Qantas 747's damaged at Avalon . . .

[Pedota]

Qantas jets collide at airport
The Age

Advertisement
Two Qantas jumbo jets - including the plane involved in the Manila mid-air explosion last July - have collided while being towed at Avalon.

"Two 747s at our Avalon maintenance base have come into contact with each other during towing this morning," a Qantas spokesman said.

"Both aircraft sustained some damage, the extent of that is still being assessed."

The spokesman confirmed one of the planes was the aircraft that was forced to make an emergency landing earlier this year when its oxygen tank exploded mid-air, blowing a hole in the plane's fuselage.

Repairs to the aircraft involved in the July incident were undertaken in Manila by Boeing, but further work was being done at Avalon.

Those involved in this morning's collision, which occurred about 9.30am, have been stood down pending a full investigation, a Qantas spokesman said.

He said it was too early to determine the cause of the crash.

The airline believes both 747s will be out of action for at least a few days.

[Mech-prentice]

Hardly a surprise.
Story I've heard is a wingtip's been towed into the other aircraft's nose. Radome and forward pressure bulkhead, and wing leading edge both damaged.

Well done, Forstaff, and congratulations to the QF strategists who set Avalon up as our Centre of Excellence

Any chance of a photo?

[framer]

Get what you pay for is right. When will bean counters learn that in aviation the quick cheap way isn't often the quickest cheapest way, and when will idiot managers have the kahonies to say no to them?

[blackd]

I would remind those posting here that our fellow workers in this industry are involved with this incident. Recriminations aimed at FS and QF help no-one.

Despite the politics of the situation, there are many who earn their living at AVV HM. Calling the place names and saying how bad it is may only hasten the demise of 747 HM in Australia.

Please remember, too, that there are human beings, working people, who are at the centre of this storm, who now have their livelihoods at stake. Please spare a thought for them in their current state of mind. :sad:

[Buster Hyman]

Geez guys. Lighten up! It wasn't a hull loss so the records intact!:rolleyes:



;)

[packrat]

A certain tug driver might be looking for a new job come monday

[neville_nobody]

When will bean counters learn that in aviation the quick cheap way isn't often the quickest cheapest way, and when will idiot managers have the kahonies to say no to them?

When they stop performance bonuses, and mangers get paid to manage, not run the place into the ground.

[ampclamp]

here here blackd, I recoil when I read the venom that is posted here at times.Without knowing the circumstances too.
beyond the politics of the avv set up are ordinary workers doing what we do.Plenty of ex qantas/ex AN folks there too.And .. its not as if anyone at a Qantas base never ever dented a jet whilst towing.

If they've made a mistake they will have to suffer the consequences.

[K9P]

What......never had a towing accident in Sydney.......ever? LOL.

Don't know what's happening in our great great country, seems to be a lot of hate and bigitory developing. We have the best place on earth don't screw it up.

[fix767]

Interesting... when you damage a plane, Qantas spokesman David Cox said workers involved in the incident had been stood down “pending a full investigation”. . When you sell of the company Dixon said the $A11 billion ($US9 billion) deal from the consortium Airline Partners Australia (APA) had been "clouded by emotion", as board members and management stood to make huge personal gains."The real Achilles' heel was that it got very, very emotional -- principally because I and the senior management team were going to earn tens of millions of dollars as part of it. Go figure

[HireTheBetter]

Silly mistake we all agree on, but very minor and has happened many times before i am sure. Funny thing is that the news have just stated that "2 qantas aircraft at Avalon have collided on the RUNWAY ."

:rolleyes:

Usual media exageration.

HTB

[jet_mechanic]

With one aeroplane having its wing tip smashed and who know's the extent of damage to the wing front spar, and the other plane having its radome smashed off and a hole in the fwd pressure bulkhead - i think the structural damage would be quite extesive.

I have also heard that the plane under tow may have had its nose gear rotated past the 90deg mark, as then the tug slamed on his brake the plane kept on rolling sheering the tow bar :oh:

I hope all the people involved had their "Tow Safe" aprovals up to date :D

[RedTBar]

If they've made a mistake they will have to suffer the consequences.
ampclamp,thats fair enough but to be fair does this law apply to all employees within the group?

Does accountability extend to the upper floors as well?

[Torqueman]

I'm sure qantas are investigating the incident fully in order to find someone to blame and sack. No blame culture they say! I beg to differ.
This airline is now reaping the benefits of it's past ten years investment into the future of this industry in Australia, Training, Infrastructure, Goodwill it has shown to it's employees.

Of course, I am joking!

While I spare a thought for those involved, I have no sympathy for the company and hope they continue to reap what they sow. :suspect:

[Capt Wally]

I feel for the workers directly involved as someone else said they are only human. Obviously nobody would deliberately do it so it's just an accident/incident that can happen in any industry & does all the time.
The real concern will be QF's handling of this event. I hope the guy/s get a fair hearing but with QF's now continuous media attention I'll bet that QF will do all they can in the publics eyes to show that an individual is/was responsible & not QF's poor track record of the way they treat their workers contractors as well.
Did a B737 conversion to freighter not have a hanger incident some time back? Sh1t happens, as long as no one was hurt it's back to the panel beaters:)



CW

[Ken Borough]

Sh1t happens

It sure does, just like one day at Sydney Terminal when an A330 was pushed back with the aerobridge still attached.

As 'stuffing-up' is clearly not the sole preserve of contractors, perhaps some of the Qantas ginger-beers should maintain a discrete silence. Have they not heard of the adage that begins 'there for the grace of God.....'?

[equal]

anyone in the know willing to shed some light on how aircraft these sizes are towed around? obviously someone towing, extra eyes watching the rest of the plane? anyone in the cockpit while towing?

[another superlame]

Don't forget the time that the SIT tow and stow crew nearly took the wingtip off a -400 due to them shutting down all power and hydraulics before the body gear had a chance to lock in the straight forward position. This caused the aircraft to crab into the door of H96. Bugger

Or the time heavy maintenance was doing a reweigh in H271 and had the aircraft roll off the pads as they had set the brakes too many times before re-pressurising the accumulators. In this case it was good luck and not good management that saved the day.
The hangar doors were open to allow the tug access and this allowed the nose of the aircraft to roll through them rather than take them out.

The aircraft was stopped by an inadvertantly placed cargo tug. The damage ended being the fairing on the R WLG door. Another lucky escape.



At the end of the day it all comes down to a failure of company policy and procedures.
QF management is known for hiding behind the P & P manual, so somewhere along the line today the processes management have put in place failed and incident has happened.

The unfortunate guys on the floor might get a huge shafting for following the rules that their management have told them to follow.

[Qantas 787]

Before anyone points fingers at the people at AVV, SYD has a fairly decent track record. The A380 was slightly damaged just weeks ago. Wasn't EBW damaged in MEL when a truck ran into it?

Accidents do happen - let things take thier course but really, SYD has a fair track record of damaging aircraft.

[Mr.Buzzy]

One machine was the "Manila oxy. bottle popper" and the other was the "battery powered plane"

bbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzz

[Dazler]

P & P is there for a reason, be accountable for your actions, it's not lego! A bad carpenter blames their tools.....conversly, I do sympathize!

[capt.cynical]

http://static.pprune.org/images/icons//icon8.gif Meeja !!
The Bimbo S.S. reading the Ch. 10 news (Syd tonight) described it as a Qantas CHRASH.:ugh: Media who'd feed them.http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/pukey.gif

[another superlame]

Dazler I know the P & P is there for a reason, but it sucks when managers and the like hide behind it or update it on the run to save their own butts. This was a common move by one short ex SYD HM manager a few years ago

[ampclamp]

No mate accountability is selective at some levels as you imply but that is not the point I was making.
I think what I was saying was if they have a case to answer taking into account the million things that will be MEDA'ed tap rooted etc they'll be dealt with. What we need first are the facts before judgement is passed.

cheers,
ac.

[hadagutfull]

Who will get the blame..... the poor bastard who is the PIC (person in charge)... the towing policy covers every possible scenario with the same statement..." The person in charge will ensure that..... blah blah blah"

so... continue to tow at your own peril, knowing that full well that if anything goes wrong... even if it gets hit by lightning during a tow, the PIC will be blamed and asked to touch his toes and hold tight.....

As for towing around the ever shrinking jet base.... try dragging a 744 between h131 and the run bay when the blast fence is in the southern position and an aircraft is in w14.... who is to blame if you whack a winglet.... PIC.
never the :mad:ing idiots who build the shyte in the way.

Hope the guys in Avalon get a slap on the wrist only.... but with this culture of blame thats festered in this place, who knows

[the rim]

my my my....it was only a few months ago that LAME's were sticking together for the first time and we needed too ...now we are bagging LAME's at the first chance without any real info....how many of us have not made a mistake...lets support the guy's involed,and dont bother to tell me that i have not used correct grammer or used a few more commers as i dont care we are engineers not english teachers

[Hempy]

Video showing some of the damage here (http://www.theage.com.au/travel/what-a-drag-qantas-jets-collide-at-airport-20081118-6a4h.html)

Had to laugh when they said "both planes are expected to be out of commission at least until the weekend"...

[employes perspective]

another superlame,that 744 run away in H71,was an accumulator failure not a crew mistake,very scary:sad:

[another superlame]

EP sorry about that, we got the other story on our shift. Still very lucky either way you look at it

[QF94]

AH! Yes!...qantas...the worlds best and safest airline!...


Now they are the "World's most experienced airline". I believe this was Pan Am's slogan back in 1961. QANTAS can't even come up with their own slogan. How much did they pay for someone to steal that and use it?

Anyway, the incident at AVV today was most unfortunate, but the usual OOH AHH brigade will be out in full force, and out will come the pointing fingers shifting the blame on the guys involved.

Not only will the PIC be held responsible, but all involved on both aircraft will more than likely undergo a drug and alcohol test, not to mention the rabbits that may have witnessed the incident.

Now we'll just have to await the torrent of e-mails and ammended procedures to towing after this incident. These incidents have been around since year dot, and will continue to happen, no matter what procedure is in place, or which idiot manager writes them. It's a thing called "Human Factors". I'm sure all in QF have attended a HF course over recent years. Who knows how much O/T has been worked by the people involved, or the shift they've been on. So long as none were under the influence of alcohol or drugs, it will be, for all intent and purposes, an accident. N one goes ot of their way to intentionally damage an aircraft or their own reputation.

Maybe QF management are the ones who need to be tested.

[enemy commander]

a parting gift to you geoff from the LAMES OF EBA 8

[teresa green]

My understanding it has to be a LAME on the flight deck when being towed, not a AME is this correct. Anyway sh$t happens, its happened before and will happen again. (Must say though that 747/400 involved in the oxy incident is starting to look like my wifes car. Best time is when they got ol EBB's wing caught behind a power pole on the base,the more pushing and shoving the more she got stuck. ( I happened to be in the crew) we stood and watched for some time, (very entertaining) in the end they took the pole out after cutting of the power, big problem being nobody told anybody in Admin 1, so the techies and c/c were stuck in the lifts along with ground staff. All flights were delayed up to three hours or more as hot and bothered crews and staff were rescued, some of the girls were slightly distraught to say the least, we were ok we were only doing a MEL, those who were heading up the track, had the total S$its, no sense of humour what so ever. :E Hope nobody gets into to much trouble over this at Avalon, but knowing the company.......... there will be a witchhunt. :uhoh:

[the rim]

yep teresa green it was called wing tip growth in them days and its the same now happens when you try to turn one of these big babies the wing gets longer

[FMU]

You're spot on RIM. Maybe it's time to reissue that maint memo of 20 years ago that explained "wing tip growth"!!

[barrybeebone]

Is there any Qantas pilot that has anything positive to say about the company? Why is it that any mistake/accident is automatically because of the decision to cut costs and make management changes? There are other reasons..believe it or not!

[Capt Kremin]

I think you'll find that 99% of the posts on this thread aren't from Qantas pilots. Qantas LAMES and ex-LAMES seem to make up the vast bulk. I am not sure what Obie is..... (hopefully under full-time supervision!)

[Tidbinbilla]

Obie aka Amos2 won't be posting on this thread for a little while.:=

[Mstr Caution]

For those Classic drivers destined for type conversions & the FE's about to be made redundant sit tight the classic might be around a bit longer then December.

MC:8

[aveng]

"My understanding it has to be a LAME on the flight deck when being towed, not a AME is this correct"

Not anymore ppm was changed during the PIA, now any duly trained person with a tow safe card - another inconvenient truth!:ok:

[the rim]

yep FMU but i think the first time wing tip growth memo came out it may have been something like 30plus years ago when we first starting getting the 74's stuck at the end of h131 untill they got rid of that light pole

[Flight Detent]

How much truth is there in the rumour I heard about the repair of the airplane at Manila following the inflight oxy incident?

I heard the Phillipinos would not allow QF to use their hangerspace to repair the damage, it had to be temporary repaired out in the open, then given a dispensation to fly back to Oz to get repaired, which is where it is right now, I guess!

I heard a payback from PA!

Anymore details anyone?

Cheers...FD...:ouch:

[Keg]

There was initially no hangar space available in MNL. The aircraft was repaired to and positioned to Avalon to complete the refit of the aircraft interior which was not able to be done in MNL. I'm not sure if additional aiframe work was required in Avalon or not.

The crew that flew it from Manila to Avalon were the crew on board the flight when the oxy bottle blew.

[Going Boeing]

FD, I'd ignore the source of your info. There was a delay in getting hangar space from Lufthansa Technic but when it was taken into the hangar, a large part of the work was done by Qantas engineers, with the main structural work done by Boeing engineers. The following was posted on Qrewroom by the Captain who experienced the incident (and as Keg said, also flew it to Avalon along with the F/O):-
I had a look at the outside last night. Really quite an amazing sight. No skin repairs at all (i.e. panels and doublers); they've used new panels. The sections that have been replaced are huge, extending many feet forward and aft of the damage.

Two complete frames were replaced, and a number of stringers. These weren't spliced/repaired, but replaced at the normal manufacturing junctions. The R2 door was replaced. I can't imagine how complex the work on the wiring and cable runs must have been.

I haven't been inside yet, we'll have a look there later today after the test flight. Apparently seating etc that was removed has been packaged up and is in the hold, and that's why it's going to Avalon.

[teresa green]

Yep, thats where it was outside the hanger with the canteen. (we went in there and bought some pies) and sat on our nav bags and watched the fun. There seemed to be more chiefs than indians, as everybody had a opinion as to how to get her out. In the end she was stuck like a rat up a drainpipe. The engineers told us a Herc had done the same thing after a engine runup a few days earlier.

[Jet Crew]

a mate just emailed me a link to some pics

http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/9130/towstacktz9.jpg
http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/7382/towstack2hp4.jpg

[Jet Crew]

You mean this one :ugh:

also in my email with the other pics :mad:

found this article to :ugh:


Qantas flight halted just before takeoff as wing damage spotted | Herald Sun (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24691096-5005961,00.html)
A NEW Zealand-bound Qantas flight had to be aborted minutes before takeoff when wing damage was discovered by an engineer at Sydney airport today.

The Christchurch-bound Qantas 747-300 was taxiing towards the runway at 9.15am (AEST) when an engineer noticed damage to its right wing flap.

The engineer notified the pilot, who aborted the flight.
Qantas said all 213 passengers on the plane have been given accommodation and meal vouchers, and booked on another flight tomorrow.

The damage was being assessed, a spokeswoman for the airline said.

The aborted flight is the latest mishap in recent months to plague the flying kangaroo.

In July a Qantas 747 had its belly torn open when an oxygen tank exploded on a flight over Manila, sparking an Australian Transport Safety Bureau investigation.

And in October a Qantas plane suffered a dramatic midair plunge on a flight from Singapore to Perth, where the plane fell 200m in 20 seconds, hurling unrestrained passengers around the cabin.

About 40 passengers were taken to hospital after the plane made an emergency landing in Learmonth, nea

http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/941/sydincidentjy7.jpg
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/6269/syd2fy3.jpg

[Jet Crew]

They will most likelly remove it. Just thought the pics might let people see the damage.

Hate the crap the media has with Qantas,

Qantas this and Qantas that, They just need to spend a day with another airline !!! :ugh::ugh:

[Capt Wally]

Fair enough although the pix where available on TV 2nite in ML anyway, odd how the MOD/s think they know better! The Media like a story & airlines especially QF always gets peoples attention & therefore has a flow on effects for the advertisers, the ones that really own a media outlet.


CW

[HotDog]

Looks like #14 Kreuger flap panel jammed on the outboard side during flap extension. They were lucky it was spotted from the outside as the flap drive unit was extended and would have indicated green on the LE flap annunciator and position indicator. Once again the Media did their usual sensationalist reporting. I think a turn back rather than an aborted T/O would have been more appropriate.

[Capt Wally]

'HotDog' I guess the ram or screwjack or whatever drives them out has enoug grunt to wreck a jammed one? Could the damage have been made by impact forces unbeknown to the person/s involved then was only noticed when extension was made? Just curious as unknown impact damage to planes wouldn't be all that unusual I'd say.


CW

[mrdeux]

The unfortunate guys on the floor might get a huge shafting for following the rules that their management have told them to follow.Perhaps, more likely, for not following them.

[Tankengine]

"I think a turn back rather than an aborted T/O would have been more appropriate." :confused:

?? Hotdog, the aircraft did not abort the T/O, simply taxied back to gate when damage noticed.:ugh:

mutter, mutter, chinese whispers, dumped 60k fuel, landed short runway, pilot didn't have licence etc etc................

[ACMS]

are you sure that's a photo of a Qantas 747? the colours above the wing look more like Cathay than a white Qantas fuselage?

[HotDog]

Tankengine, you've missed my point. I was quoting the news report which said they aborted takoff.:ugh:

[HotDog]

Capt Wally, I have several thousand hours on the Classic 747 but have never seen this kind of damage before. What you suggest is possible however. The panel may have suffered FOD on the previous landing and was missed after flap retraction but could have caused it to jam on subsequent extension.

ACMS, you are right the colours don't look like QF but Cathay do not operate the 74 into Sydney other than Cargo and they certainly weren't involved.

[SeldomFixit]

The 2 seperate tears would seem to indicate a jammed o/b drive.

[Capt Wally]

Tnxs 'HotDog' am just thinking of other causes that's all. Close examination of the flap in the pix tends to show to me that perhaps it was jammed for unknown reasons & by the looks of it the attatchment point for the jack is at the L/H end (or close to it) meaning the jack pushed that part out but the panel failed about mid point, just an observation. Previous damage in some form is a very real possability however I think.



CW

[ACMS]

Yes I know we don't operate 74's into SYD apart from the Freighter.

Who said the photo was really taken at Sydney Airport?????

Although you can see a QF Red high lift device parked at the rear cargo, which means it's probably taken somewhere in Australia.

[TWT]

You couldn't miss that damage on the walkaround.Must have happened on the taxi out ?

[Keg]

What I find a bit strange is the CHC bound flight at 9:15 is a 767 service. I know it is because I was scheduled to fly it. I'm desperately hoping that this classic wasn't the replacement a/c because I ended up not going to CHC. If it was then those punters have had a seriously ordinary day. Delayed from 0915 to 1330 and then delayed again! :eek:

[Tankengine]

Sorry Hotdog, I am afraid you missed mine, re-read the news article: nothing about aborted takeoff.:hmm:
This is how mountains are made of molehills!:eek:

TWT, flaps selected after pushback/engine start, hence not seen on walk around. Indicator on drive [extended] so no cockpit indication so well spotted by engineer!:ok:

What would have happened on flap retraction if not picked up?:confused:

[HotDog]

Tankengine, I was watching Sky News where they stated that the flight aborted take off. Anyhow, hardly a point worth arguing about. OK?

[HotDog]

Seldom fixit, The 2 seperate tears would seem to indicate a jammed o/b drive

MM 27-81-00: The flap is supported by four hinges which attach to fittings in the fixed wing leading edge. The two centre hinges are closely spaced and provide the attachment for the single flap transmission assembly which will position the flap.

There is only one drive per panel.

An update: The above configuration is for early model B747s like the last fleet I operated. Qantas and other B200-300 series have in fact two rotary actuators per Kreuger panel, driven by one drive unit through a drive shaft. Your theory could well be correct.

[ZK-NSJ]

the chc qf45/46 service is normally operated by the 767, however on busier days and for operational requirements, 747's are sometimes used, back in the day it used to be a daily 744,

[Keg]

Worst suspicions confirmed. Those poor punters.

ZK, aircraft was originally scheduled at 0915 as a 767. It was re-scheduled at 1330 as a classic. I won't go into specifics as to why but the passengers had a seriously ordinary day.

[ZK-NSJ]

what did they send over today, with yesterdays load plus todays it would have been rather full.

just noted on tonights news, that the flight today was also delayed,
not many happy faces in the arrivals hall in christchurch

[Super VC-10]

Story here:- AFP: Qantas takeoff aborted as damaged wing spotted (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h59jREe7F29fsbf0ySaHLgmcui_Q)

[aussiepax]

Attention mods, this topic is already here inside a D & G thread.

http://www.pprune.org/d-g-reporting-points/351426-qantas-747s-damaged-avalon-4.html

Oh, it's an acronym, not a word OK ,..... QANTAS = Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Service. There is no need for a U.

[merlinxx]

Only dips*ts put the 'U' in there:}

[Urshtnme]

I've just seen the 6pm news about this latest problem that Qantas have had and it just seems that you can't please passengers!! I really feel for you guys that have to deal with any passengers!!

So there was some pretty severe damage to the wing, the crew decided not to fly (good decision in my mind) so the passengers decide to whinge and moan about how much longer they had to wait around.

Heaven forbid if the crew did nothing about the wing and went flying anyway. Can you imagine the possible outcome if they did? Do you think all those whinging passengers would be complaining then? NO, cause they'd probably all be dead!

You just can't please anyone these days.

[priapism]

The punters were whinging because the replacement aircraft was not on line at the time they were told it would be and then sat on the ground for another 2 hours before taking off. Punters naturally angry - arriving 24 hours late for a trans-tasman trip is unacceptable for the world's most experienced airline. It wasn't that the original aircraft was out of service , but the fact they were dicked around afterwards. Fair enough gripe I'd reckon.

[Capt Wally]

Any experienced 747 drivers out there know what the result is (lift/drag etc) if the Kreuger flap had have worked for T/Off but failed when next extented for ldg?



CW

[gas path]

Any experienced 747 drivers out there know what the result is (lift/drag etc) if the Kreuger flap had have worked for T/Off but failed when next extented for ldg?

Not a 'driver' BUT I can tell you that with the Kreugers on one side folded UP vertically above the wing there is a need for 0.02 epr increase (JT9d) a bit of rudder trim and a couple of tonnes extra fuel burn on a 7.5 hour sector.:8

It happened to one of our early classics many moons ago. It was the type with the screwjack operating mechanism. The screwjacks failed and the kruegars on the right wing were folded UP by the airflow. Nobody noticed because it was a night flight and the flap indication worked normally as expected....Didn't 'alf look strange though!:ooh:

hope no one minds me poking my nose into the D&G forum!

[Going Boeing]

CW, I've never experienced a flight control problem in the air but from my experiences in the simulator, I believe that there would be a noticable tendency to roll but there would be more than enough aileron control to compensate - even with more than one panel not correctly deployed. When the flaps are extended, the outboard ailerons are active to assist the inboard ailerons with roll control (along with differential spoilers).

[NZ1009]

As a frequent passenger, I would like to ask the following question: Given that something like this can happen, with no indication to the flight crew, would it be better to have a procedure that the aircraft is fully configured for take-off while there is still someone around on the ground to do a final visual check.

From my experience as a passenger, more often than not, the flaps/slats are set part-way through the taxi to the take-off point and this problem (or maybe a worse one) would not be detected.

[Ron & Edna Johns]

NZ1009, on all Qantas Boeing aircraft the flaps are lowered to the take-off position BEFORE the engineer walks away from the aircraft and BEFORE the aircraft commences taxiing away. Can't comment on Qantas Airbus aircraft (have never flown them and procedures can vary subtly ) but I think they do it the same way.

[blackd]

For those who wish to know:

The Kreuger flap group is driven by one leading edge flap drive motor that includes a mech. feedback. This feedback supplies the position signal for flap position ind. system. The motor is located in the L/E gap behind #15 Kreuger.

The flaps themselves are driven by a folding linkage system on the I/B & O/B ends of the individual flap panels. These linkages are, in turn, driven by a rotary actuator, these actuators being ganged together in a tandem fashion by torque tubes.

For this sort of damage to happen is very unusual, as the O/B actators appear not to have turned, yet the I/B set have. As the drive is transmitted through the O/B actators (2), if they jam the drive torque should not be able to be transmitted to the I/B actuators, thus preventing what you see here-a broken panel. The system should just stop. Kreuger flaps are very stiff, flat panels. They are not designed to flex like the (further O/B) Variable Camber L/E flaps.

http://img106.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=94949_Kreuger_Flap_122_33lo.jpg

FYI, older -100 & SP 747's have a screwjack mechanism to drive the Kreuger's in place of the linkages.

[framer]

would it be better to have a procedure that the aircraft is fully configured for take-off while there is still someone around on the ground to do a final visual check.

Thats a great idea, and probably why qantas does it. There has been a push to have people other than engineers pushing the a/c back. This is a good example of why that is a bad idea. It is another cost cutting idea that will cost money in the long run and maybe more.

[NSEU]

Hate the crap the media has with Qantas,

Qantas this and Qantas that, They just need to spend a day with another airline !!!

Good point.... Was there any mention of the Malaysian Airlines air turnback on the same day ex-Sydney in the media. The gear wouldn't retract, so they had to dump fuel and return to SYD. The hook/lock mechanism on one of the bogeys failed.

Rgds.
NSEU

[Keg]

Thats a great idea, and probably why qantas does it.

QF moved to 'Boeing common procedures' a bunch of years back. I suspect it's a Boeing thing. Any DJ 737 drivers care to comment? Do you guys select take off flaps prior to disconnect of the tug?

[Yusef Danet]

Yep, at VB we extend the flaps to takeoff setting as the first item of the after start scan, as soon as the last engine is started. At the end of that scan the recall is checked then the engineer is bade farewell.

The Eastern part of DJ does it a little different, setting the flap when the dispatch signal is received from the gingerbeer.

Perversely the difference is due to fear of banging a Powerpush, even though PB use them at only one small port and VB use them at 6 or more ports. Must be something someone brought from JetConnect.

[ampclamp]

In the domestic arena in Oz flaps/slats are usually extended whilst the engineer is still hooked up.I always look but there is no specific instruction to check for this.Tech crew just look at the lights.
Some airlines dont use tech trained dispatch people so could go un-noticed.Its an unusual event in any case .

[satos]

Remember the oz jet landing incident,similar circumstances and they were lucky to get back on the ground.Well done to the the ground engineer who spotted the the u/s krueger flap.

[Buster Hyman]

Hate the crap the media has with Qantas,

Qantas this and Qantas that, They just need to spend a day with another airline !!!
Suck it in Princess, there's no AN punching bag around to deflect attention now!;)

[The Bungeyed Bandit]

For Christ's sake Buster. Build a bridge and get over it. Move on with your life. AN died 8 years ago and she aint coming back!!!

[Buster Hyman]

....:ugh:

Perhaps the :wink: smiley is too subtle for some.....:rolleyes:

[hadagutfull]

Many many years ago when China airlines / Air China (If my memory serves) flew the 747SP, The crew would ask the engineer to physically check and confirm the flaps were extended before disconnect.

Never been an official procedure in QF to my knowledge to inform the techies of confirmation of flap extension.

[Keg]

Don't the RAAFies check flap extension and retraction prior to each sortie?

[NZ1009]

Thanks for the replies. From what I can gather, a member of the tech crew does a walk around when the slats/flaps are stowed, the aircraft is eventually pushed back, engines started, wings totally reconfigured for flight either before or shortly after the ground engineer disconnects (if thats what dispatched means). However, even if the wings are reconfigured while the ground engineer is still connected, checking them is not an item on their checklist. So it was just through luck, rather than good procedures, that in this case the problem was detected prior to take-off.

[Agony]

Keg,

The Aircraft I flew had the flaps run out and in while a member of the crew was outside doing a walk around inspection and it was a co-ordinated task to check flaps, ailerons, rudders, landing and taxi lights for each walk around. We then taxi'd with the flaps in the take off position. One of the reasons for this is that the flaps in the take off position also assisted emergency egress from the overwing exits.

My current aircraft deploys the flaps to the take off position after engine start, which can be just before or after the engineer disconnects depending on the speed of things. The exception to this is if operating in cold weather ops where the flaps are extended at the holding point, due slush etc.

Cheers

[the rim]

get over it ....these things happen with older aircraft do we want the engineer to stay hooked up till the aircraft gets airbourne so he ....or she can see something thats not right and tell the crew....get real if its not right the flt deck indications will tell them...on later aircraft lets all do our jobs correctly ............i sometimes live in the past but we all should move forward....aircraft have so should we......

[framer]

So it was just through luck, rather than good procedures, that in this case the problem was detected prior to take-off.

I wouldn't call it luck. It's the sort of thing that you can count on when everyone involved in the operation sees aviation as a career, not a job to do for a few months until they move on and load trucks or drive taxis.

NZ1009, sounds like you are looking really really hard to find a negative view of this....total of two posts...pretty much zero knowledge of operations.......not a journo are you? If not I apologize for the inference and welcome to PPRUNE, how long have you been interested in aviation? What sort of licence do you have? Do you aspire to the airlines or have you just become interested in this push-back because it caught your eye?
Regards, Framer.

[sexy beast]

Hi All

qf lame in flight deck;
qf lame driving tug;
forstaff ame phones [ first time on headset];
forstaff wing walkers

the tug driver instructed the poor bastard on the phones to have a go , he was in the tug ,he should have been walking beside the tug watching the wing walkers, his leading hand the tug driver should have given better info to the first timer.
The tug driver was going to fast , GUNG HO WAS THE TERM USED !!!

[another superlame]

Sexy beast if these are the facts, and I don't doubt you, then this is going to hurt for those involved I would think.
Driving a tug too fast whilst towing is just stupid, I had a tug driver floor it once when pushing back from SIT because I woke him from his slumber, I had to run to keep up, not a pleasant experience.

[satos]

the rim
get over it ....these things happen with older aircraft do we want the engineer to stay hooked up till the aircraft gets airbourne so he ....or she can see something thats not right and tell the crew....get real if its not right the flt deck indications will tell them...on later aircraft lets all do our jobs correctly ............i sometimes live in the past but we all should move forward....aircraft have so should we......
Pretty daft comment.It sounds like you are supporting a Lame less tarmac.Lame's are highly trained and can spot defects that even the pilots have missed.I will give you one example, a few years ago here in oz the first officer had completed his preflight external walk on a B737.They were already to go when the Lame notified the captain to tell him the no1 engine had suffered a bird strike and some fan blades were damaged.On further investigation after a borescope inspection more bent blades were found in the high press compressor rotor assy.The engine was then removed for rectification..To the untrained eye this bird strike damage was not readily evident and the aircraft would of been sent on its way with a possible in flight shut down.

[NZ1009]

>NZ1009, sounds like you are looking really really hard to find a negative view
>of this....total of two posts...pretty much zero knowledge of
>operations.......not a journo are you?
> If not I apologize for the inference and welcome to PPRuNe,

Not trying hard at all with just two posts - was going to do a third one along the lines of:

So some tech crew configure the flaps/slats while the ground engineer is still connected, I guess in the expectation they will receive some comment if there is a problem. But we are told by 'ampclamp' "but there is no specific instruction to check for this.Tech crew just look at the lights." which is apparently okay because, as 'ampclamp' states, "Its an unusual event in any case ." (for things to go wrong). As for the tech crew just looking at the lights, that is also okay because, as stated by 'the rim', "get real if its not right the flt deck indications will tell them" but, of course, the flight deck indications didnt tell them in this case.

Talk about left hand / right hand and blind faith in electronics / computers!

Thanks for both the apology and welcome. Not really sure why the rest is relevant but you did ask and if I don't respond I will be branded as a journo.

>how long have you been interested in aviation?

Since I was about 10 years old I guess. Did get accepted into the RNZAF as a pilot trainee but a small medical condition they later uncovered put paid to that (my PPrune nick-name is the serial number of an RNZAF Harvard training aircraft inspired by a rather neat photo that came out when I was a kid).

>What sort of licence do you have?

Just a PPL, most SE ratings, about 300 (big deal, I know) hours or so in C152 - C210 plus some gliding time plus lots of real flight time as a sky-diver.

>Do you aspire to the airlines or have you just become interested in this
>push-back because it caught your eye?

No, never did aspire to join the airlines. An academic in an Australian University in the computing area, currently on sabbatical in the Northern Hemisphere (which is why I post in the middle of the night - so no, not a journo creating the morning edition).

I guess I am interested in this because, as far as I know, larger aircraft will be lucky to get of the ground if there is a significant problem with the flaps/slats and this will not become apparent until they are at high speed near the end of the runway. Most other flight safety components are inspected in their take-off configuration so was just wondering about the checking procedure for this rather significant item. Cant say the overall picture from the responses fills me with much confidence. I guess configuring for landing is different as there is a lot more time available to diagnose a problem and maybe you can still land with flaps/slats retracted(?)

Have sent my details by PM so you can check me out on the Internet using Google if you like. It will confirm that I really am just SLF with a little interest in my own self preservation.

[the rim]

satos i think you missed the point that i was making ....i am against a lame-less tarmac and yes with the pilot as well as the lame doing a walkaround is the best ...but how long after push back does the lame need to be there...thats all

[sexy beast]

Hi Superlame,
just to let you know one of the aircraft involved in the towing incident left Avalon @1440hrs vh-ojm had extensive repairs carried out to the o/b l/h wing where it contacted the radome of ojk.
The repairs were carried out by a team of Forstaff sheetmetal workers who did an excellent job under great pressure from the boys in suits
I hope the put on a barbie for the people involved!

REGARDS ,SEXY BEAST

[Buster Hyman]

...at the very least, a Roast!!!

[satos]

the rim

satos i think you missed the point that i was making ....i am against a lame-less tarmac and yes with the pilot as well as the lame doing a walkaround is the best ..Apologies mate I might of jumped the gun there.

.but how long after push back does the lame need to be there...thats allI think the Lame should be there till just after the aircraft is set up in its takeoff configuration.
Cheers mate.

[Hempy]

http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k144/h3mpy/18112008004.jpg

http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k144/h3mpy/18112008001.jpg

[framer]

NZ1009,

Good stuff mate, I have to admit I really did think you were a journo but added the questions to make it look like I was giving benefit of doubt.:O

300hrs is probably enough to have an appreciation of the constant trade off between safety and getting the job done. There is always a trade off ,otherwise we would never start the engines for fear of an engine fire.
The question is where do we draw the line?
eg Did you have a LAME do a walk around of your C152 after engine start and do a "sniff check" to ensure no fuel/oil leaks , no obstructions in front of prop etc? Of course not. Would it be a good idea to do that on an airliner? Sure....what size though? A 19 seat turbo prop? Fifty seat turbo-prop? Jet a/c only? Wide-bodies only? Where is that line ???
If you ask the bean-counters who employ LAMES you will get a different answer than if you ask the LAMES, or the A380 captain, or the SLF.
I personally think a specific check by the LAME that the leading edge devices are out is a good idea.
Have fun up north . Cheers for the PM, Framer.

[Ngineer]

Nice pics Hempy. I also liked the one by Jet Crew on page 3. Does anyone know if the black plastic and tape on Jet Crews pics was a perm or temp repair?

[max autobrakes]

Only permanent if it was high speed tape.:}

[mention1]

The 743 with the flap problem in SYD was 2 sectors away from being retired.:uhoh:

It will now be repaired at a cost of nearly $1 mill so it can be flown to Arizona for scrapping.

[Going Boeing]

The 743 with the flap problem in SYD was 2 sectors away from being retired.

It will now be repaired at a cost of nearly $1 mill so it can be flown to Arizona for scrapping.

I thought that they could get the parts cheaply off EBU, the long term blue resident of Avalon.

[Willoz269]

A Cathay 744 being towed at AMS collided with a parked KLM MD11 with damage to both aeroplanes in full view of passengers and media....and you know what? People moved on!

[Keg]

The 743 with the flap problem in SYD was 2 sectors away from being retired.

Actually, I think it had been retired. It was called in to operate the CHC service after a 767 went u/s.

[mention1]

I have a question. I have heard that Qantas will never scrap an aircraft on home soil. This is for 2 reasons;

1. The environmental damage is too great or unlawful. I.e. there are a lot of fluids to mop up and also depleted Uranium in the mass-balances.

2. Qantas won't allow a scrapping in Oz because its just too detrimental to their Public Relations.

If this is true, why have they let VH-EBU rot in the open in Avalon? It will obviously never fly again. Anyone know the story?

[rmm]

I have heard that Qantas will never scrap an aircraft on home soil.

I don't know if that's their policy or not but, you can always contain the fluids
if the area is set up right. The mass balance weights are bolt on items so these
could easily be removed and disposed of correctly.

As for public relations I could see no reason why it could not be disassembled inside a hangar out of Joe Public's view.

I believe there are some issues with the sealants that are used between lap and butt joints when the aluminum goes
to the furnace but I would think there would some work arounds by now especially with the large amount of metal
processed out of the bone yards in the US.

[simsalabim]

I find this very interesting but what is a "mass balance" item ? I have tried googling it but nothing.

[Hempy]

simsalabin,

Boeing stopped using depleted Uranium as counterweights in the 1980's, but it was used as a trim weight (denser than lead) on outboard elevator and upper rudder assemblies.

[mustafagander]

simsalabim,

Mass balancing gives equal mass about the hinge line. Flight control surfaces MUST be "mass balanced" to avoid in flight flutter and, simply, destruction of the airframe.

Obviously, the smallest physical mass of "stuff" which will balance is best, hence dense metals. As it happens, depleted uranium is more dense than lead and can be protected, or more to the point kept out of contact with people like us, by proper surface treatment. It is not a good idea to work the depleted uranium using any sort of tools unless you know what you are up to and are properly protected.

[Torqueman]

Try this link

Civil aircraft register - Search CASA's aircraft register (http://www.casa.gov.au/casadata/regsearch/findairs.asp)

Put in EBU

It is not even registered anymore.

And here's Qantas taking 'servicable' parts of it for their current fleet.

ie. fwd pressure bulkhead I hear!

[UPPERLOBE]

How is a deregistered aircraft not fit to be a parts source, the bone yards would go broke pronto.

Perhaps we should get that rudder off OJA after all it came out of the bone yard, ex EBS.

[another superlame]

Torqueman I think you are being told crap. The fwd bulkhead would not be a component that you swap between aircraft.
I could be wrong, but all the rivet holes would be drilled aircraft specific rather than using a drill jig. So using a second hand item would require lots of oversized fastener holes.
Not something you want in the pressure bulkhead.

[blueloo]

Yes no mucking around with dodgy pressure bulkhead repairs.... as JAL (via a Boeing repair) found out - a very delicate bit of gear. I remember seeing on Nat Geo very recently the boeing team repairing an Air Seychelles 767 aft pressure bulkhead - they werent taking any chances.... (well so it appeared to the viewer).

[another superlame]

This thread needs a wind.

I am told that this incident was a result of a lack of local towing procedures and nothing else.
Next time they will have to back the aircraft away from the parking mark before they start to turn, it seems that the extra length of the tow bar and tug were not taken into consideration until this incident.

Apparently the engineers involved did not lose their jobs, can't confirm or deny this point.

[Going Boeing]

Also, what is the status of OJK - is it back in service?

[Bankstown]

VH-OJK returned to service on January 18.