Ultralights
20th Aug 2006, 06:43
So QF will be flying from Darwin to melbourne again, or were all the PAX shafted to J*??

Capt Claret
20th Aug 2006, 07:09
Ultralights,

SHAFTED

paxing to BNE the other day, the CC advised that mainline are soon pulling out of BNE-DRW-BNE in favour of Jetstar. :{ :{

4hrs + :{ :{ :zzz:

Old Aggie
20th Aug 2006, 10:26
How did the captain know which engine to shut down. After all there is a 1000km wind blowing outside, which would have dissipated the fumes,and you can't smell through the fuel gauges where the smell is coming from.
Although I do recall someone going out on a wing many years ago.
And as someone else pointed out, he still had three more.

Capt Fathom
20th Aug 2006, 10:43
Aggie .. you'll have to translate that post into english .. for those of us who are old!

motaderim
21st Aug 2006, 01:45
They couldn't just shut down an engine without determining the source of problem first of all. After identifying F/O moves the start lever to cutoff after Capt confirms it. Is that how it is at QF? I think they made good decision by landing asap.

Sunfish
21st Aug 2006, 04:49
Where are the usual articles about the terrified passengers and the bangs, flames, lurches and smoke?

Atlas Shrugged
21st Aug 2006, 04:54
You forgot death plunge :suspect:

Beg Tibs
21st Aug 2006, 10:47
If anything, it'd be the FO flying the aircraft (with the AP in, of course!) and the captain shutting down the donk. I'm not gunna trust a lowly FO with my engines! :E

I thought long haul captains slept the whole flight for their 500k a year..!!

engine out
22nd Aug 2006, 01:13
Aggie, you may not be able to smell through a fuel guage but you can see when there is less fuel in one tank than the others. Just call for the 'Fuel Leak' checklist and let this guide your actions. Talking to guys in the know, sounds like all happened as advertised and it was a job well done.

Just shows money spent on training is well spent

K9P
22nd Aug 2006, 06:53
Aggie,
I reckon the flight crew just asks the flight attendent to look out the window and see which engine is streaming fuel vapour LOL.........or........the flight crew check the fuel flow against the EGT......more fuel = less heat = fuel leak.
Regards

Old Aggie
23rd Aug 2006, 09:52
K9P, It is not that simple, a fuel leak does not mean less EGT. I was in command of a 747 going to Europe one night when a dump valve malfunctioned on one side and we lost 2 tons of fuel in a short time. When there are 9 fuel tanks on an aircraft you have to do some calculations which do not include EGTs. The fuel flow and EGT on an engine is measured after the EDP and does not necessarily give an indication of a leak.
I think amateurs should stay out of this.

Point0Five
23rd Aug 2006, 10:12
With professionals like Old Aggie, I'd say the amateurs should be more than welcome.:hmm:

His grasp of the self evident is amazing, and I commend his ability to perform some calculations in flight.

Respect :}

Chequebook
23rd Aug 2006, 12:59
Actually it's the s/o who shuts down the engine in QF. That way they can cop the blame if there's a f#*k up. as per usual.

But Isn't the 744 a 2 pilot aircraft?

company_spy
27th Aug 2006, 00:00
So on a 747, your main tank jettison pumps fired up and the wing valve failed or the centre wing jettison transfer valves failed and the wing jettison nozzle failed, to lose 2 ton of fuel.I think your telling a fib, I need more info for credibility, or are you telling someone elses story in a more elaborate manner.

ITCZ
28th Aug 2006, 14:19
paxing to BNE the other day, the CC advised that mainline are soon pulling out of BNE-DRW-BNE in favour of Jetstar.

Don't put too much faith in a brisvegas trolley dolley, clarrie.

QF is still selling seats on QF825 DRW-BNE and QF824 BNE-DRW, aircraft 737-800, right up to August 2007 (which is as far ahead as the website will let you book anything).

Plenty more J-class and gentlemen's hours in the sim for those of us that remain in the Top End ;)

Capt Claret
28th Aug 2006, 16:23
ITCZ,

I hope you're correct. However I suspect that even with forward reservations to 2007, a swap to J* wouldn't be all that difficult. Must be your conversion to Mac that's allowed you to forget how a few key strokes can change the whole outlook. :p

Don Esson
29th Aug 2006, 01:48
Don't put too much faith in a brisvegas trolley dolley, clarrie.
QF is still selling seats on QF825 DRW-BNE and QF824 BNE-DRW, aircraft 737-800, right up to August 2007 (which is as far ahead as the website will let you book anything).
Plenty more J-class and gentlemen's hours in the sim for those of us that remain in the Top End ;)

Advance selling doesn't mean a thing. It is very easy to transfer punters from one flight or carrier to another. If it suits the Rat to give the routes to Jetstar, it will. Just as it has done on almost every route that Jetstar flies.

Capt Claret
9th Nov 2006, 20:31
Last Update: Thursday, November 9, 2006. 4:21pm (AEDT)

Crack in fuel line blamed for Qantas emergency landing

A cracked fuel line is being blamed for a mid-air emergency that forced a Qantas plane to make an unscheduled landing in Darwin in August.

The Boeing 747 was forced down after pilots saw fuel streaming from one of its four engines.

The plane was en route from Hong Kong to Melbourne with 261 people on board when the crew complained of smelling fuel in the cabin.

The pilot shut off the number three engine and flew to Darwin where he landed safely.

An Air Transport Safety Bureau report has found the leak came from a broken fuel manifold return line.

In the same week, two more broken fuel lines were reported on the same model engine, sparking a worldwide alert.

Qantas replaced the damaged fuel lines on the same day.

Now, what I'd like to know is what the bloody pilots were doing inside the cabin, in such a position as to see fuel "streaming from one of its engines", instead of on the flight deck where they belong? :}

Going Boeing
10th Nov 2006, 01:11
Rolls orders fuel-line fix on workhorse engine

Steve Creedy
November 10, 2006
ROLLS Royce has ordered modifications to fuel lines on its workhorse RB-211 engine after a series of fuel leaks, including three in planes operating to or from Australia.
The British engine maker has issued a service bulletin requiring operators to replace a fuel manifold return line with a new type and to change the clips holding it in place.

The service bulletin was issued after two leaks occurred in the same week in August, including an August 18 incident involving a Qantas Boeing 747-400.

The jet with a crew of 18 and 243 passengers was on its way to Melbourne from Hong Kong and about 480km northwest of Darwin when a cabin crew member notified the flight crew there was smell of fuel in the first class cabin.

A pilot verified the fuel smell and spotted a fluid trail from the rear of No3 engine.

At the same time, other pilots noted a higher than usual fuel flow.

The flight crew shut down the engine and diverted the plane to Darwin where an inspection found the fuel manifold return line had fractured.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau investigated two similar occurrences in 2005, including a leak on a Qantas 747-400 on a scheduled flight from Brisbane to Los Angeles.

In the August 18 incident, ATSB investigators found the fuel line had cracked near a zone affected by the heat of a weld.

A microscopic examination found that the damage was consistent with fatigue crack progression and that the final fracture had occurred rapidly.

It also found the line fracture surface displayed the same characteristics as the previous two lines inspected by the ATSB in 2005.

A second report, also released this week, revealed that Qantas and Rolls conducted extensive tests on the engine involved in the Brisbane-Los Angeles incident last November.

The airline removed the engine and subjected it to vibration stress tests which found the fuel line was subject to peak stresses at 10 times the anticipated levels.

These high levels were attributed to harmonic resonance created by combustor rumble - an unstable pulsing at low frequency in a jet engine - the origin of which could not be identified.

"During the testing, the manufacturer tried various clipping arrangements on the drain line, giving varying degrees of change to the stress levels recorded," safety investigators said.

"Experimentation with different shape drain lines was also tried until an acceptable vibration stress level was achieved."

cowpatz
10th Nov 2006, 01:21
Interesting standard operating procedure..................smell fuel in the cabin and shut an engine down..............hhhhmmmmm let me see Ennie, meenie, mynie, moe.........:D

Kooka
10th Nov 2006, 03:34
Interesting standard operating procedure..................smell fuel in the cabin and shut an engine down..............hhhhmmmmm let me see Ennie, meenie, mynie, moe.........:DTry reading the post preceding yours again (or indeed, as seems more likely, for the first time). I will be interested to read your comments after you have done so.

neville_nobody
10th Nov 2006, 04:13
I think we had found the winner of the Pprune 2006 foot in mouth award! :}

Capt Claret
10th Nov 2006, 09:11
G'day Frozo,

You're right about Mrs C not being cabin crew. Given that it takes a chemical cocktail, usually 10+mg valium and scotch to get her onto an aeroplane, I don't think she has the right disposition for the job.

However, it was the following that piqued my interest (my bolding). The Boeing 747 was forced down after pilots saw fuel streaming from one of its four engines. ;)

HotDog
10th Nov 2006, 09:23
This has to be one of the most pathetic threads I have ever read on D & G. :yuk:

numbskull
10th Nov 2006, 10:53
I was the first person than crawled into the back of one those engines that was shutdown inflight and I can assure you that there was a severe fuel leak from a high pressure fuel line onto and around the combustion chamber case of the aforementoned #3 engine.

You guys are just lucky that Jet A1 isn't easy to ignite. That engine was soaked in fuel on landing, even after an inflight shutdown.

I can assure you that one of the pilots could have seen fuel streaming from one of the engines if they had been alerted by a passenger and gone and had a look from inside the cabin(which is probably what happened). From memory 2000kg/hr.