Cabin door ripped off Jetstar plane, passengers stranded
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Annoyed Jetstar passengers diverted
AAP
Annoyed Jetstar passengers diverted
June 22, 2004 - 10:19AM
Discount airline Jetstar's passengers booked for a flight from Victoria's Avalon Airport to Sydney today were forced to drive about 80km to Melbourne Airport after damage to a plane forced the cancellation of their flight.
The 6.30am flight to Sydney was cancelled after the plane was grounded in Sydney last night because of damage to a cabin door.
Jetstar spokesman Simon Westaway said the plane's door was damaged due to the airbridge still being attached when the aircraft was being taxied away from the terminal.
"The aircraft was pushed back too early and the airbridge still had some connection to the aircraft and it affected the door," he said.
"We took the precaution that we believed the aircraft was inoperable and deboarded the passengers."
A Melbourne businessman who gave his name only as Damien was one of the passengers inconvenienced by the cancellation.
"It creates the difficulty I have just driven to Tullamarine, had a little challenge getting on the (replacement) Qantas flight ... They have said you will be flying back to Avalon (and) my car's at Tullamarine," he told ABC Melbourne radio.
Mr Westaway said that Jetstar recognised that some passengers would be inconvenienced, and was trying to assist them.
"We have tried very hard, given the lateness of the incident last evening, to get passengers on the Qantas service," he said on Melbourne ABC radio.
"Certainly we're at fault and we will be speaking to those passengers."
- AAP
==========================================
Annoyed Jetstar passengers diverted
June 22, 2004 - 10:19AM
Discount airline Jetstar's passengers booked for a flight from Victoria's Avalon Airport to Sydney today were forced to drive about 80km to Melbourne Airport after damage to a plane forced the cancellation of their flight.
The 6.30am flight to Sydney was cancelled after the plane was grounded in Sydney last night because of damage to a cabin door.
Jetstar spokesman Simon Westaway said the plane's door was damaged due to the airbridge still being attached when the aircraft was being taxied away from the terminal.
"The aircraft was pushed back too early and the airbridge still had some connection to the aircraft and it affected the door," he said.
"We took the precaution that we believed the aircraft was inoperable and deboarded the passengers."
A Melbourne businessman who gave his name only as Damien was one of the passengers inconvenienced by the cancellation.
"It creates the difficulty I have just driven to Tullamarine, had a little challenge getting on the (replacement) Qantas flight ... They have said you will be flying back to Avalon (and) my car's at Tullamarine," he told ABC Melbourne radio.
Mr Westaway said that Jetstar recognised that some passengers would be inconvenienced, and was trying to assist them.
"We have tried very hard, given the lateness of the incident last evening, to get passengers on the Qantas service," he said on Melbourne ABC radio.
"Certainly we're at fault and we will be speaking to those passengers."
- AAP
==========================================
Whispering "T" Jet
Yes,mauswara ,you have correctly identified a possible causal factor in this accident.
25 minute turn arounds and the pressure to be out on time may have played a big part in this accident. Qantas may like to review the wisdom of this combination in future planning.
Chuck Magutzup, you should consider some serious CRM / Human Factors training or pursue another career, if in fact you are a Pilot.
25 minute turn arounds and the pressure to be out on time may have played a big part in this accident. Qantas may like to review the wisdom of this combination in future planning.
Chuck Magutzup, you should consider some serious CRM / Human Factors training or pursue another career, if in fact you are a Pilot.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: aus
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To those who compare QF damaging doors on A330's - lets compare apples with apples.
Impulse, whilst engineers were responsible for pushouts, has NEVER had an incident. Within three weeks of removing engineering qualification and experience from the process, the first incident has ocurred and it's a MAJOR one where it is lucky bobody was standing in the doorway..............
Some of you people need to acquaint yourselves with James Reason's theory of aircraft safety barriers, and clearly that is also the case in airline management as well. It's time CASA stood up and made safety it's highest priority rather than pleasing business.
I believe that most of the fault in this incident lies with CASA for not ensuring maintenance of public safety.
The aircraft was not VQA and it will be out of service for quite some time.
Impulse, whilst engineers were responsible for pushouts, has NEVER had an incident. Within three weeks of removing engineering qualification and experience from the process, the first incident has ocurred and it's a MAJOR one where it is lucky bobody was standing in the doorway..............
Some of you people need to acquaint yourselves with James Reason's theory of aircraft safety barriers, and clearly that is also the case in airline management as well. It's time CASA stood up and made safety it's highest priority rather than pleasing business.
I believe that most of the fault in this incident lies with CASA for not ensuring maintenance of public safety.
The aircraft was not VQA and it will be out of service for quite some time.
Last edited by pullock; 22nd Jun 2004 at 03:08.
Evertonian
Perhaps they can rush that A320 into service to cover the fleet gap? That ought to fix the problem.
Now, did anyone honestly think that punters having to drive between Tulla & Avalon would never happen? It amazes me that they are unsure as to how they can help the inconvenienced punters! Surely this formed part of their risk analysis with going to Avalon?
Bottom line for the punters; you've had the cheap fares, now here's the no frills!
Now, did anyone honestly think that punters having to drive between Tulla & Avalon would never happen? It amazes me that they are unsure as to how they can help the inconvenienced punters! Surely this formed part of their risk analysis with going to Avalon?
Bottom line for the punters; you've had the cheap fares, now here's the no frills!
Hey Buster
Just curious to know how you managed to crunch a door on a DC-10. I too would have been a participant in such an incident several years ago had it not been for the inward/upward cabin doors on the DC-10. Come to think about it, the cabin doors were one of the few things I liked about the 10.
Cheers
Just curious to know how you managed to crunch a door on a DC-10. I too would have been a participant in such an incident several years ago had it not been for the inward/upward cabin doors on the DC-10. Come to think about it, the cabin doors were one of the few things I liked about the 10.
Cheers
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Cairns
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now Now
An aircraft could be turned quicker with more professional people, this is not the problem.
How about the FO and the Capt agreeing on the question are we clear to push back and are we clear to taxi.
No Sir we are not, the aerobridge is attached! Rushed or not, the buck stops up the pointy end, if the plane is not ready to push back then the damn plane is not ready to push back.
Pilots need to stick together, have some balls and show some management skills. After all even with all the management in the world the Captain is the sole responsible person for the well being of the flight.
So to all out their, stand up, do not let the panic of management cloud your decisions. Twenty five minute turns are the goal yes, but not at the cost of lives, hulls, embarassment. Management would rather a 10 min delay than a please explain from CASA.
For Gods sake be safe!
How about the FO and the Capt agreeing on the question are we clear to push back and are we clear to taxi.
No Sir we are not, the aerobridge is attached! Rushed or not, the buck stops up the pointy end, if the plane is not ready to push back then the damn plane is not ready to push back.
Pilots need to stick together, have some balls and show some management skills. After all even with all the management in the world the Captain is the sole responsible person for the well being of the flight.
So to all out their, stand up, do not let the panic of management cloud your decisions. Twenty five minute turns are the goal yes, but not at the cost of lives, hulls, embarassment. Management would rather a 10 min delay than a please explain from CASA.
For Gods sake be safe!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: utopia
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skyway is right. The pilots need to agree that the aircraft is safe for push. You can see from the cockpit whether the aerobridge is still attached, let alone whether the checklist item of DOORS - CLOSED is complete prior to push and engine start.
These guys were too busy thinking about their pitiful salary.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. This mob is fricking dangerous.
These guys were too busy thinking about their pitiful salary.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. This mob is fricking dangerous.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to make the comment that the aircraft back in the air at 0300 after the possible stresses placed on the fuselage and undercarriage was phenomenal, but then pullock's reply seemed a little more plausible.
Next question - how do the pilots do their checks in the sim and on the aircraft? Is DOORS -CLOSED regarded as a routine response in the sim and the real cockpit partly because of the reliance on the ginger beers? Pull the ginger beers, put in some time constraints and people could be forgiven (debateable) for carrying on with making the check a routine response in the cockpit as well. Just a thought. Although not with the door and fortunately without damage, I've been there and caught myself doing that before. Red faces all round.
Next question - how do the pilots do their checks in the sim and on the aircraft? Is DOORS -CLOSED regarded as a routine response in the sim and the real cockpit partly because of the reliance on the ginger beers? Pull the ginger beers, put in some time constraints and people could be forgiven (debateable) for carrying on with making the check a routine response in the cockpit as well. Just a thought. Although not with the door and fortunately without damage, I've been there and caught myself doing that before. Red faces all round.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am having a really difficult time drawing a line between whatever their salary is and the door not being shut.
James Reason may have something to say on it, but at the end of the day, there were more than the two persons in the cockpit in the chain.
However at the end of the day;
surely must be the line in the sand, from which the Captain must take total responsibility for his aircraft and the flight, regardless of external intervention.
I am prepared to be educated otherwise.
I am reminded of a, for me rare, white knuckle departure from SEATAC during a snowstorm deiced by cherry picker four times between bridge, taxi to and on the runway, each time the FO came back for a look through the overwing windows, for correct application and that the rig was clear.
James Reason may have something to say on it, but at the end of the day, there were more than the two persons in the cockpit in the chain.
However at the end of the day;
DOORS - CLOSED is complete
prior to push and engine start,
prior to push and engine start,
I am prepared to be educated otherwise.
I am reminded of a, for me rare, white knuckle departure from SEATAC during a snowstorm deiced by cherry picker four times between bridge, taxi to and on the runway, each time the FO came back for a look through the overwing windows, for correct application and that the rig was clear.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Melbourne - Australia
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engineers might have helped prevent the door catching but everytime I've seen an aircraft drop to the ground because of the nosewheel retracting, its usually been an engineer in charge!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I have mentioned on a previous thread, we almost had the exact same thing happen to an A300-600R in Brisbane in the Compass days. 
ONLY thing that saved it, was that Compass was Jetsafe.
ONLY thing that saved it, was that Compass was Jetsafe.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: 1/12 Lord ST Botany ;)
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This one is for the pilot bashers.
The incident was caused by the remote control's for two different aircraft being mixed up. When one aircraft was cleared to push the ground support had the remote for the other aircraft's power push vehicle. Fortunately the tech crew were on the flight deck, obviously they had decided NOT to help with the cabin cleaning on this occasion. Quick work buy the skipper on the brakes caused minimal damage to the aircraft which is expected back on line at lunch time today (22/06/04).
The incident was caused by the remote control's for two different aircraft being mixed up. When one aircraft was cleared to push the ground support had the remote for the other aircraft's power push vehicle. Fortunately the tech crew were on the flight deck, obviously they had decided NOT to help with the cabin cleaning on this occasion. Quick work buy the skipper on the brakes caused minimal damage to the aircraft which is expected back on line at lunch time today (22/06/04).
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Hmmm, I'm not going to jump in too early and blame the crew just yet, as there are several people usually involved in pushbacks...(i)the Ground Engineer/tug driver who tells (ii)the Captain the aircraft is ready to go. The Captain then asks (iii) the F/O to request pushback clearance from (iv) SMC.
Let me recount a story from several years ago, that happened in LAX. We were parked at an aerobridge - parking brake set ON, tug hooked up - watching the door lights go out.
As the last door closed, the Ground Engineer blurted something across the interphone that none of us understood, but which - by consensus of opinion sounded as though he was telling us that they were ready to push. And so the Captain called back to Ground, "Confirm you are ready for pushback?"
Almost immediately, the over zealous tug driver went into action, trying to push a fully laden 747 back with the park brake still ON". Fortunately a STOP from the Captain prevented any damage.
So let's not race in too quickly and hang the crew just yet.
And btw, Chuck, if you feel so strongly about maligning the Impulse crews, and accusing them of being dangerous, then follow up with the strength of your convictions and submit a report to CASA, outlining the reasons on which you base your charges.
After all, it's CASA who have licenced them!
Put up - or shut the fcuk up!
So my question is, "Are tugs used? Or do they use those motorised thingamies that attach to the mainwheels?"
Oh, and one more, "Who on the tarmac is responsible for advising the crew that they are clear?"
Let me recount a story from several years ago, that happened in LAX. We were parked at an aerobridge - parking brake set ON, tug hooked up - watching the door lights go out.
As the last door closed, the Ground Engineer blurted something across the interphone that none of us understood, but which - by consensus of opinion sounded as though he was telling us that they were ready to push. And so the Captain called back to Ground, "Confirm you are ready for pushback?"
Almost immediately, the over zealous tug driver went into action, trying to push a fully laden 747 back with the park brake still ON". Fortunately a STOP from the Captain prevented any damage.
So let's not race in too quickly and hang the crew just yet.
And btw, Chuck, if you feel so strongly about maligning the Impulse crews, and accusing them of being dangerous, then follow up with the strength of your convictions and submit a report to CASA, outlining the reasons on which you base your charges.
After all, it's CASA who have licenced them!
Put up - or shut the fcuk up!
So my question is, "Are tugs used? Or do they use those motorised thingamies that attach to the mainwheels?"
Oh, and one more, "Who on the tarmac is responsible for advising the crew that they are clear?"
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin M,
I certainly wasn't blaming the Crew, I blame the Management of Jetstar.
However, even in your scenario, IF you take away the Engineer AND the tug, as Jetstar have done.......... ? Not many people left to blame.
Are you sure it was an Engineer/Mechanic at LAX?
Just most places it is not, certainly never was at JFK.
I certainly wasn't blaming the Crew, I blame the Management of Jetstar.
However, even in your scenario, IF you take away the Engineer AND the tug, as Jetstar have done.......... ? Not many people left to blame.
Are you sure it was an Engineer/Mechanic at LAX?
Just most places it is not, certainly never was at JFK.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Melbourne - Australia
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just had a source with a story along the same lines as Rostov. If that is the case, who provides tug support for Jetstar? Is it possible that they were just an innocent third party?
Nunc est bibendum
Funny how Chuck and a few others point the finger at the techies so quickly. Whilst this may have had EVERYTHING to do with the desire to be 'low cost', the version of events on the QF ramp would suggest that Rostov is spot on the money.
So, based on the info I have, this was not caused by a couple of techies being neglectful (nor was the A330 door with QF earlier this year). This happened because somewhere along the line, a number of mistakes have been made. Undoubtedly there was an active failure but it will be interesting to see if any latent failures are identified in the way it occurred.
Chuck, you're a disgrace.
So, based on the info I have, this was not caused by a couple of techies being neglectful (nor was the A330 door with QF earlier this year). This happened because somewhere along the line, a number of mistakes have been made. Undoubtedly there was an active failure but it will be interesting to see if any latent failures are identified in the way it occurred.
Chuck, you're a disgrace.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keg mate, not pointing at techies just asking the question, where does what start and end and if Rostov is even close about the remotes that's really scary.
If it was my house I can see it now, search high and low for the remote, yup knew it would be in the garden, click to change channel from MTV to Discovery and the 747 on the stand at Perth starts backing out with baggage handlers service trucks all hanging off it with the crew watching out of the window from briefing.
There's only one person in charge of the remote in my house and that's my wife.
If it was my house I can see it now, search high and low for the remote, yup knew it would be in the garden, click to change channel from MTV to Discovery and the 747 on the stand at Perth starts backing out with baggage handlers service trucks all hanging off it with the crew watching out of the window from briefing.
There's only one person in charge of the remote in my house and that's my wife.