PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   QF 737 AKL-SYD Turn Back (Insufficient Gas) (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/135300-qf-737-akl-syd-turn-back-insufficient-gas.html)

snail 25th Jun 2004 10:26

QF 737 AKL-SYD Turn Back (Insufficient Gas)
 
How did a QF 737 end up leaving Akl with insufficient fuel to reach Syd last week?
Apparently it had to turn back after they realised that they were 4T short!

RaTa 25th Jun 2004 11:02

Or......could it mean that the forcast changed and they needed the extra fuel for a legal requirement?

Capt Claret 26th Jun 2004 06:24

Or fuel transfer system failed and 4t bacame unuseable. :\

Capt Fathom 26th Jun 2004 11:55

The Flightplan says 11,000kgs required. So the captain decides....'let's take 7,000kgs and see how we go'.
Yep. That makes sense!

DeltaT 29th Jun 2004 19:34

Aircraft departed with only the straight Burn Off fuel loaded is what happened, and the crew did not pick this up.
I think it was along the lines of the provisional fuel not being updated to a final fuel.

Sonny Hammond 29th Jun 2004 22:12

When we say QF 737, do we mean QF or Jetconnect?

I am guessing QF on that route.

mjv 29th Jun 2004 22:26

the crew used the burn off figure, but it wasn't the first time:*

BCF Breath 1st Jul 2004 09:33

QF 44. Big bro. Not the local chaps.....

bombshell 1st Jul 2004 09:56

I'm begining to think this is a wind up. Unless there has been a schedule change, it's either a 76 or 74 that does the QF44.

BCF Breath 1st Jul 2004 20:21

I'll check on the Flt No, but it was a -800.

Woomera 2nd Jul 2004 01:08

The Captain said “Thank Christ they’ve stopped
They make a dreadful din
I’ll now complete the exercise
And glide this b@stard in”


With noses flat against the glass
The victims watched in horror
And none of them had any doubt
They’d all be dead tomorra!

:}

I shouldn’t be facetious but I get very sceptical incidents such as that mentioned above - if indeed it was the result of a fuel management error and not a mechanical malfunction - have any safety implications.

Aside from costing the employer extra DOC’s (obviously less than returning a perfectly serviceable 744 back to Sydney a few days ago), to err is human and we all know there is absolutely zero chance of the crew blindly flying on until the tanks run dry!

Woomera

mjv 2nd Jul 2004 03:28

I know it's hard to belive (for some),

but
-it was a 737-800
-it was from AKL-SYD
and it was neither a communication problem nor a technical malfunction!!

the crew had plenty of ground time (45min delay outbound).

take it easy

The_Cutest_of_Borg 2nd Jul 2004 12:13

It was a human error.

It was not that they only loaded Burnoff.

..and when they discovered the error, they did the correct thing and returned.

Roadrunner 3rd Jul 2004 03:26

A few years back a certain quadrapuff operator loaded trip fuel on a charter from Darwin to Brissy I think it was. Hard to believe, however, **** happens.
They turned back too I guess.
We should remember to look at the figure at the bottom of the column, not at the top, eh.

:ok:

Capn Bloggs 3rd Jul 2004 09:18

That's if there IS a column, roadrunner...

An old Ansett WA spud C and T told me once: always have a look at the plan to make sure you have enough fuel on board...

And of course, trust no-bloody-one, not even (especially!) your own captain!

amos2 3rd Jul 2004 09:38

Well, let's have a think about this shall we?

It's really totally impossible for a professional crew to depart A for B with burn off fuel only, if all the checks are done correctly!

There are numerous checks and double checks to ensure an airplane doesn't run out of fuel between A and B!

And the reason for this is that if an airplane does run out of fuel en route, all the poor sods down the back, as well as the crew, are probably going to die!

This is not a good thing!

This thread has to be wrong, in respect to a professional Capt and First Officer, as well as a Lame, as well as a load controller, as well as a refueler and a few other people, not picking up the lack of "normal fuel" for a flight from A to B.

This nonsence, from some uninformed people that "we all make mistakes" and that we are all "human" is just that.

Nonsence!

If you believe that, go get another job, like selling used cars. Aviation can do without the likes of you!

If, however, I am wrong and and the aircraft did depart with burn off fuel only, then all I can say is, God Help Us All, don't ever fly with Qantas!!!

Kaptin M 3rd Jul 2004 11:04

Awww, c'mon Amos, you've got no sense of adventure!!!

This isn't the first time that a RUMOUR wrt QANTAS and low fuel have been mentioned in the same sentence.
Anyone else recall the story doing the rounds, about 10 years ago, of the QF 767(?) that arrived overhead Perth, in the wee hours, to find it totally enveloped in fog.
As the story goes, the crew hadn't taken much more than the basic requirements, and so had NOWHERE else to go.
After holding for some time - hoping that the fog would start to dissipate - they were reaching the critically low level, and so decided that a controlled ditching seemed to be the only alternative to a Gimli glide........................until "someone" suggested that they plug in all 3 auto pilots and make an auto land :ok:

I wonder if the QF pilots on the flight under discussion had jumped through the QF selection hoops that we've been hearing are just soooooooooo wonderful, lately :rolleyes:

Romeo Tango Alpha 3rd Jul 2004 11:12

The Gimli Glide and the Air Transat A330 into Lajes in the Azores SURELY must rank as some of the better glides in history! :ok:

Canucks make good glider pilots it seems! :p

amos2 3rd Jul 2004 11:17

I'm trying to be serious here, Mate!...

but I must admit, M... you break me up with that story that I remember very well! :p

The_Cutest_of_Borg 3rd Jul 2004 12:38

Amos, read what I said.

The fuel they departed with was NOT the burnoff fuel. They departed with the correct fuel order, except that it was the correct fuel order for the sector they had just completed, Syd-Akl. That was the error and that was the reason it wasn't picked up until after departure.

There were reasons for it (there always is), but it was an error nevertheless.

Kaptin M, that story was a 747 and like other stories, there was a lot more to it than what you just mentioned.


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:02.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.