Latest Qf Incident,where Will All This End
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mmmbop:
Non-pilot speaking, but could a routine change in altitude (ATC instruction) have caused this? How about responding to a TCAS RA?? Obviously if that had happened, you would be having a very bad day!
I remind you all, non-pilot speaking! Be gentle..
JBS
If by some chance in a godzillion this had happened over the Pacific (EXTREME turbulence for eg) basic control could to be maintained, however the lack of a standby AH would make orientation in IMC or at night a difficult task. Extreme workload on the Tech crew, but definitely not insurmountable (given a good bit of luck!)
I remind you all, non-pilot speaking! Be gentle..
JBS
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The normal gear extension on 747's is mechanical + hydraulic. Definitely no gear up landing.
Nunc est bibendum
jbsharpe, most TCAS RAs require an attitude change of no more than a couple of degrees. It's be a very, very close call were a RA require a change from level flight (couple of degrees up) to something approaching five degrees down.
A cruise descent to a lower altitude isn't generally done at idle thrust and so the attitude is much higher than a normal descent.
A cruise descent to a lower altitude isn't generally done at idle thrust and so the attitude is much higher than a normal descent.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Up left - Down right
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the uplocks were electrically operated. Hence no electricity, no gear.
So, if the primary fails and power has failed the alt extend system will not work.
Sounds the wrong way around but that is the way it is.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Non-pilot speaking, but could a routine change in altitude (ATC instruction) have caused this?
Cheers.
NSEU
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: brizvegas
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is so much distrust at QF I am scared for my safety like never before. This thread is a wonderful opportunity for like minded people to unite and express their opinions. I know the QF culture and I am scared that the yes people and the bean counters will ultimately destroy what is Qantas if this global greed and the race to the bottom is not stopped. They are blind to this growing swiss cheese event. They even today publish spin their blindness is frightening. Our engineers and pilots are what keeps Qantas safe not the spin that management keeps trotting out. Listen to what Qantas is not saying about this incident. QF2 would have been a catastrophe had this occured over the ocean in the middle of the night.
If your loved ones were on that fligth how would you feel. Qantas needs to have a long hard look at itself. Unfortunately the culture within Qantas is about pretending everything is rosey. Rose coloured glasses head in nthe sand mentality. Yes I can see all the swiss chesse lining up I just hope no ones loved ones are on the plane thet seems to very shortly be plunging to the ground. This may sound dramatic but pilots engineers and Cabin Crew the people that work on planes are worried. It's alright for those in their ivory towers they do not understand the realities and safety implications of flying
If your loved ones were on that fligth how would you feel. Qantas needs to have a long hard look at itself. Unfortunately the culture within Qantas is about pretending everything is rosey. Rose coloured glasses head in nthe sand mentality. Yes I can see all the swiss chesse lining up I just hope no ones loved ones are on the plane thet seems to very shortly be plunging to the ground. This may sound dramatic but pilots engineers and Cabin Crew the people that work on planes are worried. It's alright for those in their ivory towers they do not understand the realities and safety implications of flying
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, they are not saying if the Loss of all Generators checklist was activated. However, with 15 minutes on finals prior to landing it was probably the best decision to continue on standby power, supplied by the battery. Since the 1&2 GCUs, No1 BPCU and the 3&4 GCUs & No.2 BPCU are widely seperated at oppsite ends of the top shelf of the E rack, it is unlikely that power could not have been restored to at least two generators, providing the SSB (split system breaker) remained open. Therefore the hypothesis of impending disaster of a similar failure over the Pacific, may not necessarily be a valid observation.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Wybacrik
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting post Ruffrider 747 (phew)..or whatever you call yourself!
Done this before have we?...perhaps by another name?
What do you think...that we came down in the last shower?
Ten posts and you have all this concern??
Get honest or go away!
Done this before have we?...perhaps by another name?
What do you think...that we came down in the last shower?
Ten posts and you have all this concern??
Get honest or go away!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HOTDOG:-
There is no "loss of all generators" in the Boeing 747-400 Non-normal QRH - unless QF have 'made one up'.
I would hope that Boeing will come out with some better advice, following a loss of electrical power, than has been posted on this forum by speculators!
There is no "loss of all generators" in the Boeing 747-400 Non-normal QRH - unless QF have 'made one up'.
I would hope that Boeing will come out with some better advice, following a loss of electrical power, than has been posted on this forum by speculators!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would hope that Boeing will come out with some better advice, following a loss of electrical power, than has been posted on this forum by speculators!
Reminds me of a story someone related to me many years ago... of the crew of Middle-Eastern carrier faced with what seemed like an unsolvable problem. While the guys in the front seats prayed to their god, the Flight Engineer of non-Arabic origin kept on trying to come up with a solution (I believe he finally did). ok ok.... maybe the prayers helped...
And speaking of pitch/power solutions... If a certain DC10 pilot hadn't practiced all-hydraulic failures in the sim after another DC10 experienced problems... a few hundred passengers might not be alive today to tell the tale of his heroism.
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I was talking with my Classic experience where the electrical system is very similar to the 400 but if there is no reference to loss of all generators on the 400, there should be or put the flight engineer back on board.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stralya
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vigilance
The title of this thread is Where will it end. NASA had two catastrophic failures. Thier systemic failures were the result of normalised divergence of operating procedure. Things that crept into the operational phases of the organisation. Most usually these deviances were Cost based, imposed by real bugetary constraints. The problem in an organisation where the failure could result in the death of people is that cost is an accountant concept. It's measurement for them means recorded on paper and reproduced in financial results.
For those in an operational sphere, the incorrect consideration of cost, or the inappropriate focus on cost have rather more dire consequences.
"This core concern for safety makes both NASA and healthcare unique among industries. Budgets and deadlines dominate every business, inescapably so, but the failure of most businesses is financial, not fatal. As we have forced the space program and healthcare into the usual business model, we squeezed out safety. Other businesses can “push the envelope” and fail without serious consequence - a product or service doesn't sell, they go out of business, employees and sometimes CEOs lose their jobs. Pushing the envelope in our field can maim or kill people."
from an essay by James O. Westgard, PhD, and Sten Westgard
I think the focus on cost at Q is at the core of the disconnect. Those who disagree with management are sidelined. Clever financial engineering was at the heart of the APA bid. Clever financial spin gobbled up by the media suggests the company is doing well as it exceeds "financial expectations" Unfortunately for an endeavour such as Qantas the intangibles aren't recorded on a profit and loss. This latest incident will have no place on the Balance Sheet or Profit and Loss. The implications of this type of failure will impact the P&L in years to come, something that the current executive and "30th June" mentality have no concern for. They are not operational people, have an expertise readily transferred to another organisation and have little understanding for the impact of the lining up of the holes with the Reason model.
It is this lack of operational understanding that is at the core of our (operational people's) concern. We understand the implications of a systemic failure. If it is not us signing out the aircraft, or stapped to it we will know someone involved.
Food for thought
For those in an operational sphere, the incorrect consideration of cost, or the inappropriate focus on cost have rather more dire consequences.
"This core concern for safety makes both NASA and healthcare unique among industries. Budgets and deadlines dominate every business, inescapably so, but the failure of most businesses is financial, not fatal. As we have forced the space program and healthcare into the usual business model, we squeezed out safety. Other businesses can “push the envelope” and fail without serious consequence - a product or service doesn't sell, they go out of business, employees and sometimes CEOs lose their jobs. Pushing the envelope in our field can maim or kill people."
from an essay by James O. Westgard, PhD, and Sten Westgard
I think the focus on cost at Q is at the core of the disconnect. Those who disagree with management are sidelined. Clever financial engineering was at the heart of the APA bid. Clever financial spin gobbled up by the media suggests the company is doing well as it exceeds "financial expectations" Unfortunately for an endeavour such as Qantas the intangibles aren't recorded on a profit and loss. This latest incident will have no place on the Balance Sheet or Profit and Loss. The implications of this type of failure will impact the P&L in years to come, something that the current executive and "30th June" mentality have no concern for. They are not operational people, have an expertise readily transferred to another organisation and have little understanding for the impact of the lining up of the holes with the Reason model.
It is this lack of operational understanding that is at the core of our (operational people's) concern. We understand the implications of a systemic failure. If it is not us signing out the aircraft, or stapped to it we will know someone involved.
Food for thought
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the main Rumours board: "Q(u)antas Fake Engineer" http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...159455322.html
How fortuitous for Qantas' PR Dept that they will be able to spin the story to Joe Public that the maintenance problem at Bangkok was caused by one rogue fake engineer, and not a seriously flawed new corporate culture directed from the very top.
One that is becoming more and more obviously to those within the industry - and in the lower echelons of the company itself - the complete opposite of what the company once was. A hard-earned reputation Qantas still attempts to trade on looks more and more like being at risk of being lost in the most tragic circumstances if one day a crew - be it maintenance or technical - who still retain enough of the 'old Skippy' ethos isn't there to bail the company out of a future situation that would have been stopped three or four 'slices of cheese' earlier under the 'Old Qantas' formula.
How fortuitous for Qantas' PR Dept that they will be able to spin the story to Joe Public that the maintenance problem at Bangkok was caused by one rogue fake engineer, and not a seriously flawed new corporate culture directed from the very top.
One that is becoming more and more obviously to those within the industry - and in the lower echelons of the company itself - the complete opposite of what the company once was. A hard-earned reputation Qantas still attempts to trade on looks more and more like being at risk of being lost in the most tragic circumstances if one day a crew - be it maintenance or technical - who still retain enough of the 'old Skippy' ethos isn't there to bail the company out of a future situation that would have been stopped three or four 'slices of cheese' earlier under the 'Old Qantas' formula.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on guys ....
(update on QF2)
"Mr Borghetti said, that speculation by a wide range of people, including individual engineers, pilots, commentators and union officials, was inevitable but unhelpful."
Lets not discuss this or any other incidents in the the future so as to be more "helpful".
(update on QF2)
"Mr Borghetti said, that speculation by a wide range of people, including individual engineers, pilots, commentators and union officials, was inevitable but unhelpful."
Lets not discuss this or any other incidents in the the future so as to be more "helpful".
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Mr Borghetti said, that speculation by a wide range of people, including individual engineers, pilots, commentators and union officials, was inevitable but unhelpful."
let's stick our heads in the sand,that'll fix it
it's this "what if "within engineering that has kept the airline so safe for so many years,if this bonehead takes over the reins of QF i think we will be in for a much larger world of pain
let's stick our heads in the sand,that'll fix it
it's this "what if "within engineering that has kept the airline so safe for so many years,if this bonehead takes over the reins of QF i think we will be in for a much larger world of pain