How much truth is there in the rumour I heard about the repair of the airplane at Manila following the inflight oxy incident?

I heard the Phillipinos would not allow QF to use their hangerspace to repair the damage, it had to be temporary repaired out in the open, then given a dispensation to fly back to Oz to get repaired, which is where it is right now, I guess!

I heard a payback from PA!

Anymore details anyone?

Cheers...FD...:ouch:

There was initially no hangar space available in MNL. The aircraft was repaired to and positioned to Avalon to complete the refit of the aircraft interior which was not able to be done in MNL. I'm not sure if additional aiframe work was required in Avalon or not.

The crew that flew it from Manila to Avalon were the crew on board the flight when the oxy bottle blew.

FD, I'd ignore the source of your info. There was a delay in getting hangar space from Lufthansa Technic but when it was taken into the hangar, a large part of the work was done by Qantas engineers, with the main structural work done by Boeing engineers. The following was posted on Qrewroom by the Captain who experienced the incident (and as Keg said, also flew it to Avalon along with the F/O):-

Yep, thats where it was outside the hanger with the canteen. (we went in there and bought some pies) and sat on our nav bags and watched the fun. There seemed to be more chiefs than indians, as everybody had a opinion as to how to get her out. In the end she was stuck like a rat up a drainpipe. The engineers told us a Herc had done the same thing after a engine runup a few days earlier.

a mate just emailed me a link to some pics

http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/9130/towstacktz9.jpg
http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/7...wstack2hp4.jpg

You mean this one :ugh:

also in my email with the other pics :mad:

found this article to :ugh:

http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/9...ncidentjy7.jpg
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/6269/syd2fy3.jpg

They will most likelly remove it. Just thought the pics might let people see the damage.

Hate the crap the media has with Qantas,

Qantas this and Qantas that, They just need to spend a day with another airline !!! :ugh::ugh:

Fair enough although the pix where available on TV 2nite in ML anyway, odd how the MOD/s think they know better! The Media like a story & airlines especially QF always gets peoples attention & therefore has a flow on effects for the advertisers, the ones that really own a media outlet.


CW

Looks like #14 Kreuger flap panel jammed on the outboard side during flap extension. They were lucky it was spotted from the outside as the flap drive unit was extended and would have indicated green on the LE flap annunciator and position indicator. Once again the Media did their usual sensationalist reporting. I think a turn back rather than an aborted T/O would have been more appropriate.

'HotDog' I guess the ram or screwjack or whatever drives them out has enoug grunt to wreck a jammed one? Could the damage have been made by impact forces unbeknown to the person/s involved then was only noticed when extension was made? Just curious as unknown impact damage to planes wouldn't be all that unusual I'd say.


CW

Perhaps, more likely, for not following them.

"I think a turn back rather than an aborted T/O would have been more appropriate." :confused:

?? Hotdog, the aircraft did not abort the T/O, simply taxied back to gate when damage noticed.:ugh:

mutter, mutter, chinese whispers, dumped 60k fuel, landed short runway, pilot didn't have licence etc etc................

are you sure that's a photo of a Qantas 747? the colours above the wing look more like Cathay than a white Qantas fuselage?

Tankengine, you've missed my point. I was quoting the news report which said they aborted takoff.:ugh:

Capt Wally, I have several thousand hours on the Classic 747 but have never seen this kind of damage before. What you suggest is possible however. The panel may have suffered FOD on the previous landing and was missed after flap retraction but could have caused it to jam on subsequent extension.

ACMS, you are right the colours don't look like QF but Cathay do not operate the 74 into Sydney other than Cargo and they certainly weren't involved.

The 2 seperate tears would seem to indicate a jammed o/b drive.

Tnxs 'HotDog' am just thinking of other causes that's all. Close examination of the flap in the pix tends to show to me that perhaps it was jammed for unknown reasons & by the looks of it the attatchment point for the jack is at the L/H end (or close to it) meaning the jack pushed that part out but the panel failed about mid point, just an observation. Previous damage in some form is a very real possability however I think.



CW

Yes I know we don't operate 74's into SYD apart from the Freighter.

Who said the photo was really taken at Sydney Airport?????

Although you can see a QF Red high lift device parked at the rear cargo, which means it's probably taken somewhere in Australia.

You couldn't miss that damage on the walkaround.Must have happened on the taxi out ?

What I find a bit strange is the CHC bound flight at 9:15 is a 767 service. I know it is because I was scheduled to fly it. I'm desperately hoping that this classic wasn't the replacement a/c because I ended up not going to CHC. If it was then those punters have had a seriously ordinary day. Delayed from 0915 to 1330 and then delayed again! :eek:

Sorry Hotdog, I am afraid you missed mine, re-read the news article: nothing about aborted takeoff.:hmm:
This is how mountains are made of molehills!:eek:

TWT, flaps selected after pushback/engine start, hence not seen on walk around. Indicator on drive [extended] so no cockpit indication so well spotted by engineer!:ok:

What would have happened on flap retraction if not picked up?:confused:

Tankengine, I was watching Sky News where they stated that the flight aborted take off. Anyhow, hardly a point worth arguing about. OK?

Seldom fixit, MM 27-81-00: There is only one drive per panel.

An update: The above configuration is for early model B747s like the last fleet I operated. Qantas and other B200-300 series have in fact two rotary actuators per Kreuger panel, driven by one drive unit through a drive shaft. Your theory could well be correct.

the chc qf45/46 service is normally operated by the 767, however on busier days and for operational requirements, 747's are sometimes used, back in the day it used to be a daily 744,

Worst suspicions confirmed. Those poor punters.

ZK, aircraft was originally scheduled at 0915 as a 767. It was re-scheduled at 1330 as a classic. I won't go into specifics as to why but the passengers had a seriously ordinary day.

what did they send over today, with yesterdays load plus todays it would have been rather full.

just noted on tonights news, that the flight today was also delayed,
not many happy faces in the arrivals hall in christchurch

Quantas plane taxying for take-off when damaged flap spotted
 

Story here:- AFP: Qantas takeoff aborted as damaged wing spotted

Attention mods, this topic is already here inside a D & G thread.

http://www.pprune.org/d-g-reporting-...-avalon-4.html

Oh, it's an acronym, not a word OK ,..... QANTAS = Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Service. There is no need for a U.

Only dips*ts put the 'U' in there:}

I've just seen the 6pm news about this latest problem that Qantas have had and it just seems that you can't please passengers!! I really feel for you guys that have to deal with any passengers!!

So there was some pretty severe damage to the wing, the crew decided not to fly (good decision in my mind) so the passengers decide to whinge and moan about how much longer they had to wait around.

Heaven forbid if the crew did nothing about the wing and went flying anyway. Can you imagine the possible outcome if they did? Do you think all those whinging passengers would be complaining then? NO, cause they'd probably all be dead!

You just can't please anyone these days.

The punters were whinging because the replacement aircraft was not on line at the time they were told it would be and then sat on the ground for another 2 hours before taking off. Punters naturally angry - arriving 24 hours late for a trans-tasman trip is unacceptable for the world's most experienced airline. It wasn't that the original aircraft was out of service , but the fact they were dicked around afterwards. Fair enough gripe I'd reckon.

Any experienced 747 drivers out there know what the result is (lift/drag etc) if the Kreuger flap had have worked for T/Off but failed when next extented for ldg?



CW

Not a 'driver' BUT I can tell you that with the Kreugers on one side folded UP vertically above the wing there is a need for 0.02 epr increase (JT9d) a bit of rudder trim and a couple of tonnes extra fuel burn on a 7.5 hour sector.:8

It happened to one of our early classics many moons ago. It was the type with the screwjack operating mechanism. The screwjacks failed and the kruegars on the right wing were folded UP by the airflow. Nobody noticed because it was a night flight and the flap indication worked normally as expected....Didn't 'alf look strange though!:ooh:

hope no one minds me poking my nose into the D&G forum!

CW, I've never experienced a flight control problem in the air but from my experiences in the simulator, I believe that there would be a noticable tendency to roll but there would be more than enough aileron control to compensate - even with more than one panel not correctly deployed. When the flaps are extended, the outboard ailerons are active to assist the inboard ailerons with roll control (along with differential spoilers).

As a frequent passenger, I would like to ask the following question: Given that something like this can happen, with no indication to the flight crew, would it be better to have a procedure that the aircraft is fully configured for take-off while there is still someone around on the ground to do a final visual check.

From my experience as a passenger, more often than not, the flaps/slats are set part-way through the taxi to the take-off point and this problem (or maybe a worse one) would not be detected.

NZ1009, on all Qantas Boeing aircraft the flaps are lowered to the take-off position BEFORE the engineer walks away from the aircraft and BEFORE the aircraft commences taxiing away. Can't comment on Qantas Airbus aircraft (have never flown them and procedures can vary subtly ) but I think they do it the same way.

For those who wish to know:

The Kreuger flap group is driven by one leading edge flap drive motor that includes a mech. feedback. This feedback supplies the position signal for flap position ind. system. The motor is located in the L/E gap behind #15 Kreuger.

The flaps themselves are driven by a folding linkage system on the I/B & O/B ends of the individual flap panels. These linkages are, in turn, driven by a rotary actuator, these actuators being ganged together in a tandem fashion by torque tubes.

For this sort of damage to happen is very unusual, as the O/B actators appear not to have turned, yet the I/B set have. As the drive is transmitted through the O/B actators (2), if they jam the drive torque should not be able to be transmitted to the I/B actuators, thus preventing what you see here-a broken panel. The system should just stop. Kreuger flaps are very stiff, flat panels. They are not designed to flex like the (further O/B) Variable Camber L/E flaps.

http://img106.imagevenue.com/img.php...p_122_33lo.jpg

FYI, older -100 & SP 747's have a screwjack mechanism to drive the Kreuger's in place of the linkages.

Thats a great idea, and probably why qantas does it. There has been a push to have people other than engineers pushing the a/c back. This is a good example of why that is a bad idea. It is another cost cutting idea that will cost money in the long run and maybe more.

Good point.... Was there any mention of the Malaysian Airlines air turnback on the same day ex-Sydney in the media. The gear wouldn't retract, so they had to dump fuel and return to SYD. The hook/lock mechanism on one of the bogeys failed.

Rgds.
NSEU

QF moved to 'Boeing common procedures' a bunch of years back. I suspect it's a Boeing thing. Any DJ 737 drivers care to comment? Do you guys select take off flaps prior to disconnect of the tug?