Merged: QF emergency landing into SYD.

[speedbirdhouse]

From this afternoons SMH online.

Emergency landing

August 2, 2008 - 4:15PM
Advertisement

A Qantas international flight bound for Manila has made an emergency landing at Sydney Airport.

An Air Services Australia spokesman said the pilot was forced to turn back to Sydney shortly taking off from Sydney's international airport.

"Air traffic controllers received a call from the pilot declaring an emergency and proceeded to give priority clearance for a landing at Sydney,'' the spokesman told AAP.

He said details of the nature of the emergency were not yet available.

[Alex 009]

I am probably wrong, but isn't the Sydney-Manila service usually flown by 767s

[B A Lert]

The only Swiss Cheese-type holes are the latest SMH story:

Qantas flight leak scare


Glenda Kwek
August 2, 2008 - 5:05PM


A Qantas 767 has been forced to turn around and make an emergency landing at Sydney Airport due to a hydraulic leak, the airline says.

The international flight bound for Manila took off at 1.20pm and landed back at Sydney Airport about 3pm after air traffic controllers gave the pilot priority clearance to land.

A Qantas spokeswoman said Qantas flight QF19, a Boeing 767-300 with 200 passengers on board, "landed without incident after the captain became aware that the aircraft had a hydraulic leak''.

"On inspection, engineers determined that fluid was coming from the spoiler actuator that was not evident before departure,'' the spokeswoman said.

"There was no safety issue at any time.''

'Plane was very low in the sky'

One of the passengers on the flight, told smh.com.au the flight was "very low in the sky" after take off.

"About about five minutes about taking off it was very obvious the plane very low in the sky. ... It was very strange," said the man, a frequent flyer who did not want to be named.

He said the passengers were informed by the crew that the airport control tower had seen "stuff leaking from the plane" as it was taking off.

'Very professional'

He said the passengers were very professionally handled, but that they had not been kept fully informed during the flight.

"For 45 minutes we did not know what was going on.

"There was an announcement once every 40 minutes. ...

"The plane circled about an hour and a half dumping fuel from the plane."

The man said the crew did not inform those on the plane why there was a delay in landing the plane, "only that they were doing a safety check".

Passengers disembarked from the plane about 3.15pm and were told that they were going to take off again at 5.30pm on another flight, he said.

'Not well communicated'

The man said the disembarked passengers were told to go through the security screening again.

First and business class passengers returned to the business class lounge, but were asked why they were using the lounge for the second time.

"It was not well communicated," he said.

The incident comes a week after an explosion blew a hole in a Qantas jet flying from Hong Kong to Melbourne, forcing the plane to make an emergency landing in Manila.

Qantas was yesterday completing checks on oxygen bottles on its fleet of Boeing 747s.

[HotDog]

Swiss Cheese.:confused:
'Plane was very low in the sky'

One of the passengers on the flight, told smh.com.au the flight was "very low in the sky" after take off.

Big deal! Spoiler actuator leak, Swiss Cheese indeed.:rolleyes:

[TMAK]

Swiss cheese (the actual cheese) is about as useful here as is any reference to Prof James Reason's accident causation model....

would you stop using your car or get a more expensive mechanic if you had a flat tyre in your car?? Nope, you would pull over somewhere safe and fix it! Somewhere safe for this 767 was SYD airport....

[Tempo]

"Swiss Cheese"......what the????

As TMAK and Hotdog said....not really a major issue. Triple redundancy on the 767.

Sometimes I think the headline posters on this site are as guilty as our media of outrageous statements.

[tobzalp]

Very low? Big F off westerly today wasn't it? Maintain A050 ring a bell?:rolleyes:

[Rongotai]

IF it is true that the frequency of failures on QF aircraft has increased recently (as many who should know maintain is the case on this forum) and IF such increased frequency is caused by declining engineering management (as many who should know also maintain on this forum) then the swiss cheese metaphor is appropriate in this case regardless of how minor any given incident is.

If, on the other hand, engineering problems remain within historical statistical norms and if engineering standards have not deteriorated, then the metaphor is not very useful in this case

[arkmark]

Blind Freddie can see an increasing amount of maintenance related issues.

Aircraft maintenance is simple -- you get what you pay for:ugh:

Old aircraft need to be maintained by the best of the best, not the cheapest of the region.

[SeldomFixit]

World's Best Practice - that lovely euphamism for as cheap as you can get it :ok:

[Barkly1992]

Give me a break. I'm getting a little tired of 'swiss cheese' - implication that Qantas are about to kill 450 people through major incompetence.

Think of something a little more innovative.

How many times have you been met by fire engines - me 2 times. No drama. Didn't request.

Oh lighties - BTW. But just as important to me.

Just routine.

[Jabawocky]

The problem here is the media are like a pack of sharks and there is blood in the water.

QF30......serious deal, but most likely a freaky event and maybe nothing to do with Q maint.

The 737 door.......... non event really, just heightened media interest after QF30.

767 today, minor event. How many hydraulic leaks have there been around the world in the last 4 weeks, I do not know but its bound to be a few. So these last two events are just media fodder.

If you are a journo reading this, learn something for goodness sake! I think the public deserve better from the media!:=

J

[Cap'n Arrr]

Have a read through any month's ATSB incident reports, theres usually a few incidents/diversions etc from 737s, 747s, A320s etc (all OZ registered). Whats happening here is that the media is latching onto anything that happens which is out of the ordinary with a QF plane since the oxy bottle incident to drive up sensationalism/sales.

Pity that this is the sort of garbage that gets fed to the general public.

Side note - planes are generally very low during takeoff :ok:

[PyroTek]

Is it just the media blowing things out, or are QF aircraft really increasing in the number of faults per week? I'm just wondering if this stuff usually happens on a weekly basis, and after the first event, the media is focussing on QF..

[teresa green]

Oh. please no, not more of "I thought we were all going to die" I have had enough for this week.:{ PS: Wallabies, back to the drawing board:{

[speedbirdhouse]

Those protesting about my reference to swiss cheese really do need to get over themselves.

You'll note of course that my original post was a cut and paste from a press release that had nothing in the way of detail.

The detail came AFTER my post. The heading of which had a ? after it.

Oh BTW.

Aviation professionals may not be concerned about 3 Qantas emergency landings in the space of a week but it could be reasonably expected that the traveling public [who buy tickets] would be.

Especially given the publicity surrounding the recent Engineering dispute and resultant collapse of our schedules.

As I said before.

Get over yourselves.

[Bankstown]

What's wrong about the SMH's "dumping fuel" bit B A Lert?

[apache]

The plane circled about an hour and a half dumping fuel from the plane."


not bad for a 30 minute MAX dump time!!!!

now THAT would be a story... why did it take 90 mins to dump 38,000kg of fuel (IF it was absolutely full!!!) at approx 1000kg/min ?

gotta love these six fingered banjo players who talk to the idiots in the media!

[parabellum]

A turn back for technical reasons followed by an uneventful precautionary landing:ugh:

[speedbirdhouse]

Quote-

"Air traffic controllers received a call from the pilot declaring an emergency and proceeded to give priority clearance for a landing at Sydney,'' the spokesman told AAP."
:ugh:

[Barkly1992]

Flyingit

Your call signs says it all.

Of course IF a Qantas flight 'bites it' - whatever that means - and they have in the past - an appropriate investigation will take place and a series of causes will be attributed.

Some people will be balmed.

And the media will go ballistic.

There are about 20-30 fatal accidents in Oz each year which result in about 100-150 fatalities (haven't checked it for a while). Qantas (international) is more tha likely to have an accident overseas as it did in Bangkok.

80% of accidents are attributed to 'human factors' and mostly 'pilot failures' of judgement - about 80% on landing about 10% on take-off.

Very few to system or airworthiness failures - but yes some. Some even to ATC - some to pasengers.

If you really want to appear knowledgable - rather than tabloid - just read the available data.

I worked in this field for 10 years - and have had a licence for 30.

I watch these incidents with interest - but don't judge.

RANT OVER.

:E

[Matt-YSBK]

These passanger reports to the meida sound like that seenfrom Flying High. Where all the reporters run into the phone boxes and they fall over after

Quick boys let's get some pictures.

[HotDog]

Speedbirdhouse, I think you need to get over it as well.

Aviation professionals may not be concerned about 3 Qantas emergency landings in the space of a week but it could be reasonably expected that the traveling public [who buy tickets] would be

The depressurisation incident can be classified as an emergency landing without doubt; but the other two you are eluding to, had absolutely nothing to do with an emergency. Two normal turnbacks to base due to a mechanical malfunction. Happens all the time but is not at all newsworthy, especially if it isn't Qantas who happens to be the flavour of the month right now.:rolleyes:

[Tempo]

SBH,

Get over yourself ....your the one that was so quick to be the first one to post "swiss cheese" in your title post. Jumping to assumptions like most do on this website. Honestly, sometimes I think there are people on here (and maybe you and 'flyinggit' are two of them) that will not be happy until Qantas is no longer-just so they can say "I told you so".

[speedbirdhouse]

Hot Dog,

you say-

"Two normal turnbacks to base due to a mechanical malfunction."


Quote-

"Air traffic controllers received a call from the pilot declaring an emergency and proceeded to give priority clearance for a landing at Sydney,'' the spokesman told AAP."

________________

So it was only a turnback AFTER it was found to be a hydraulic leak?

Humour me, what was it up until that point?

________________

Tempo,

do you know what this is? ?

[Scurvy.D.Dog]

Hey Hot Dog
.
This turned up in the mail from Thames House .... http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/party/party-smiley-013.gif
.
... what do you reckon is in it? :E

[ZK-NSJ]

channel 7 news was priceless
"it flew low over botany bay to dump petrol"

[Scurvy.D.Dog]

.... petrol :hmm: ... :rolleyes: ... **** :hmm:
.
As our dearly departed SY TWR (real) legend P.B would have said :-
.
... why am I surprised that you are surprised! :D

[Mr. Hat]

everyones sayin swiss cheese

so i thought i would to


parmesan maybe

[Chronic Snoozer]

Parmesan's Italian. Actually its Parmigiano.

Swiss cheese refers to Emmental I believe.

Cokk all to do with this thread though.

[Chimbu chuckles]

There are three hydraulics systems in a 767. A leak in any one, even if all the fluid escapes, does not even require a diversion to nearest suitable let alone dumping fuel and declaring a Pan. Fair enough he was close to Sydney and no doubt he got on the radio and asked advice and maybe they said 'we'd like you to land here and we'll fix it'. The fuel dump would just be QF SOP, my company would not expect that unless I was over 170 tonnes, on a long runway....short/wet runway very different story.

Had he been over Ujung he'd have likely kept going to Manila and no one would have heard about it, not even the pax. This is a non issue blown out of all proportion by irresponsible media.

[Pegasus747]

It would be fair to say that many of the travelling public are right concerned with recent media reporting about Qantas.

In a forum that was essentially about the ALAEA dispute with Qantas various engineers were posting about their grave concerns about the state of QANTAS engineering. Now these are the so called Subject Matter experts. The media have been following that column too.

Is it any wonder given the number of newsworthy events that the media have been reporting it. Given the outsourcing of engineering function to MROs and the general decline in Aircraft servicability that some might start to use the term Swiss Cheese.

If the standard of general maintenance is anything like the standard of "cabin" functionality then there may well be cause for concern,

[Keg]

G'day Chimbu, I agree with almost everything you said and the possibilities about the way it may have gone down. The only point I raise is that if it was a C HYD SYS PRESS ( I don't know if that's what it was) just out of Sydney I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be continuing to Manila irrespective of the fact that I still had two other systems.

[teresa green]

Now the Flight Attendents Union want to front the Boss for some answers and have told the press so. Thanks a lot, that will be a great help, in this crazy hunt by the journo's to bring QF down. I can see the next headline "PAX kept waiting for second scotch and dry" onroute to SIN, "how much further can QF sink" give us a break. Some bleedin A/C somewhere will have a engineering problem as we all know so well, its the nature of the beast, the majority do not end up a smoking black hole, due to pilot training and well serviced aircraft. So if you are a journo, (and we know you read this forum) layoff for Chr$#ts sake, most of these matters are everyday occurances somewhere in this country and every other country that has airliners and cargo aircraft, and most survive and reach their destination. We all understand that Aviation is unforgiving, all pilots and engineers have that drummed into their heads from day 1 and to quote an old cliche "the drive to the airport is the most dangerous part of the trip" stands firm today. Layoff!:=

[genex]

Maybe the industry has for too long "dumbed down" the public on what is normal, what is routine and what is scary. I know when you talk to fearful fliers one-on-one its relatively easy to explain that you have lots of redundancy and that a precautionary return to a nearby big engineering base is simply that....a sensible precaution.

Years back I had a chance to see the daily rap sheet of faults, flaws, mistakes, diversions, go-arounds, air and ground returns etc for a very big US carrier with 500 ish aircraft. Make your eyes water if you knew no better but actually as most here know, was relatively routine.

[Capt Kremin]

The fact that the FAAA is now getting involved and "demanding answers" simply goes to highlight the fact that most cabin crew wear their total ignorance of their very working environment like some sort of badge of honour.

You would think that years of working inside an aircraft might spur some curiosity about how they actually worked, but no; one must remain cool and aloof from the "techies" at all times.

So why don't you guys and gals ask some questions once in a while instead of mindlessly gossiping in the galley? Find out about why the leak in one hydraulic system is generally no big deal. Find out that aircraft don't simply "plunge" 20,000 feet, why engines and aircraft are engineering marvels and why most pilots really do believe that the drive to the work will be the closest they ever come to death in their aviation career instead of listening, and in this case feeding, the media drivel?

[Sunfish]

The "flat tire" model is misleading.

The "swiss cheese" model is relevant.

The trouble with cheese paring on maintenance is that you can get away with it for maybe Ten years....and then when things start going wrong it takes you Ten years to get back to where you originally were.

[QF skywalker]

Capt Kremin,

Get a grip. You are generalising, obviously because you have had a bad experience along the way.

I always ask questions and I do care about the environment we work in.

Your statement is unfair. Have some respect for your cabin crew. :(:rolleyes:

[maui]

Keg

A point of clarification if I may.

Do you fly single pilot, as your post would suggest? I, I, I

and;

If not, from which seat do you make all these decisions?

Thanks

Maui

[Capt Kremin]

I do respect my cabin crews and the work they do. However, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of questions I have been asked by any Flight attendant about any aspect of flying. It's is just not in the culture and it shows by the actions of the FAAA.

[Howard Hughes]

I don't know if you've noticed these things come 'in threes' especially as far as the media is concerned, we have seen it before with both Virgin and Jetstar and now it is Qantas's turn!

As far as I am concerned, I think an explosive depressurisation is news worthy, the rest is just media muck raking and sensationalism at it's best!:rolleyes:

[qfcabin]

representing the FAAA at the ATSB (Australian Safety and Transport Bureau) investigation of the incident; acting as a support person for our members who were on the flight.

The FAAA like other interested parties is awaiting the outcome of this investigation.

The FAAA on Tuesday wrote to Geoff Dixon requesting a full Company briefing on the incident at the earliest opportunity. We will advise members of Mr Dixon’s response in due course. Naturally our members are concerned about the causes of what was a very serious incident.

The FAAA wishes to thank the Company for its co-operative approach in relation to this matter

Finally, we applaud the professionalism displayed by our members during and after
Doesn't look like 'demanding answers' to me kremin

[HotDog]

Speedbird,

"Air traffic controllers received a call from the pilot declaring an emergency and proceeded to give priority clearance for a landing at Sydney,'' the spokesman told AAP."

I presume you take Channel 7's report of dumping petrol low over Botany Bay as gospel also.:rolleyes:

[Transition Layer]

The front page of the Sun-Herald has a huge photo of a 767 with a white stream of what looks like fuel coming out the trailing edge of the right wing, and the caption on pg. 5 reads "...the Qantas 767 leaks fluid above Sydney Airport yesterday...."

This photo mysteriously doesn't make it anywhere onto the smh or sun-herald websites...could it be they have realised that the "fluid" in question was actually the fuel they are intentionally dumping and the photo has been pulled?

:hmm:

[Keg]

Maui, let's go through the post bit by bit.

I agree with almost everything you said...

Chimbu offered a hypothesis and I agreed. You may not however there is no 'we' in this part of the discusion.

The only point I raise is that if it was a C HYD SYS PRESS ( I don't know if that's what it was) ...

I'm raising a new discussion point and stating that I don't know what it really was....others may know what it was, I didn't. I raised the point, there was no other person sitting beside me to discuss it with. Therefore there is no 'we' in this part of the discussion.

...I wouldn't be continuing to Manila irrespective of the fact that I still had two other systems.

Here is the only part where I intimated a decision. Given that I still don't have anyone sitting beside me at the moment to discuss it with then there is still no 'we' to considered in this point. Therefore, do you dispute the application of airmanship or is it just the fact that I didn't actually articulate the decision making process of not wanting end up in Manila with 6-7 tonne of fuel at a time of year where CBs and rain are pretty common, having flown all the way there on one A/P, run the flaps on an alternate system with attendant issues for approach and track miles/sequence with ordinary ATC, terrain, weather, go around, etc; manually drop the gear and have it permanently locked down once lowered with the possibility of no nose wheel steering which I wouldn't know until after I'd dropped the gear but would then require a tow and then not have any maintenance facilities available after landing to fix the problem when a major maintenance facility and spare aircraft are available 15 minutes away. Is it also the fact that I didn't articulate that whilst not wanting to go to MNL on first glance I'd probably be comfortable to take the aeroplane to Brissie or Melbourne if the company wanted it there instead and after consideration of all the information including wx, notams, etc? Or is it simply the fact that I didn't articulate that my decision making process for most events (bar the time critical ones) is always based upon input from all possible resources including the F/Os (who have provided some bloody good input for me in recent times and whose support I rely on always) and spoke simply as another contributor to the discussion? :rolleyes:

Seriously, we are being far too precious about what we write on an internet chat forum. :ugh:

[tinpis]

Might be timely for a Dustin Hoffman ad. :hmm:

[Chimbu chuckles]

Not sure I agree Keg. (EDIT - hadn't read you last post before I hit send on this one - I'll let it stand as written despite your further and excellent input)

Certainly I would be seeking input from the company IF that was possible and diverting/landing if instructed to do so. If it was not I would simply continue to destination. In fact the radio call would go something like "Hey guys we have lost the center hydraulic system. We are happy to continue to destination unless you have other considerations/objections"

Yes, you will be landing flap 20 and doing alternate gear/flap extension but really that is about it..unless the reserve brake/nosewheel steering light remains on...you might as well do it at destination.

Diversions/dumping fuel are VERY expensive exercises...just in capital never mind PR considerations. There is no QRH 'Plan to land at nearest suitable airport' statement in the CTR HYD PRESS non normal.

The repair bill will be pretty similar no matter where on the QF network you park the jet...whether you add $100k to that bill by making a less than enlightened decision is the crux of command decision making in my view.

Lets face it...99.9% of non normal situations we face are NOT Souix City or even exploding oxy bottles near Manila...they are just mundane scenarios as outlined above. The mundane does however happen quite often and the bottom line impact on the company can be very large indeed over the course of a financial year, if people are over reacting and diverting for no good reason.

[PlankBlender]

Headline in today's Australian.. all a bit too predictable and boring, methinks.. :rolleyes: media whips up a frenzy to further their own agenda (ie selling copy with over-hyped crap stories :yuk:), regulator has to been seen to be doing something, so he does something amounting to nothing, once grass grows over the issue, the "special team" -- no doubt made up of people that are "available" (read "best out of the way in a sideline project somewhere where they can't break anything") -- will be quietly disbanded.. :ugh:

The only thing that is really concerning in this whole saga is how much kudos the media has in this country.. imagine the same in the UK, everybody would just be going "ah well, it's just the yellow press which we'll just ignore" and all would be going after their actual business..

Of course Qantas had a bad PR run lately, but as others here have pointed out, NO-ONE who counts has said publicly that there has been any increase in actual safety related incidents.

Break over, back to productive work now :}

[7378FE]

Well CASA have appointed a special team to investigate this mob............why did it take so long:hmm:

[Islander Jock]

Poor b@stards. If the flight made it to within striking distance of Manila before fault was identified, this probably wouldn't have even made the papers.
Bloody hell, I've seen bigger problems than this involving Q-link at regional airports. Does it make the news? Not a chance. Reason - no bottom feeding journos lurking in regional WA towns. Just the way we like it.:ok:

[parabellum]

A thought that crosses my mind about pushing on or turning back is that if you don't know what caused a fluid and pressure loss in any system then you don't know that that cause may not strike again on the other systems. Personally I would probably turn back if still near to my major engineering base.

[Wod]

At least we can be clear that concerns about what Crikey, Ben Sandilands and some in Pprune will feel irresistably inspired to spout forth do not yet feature in the QF decision making process.

Got a problem on climb out from a Main base? Come on back and we'll put the skilled guys with the full stores backup onto the job.

Prudent. Safe. Professional. Normal.

[ferris]

Getting a bit sick of the "this is a normal event" type posts. I would hope that readers of this forum are a bit more 'aviation savvy' than the average 'man in the street', which is why it's a little insulting.

Yes, sure, if you look at any of the recent incidents IN ISOLATION, then they are Prudent. Safe. Professional. Normal. However, with several in the space of 2 weeks, and given that
1. QF has been on a Dixon-era cost cutting drive
2. This forum has been privvy to engineers warning of the risks of outsourcing/cost cutting et etc.
3. the media love anything to do with aviation 'dangers'
you'd have to have your head in the sand not to think there may be some dots that might need joining.

I find this comment interesting
Of course Qantas had a bad PR run lately, but as others here have pointed out, NO-ONE who counts has said publicly that there has been any increase in actual safety related incidents. Surely those "that count" should've been making regular and loud noises that there hasnt been any increase, and that there is no developing/ongoing problem?

Certainly, some posts smack of "don't you dare say anything bad about the Q". Sometimes, people with concerns are not smacking their lips at the prospect of QF going under- in fact, maybe they want the opposite?

[SOPS]

BBC has just reported that CASA is launching special investigation to look into Qantas saftey standards.....anyone know anymore?

[airtags]

Ok at the risk of
a) exposing my staff id to the QCC bugwatch brigade
b) upsetting collegues from my (semi) former profession and
c) sounding disrespectful to crew involved in the recent incidents...................

Let's be real in accepting that aside from an articulate few, those reporting the stories are by and large at the back of the grid and without a media release or briefing in their hand would'nt know which way their a*rse was pointing (particularly the case it seems if their pay comes from News Ltd or Sthn Cross)

Let us also be real in accepting Q has it's share of problems - many of which arise (and will continue to hangover) from the Dixon era of plundering the core business to fund wayward left field endeavours and underwrite the cash flow meanderings of JetSAR [no correspondence pls AJ still has start up and capital amortised on the Q balance sheet which is a bit like the bank forgetting it has given the business an overdraft]

Let us also be real in accepting that Q has an old tired fleet....a few old tired has been managers...and even the odd old 'has been' workers who desperately hang to an IR philosophy from another era.

Let us also be real in accepting that some of the union pitches and pushes and leaks of late have been a little amateur and in fact have totally painted the wrong picture. (To be fair to the unions, QF Corp/Media Comms have also equally been a total embarassment)

Finally for all the woes and contingent risk, let's not forget that we have other operators running aircraft around Australian Skies without liferafts, expecting a Cabin crew Member to cover TWO primary doors, ignoring Boeing directives and even one or two exploiting the opportunity of operating outside the (so-called) watchdog's area from behind the skirt of an FAOC.

Added to this we have CASA chasing cameras and chanting rhetoric rather than auditing compliance and a Minister that has his head so far up a dead bear's bum that when he finally sees the light it probably will be an endoscope.

Baseline: we are in an era where the regulatory arena is not stable and the real story should be that every Australian LAME, aircrew and operator is unified in ensuring Australia has the safest skies in the world.

Hang out the dirty sheets - but let's all be a little more outcomes focussed when it comes to explaining the stains.

here endeth today's sermon :E
AT

[Lookleft]

767's, Special CASA investigation teams, accusations of failing maintenance standards due cost cutting. All you need are the intials TJ somewhere in the mix and I have a horrible feeling of deja vu all over again! I hope there are no expired AD's lurking in the paperwork otherwise QF 767 crews will have plenty of time to watch the Orympics.

There is no I in TEAM but there is one in PIC and that's whose license is on the line if there is not a safe outcome to a problem.

[teresa green]

I say, its a bit rough to blame poor ol TJ for all this, isn't it, isn't it? Putting aside all QF's problems, I want to know why the add for getting rid of your fat stomach is neally always in my posting:sad:!

[601]

concerned with recent media reporting about Qantas.

This woud be more correct

"concerned ABOUT recent media reporting about Qantas."

Wish we could get someone in the media who knows at least a little about the subject matter. And that goes for the so-called "CASA spokeperson"

[Wing Root]

I survived Flight QF19 to Manila (http://www.news.com.au/travel/story/0,26058,24123002-5014090,00.html) - By Cecille Higgins

Yes, you and everyone else love. She probably has a T-Shirt with that "headline" written on it. This article is so cringe inducing it's crazy. OK, we all know the punters don't understand triple redundant systems but what about this fuel dumping? Would you rather, to NOT dump fuel and land overweight??

The editorialising will be rife this week. I've already come across this in another article (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24121353-5007146,00.html)...

"Still in possession of the best safety record in the world, there's no denying something fishy is going on at the airline.”

Clearly the depressurisation is a major event. The others... well I would feel extremely happy if those could be the only problems I encounter in my career.

It's all pretty typical I suppose. But the one thing it should demonstrate to Qantas is how precious their record is. You can have all the frequent flyer programs in the world but all this WORLDWIDE media exposure must be doing major damage to them.

[wesky]

I'm just waiting for the Movie to come out...

[genex]

Brad Pitt as the gritty young Qantas Captain, flames and smoke all round but trying to do his best. George Clooney the wise old co-pilot who learned his trade in the Andes and PNG, will never again be a skipper himself and battling envy and yet filled with inate airmanship, helping the stricken jet as it swoops low over Port Botany ("Pull up skipper, there's a freaking crane ahead!!!") while dumping petrol.

Down the back, Sister Maria (Angeline Jollie) is sharing her rosary with the little polio victim in the stretcher next to her. She has waited all of her life for this moment. One Hydraulic system out!. Shock horror! She thinks of sisters from her Order who died in the Congo, who manage leprosy clinics, ho minister to the dying in hospices. But this, the loss of C system, has to be the worst ever.......

[pump up]

I woke up this morning, and managed to crawl put of bed (albeit slightly hung over.) So just like the Filipino woman in Cecile's article,"I guess it just wasn't my time!"

[Tidbinbilla]

Genex - already done in Flying High! (Airplane) :}

[teresa green]

CASA, save me, from the youngest apprentice on the hanger flr, to the Duty Engineer to the most Senior Captain, we all know that QF and CASA have been pis#ing in each other pockets for years. Many a time they have busted a small operation, but have never touched the Big Q. (And probably never will). No, the best we can hope for is that the beancounters, and Engineering management have had enough of a fright, to "revise" their heavy engineering operation, employ more engineers, (instead of firing them) and get engineering back onto straight and level. I would guess there is a lot of meetings in dark little corners all over the base at the moment, hoping to come up with a scapegoat,that they can present to the public.

[blow.n.gasket]

How about Geoff?
I hear he's leaving and taking his million$ before there is nothing left.