JQ MEL - PER Diverted to ADL
 

Hi all

had a friend on a JQ flight from Melbourne to Perth which was diverted to Adelaide.

Apparently the aircraft had to dump fuel and conditions were rather bumpy (probably only due WX though).

Anyone got any info as to what happend there?

An A320 dumping fuel? I'd like to see that.:rolleyes:

AVV(daylight flight) or MEL (night flight)

Yes Sue, it's called dumping fuel thru the combustion chambers! :ok:

Haha, yes I totally forgot that 320's and RJ's didn't have fuel dump facilities... :ugh:

Only going by what my friend told me...

Details are:

JQ970 departing tullamarine at 2040

.......keep it at full rich for a while, full flap, gear down & make the Capt put his wallet to one side, that should create an out of balance plane & use yet more fuel !.......that ought to help!:ok:



CW

So noones got any info about this? Would have thought an aircraft making an emergency landing would at least make the news, or travel fairly quickly down the grapevine.

NB: I'm assuming an Emergency as pax were asked to brace, though not sure if that is just protocol regradless of the severity issue requiring a divert...

Biggles.

My sister was on that flight. She mentioned nothing about being ordered to brace. Nor did she say it was very bumpy. All she mentioned was the inconvenience of arriving in Perth at 2am instead of the scheduled time.

You must have missed the bit that said it was a Jetstar aircraft. Captain's wallet wouldn't be too heavy, except maybe with all the rand he took out of SA.

No emergency, just a late call (west of AD) about not quite enough juice for the trip. :hmm:

was that industrially bumpy or were the bumps from when the dodgy half of the JPC, that were trying to run over all the original EBA "no" voters.:ok:

They couldn't dump fuel because the J* A320s require you to insert coin for many procedures. Like cleared ILS approach and then you slide a gold coin in to get up the localiser up
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/161/3...6840c44c66.jpg
- the fuel jettison too requires a coin
http://www.envador.com/Photos/LovePC/LovePC18.jpg
but as you can see it costs far more and therefor was over budget for the trip.

So the Captain initiated the GRADE protocol and They Gathered all their money
http://www.australianstamp.com/Coin-...t/1989detr.gif
they Reveiwed their conditions

http://www.germes-online.com/direct/...s_in_Shell.jpg

Adelaide was looked at

Diversion was initiated

Evaluation was made that the crew wished that the coin slots took the south african Rand so that DEC could have paid for the fuel dump

Maybe it was just a professional crew doing a good job. Thought of that?

BTW....aren't there still a few DECs still in QF from 19 years back? Didn't Qantas buy a nearly defunct airline and with that, buy a lot of instant 737 and A300 Captains?

Doesn't fuss me but I'd rather see both sides of an argument in print, not just the nice picture clippings.

land of 4 x... grow up doofis

Thanks guys... will put it the comments about what happend down to an over-dramatic female :}

Land of 4x. You would want to hope your GA job pays as well as a Jetstar Captains gig does. What ever your flying, with your attitude get used to it. Id say you will be on that 152 for quite a while. Im assuming that you most probably haven't been exposed to airline ops due to the nature of your 5yr old style comments. I hope you aren't an instructor.

DM

Sherm
 

No doubt designed to enrage but I'll bite.

I suspect you are a typical red rat injected f@&*wit.:mad:
Perhaps I'm wrong.

And yes I am ex TN for what it's worth but unlike yourself I'm happy to move on.:ok:

Land of. I have actually never paid for an endorsement being one of the older types. I think that what you have lost sight of is that the young blokes that choose this path do so knowing that in the long term ( 5 yrs max ) they will be earning good money. With most other airlines in this country doing this now as have many o\s for a long time, I think you may find yourself getting marooned on your ever decreasing high moral ground. Perhaps attitudes like yours are more indicative of the eventual slide of Aus with the emergence of generation y and z onto the aviation scene. The good old days are unfortunately that.

Now, put your Nintendo away and go and run around outside till your called for dinner!!!

Doug

You've not heard of unforecast changes to aerodrome conditions?

And Perth is a classic when it comes to unforecast wx :eek:

The rumour I heard was that the Jet* planning software is limited in that if a flight is overbooked, the data resets itself. Ie. if the a/c has 200 seats for example and the flight has 201 seats booked, the planner clocks itself and shows the pax numbers as 1! This fact was missed by (very green) dispatch and the crew, and was only picked up as fuel numbers were rechecked prior to going over the Bite. Whoops, not enough fuel, gotta divert. :eek:

Roger. If your statement is correct (and I'm not misunderstanding you) then
- They took off with grossly inaccurate weights (about 200 x 100kgs)
- There was no comment passed when the loadsheet presented with only 1 pax, rather than 201
- There was no comment with a grossly different final ZFW compared with the provisional ZFW (about 20 tons??)
- the tech crew were expecting 1 pax and the cabin crew got 201?

Please correct me if wrong

Stiffwing,

Not saying that the manifest showed 1 pax, but that the system for calculating fuel weights is flawed. The numbers quoted were as an example.

As to the rest of your questions, yes, that is what I have been told.

I seriously hope that I have been misinformed and that someone will shoot this theory down.

If what I read here, especially over the last few posts, is in fact the case, may I ask, what happened to gross error checks of flight plans? For the A320, flight planned time in minutes x 38Kg (light weight) or minutes x 43Kg (heavier weights), is a ball park figure for flight fuel. Add to these figures all the required reserves and one is within a bulls roar of fuel required.

Surely there must be more to this turn-back than what is being written here?

The silence is deafening. I thought someone would have shot me down by now...:(

RS,

If what you are saying proves to be correct, and there is a software error of that nature, surely this would have been picked up by someone in house (I mean, if J* regularly overbook this would have manifested itself before now, and no ones fallen out of the sky yet). That being the case, it would be a known problem, one that would seem serious enough to need rectifying ASAP (considering the consequences of a "green" (i.e. the known problem wasn't known to them) dispatcher giving the pilots bad numbers...not too many alternates over the bite). No wonder the silence is deafening......

unfortunately we are getting used to being supplied with incorrect data therefore most of us are getting used to filling in the holes:ugh: however the risk of this happening is always present:oh:

If the flight plan fuel was calculated in error on a "light load" then:

a. If the ZFW increased dramatically preflight (and entered in FMC) wouldnt the FMC produce a scratchpad message to the effect "insufficient fuel"

b. If the ZFW error was not identified & the wrong ZFW entered into the FMC. Then wouldnt all the takeoff calculations of takeoff speeds & thrust be in error.

therefore

c. If reduced thrust takeoff used for the incorrect weight. Wouldnt the takeoff acceleration be unusually lower.

Perhaps someone with A320 experience could tell me, isnt the aircraft system designed to catch such errors? Is there a ECAM message something like "STAB BAND" which would appear if the FMC programmed weights differ to that in which the nose gear senses as actual aircraft weight? :8

News to me, however I think the dumbest pilot would look at that and be a little suspect, only time I carried close to 1 pax was on a ferry. Also, normally, most guys/gals carry enough " fat " to cover the difference in fuel burn, especially on a long night flight.

Yes you have, there is no way they would have blasted off with a difference in pax of that magnitude, or any magnitude for that matter, the PDA docket has to match the Cabin Crew count, simple.

Yep, you can bet on it, I don't know but as mentioned earlier PH wx forecast is quite often dodgy, especially with fog.

No

V speeds are manually inserted by the pilots, which are taken from the TOLD card after obtaining from the RTOW book

No such message, and to the best of my knowledge, no weight sensor in nose gear. The only message that even slightly applies to the above is " CHECK GW " which only shows if the FMC and FAC computed weights differ by more that
7T. (this is based on pilot inserted data, and the GW computed by the FAC via AoA etc )