QF Incident in Hong Kong

[demon_duck]

So what happened to the QF aircraft that was escorted by fire trucks in Hong Kong today? Aborted T/O? engine fire?

Where's the rumours?

DD :)

[LapSap]

Well I believe it was QF30 in the wars again. (coincidentally on the day that the intermediate investigation report into the cylinder rupture was released).
Rejected T/O from fairly high speed apparently and small brake fire ensued.
Aircraft sitting on the stand-off on the western apron. Flight cancelled.
Dunno the reason for the RTO.

[hadagutfull]

Ive heard through the traps that it need an engine change..... not sure what let go though..

HAECO should have a "pool spare" donk strapped on in no time

[Leatherdog]

Absolute rubbish journalism

Engine bang halts Qantas take-off
By David Southwellnews.com.auNovember 18, 2009 04:11pm+-PrintEmailShare
A QANTAS passenger plane taking off from Hong Kong was brought to a screeching halt after a pilot heard "a loud bang" from the engine.
QF30, a 747 Jumbo with 313 passengers onboard, was heading to Melbourne from Hong Kong International Airport at 9.55am local time yesterday (1:55pm AEDT yesterday) when it came to an abrupt halt.

Clasina Cue, a Melbourne grandmother and former airport worker, was aboard along with her friend, Lisa Taliana, also from Melbourne with both returning from a Hong Kong holiday.

Both say the plane was nearing taking off speed.

“The plane's nose was a bit up in the air,” Ms Cue said.

Ms Taliana was not sure on that point.

“There was a big bang and a shudder. The pilot slammed the brakes and stopped the plane. It had been close to the point of no return.”

A Qantas spokesperson confirms it was a "high-speed rejected take-off" but denies the nose was off the ground.

Both Ms Cue and Ms Taliana said they could smell smoke in the cabin, Ms Cue believed it was from the “screeching” tyres.

Ms Cue and Ms Taliana both praised the pilot.

“It was the pilot’s quick thinking. We could have gone up in the air. It could have been a lot worse,” said Ms Cue.

“I’m just thankful we’re not dead,” said Ms Taliana.

“The pilot did an awesome job. Not taking off was the best thing he could have possibly done.”

Both said all the passengers aboard an apparently fully-laden plane were very calm, there were no screams.

“It just happened so quickly,” Ms Cue said.

“There was a baby crying but no one appeared to be hurt.”

The passengers were told to stay in their seats and then the pilot’s voice came over the speakers.

“He said we weren’t in any danger but it seemed one of the engines had blown,” Ms Taliana said.

The airport’s fire brigade were on hand and engineers jumped into the engine that showed no sign of damage.

The plane sat on the runway until the tyres cooled and then it was towed to an area safe for the passengers to disembark.

The Qantas spokesperson said there had been no cockpit indications of engine failure but it was later found that the engine needed new compressor blades.

The spokesperson could not say why there was no cockpit indicator of a problem before the bang alerted the pilot.

The passengers went back through Hong Kong Customs and were put up in an airport hotel.

Ms Cue and Ms Taliana were expecting to fly out of Hong Kong today but were told they could get on a Cathay Pacific flight that left Hong Kong yesterday.

Neither were impressed that they weren’t told it was a indirect flight, meaning a stopover in Adelaide.

Both are back in Melbourne.

Ms Cue says she finds the whole thing “quite funny in the end” and “just one of those things.”

As a former airport worker she says there are lots of similar incidents from many airlines that never get reported.

Qantas planes have been bedevilled with numerous incidents over the past couple of years.

There have been union claims that safety is being compromised with maintenance work being outsourced to overseas terminals.

The Qantas spokesperson however said the plane in question had been maintained in Sydney.

[40Deg STH]

Imagine if we flew, like these reporters wrote their articles. We would all be driving garbage trucks. Carrying the garbage these jokers waste good ink printing.

Note to self; Only read quality publications:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[LEvans]

Ms Cue and Ms Taliana were expecting to fly out of Hong Kong today but were told they could get on a Cathay Pacific flight that left Hong Kong yesterday.

Neither were impressed that they weren’t told it was a indirect flight, meaning a stopover in Adelaide.

So.... They got home on the same day, on a different airline that QF didn't have to provide to them...and they still find something to complain about!?

[Spaz Modic]

:} Rumour is the mod is a QF FO :8

[blow.n.gasket]

Imagine the indignation if they had been sent home with the other Qantas Group airline???:}

[p.j.m]

apparently Qantas problems are caused by "Cosmic Rays" :)

'Cosmic rays' may have caused Qantas jet's plunge (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/cosmic-rays-may-have-caused-qantas-jets-plunge-20091118-ilei.html)

[zube]

I'm still wondering what this "point of no return" Mrs Taliana was talking about. No doubt she is an expert on things aviation so the reporter would be eating it up. Hey, throw the dog a bone.

Are there any journos in the country who have actually got a private pilots licence, and have a basic knowledge of what's going on out there.

[Capt Claret]

Must be good, these QF aircraft. Oh to have a V1 after VR in all modern jetliners! :8

[40Deg STH]

if they had a Profesional Reporters Rumour network, it would be empty!!! Or the 1 who is, would have to have discussions with himself/herself!!!:ok:

[b_sta]

Clasina Cue, a Melbourne grandmother and former airport worker

I didn't realise that serving coffee at the domestic airport cafe makes you an expert on aviation :ok:

[777WakeTurbz]

“It was the pilot’s quick thinking. We could have gone up in the air. It could have been a lot worse,” said Ms Cue.She obviously understands that it could have been much worse if the a/c was beyond V1 and conducted the RTO!

“The pilot did an awesome job. Not taking off was the best thing he could have possibly done.”Excellent to see that she identified the aircraft as not having yet reached V1 and commending the pilot for implementing the correct procedure!

[bazza stub]

Sound like it was past V1 afterall!


“The plane's nose was a bit up in the air,” Ms Cue said.

Sh!t :}

[Loiter1]

That sounds like a great excuse for my next line check, 'honest it wasn't me, it was the cosmic rays!":D

[What-ho Squiffy!]

Aviation is not singled out for bad reporting - it's not unique. If you are ever involved in ANYTHING that subsequently is reported in the media, you will see that the facts will be wrong and witness reports will be way off the mark.

Unfortunately this is the way of the media.

And to pay out on witnesses describing what they saw and felt in the back of the plane is a bit condescending. Why waste good electrons about complaining about it?

[ditch handle]

Yes. I too have never really understood the patronising attitude displayed by pilots to industry outsiders in describing their experiences of aviation matters.

Strikes me as a self congratulatory manifestation of the "sky god" syndrome.

[funbags]

ditch,

Unlike LHCC and their patronising attitude towards their own! Slagging off the LHR base, QCCA and anybody who isn't part of the Sydney scene. It seems like the pot calling the kettle black!

LHCC are the biggest backstabbers known to man! :ugh:

[Flight Detent]

I would have thought taking it flying would have been safer/more expedient than a high speed RTO.

But then again, I wasn't there!

Cheers...FD...:\

[404 Titan]

Flight Detent
I would have thought taking it flying would have been safer/more expedient than a high speed RTO.
Continuing with the take-off after an engine failure/malfunction but before V1 will probably get you killed. As it was a text book RTO we know it was before V1. After V1 we are “Go Orientated”. But you already knew this right?

[slamer.]

Hmmm ... really.... so your departing VHHH, MTOW in your B744. RTO 10 or 15kts before V1 is going to kill you ...?

I would suggest you should be "go orientated" approaching V1 in a heavy jet...... not after it !

[captaintunedog777]

Flight Detent. This is a professional pilot rumour network. I know it is hard to believe given the scope of postings here. But please refrain from comments such as yours just posted. At least do some research before you engage in discussion on this forum otherwise you could come out looking like an idiot.

[404 Titan]

slamer.

Minor faults yes. Major faults no. An engine failure/malfunction before V1 = RTO. No exceptions.

[Obie]

I think slamer needs some performance lectures, exams and understanding!... which I think he would fail dismally!! Amateur pilots with PPLs...why don't they just go away? :ok::ok:

[slamer.]

Another meaningful reply obie.

Go back to your Airline training dept, find someone who flys big a/c (not B737) and knows what they are talking about and have a chat.

Or, as I suspect you have probably been out of the biz a long time and dont have any good contacts. Google the more recent Boeing sites and others (theres some good military stuff on this subject) to see what the thinking is on RTO close to V1.


Oh... with a reply like that (and others on this forum) I hope you were never a trainer.

[Capt Fathom]

Whilst statistics may support it, the old adage of continuing rather than stopping, may not always result in a better outcome.

The results are somewhat biased in that more people decide to stop, then run off the end of the runway. Because of this, fewer become statistics after becoming airborne!

So it seems that high speed aborts are more problematic than continuing the takeoff!

The worst example was the DC8 at Jeddah. Continued the takeoff as several tyres disintegrated and caught fire.
The wheel well fire subsequently burnt through the controls and the aircraft was lost before it could return to land!

[captaintunedog777]

Sorry

Believe me. They make it simple for clowns.

[p.j.m]

That sounds like a great excuse for my next line check, 'honest it wasn't me, it was the cosmic rays!":D

Blackholes will be the new excuse next week as the LHC has been fired up again, albeit at half power at the moment!

[mustafagander]

Just a couple of facts.

There was a bang on the RHS of the ship, RR engines.

RTO initiated @ 106Kts.

#4 eng found to "fail boroscope check". #4 eng changed.