QantasLink Plane forced to land after smoke fills cabin
Apparently DHC* trouble was not confined to the northern states yesterday.....
Qantas' regional fleet hits trouble | theage.com.au
Gotta love this...
"The incident came a month after a Qantas plane lost control and nosedived off Western Australia"
nosedived???
wasn't it about 300 feet?
Qantas' regional fleet hits trouble | theage.com.au
Gotta love this...
"The incident came a month after a Qantas plane lost control and nosedived off Western Australia"
nosedived???
wasn't it about 300 feet?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wherever the hotel drink ticket is valid
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we're going to throw down arbitrary comparisons, I'm waiting for something like:
"The incident comes only years after a completely different aircraft type operated by a separate company suffered an unrelated system failure, which was also scary and inconvenient for passengers".
Only a very slightly longer bow, don't you think?
"The incident comes only years after a completely different aircraft type operated by a separate company suffered an unrelated system failure, which was also scary and inconvenient for passengers".
Only a very slightly longer bow, don't you think?
Posted by mootyman
I believe that it happened in cruise less than one hour from BNE (Roma - Brisbane sector).
Posted by dizzylizzy
That's my understanding. The pax were aware that there was a problem as the service was delayed. Apparently, there was communication with engineering in BNE, but I don't know the nature of the defect.
does anyone know when in flight the smoke started?, have seen this on a pw100 series before, maybe ad due soon on this.
Posted by dizzylizzy
Apparently a/c was u/s in RMA then suddently became servicable.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that it happened in cruise less than one hour from BNE (Roma - Brisbane sector).
It would be fair to assume that given the nature of the problem, that it would have been during the descent into BN. Any earlier and a diversion back to RMA or to OK would have been made.
"...With everyone working to ensure a safe conclusion, along comes a BAC wally (apologies CW) who starts handing out infringement notices wrt the way some vehicles were positioned"
I believe that the drivers of the airline vehicles involved here were issued the infringements because they approached the aircraft before the Fire Service Commander had declared the area safe, parked their vehicles in such positions as to impede the Firies access and ignored numerous requests to move them.
I believe that the drivers of the airline vehicles involved here were issued the infringements because they approached the aircraft before the Fire Service Commander had declared the area safe, parked their vehicles in such positions as to impede the Firies access and ignored numerous requests to move them.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was, the first infringement was legit but could be put down to poor vis associated with the weather. The young driver thought that he was doing the right thing but was unaware that he had cut off one of the RFF vehicles. The second vehicle remained clear until the RFF vehicles (& the BAC wally's vehicle) had cleared the area & then proceeded to a position at the rear of the aircraft (clear of other services). Said BAC wally returned & issued the infringement notice to the driver, even though the aircraft was on the apron and was now the responsibility of the airline staff - not BAC or RFF etc
This "BAC wally" drives a ?? vehicle.
Is he one of the "safety officers" who do runway inspections ect?
Or one of the many BAC vehicles that prowl around ie civvy type vehicles.
Is he one of the "safety officers" who do runway inspections ect?
Or one of the many BAC vehicles that prowl around ie civvy type vehicles.
Ummm, interesting.
I wonder what other powers they have.
I wonder what other powers they have.
Posted by Worrals in the wilds
That is correct in day to day operations, but when an emergency has been declared and staff are going about their duties ensuring the safety of pax & crew, handing out infringement notices sounds like abuse of power. A more appropriate way of handling this would have have been for the BAC person to have a quiet word to the drivers after all the passengers and crews had disembarked, and told them how to do it better in the future. After all, the QLink staff were looking after their pax, on their aeroplane, on their tarmac - if BAC is going to play heavy handed policeman, then we should move to the US system whereby each airline is responsible for the safe movement of every vehicle/aeroplane/staff/pax on their tarmac. Maybe we have too many layers of policeing going on at Oz terminals.
Correct. Duties include regulating apron traffic.
