Qantas Link 717
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas Link 717
I hear from a qantas link flight attendant, that there was a mayday incident involving a 717 going from hobart to sydney on 5 june, the aircraft
diverted to melbourne due control issues, once on ground the problem
load in the holds was checked, and it had been incorrectly loaded
by the baggage staff at hobart airport, this caused the control
problems.
diverted to melbourne due control issues, once on ground the problem
load in the holds was checked, and it had been incorrectly loaded
by the baggage staff at hobart airport, this caused the control
problems.
Who does the baggage handling down there? Isn't it QF?
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there was a diversion due to load and trim then there is a problem that needs to be addressed.
Declaring mayday or pan or whatever is important if it did happen but most important is was there a misload.
If the DC9s grand daughters are like the DH8s they are remotely trimmed and simple instructions need to be followed. If they were not followed and nobody kept at least cursory note on what was going where then we have a major problem waiting to happen.
Load control should never have been removed from the outports as the guys and girls checking in the aeroplane could keep a "live action" handle on the thing and with last minute aberrations (and they are not a rarity) react and retrim as necessary.
Another instance of a level of security and safety being removed when the brand of primate assigned the job is under trained or related to the incumbent contractor or both.
This of course is oinly relevant if the diversion due to an out of trim aeroplane actually happened and we have yet to have any solid information on that matter.
Slowly but surely the care factor and the "old head" is being lost to this industry and I hope this is a Furphy.
If not the rot has got beyond controlling.
Best all
EWL
Declaring mayday or pan or whatever is important if it did happen but most important is was there a misload.
If the DC9s grand daughters are like the DH8s they are remotely trimmed and simple instructions need to be followed. If they were not followed and nobody kept at least cursory note on what was going where then we have a major problem waiting to happen.
Load control should never have been removed from the outports as the guys and girls checking in the aeroplane could keep a "live action" handle on the thing and with last minute aberrations (and they are not a rarity) react and retrim as necessary.
Another instance of a level of security and safety being removed when the brand of primate assigned the job is under trained or related to the incumbent contractor or both.
This of course is oinly relevant if the diversion due to an out of trim aeroplane actually happened and we have yet to have any solid information on that matter.
Slowly but surely the care factor and the "old head" is being lost to this industry and I hope this is a Furphy.
If not the rot has got beyond controlling.
Best all
EWL
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Tjuntjuntjarra
Age: 49
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was an out-of-CG load trim problem, then why did they fly as far as they did and not divert back to Hobart immediately?
If they were safe to fly on, then why stop at YMML? It doesn't quite make sense. Even a case of load shift would take place on the take off roll and they'd be back to sqaure one, as above.
If they were safe to fly on, then why stop at YMML? It doesn't quite make sense. Even a case of load shift would take place on the take off roll and they'd be back to sqaure one, as above.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Give 'em a break. By the time they consulted the QRH with probably nothing directly in there addressing their particular issue, worked out if Hobart was long enough for what may well be an emergency landing as they probably weren't exactly sure what the exact issue was, briefing cabin crew/pax etc. Checked the how the aircraft flew at different powered settings/air speeds etc etc, Melbourne would probably have been slightly closer than Singapore.
If the aircraft was controllable, an immediate return is not necessarily required, however, fuel burn off can and does affect CG position in flight. Stuffed if I know how the 717 reacts, but in my RAAF days we had to calculate a TO weight and CG position, a landing weight and CG position as well as a worst-case ZFW CG position to make sure the aircraft wouldnt go outside the envelope in case of fuel exhaustion.
Melbourne probably had better connections for the passengers too but I doubt that would be the main concern.
Melbourne probably had better connections for the passengers too but I doubt that would be the main concern.
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Australia
Age: 34
Posts: 1
Location: Australia
Age: 34
Posts: 1
I wonder why all the dramatic life and death in flight emergencies are always posted as a first post by a new user?
Moderator
Perhaps to avoid using their "real" PPRuNe ID, that likely contains enough references in earlier posts to specific locations and aircraft types that would allow their company to work out exactly who it is posting things outside of school that they shouldnt be? It could also be that they are just making things up, who knows for sure...
Yes Blitzkrieger, this thread has had a fair run with not a skerrick of confirmation or proof the alleged event actually occurred.
Moderator
Oooops. Forgot to lock the thread............ 
