QF144 Auckland to Sydney engine out
Wait a mo you totally ignore the latest version of the stick has three ends ....
The following 2 users liked this post by drpixie:
The following users liked this post:
Q Codes
Been a l o n g time since I worked with the Q and Z codes. Luckily I found my old ACP131 to de-code the Qs:
QHH: I am making an emergency landing (at...)
QGP: You are number ... to land.
QFO: You may land immediately.
The following users liked this post:
Last edited by roundsounds; 18th Jan 2023 at 11:14.
The following 6 users liked this post by roundsounds:
Australia has be asked by ICAO to trial a new emergency call, it's just below a MayDay but above a PanPan and it's called a "MaeDey"
Today was a great great day to try it
Today was a great great day to try it
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lagiace
The aircraft started a slow descent 40 minutes after t/o indicating engine problem. Very close to Auckland than Sydney.
The following users liked this post:
Then we were treated to "this near disaster" and "the pilot executed a near perfect landing as though nothing was wrong" - pretty sure the air head doing the reporting, judging by her language like with all reporters not quite being right, doesn't have a pilot license or any time on the B737 so how would she know?
Then she rabbited on about "what a terrifying experience for the passengers, with anxiety levels high and every passengers' worst fear".
Upon interviewing some passengers, the first ones she spoke to said "No. We didn't know about the engine shutdown, the Captain told us once we'd landed and explained it was a routine procedure when they shut down an engine as there was no danger".
When is the media going to spend some money and get some decent reporters. A bunch of 5 year olds would be more honest and less sensationalist.
All the talk on here of people like GT not knowing what the hell they're talking about put me in mind of a story I once heard at a major Australian airline (no, not QF).
At a meeting, two managers who's aviation experience between them consisted of stints at Bunnings or McDonalds or something asked of a ground person "What was the reason for the engineering delay on such and such flight?".
I've always been amused by non-aviation, non-engineering managers asking this question. My response was always, "I'm not an engineer, it was an engineering related matter".
Anyway, on this occasion, one of the ground people who was known to be a stirrer replied "It was a problem with the flux capacitor".
Yes. Sit down if you aren't already. The two managers wrote it down on their notepads. Fully prepared to go into a high level Ops Review meeting with executives on the line and say that a delay that morning was caused by a faulty 'flux capacitor'.
At the end of the meeting, the ground handler apparently said to the managers "Ah, I was just pulling your leg, there's no such thing as a flux capacitor, it's from a movie".
Both managers got visibly angry and berated the person for it.
My point is, how bloody stupid does someone have to be to fall for that? When I was told the story, I was asked "You know what a flux capacitor is" and I responded immediately "Yes. Marty my boy, it's the thing that makes time travel possible".
Reminds me of another incident many years before where an Ansett flight was delayed due to dupe seating on board. A newly minted manager fresh from Uni with his MBA butted in and said "Wait a minute. That aircraft came out of the hangar this morning, why weren't the dupe seats picked up before it left the hangar".
A brief but excruciating silence ensued after which someone was heard to mumble "I think we'll take that offline".
At a meeting, two managers who's aviation experience between them consisted of stints at Bunnings or McDonalds or something asked of a ground person "What was the reason for the engineering delay on such and such flight?".
I've always been amused by non-aviation, non-engineering managers asking this question. My response was always, "I'm not an engineer, it was an engineering related matter".
Anyway, on this occasion, one of the ground people who was known to be a stirrer replied "It was a problem with the flux capacitor".
Yes. Sit down if you aren't already. The two managers wrote it down on their notepads. Fully prepared to go into a high level Ops Review meeting with executives on the line and say that a delay that morning was caused by a faulty 'flux capacitor'.
At the end of the meeting, the ground handler apparently said to the managers "Ah, I was just pulling your leg, there's no such thing as a flux capacitor, it's from a movie".
Both managers got visibly angry and berated the person for it.
My point is, how bloody stupid does someone have to be to fall for that? When I was told the story, I was asked "You know what a flux capacitor is" and I responded immediately "Yes. Marty my boy, it's the thing that makes time travel possible".
Reminds me of another incident many years before where an Ansett flight was delayed due to dupe seating on board. A newly minted manager fresh from Uni with his MBA butted in and said "Wait a minute. That aircraft came out of the hangar this morning, why weren't the dupe seats picked up before it left the hangar".
A brief but excruciating silence ensued after which someone was heard to mumble "I think we'll take that offline".
It is actually a requirement under mat regulatory systems. It might seem excessive, but it gets the point across. A pan would seem to be adequate, but often the failure to communicate issues has led to bad days. Much of the world will only achieve curiosity from a Pan call.
All the talk on here of people like GT not knowing what the hell they're talking about put me in mind of a story I once heard at a major Australian airline (no, not QF).
At a meeting, two managers who's aviation experience between them consisted of stints at Bunnings or McDonalds or something asked of a ground person "What was the reason for the engineering delay on such and such flight?".
I've always been amused by non-aviation, non-engineering managers asking this question. My response was always, "I'm not an engineer, it was an engineering related matter".
Anyway, on this occasion, one of the ground people who was known to be a stirrer replied "It was a problem with the flux capacitor".
Yes. Sit down if you aren't already. The two managers wrote it down on their notepads. Fully prepared to go into a high level Ops Review meeting with executives on the line and say that a delay that morning was caused by a faulty 'flux capacitor'.
At the end of the meeting, the ground handler apparently said to the managers "Ah, I was just pulling your leg, there's no such thing as a flux capacitor, it's from a movie".
Both managers got visibly angry and berated the person for it.
My point is, how bloody stupid does someone have to be to fall for that? When I was told the story, I was asked "You know what a flux capacitor is" and I responded immediately "Yes. Marty my boy, it's the thing that makes time travel possible".
Reminds me of another incident many years before where an Ansett flight was delayed due to dupe seating on board. A newly minted manager fresh from Uni with his MBA butted in and said "Wait a minute. That aircraft came out of the hangar this morning, why weren't the dupe seats picked up before it left the hangar".
A brief but excruciating silence ensued after which someone was heard to mumble "I think we'll take that offline".
At a meeting, two managers who's aviation experience between them consisted of stints at Bunnings or McDonalds or something asked of a ground person "What was the reason for the engineering delay on such and such flight?".
I've always been amused by non-aviation, non-engineering managers asking this question. My response was always, "I'm not an engineer, it was an engineering related matter".
Anyway, on this occasion, one of the ground people who was known to be a stirrer replied "It was a problem with the flux capacitor".
Yes. Sit down if you aren't already. The two managers wrote it down on their notepads. Fully prepared to go into a high level Ops Review meeting with executives on the line and say that a delay that morning was caused by a faulty 'flux capacitor'.
At the end of the meeting, the ground handler apparently said to the managers "Ah, I was just pulling your leg, there's no such thing as a flux capacitor, it's from a movie".
Both managers got visibly angry and berated the person for it.
My point is, how bloody stupid does someone have to be to fall for that? When I was told the story, I was asked "You know what a flux capacitor is" and I responded immediately "Yes. Marty my boy, it's the thing that makes time travel possible".
Reminds me of another incident many years before where an Ansett flight was delayed due to dupe seating on board. A newly minted manager fresh from Uni with his MBA butted in and said "Wait a minute. That aircraft came out of the hangar this morning, why weren't the dupe seats picked up before it left the hangar".
A brief but excruciating silence ensued after which someone was heard to mumble "I think we'll take that offline".
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
Sounds like the QF manager that thought AOG was a rego. Apparently AOG was a very unreliable aircraft.
By the way did we find out what the actual defect was?
By the way did we find out what the actual defect was?