QF 29 diversion to Manila
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF 29 diversion to Manila
Anyone know the reason ?
Guessing a medical one but following on flight radar from where they commenced the diversion and all the routeing around in Philippines airspace in retrospect I bet they wished they just continued on to HKG
and as I write this at 1915 local time QLD they have just made a missed approach
Guessing a medical one but following on flight radar from where they commenced the diversion and all the routeing around in Philippines airspace in retrospect I bet they wished they just continued on to HKG
and as I write this at 1915 local time QLD they have just made a missed approach
Last edited by faheel; 20th Jun 2018 at 09:18. Reason: added text
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep , my son who was on the flight sent a one word email ..weather !!
But from what I could find from flight aware the wx at scheduled arrival time was vfr, but dunno how to find past metar, speci or tafs for vhhh.
On a similar question, I seem to remember QF never used to carry alternate fuel but 60 mins fixed reserve plus any tempo or inter fuel reserves as the case may be.
Is that still the case ?
the 3 longhaul carriers I worked for all carried alternate fuel plus any wx holding fuel as well.
But from what I could find from flight aware the wx at scheduled arrival time was vfr, but dunno how to find past metar, speci or tafs for vhhh.
On a similar question, I seem to remember QF never used to carry alternate fuel but 60 mins fixed reserve plus any tempo or inter fuel reserves as the case may be.
Is that still the case ?
the 3 longhaul carriers I worked for all carried alternate fuel plus any wx holding fuel as well.
That seems to suggest that QF never carried alternate fuel, even if it was legally required. It’s not still the case, and never was. An alternate won’t be automatically carried as a matter of course, but it certainly will if the forecast requires it, or the dispatchers think it’d be a good idea, or the captain wants it.
On a similar question, I seem to remember QF never used to carry alternate fuel but 60 mins fixed reserve plus any tempo or inter fuel reserves as the case may be.
Is that still the case ?.
Is that still the case ?.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eagles Nest
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weather forecasts in Hong Kong are hit and miss this time of year add to that the massive amount of traffic and holding once a few storms rock up . Change of runways and airspace constraints only add to the problem . Macau is just a 3 rd runway at Hong Kong . Shenzhen , Guangzhou and Macau regualary have storms but Hong Kong is clear ( hard to believe ) ? Do you want to rock up to Hk with no alternate ? Do you want to take 300 passengers with no CHINESE visa into China on a diversion only to run into FTL problems ? Diverting into Manila is understandable but carrying Manila plus 30 for Hk makes more sense .
Faheel,
Australian regulations have never required, in general, always carrying an alternate. It is not particular to Qantas.
Likewise, FAA have a set of conditions where carrying an alternate is not required.
Good advice on Manila to keep very close track of radar vectors and ATC "clearances", there is more than one aircraft sticking out of a mountainside in the area, including a PamAm aeroplane years ago.
Tootle pip!!
Australian regulations have never required, in general, always carrying an alternate. It is not particular to Qantas.
Likewise, FAA have a set of conditions where carrying an alternate is not required.
Good advice on Manila to keep very close track of radar vectors and ATC "clearances", there is more than one aircraft sticking out of a mountainside in the area, including a PamAm aeroplane years ago.
Tootle pip!!
Yep HKG weather at this time of the year can be interesting but generally thunderies that move through.
A diversion enroute due destination weather in HKG does not sound right, have the alternate fuel and 60 holiding should be no issue.
Unless flow control advised something different? What were the European arrivals doing?
Just doesn’t sound right.
As for Manila, I say excellent controlling, traffic management and flow considering its crossing runways, one runway for heavies, infrastructure that gets smashed by the wx. I say they do a great job. Though yes always pay to double check the ole vectoring altitudes, lots of high ground for sure. Today though with GPWS and even TCAS both above help the situational awareness.
Back on topic why did it really divert? Medical?
A diversion enroute due destination weather in HKG does not sound right, have the alternate fuel and 60 holiding should be no issue.
Unless flow control advised something different? What were the European arrivals doing?
Just doesn’t sound right.
As for Manila, I say excellent controlling, traffic management and flow considering its crossing runways, one runway for heavies, infrastructure that gets smashed by the wx. I say they do a great job. Though yes always pay to double check the ole vectoring altitudes, lots of high ground for sure. Today though with GPWS and even TCAS both above help the situational awareness.
Back on topic why did it really divert? Medical?
Last edited by Global Aviator; 21st Jun 2018 at 05:50. Reason: Make it sound better :)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to my son skipper came on and said something along the lines that the wx was not as forecast and they did not have enough fuel to continue to hkg. So off to Manila for some fuel...and when they finaly got on the approach made a missed approach..for wx !
I have been flying into HKG for nearly 3 decades with a well known HKG airline, which at least always carries an alternate. But all the close alternates can fill up with diverting traffic. Over the last few years the traffic has become crazy and the weather forecasting, never particularly good, has got to the point where I just don’t trust it at at all in the HKG summer.
Years ago an ‘old and bold’ told me, ‘If any one of HKG, Macao or Shenzhen have even a prob of thunderies, put the fuel on’. This advice has served me well.
Has not happened to me yet, but I have heard northbound aircraft, even some overflying HKG, being told to hold in Manila’s airspace as ‘Hong Kong will not accept them’ due traffic. Even enroute ‘large scale weather avoidance’ causes chaos in the FIR.
Couple years ago our bean counters cut back Contingency fuel to save $$$ (due to stupidly hedged fuel). A few diversions into Manila with several hundred punters eventually dissuaded them of that great money-saving idea.
Years ago an ‘old and bold’ told me, ‘If any one of HKG, Macao or Shenzhen have even a prob of thunderies, put the fuel on’. This advice has served me well.
Has not happened to me yet, but I have heard northbound aircraft, even some overflying HKG, being told to hold in Manila’s airspace as ‘Hong Kong will not accept them’ due traffic. Even enroute ‘large scale weather avoidance’ causes chaos in the FIR.
Couple years ago our bean counters cut back Contingency fuel to save $$$ (due to stupidly hedged fuel). A few diversions into Manila with several hundred punters eventually dissuaded them of that great money-saving idea.
Any TS in the hkg terminal area can really clog things up
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the weather on arrival is unforecast then what can you do. Can't plan for everything.
Done and dusted
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Wow...inbound to Wanchai, at this time of year without alternate gas, bravery personified and probably just cost the airline all the savings they made by having a policy to not carry alternate gas for the last year or three.
Nothing like being compliant :-)
Nothing like being compliant :-)
Trip summary says "HKG storms"
One wonders why the decision of the crew, backed up by IOC, is being questioned?
One wonders why the decision of the crew, backed up by IOC, is being questioned?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am in the camp that an alternate should be carried at all times as a contingency plan to cover the unlikely event that for whatever reason you cannot land at your destination.
When you consider that your destination is 8 or 9 hours away and in an area where the wx can change markedly I think its prudent.
I am sure the QF bean counters have worked out that the cost of carrying the extra fuel versus the cost of making the rare diversion puts them in the camp of no alternate fuel required based on the current TAF so be it.