QF A380 rejected take off YMML
 

QF93 is still on the the ground at MEL after the pilots decided to abort due to dodgy fuel gauges, Pax trapped on board as the flight had already been fully screened for the flight to LAX, and the authorities aren't keen on another screening.

The papers have got hold of this already :

Passengers stuck on Qantas A380 after aborted take-off

7378FE

No, it's worse than that...
 

The passengers are still on the plane five hours later. The flight crew are now out of Duty Hours.

But due to the USA State of Terror security procedues, the passengers can't get off, the bird isn't fixed, and people are seriously not happy.

I hope no-one imagines this is making air-travel "more secure". It's not. But it's making the jobs of the professionals who provide it a lot less secure.

The people who make the diference between profit and loss do not HAVE to fly. And if this cluster-eff continues, they won't...

I understand pax being held on board whilst a tech issue is being resolved. But can someone please explain why, in instances such as this, they just don't disembark the pax back into the sterile area?

The pax will need to rescreened at the gate, the authorities are not willing to do this, apparently QF are talking to the TSA & Australian authorities, but no such luck so far, the passengers are, as I said earlier trapped, but not due to the fault of QF, extra catering has been loaded. (not sure if this is a good thing :})

7378FE

US flights have requirements for additional screening at the departure gate. This consists of pat downs and additional bag searches and requires a whole bunch of additional security staff- probably 20 of them.

In terms of time you're looking at 15-25 minutes to unload 450 punters and their bags. To load them all back on board is probably 30 minutes after they've been through the security check. Add another 20 minutes for the security checks and you're looking at long turn around time to get them off and on again.

It's about time..........
 

...........the media and uninformed punters got off Qantas's back. Do they collectively understand and realise that

1. they are travelling on an extraordinarily complex piece of machinery and that it's inevitable from time to time that problems do occur?

2. the security requirements are beyond Qantas's control and that they should be directing their ire at Uncle Sam?

3. Qantas is a full service airline and, unlike some of its competitors, will turn itself inside out to get its passengers to their destinations as quickly and as safely as possible?

4. the last thing Qantas and its staff wants is a long and expensive delay that will not only delay one flight but several others that follow?

Some pr!icks just can't help themselves. Maybe they should try some other 'full service' carriers (or LCCs for that matter) and then see just how good is Qantas and its people.

End of tant. :ok:

.... and then you have to wait and try and find the ones who go walkabout, or shopping or stealing an extra smoke in the terminal toilets.... so maybe an extra 1/2 hour on top of that!

Unfortunate series of events again for the dugong.

And why is the rest of the world held hostage due to the USAs foreign policies.

If anything these people will have more ill feeling towards the USA now that the

US has made them endure hours on an aircraft while stuck in their home town.

Damn yanks

Well said Ken and superlame! It doesn't matter if it was a 380 or what the issue was, the dumb security requirements and the fact the TSA seem to have a lot of power in countries outside of thier own is a joke. Mind you none of the media (or the QF spokesman) has mentioned this in the media report :confused:

I'm not sure where the answer really lies but at some point I will and have made the decision to offload the passengers due to an extended delay despite what the local company reps have advised.
The company is looking at turnaround time, schedule disruption, staffing levels and subsequent costs.
The company reps are looking at extended hours looking after a flight that should be airborne.
I am weighing up the welfare and comfort of my passengers and crew.

At some point a line has to be drawn when regardless of what the 'far removed interested parties' are saying the PIC has to make a decision to 'get them off'.

I don't know where the answer lies in this instance and no criticism is implied, but I would like to know where the A380 line in the sand is.
I certainly would be concerned at a 5+ hour ground delay.

Also this is aircraft VH-OQE the newest dugong in the fleet. Hopefully Airbus is going to be cop the full cost of this delay. I know it is new and all but when will this end.

And another thing about Damn Yanks, didn't they just bring in a law stating that passengers aren't to be made to sit in an aircraft on the tarmac for more than 2 hours. Yet their stupid laws that they have just introduced again have caused passengers 14 hours away to sit in an aircraft on the tarmac for 6 hours. Pathetic laws for a paranoid nation.

Indeed - there seem to have been quote a few issues with A380's over the last few months. I wonder what other issues are going to surface as time goes on? It certainly seems a few corners have been cut to "get them out the door"!

Since when have the Yanks become "World Government"? How can they possibly stop people in an aircraft 1000s of miles away from getting off. This whole thing is crazy..the lunatics are really running the asylum!!!:ugh:

Stop crying you pathetic weasels...an aircraft delay is NOT news, unless you are a reporter looking for an easy 'story' to make it look like you actually did something today.

'Woolies customers delayed at checkout due price check...'

'those toilet rolls were not priced correctly!' shouted a pregnant mum..'

'old lady inconvenienced by massive checkout queue..'

'baby crying in fruit and vege!'

Now these stories are really worthy of reporting, hopefully A Current Affair is on the case!

Media beating up Qantas again....boring, blah blah.

An Aerolineas Argentinas flight from SYD-AKL-EZE was recently delayed for over 2 days (yes days...53 hours late in fact). They were waiting for a part, which I'm sure could have been sourced from any of the A340 operators in the region. Admittedly passengers hadn't boarded but they were in the departure lounge.

Now that is unacceptable!!!! Any mention in the media? No of course not.

Delays can happen to any airline. And we all cope with it.
Yes its Qantas and they cop more than their fare share of unnecessary bad press.

But,

I thought this thread was about the fact that the passengers were kept on board for what a lot of people considered was an unacceptable amount of time with the yanks security measures being used as the reason for not disembarking.??

Rewind
 

Back to the original thread -
Firstly,of course the papers have got a hold of the story,anything to make a big story out of very little.Thats their job,speak and report sensationalised crap on a daily basis.Journo's are a bunch of f*#wits.
As for QF being the unlucky Operator, its just sheer bad luck,one of those days for them.
The real issue and villain is the completely and utterly ridiculous knee jerk paranoid and dilusional fools running the USA.What a bunch of morons with their frightened and irrational reactions. World Super Power my a*s, more like a downtrodden and defeated a*s whipped bunch of 'girly men' running scared.
Boo hoo, lets put up a big gate and keep all the nasty people out ! Fools.

I will stop my rant now, the valium has kicked in and the full moon has passed.

Not good for 380 that something so small has now snow balled

I agree whole heartedly gobbledock.
Morons is understated and polite

Ah ha now I get it - you guys are racist.

Qantas has a technical delay and keeps the passengers on board for 5 hours blaming US security requirements - and you guys swallow it.

Tell me, did it take 5 hours for the pax to go through security in the first place? No, of course not. One response above mentions the requirements and it certainly seems like less than an hour. Just think - these pax have already been through security how long did that take? It'll take the same time again.

So to me the real reason is a Qantas requirement, that's all. The security requirement is a smokescreen. Five hours on the ground? Are you kidding me? How could that possibly be blamed on security requirements?

Story: Qantas aircraft aborts takeoff. Repairs take longer than expected. Crew run out of hours. Where in this story is the security requirement? The pax should've been offloaded and when the delay exceeded x hours and put up in hotels. End of story.

Blaming the US in this case is racist. They have security requirements which might add 20 minutes to a boarding time over and above normal boarding times. That's it. To say they add 5 hours is cr@p.

Get a grip. This is Qantas mismanagement and Airbus typical, well known and previous history failures.

I suspect what really happened was a rolling delay. Crew returned to gate, told it might take a couple of hours to fix, then told just an hour longer, etc, etc. Meanwhile they did the right thing and loaded extra booze and turned on the flight entertainment system. At some point crew duty became an issue and they pulled the plug. At no stage was US security requirements an issue.

Morons

Beerbaron, Which "race" in the US of A is being particularly targeted by these racist comments?

A New Race ?
 

Good point blueloo, how does BeerBarron reach the conclusion that referring only to 'inept and incompetent levels of a government' is a racist comment ??
Beerbarron, exactly who is being a racist ? You did say :
I know I have never been and never will be racist in any form. In fact, I dont give a flying f*#k what nationality,skin colour, race, religion, sexuality or bad personal hygeine habits the people making these high level decisions are - My gripe is with the dumb a*s knee jerk policy that has been implemented, that is what I am critical of.
BeerBarron, you are obviously some sort of touchy, sensitive, 'oh dear the world is pointing a finger at me' type of softc*#k.
Are you still breastfed ?

Qantas deserve every bit of bad press they get on this occassion. Yes the pax where handled poorly and could have come off earlier but something far deeper underlines this technical failure.

The 380 fuel tanks have been dogged with problems from day one. Tech services are fully aware that the lining inside the tanks is peeling away and clogging the components within. Engineering management are continually ignoring the problem in the hope it will just go away when in reality it will only get worse. Here's an idea. Fix your f****n planes properly. Then you won't have the delays in the first place.

Once again quality reporting by the media at news.com.au, within 10 seconds I had already spotted two spelling mistakes.

Well well well. We have a hero folks. Perhaps even the 'saviour of the skies'. The masked goatrider has it all worked out - tech services, engineering management, even Airbus are all conspiring to make QF's 380's giant paint peeling clogged component delay causing s#*t boxes !!
Somebody call Michael Moore, quick....

- gobbledock

Well let's read your own post gobbledock:

- gobbledock

I guess that makes you the racist gobbledock, blaming something and someone completely irrelevant based upon where they come from.

And it's "Baron" with one r - same as there is one r in moron.

Moron

Oh, and thanks for the gratuitous name calling against me as well - nice. I guess you disagree with my post explaining how these events typically unfold. It's worth repeating:

- me

Nothing there about sledging off other nationalities. You, however, did so, and me as well to boot.

That makes you the racist.

And you're still a moron.

God I love typing drunk.

beerbaRRon
 

Desperate measures tosspot. Resorting to 'spelling mistakes'.
Crawl back under your rock MORON.

If you believe the USA is that bad, then dont go there, that includes pilots and cabin crew. There you go, how easy was that.:hmm:

Geez you little Qantas primadonnas get a bit sensitive when anyone attempts to poke a finger at your "we are Qantas and we are gods gift to aviation" thin skin.

Lighten up you guys, its not personal.

One page and you lot are into one another, far out !

As the masked goatfiddler said, fix your aeroplanes.

It's funny that so many people posting here are buying the line given in the media.This is the same media that the same people openly have a go at.

Of course the airline would try and blame someone else.I have been on umpteen delays because of technical or weather glitches where the passengers were not allowed to disembark.The last thing the airline or airport wants is for the passengers to disembark.It does not matter if the aircraft is flying to the US or the UK.It (disembarkation) causes problems and if you have them all in the same place that is your preferred option.

The problem lies with the nature of the beast and that is when will the problem be fixed.It's like 'how long is a piece of string ?'
How do you know when it will be fixed when the engineers don't and if it goes beyond the crew hours limitations then you take them off which is exactly what happened.That has not stopped so many experts here quick to have a shot at US.

The big problem with most people is that they can't see the forest for the trees.

The problem is/was that the aircraft (QF's not the US governments) had a technical problem preventing departure.
End of story.

Reeltime:


Rubbish! It is a very different situation!

At Coles or Woolies if I'm delayed I simply put my basket on the ground and walk out of the store empty handed and go somewhere else to do my shopping.

The Airline situation is quite different:

1. I've paid for the flight in advance of receiving it. I may, or may not, lose the money if I walk off the flight, even assuming that was possible. I may also not be able to choose another airline flight that day, or that week.

2. I've invested in the time and money involved in getting to the airport, been screened and passed immigration.

3. I've made arrangements at the destination that may not be easily changed, your delay may result in a series of cascading failures which may vitiate the entire purpose of the trip (for example attending a Three day scientific conference).

AND FINALLY, WHAT DOES THIS INCIDENT SAY ABOUT THE SAFETY CULTURE OF QANTAS WHEN THIS MATTER IS ONLY DETECTED AS A PROBLEM AT THE POINT WHEN THE AIRCRAFT IS ABOUT TO DEPART????????


This is why I no longer willingly fly Qantas. After loading it's "Aw Gee! We've got a leaking spoiler actuator folks!" First we wait an hour to see if there is a spare in Melbourne and someone to change it (there isn't). Then its deplane and travel to Sydney. Then its re-board and arrive Twelve hours late in New Orleans. At least the pilot kept us in the loop.

To put it another way, if the aircraft is not already capable of flight, then don't board any passengers. Don't even check us in. Tell us and we will change our travel plans to avoid you, although I can see that your managers don't want to lose their captives.

....And don't try and tell me that this was a "sudden" occurrence, I've heard that one before (although it can happen). Was this issue already written up by the previous crew? Has the aircraft been carrying this defect for days or weeks? Did what we once called a "permit to fly" expire? What about our wonderful in flight monitoring systems? It's lack of engineers, lack of spares, lack of spare aircraft and shoddy maintenance systems.....the low cost model.

To put it yet another way; If I'm prepared to invest my precious time and money in flying with you, then I expect that you are equally investing time and money in providing me with what I asked for; safe and regular public transport. Obviously you aren't investing enough engineering and technical resources to do that.


To put it even yet another way; If, as Masked Goatrider has said, there is an issue with fuel tank sealant that is intermittently screwing up the probes or fuel system, then take the effing thing out of service until its reliably fixed instead of subjecting your passengers to this torture.

I think a few prescriptions for valium might not go astray on this thread.

So, point 1: I find conspiracy theories entertaining too, but when all is said and done, they virtually never withstand any serious scrutiny. If the company said the pax couldn't disembark due to security issues, then it is likely that was the case in some way, shape or form, at least for part of the delay.

point 2: the yanks, love 'em or hate 'em, have always been pretty over the top in getting their own way. They have such massive and overwhelming economic power that they are well known for saying "you do it our way or we'll refuse to let you land here". They know everyone will meekly comply. And that's if you're an ally. If they consider you an enemy, it's simply: "we have 15 stealth bombers on standby with your coordinates loaded into their cruise missile IRSs, so we suggest doing what we say".

So could they dictate security terms in this way? Quite possibly. Notwithstanding that, it could also have been a complete screwup from our end too. Or a combination of both.

I am in the USA on holiday at the moment, and you really need to see what's going on here regarding the TSA and security to believe it. You want to allow a good 2 hours to get through domestic screening in the major airports right now, plus time to get to the gate, or you risk missing your flight. International is probably worse. Getting into, out of, and around inside the USA by air at the moment is a total pain in the @rse. Honestly.

EDIT: please note this is not intended as a slag off at the US. It's just a fact that if the US dictates that USA-bound flights have to comply with their security requirements, then that's what happens. Simple. Or you don't fly there.

point 3: planes break. Old planes break repeatedly in much the same old manner as the engineers are used to. New planes break in new and interesting ways which people often haven't dealt with before. Qantas. Lufthansa. SQ. United. 777, 747, 767, A330, A380, whatever. They still break, sometimes even after you think you've fixed them.

In such a situation can not the aircraft Captain at least consider declaring an emergency & thus have his pax deplaned.

About the only factual statement in this thread so far is:

Does anyone have any first hand or factual contribution? If not, I'm happy to move this thread to JetBlast and you can continue to dribble bile at QF, US Government, airport security or anyone else that tickles your fancy!

And you all wonder why Moderators hate Qantas threads!!!

:mad: :mad: :mad:

mods, the problem with Qantas posts are that Australians are quite parochial

we reserve the right to unreservedly bag the crap out of our government, our employers, our airline etc but whoa betide anyone "outside" who dares to be critical.

Most of the posters on here carry more baggage than a Sky-lifter and should probably follow my grandmothers axiom..."get off the cross, we need the wood"

Love that, I'm gunna be using that some time:E

All I am hearing in this thread is "QANTAS did this wrong, QANTAS did that wrong". As of when have all the badmouthers in this thread actually gotten behind the stick of one of those monsters. QANTAS did the best they could, with what they had available to them. That is all.

I too was delayed on a QANTAS flight out of Sydney bound for Perth. 5 Hour delay there. Did I whine like a little b**ch? No. Did I complain? No. You guys need to grow up. I still fly QANTAS now. Always will if given the choice!

The captain made the command desicion to abort the flight for SAFETY REASONS. It's his/her desicion. No-one elses. Not planning, not upper management. He/She makes the final call. If they don't like something, then they don't go. Simple as that. Maybe frequent flyers in this day and age should go back in time, when RPT's weren't operating. Maybe then you "sh*t stirrers" will see how it was done.

Well done to QANTAS for doing the best with what they had available to them at the time. Now can we please move on from this?

Firstly, I don't blame the pilots at all.

The point is that the Qantas AOC is issued on the basis that Qantas is supposed to supply REGULAR Public Transport.

Now we all know that aircraft break, and I know from my own experience that there is always something broken on any aircraft all the time, just not the critical bits. I also know about teething troubles and infant mortality in electrical and other systems. I am also aware that the old excuse "The light came on just after we took off" is no longer usable in an environment with continuous data recording, and things always fail at the most inconvenient times.

I can even put up with a bit of "yield management" provided I'm told with enough time to reschedule.

However, the cavalier attitude to despatch reliability of certain posters here gets my goat, and if that attitude is wide spread in Qantas, then God help you. Your flagship aircraft has just disappointed 300+ pax, many of whom will now dissuade their nearest and dearest from having anything further to do with your airline, and you treat their concerns with scorn?

Charming.