why would QF7 turn back to SYD when ...

[BNEA320]

it was reported it was 4 hours out of SYD. This would put it almost on top of NAN.


Surely engineers at NAN could have a look at a minor problems like IFE & toilets ?


Were all toilets U/S or just some ?


Surely an A380 can land at NAN ?


Might save around 8 hours of fuel & minimum of 10 hours turnaround & instead of a 10 hours plus delay, pax might have a 2 to 3 hour delay.

[porch monkey]

Won't save any fuel. Long way over MLW. You don't operate aircraft, do you?:ugh:

[BNEA320]

MLW ? After 4 to 8 hours flying ?


Circling NAN until reach MLW surely would be much better option than flying back to SYD.


& what about the massive time saving ?



Don't operate long haul.

Toilet problem probably means a plumber required.

[Flying Tiger]

The reason it came back to SYD, 320, is because you weren't there. And without you, nobody in aviation is capable of making a decent decision.

[BNEA320]

flying tiger you must be another public servant ?

[Australopithecus]

Sigh. It takes more than a few hours to get down to MLW. And how many A380 rated engineers do you reckon are stationed in Fiji? And parts? At least in SYD they have those things as well as replacement crews.

[DirectAnywhere]

It was over MLW when it arrived in Sydney, and that's after 8 hours.

I don't fly the 380 but I can tell you that a 747 at MTOW will reach MLW 8-9 hours after takeoff. It's not quite like an A320, which I assume is what you fly from your handle?

Presumably the company said they wanted it in Sydney with spares and engineering support and aeroplanes leaving to go to LA tomorrow (if you can do it thanks Captain, to arrive before curfew). The Captain could see no reason why it wasn't safe to return, calculated a PNR to get back to Sydney before 11 while they continued to troubleshoot. Couldn't be fixed so they went to Sydney.

Fairly straightforward decision making I would have thought.

[Ollie Onion]

You can't possibly second guess the decision. May have been significantly over MLW, so a Sydney return more sensible.

Are the engineers in Nadi even rated on the A380??

Would NAN have the parts in stock to enable repair or would the aircraft be stuck there anyway until they arrived?

Was the weather in Nadi suitable at the time?

Is there enough accommodation available in Nadi at that time?

You will find when the diversion is due to 'passenger comfort items like this there will be a lot of liaison with ops as to where they want you to go, I know for a fact if I was given the choice of holding for hours to reach MLW for Nadi or returning to Sydney I would have returned. Have you ever dealt with the Fijians after a diversion? Can be a bit of a nightmare.

[Spey]

Sydney was clearly the only sensible option. Note that OQD is still out of action in H96.

[wishiwasupthere]

It's not quite like an A320, which I assume is what you fly from your handle?

Yeah, on FlightSim.

[C441]

So A320 you're suggesting:

Dumping 120T of fuel. Why 120T? Take off at 569T less 15T/hr & MLW 391T
Parking the crew and punters in a hotel for 12 hours (I'm sure there's always 410 beds available in Nadi at short notice). It's a planned 17 hour Duty so no danger of overshooting the any limits there of course:rolleyes:
Call out the A380 rated engineers to reset the dunnies and IFE or just get a local plumber and sparky?


Personally I think the correct decision was made.

[Check_Thrust]

BNEA320,

MLW ? After 4 to 8 hours flying ?I have no idea what weight QF7 was being operated at that day (or any day for that matter) but here is a little bit of mathematics on the A380 for you.

A380 (figures extracted from Wikipedia)
MTOW: 575,000 kg
MLW: 394,000 kg
MTOW - MLW = 181,000 kg

So based on the above if QF7 had departed at MTOW (not saying it actually did) it would need to burn off and/or dump a total 181,000 kg of fuel prior to landing. You state that it was 4 hours out of SYD so excluding fuel dumping it would have had to be burning fuel at the rate of 45,250 kg/hr to be able to achieve a landing at MLW at NAN. Now I don't fly A380 and I have no idea what the typical fuel flow rate of one is but I dare say it is nowhere close to the above figure.

So excluding other factors already mentioned about engineering, aircraft spares and alternative crews I think your thought process on this is very flawed.

Perhaps think or research (preferably both) before you post, but then again you might be just wanting to stir the pot...

[outside limits]

BNEA320 is your typical pilot who assumes he knows pretty much everything about aviation because he fly's an A320 for a LCC. This is the type of expert who thinks flying an A380 over the pacific must be the same as doing a SYD-BNE on a CAVOK day. Ignore him.

[ramius315]

BNEA320 has you all fooled and is sitting back laughing his/her ass off at the fact that you reply and take him/her seriously.

Nobody can make so many incorrect, stupid and illogical posts as BNEA320 has, and be serious.

Well that's what I have concluded. The alternative is just too frightening to consider........

:E