Another QF air return

[Thats what she said]

You guys just can't take a trick at the moment....

Qantas jumbo in mid-air scare - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/04/3235757.htm?section=justin)

[Artificial Horizon]

And how is the landing gear not coming up a 'mid-air scare'. Sometimes these reporters are just ****ers.

[blueloo]

It wasnt the landing gear that was the mid-air scare...It was the Neil Perry meal they were given.

[Sunfish]

A.H.:

And how is the landing gear not coming up a 'mid-air scare'. Sometimes these reporters are just ****ers.


The ****er is you.

Ever looked in a LG Bay? Obviously not.

[peuce]

I know QANTAS want to start a new base in Singapore ... I'm beginning to think that this string of air returns to Changi is their machiavellian way of sneaking in? :confused:

[Artificial Horizon]

Sunfish,

Quite right, I apologise. Not being able to retract the gear is obviously a scary incident for all involved, including the passengers who thought they 'were going to die' and worthy of an article in the newspaper and a story on the evening news every time it happens!! :ugh:

[maggot]

since when is the 52 a jumbo?

[caneworm]

51 & 52 recently went to the -400 from the 330.
Interesting that 3 techies are rostered for this flight when only 2 were needed on the 330. :rolleyes:

[Angle of Attack]

Interesting that 3 techies are rostered for this flight when only 2 were needed on the 330.

Well they are usually returning from a Europe trip I would gather so the duty hours in the previous week or so would require a 3rd pilot, as per the CASA requirements, A330 crews just went up and back, so no hour/duty requirements like that.

[blueloo]

Bunch'a'wooses - 767 would have done it single pilot 14 hour TOD.

[Avionker]

Landing gear not retracting = inconvenience

Landing gear not extending = major drama

Just my opinion of course.

Anyone got any idea what failed?

[Angle of Attack]

Bunch'a'wooses - 767 would have done it single pilot 14 hour TOD.

Lol now see what the 737 can do! :ok:

[turtlehead]

Anyone got any idea what failed?

Have been informed one of the main body gear tilt actuators failed...as in sheared off the oleo. Good to know QF don't overhaul their gears anymore......interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Remember the 743 in Rome a few years ago???????????????Ouch!!!!!!!!!!

[Sunfish]

AH:

Sunfish,

Quite right, I apologise. Not being able to retract the gear is obviously a scary incident for all involved, including the passengers who thought they 'were going to die' and worthy of an article in the newspaper and a story on the evening news every time it happens!

It still appears you don't understand what you are talking about. To put it simply, the "failure to retract" may be a symptom of another safety related problem - anything from a tire or wheel failure to fire. We are also assuming here that the gear remained "down and locked". If you have ever watched a LAME approaching an aircraft and gingerly putting a locking pin into a suspect gear after a cockpit warning and return, it's possible you might understand.

[Elton Jon]

Going on memory I am fairly sure this is the same aircraft that returned from an MRO on Tuesday last week (I wrote about it in another thread) . There was about 150hrs in repairs prior to service, now in the first few services it has had landing gear, thrust reverser, APU generator problems, Eng EEC & P2/T2 probes defects all immediately after leaving a C Chk at an MRO.

The only reason this is raised in because generally a post check aircraft (from In-house) was in very good condition with very few holds and MEL's. I am confused at the decisions by management but reading these threads it seems they are not interested in sensible rationale.

Is Qantas choosing the special 30% discount C Checks on offer from these MRO's as one would imagine they are capable of very good work but QF aircraft seems to have a high incident of issues after receipt. The ALAEA have good reason to make a noise, where are CASA?

[stewser89]

Whats with all these references to Cafe De Suda?

[rob_ginger]

AH and hcmcmcclow

And how is the landing gear not coming up a 'mid-air scare'. Sometimes these reporters are just ****ers.In most cases I think AH is right about the ridiculous drivel written by aviation journalists, but in this case I don't think the ABC article is too bad.

If you fly for a living then I guess most incidents are pretty ho-hum ?? But I'm SLF (albeit with an Engineering degree and an interest in aircraft) with quite a bit of business and holiday air travel under my belt, and I don't like anything out of the ordinary. I remember feeling quite apprehensive when on a flight from Sydney to Auckland we abruptly leveled off at 5000 feet or so on the climb out from Sydney. It wasn't until the pilot announced that ATC had told us to level off and the climb would re-commence in a few minutes that I felt comfortable again. If I had been on the flight in question I would have felt a teeny bit apprehensive, and I'm sure I wouldn't have been the only one. So I do think you were being a little bit hard on Sunfish, even if he wasn't all that polite to you !

Meanwhile the damage to the Qantas brand continues. It's not just the media reporting of each small incident, but it seems to me also the hypocrisy of highly paid management taking on its workforce in a very public attempt to cut pay, conditions and staff numbers. Gee, I wonder if they could be trying to get rid of Australian staff, and then hire staff offshore at much lower wages and conditions ??

[Sunfish]

hcmcmcclown:

I spent enough time in the airline engineering maintenance and defence aerospace industries to gain a little knowledge, and that included spending a great deal of time working out what had failed/worn out prematurely and what we should do about it. For example like the rotten sprag clutch in the Airresearch starter on F28 APUs. We went through Sixty starters at about Ten grand each. The pilots ended up running the Port engine during stopovers in case they couldn't get a start.

Here is a question for you: Have you ever seen a tread separation beat the shyte out of a set of flaps and the wheel well contents like flap motors, gearboxes, hydraulics and spoiler and aileron controls? I have.

An "unraisable landing gear" is only a joke after you are back in the terminal and the gear has been pinned.

[Artificial Horizon]

Sunfish,

I do agree with you to a certain extent, any problem onboard the aircraft should be taken seriously. What I have a big problem with it the way these things are reported i.e. Big Font headline 'QANTAS AIRCRAFT IN MID AIR SCARE!!!'. This kind of stuff happens all the time worldwide but the Australian Press when it comes to Qantas tend to sensationalise things and that is what annoys me. I mean for christ sake it was 'breaking news' on sky news in OZ with a live feed when a Jetconnect (Qantas) 737 landed at Sydney with a stuffed fuel crossfeed valve. If the media keeps reporting this kind of crap then the public get a totally unrealistic view on how serious these things are. :ugh:

[Silverado]

Here is a question for you: Have you ever seen a tread separation beat the shyte out of a set of flaps and the wheel well contents like flap motors, gearboxes, hydraulics and spoiler and aileron controls? I have.

Yes and in all cases the gear retracted/extended properly. How did you think it beat the shyte out of the wheel well contents.

[Nudlaug]

@turtlehead

Anyone got any idea what failed?

Have been informed one of the main body gear tilt actuators failed...as in sheared off the oleo. Good to know QF don't overhaul their gears anymore......interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Remember the 743 in Rome a few years ago???????????????Ouch!!!!!!!!!!

Confirmed. Body landing gear tilt actuator sheared. Rather unusual i'd say.....

[puff]

Was it OJC - it's currently in the old QF hanger at BN with the activity seemingly around the main gear.

[Dick N. Cider]

Sounds like it's straight out of the archive...

The Lazy Journalists Plane Story Generator (http://www.radans.net/jens/planestory.html)

DNC

[halfback]

Hey Puff,
Answers to your questions....
1--- Not OJC.
2--- Yep, absolute FRENZY around main gears... 3 old QF farts changing wheels... No rumours here buddy.

[empire4]

I think there is an SB for the rod ends of those tilt actuators. sounds like they did the inspection at the MRO.....

[Dangnammit]

My money is on Q management informing the media of these incidents to assist in their ultimate goal.....

[Sunfish]

Hccmclown:

Why on earth would a pilot leave an engine running due to an APU starter issue "in case they couldn't get a start"? This statement does not make sense at all.

And anyone in the industry would refer to the starter as a Garrett, not an Airresearch.

You are displaying your ignorance yet again and obviously not a pilot or an engineer.

1. The RR Spey engines in an F28 at the time have air starters like most jets. They need compressed air which is supplied by the APU, GPU or a rather large ground based large air tank to start. Once one engine is started, it can provide bleed air to start the other one.

2. At the outstations in far Northern Western Australia there was no GPU or GSE. If both engines are shut down as is the usual practice, then you are reliant on the APU for starting, and if that won't start you are stuffed.

3. The APU's were built by Garrett Airesearch as it was then called. The provider of the biggest heap of shyte in the aviation industry and I'm paraphrasing old Jim Blue who told us that at a Boeing conference in Seattle.

The particular problem with this heap of crap of an APU involved the starter - an electric motor that spun the thing up to about 10% N1 (say 10,000 rpm) for ignition. The starter was then supposed to disengage via the aforesaid sprag clutch so that the motor didn't spin up to 100% N1 along with the APU turbine.

...And the things often didn't disengage - which meant the armature "grew until it hit the case and failed...... and the next time the pilot shut down and tried to restart via the APU.....she no start. We stuck in Karratha until an engineer arrives with a new starter.

Sorry for being verbose, but you did ask. After some sixty starter failures and associated delays, the F28 pilots decided to keep the Port engine running at idle at outstations rather than risk another failure and delay. Airesearch took forever to redesign the starter clutch.

As I said, failure of the gear to retract is only a minor issue after you are safely back on the ground with the gear pinned.

[peuce]

Just read that a SIA A380 has done an air return out of Honkers.
Landing gear failed to retract. What's the odds of that?

[Sunfish]

Mate, I just got told what the problem was and went and investigated it. Exctly why the aircraft was operated the way it was I don't know, but this was a long time ago

1. How was electrical power supplied to the aircraft during a normal transit with the APU not being run till engine start is required, bearing in mind your claim that no GSE was available?

It's not a fukcing "claim" this is Far North Western Australia in the early 1980's. All I know is that we were spending a fortune on unscheduled maintenance and ALan Grey was tearing his hair out.

2. At what stage of operation does the pilot start the APU?

Not being an F28 driver I wouldn't know. It may be useable in the air ..or not. All i know is that when they went to start it it wouldn't start, end of story.

3. Do you think that it is normal for the first engine to be started from the APU, then the second engine started from the first engine?

It may not be normal, but it can be done on an F28.

4. Why are you using the term N1 when referring to APU's?

Make it N2 or N3 or whatever, I could care less

5. What indication of "APU N1" is there on the F28?

None as far as i know, just a panel with a start sequence switch and warning lights I expect. The poor old starter knew though when the engine caught and tried to wind it up to 100,000+ rpm.

6. What is a GPU and what does it supply to an aircraft?

The ground power unit I was talking about was actually a trailer mounted APU for starting, not a generator unit.

7. At what stage of APU start is ignition introduced, and how is it introduced?

search me, I would assume at about 10% of rated speed. I suppose I could google it like you must have.

And the "rather large ground based large air tank" are called ground start bottles.

Thank you for the terminology, I couldn't remember.

I will ask you for the third time...What do you do in the aviation industry?

Read a few of my posts and you might find out. I worked for AN when it was a real airline and HdH when it built real aircraft

[The Green Goblin]

The particular problem with this heap of crap of an APU involved the starter - an electric motor that spun the thing up to about 10% N1 (say 10,000 rpm) for ignition. The starter was then supposed to disengage via the aforesaid sprag clutch so that the motor didn't spin up to 100% N1 along with the APU turbine.

A Garrett engine at 10% would be doing around 4000 rpm.

It's a fixed shaft turbine, N1 refers to RPM of a free power turbine.

A Garrett has an electric starter that motors the engine until ignition and fuel flow, then assists combustion until self sustaining RPM. Generally After reaching 60% the engine will be self sustaining.

On a turboprop engine the starter will now become a generator.

I find it hard to accept the flight crew would leave the port engine (left) running when pax would be disembarking and embarking via the forward port exit.

Do you mean the starboard engine?

An APU is generally started prior to circuit to supply the packs with bleed air to achieve maximum power during a go around.

At the latest it is started vacating the runway.

The only way I can understand what you are saying is if the aeroplane was overnighting and they could not get the APU lit in the morning.

[Sunfish]

You are right, I meant the starboard engine and thank you for your detailed description.

You would have to talk to an Ansett F28 pilot about why things were done this way, but they did.

The problem was that the APU starter would fail at the end of the start sequence, leaving you with a running APU with no indication of starter quill shaft failure. The only indication was a failure to start at the next port. I assume the crew tried to start it and if it failed, would leave one engine idling during turn around.

My involvement was to be told by Bondy, Ron Jackson or Bushy, I forget which, to find out what the heck was going on and if we had a real problem, find out what needed to be done to fix it and report back.

[Popgun]

What is Cafe Sua Da????? :confused::confused::confused::confused:

[RATpin]

Popgun,Vietnamese iced coffee.

[Nudlaug]

@puff Was it OJC - it's currently in the old QF hanger at BN with the activity seemingly around the main gear.

From memory i think it was OJI

:E

[OhForSure]

VH-OJI. About it's 4th flight back in service after overhaul in Hong Kong. :ok:

[maggot]

What is Cafe Sua Da?????

a very serious caffeine & sugar fix! it's goooooood! :ok: