QF575 return to SYD and emergency evac
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: act
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hats off to the crew for a job well done. However, with the industry captured ATSB and CASA conducting investigations I’m sure the truth into this incident will never emerge. Particularly as the QF group is currently trying to discredit one of it’s pilot groups, management Couldn’t possibly be seen to acknowledge the Skill and need for a well trained pilot group. I can just imagine the investigation entry meeting agenda (being held in the Chairman’s lounge of course). Item 1- how to lay the blame squarely on the pilot group.
IIRC it was deemed too gray area and CC we were told to recheck the door status prior to opening.
I actually recall having this exact situation as part of my final type exam for the 737. Evacuation at gate after disarm PA. I think 1 of the 4 of us forgot to re-arm in that case the procedure was to redirect to usable exit same as if the slide fails.
But by the time we got out of training the habit was so ingrained to check the slide status before opening a door that it's be muscle memory for crew especially those who have done EPs a number of times
After an 18 month hiatus from flying I definitely noticed significant effects after copping a lungful of exhaust via the APU on a VH reg A320... I think it's something that doesn't really hit you until you've been absent from it and get reexposed...
I would suspect it was supposed to be a precautionary evacuation via the slides since it would take too long to taxi to the gate or get stairs to the plane. But the method of use of the slides got lost in translation and it became an emergency evac. The industry doesn’t put enough training into communication between the flight and cabin crew.
Evacuation was trained that the first you knew was "evacuate evacuate evacuate" and/or tEEtevac signal.on the A330.
PD was clear, but I'm guessing legal department figured out that it could go pear shaped and better to just throw everyone off if in doubt.
When did they remove precautionary from procedure out of curiosity? Been out of the Oz scene for a while now
Did a bit of digging.. these are taken from another forum ..
EBA is technically owned by Qantas EBA G.I.E. of 203 Coward St Mascot, EBB by Qantas EBB G.I.E. of L8 241 O'Riordan St Mascot, and EBC by Qantas EBC G.I.E. of L5 241 O'Riordan St Mascot. QPA-QPC are owned through QF A333 Leasing 4 Pty Ltd, and EBD comes through QF A332 Leasing 4 Pty Ltd. .
Typically financiers like large and valuable assets to be held in a specially incorporated wholly owned subsidiary which does nothing other than own the legal title to the assets being financed. That way the financiers can take a share mortgage over the shares of the holding company which owns the aircraft (in addition to taking a slew of securities over the aircraft itself). Typically when they take a share mortgage the financiers get demand a blank but signed share transfer form - which they have authority to complete if they are exercising the security. Financiers like this kind of security because they can effectively enforce in a matter of seconds rather than taking possession of the physical asset - just take control of the holding company for that asset.
EBA is technically owned by Qantas EBA G.I.E. of 203 Coward St Mascot, EBB by Qantas EBB G.I.E. of L8 241 O'Riordan St Mascot, and EBC by Qantas EBC G.I.E. of L5 241 O'Riordan St Mascot. QPA-QPC are owned through QF A333 Leasing 4 Pty Ltd, and EBD comes through QF A332 Leasing 4 Pty Ltd. .
Typically financiers like large and valuable assets to be held in a specially incorporated wholly owned subsidiary which does nothing other than own the legal title to the assets being financed. That way the financiers can take a share mortgage over the shares of the holding company which owns the aircraft (in addition to taking a slew of securities over the aircraft itself). Typically when they take a share mortgage the financiers get demand a blank but signed share transfer form - which they have authority to complete if they are exercising the security. Financiers like this kind of security because they can effectively enforce in a matter of seconds rather than taking possession of the physical asset - just take control of the holding company for that asset.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR24 says that it is still on the ground.
Is that correct?
Is that correct?
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done, you just created an obstruction for everyone else behind that pax.
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Currently: A landlocked country with high terrain, otherwise Melbourne, Australia + Washington D.C.
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why releasing the oxygen masks and have everyone breathe into them while the captain docked properly at a gate to allow a tidy and safer evacuation was not considered here?
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do wonder if you may be subject to manslaughter if the pax you decked dies.
People grabbing bags is an issue, but remember that pax are not trained and when panicking will do all sorts of stupid things. The quickest way off a plane is to not create more issues yourself.
Evertonian
