Another QF air return
 

You guys just can't take a trick at the moment....

Qantas jumbo in mid-air scare - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

And how is the landing gear not coming up a 'mid-air scare'. Sometimes these reporters are just ****ers.

It wasnt the landing gear that was the mid-air scare...It was the Neil Perry meal they were given.

A.H.:


The ****er is you.

Ever looked in a LG Bay? Obviously not.

I know QANTAS want to start a new base in Singapore ... I'm beginning to think that this string of air returns to Changi is their machiavellian way of sneaking in? :confused:

Sunfish,

Quite right, I apologise. Not being able to retract the gear is obviously a scary incident for all involved, including the passengers who thought they 'were going to die' and worthy of an article in the newspaper and a story on the evening news every time it happens!! :ugh:

since when is the 52 a jumbo?

51 & 52 recently went to the -400 from the 330.
Interesting that 3 techies are rostered for this flight when only 2 were needed on the 330. :rolleyes:

Well they are usually returning from a Europe trip I would gather so the duty hours in the previous week or so would require a 3rd pilot, as per the CASA requirements, A330 crews just went up and back, so no hour/duty requirements like that.

Bunch'a'wooses - 767 would have done it single pilot 14 hour TOD.

Landing gear not retracting = inconvenience

Landing gear not extending = major drama

Just my opinion of course.

Anyone got any idea what failed?

Lol now see what the 737 can do! :ok:

Anyone got any idea what failed?

Have been informed one of the main body gear tilt actuators failed...as in sheared off the oleo. Good to know QF don't overhaul their gears anymore......interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Remember the 743 in Rome a few years ago???????????????Ouch!!!!!!!!!!

AH:

It still appears you don't understand what you are talking about. To put it simply, the "failure to retract" may be a symptom of another safety related problem - anything from a tire or wheel failure to fire. We are also assuming here that the gear remained "down and locked". If you have ever watched a LAME approaching an aircraft and gingerly putting a locking pin into a suspect gear after a cockpit warning and return, it's possible you might understand.

Going on memory I am fairly sure this is the same aircraft that returned from an MRO on Tuesday last week (I wrote about it in another thread) . There was about 150hrs in repairs prior to service, now in the first few services it has had landing gear, thrust reverser, APU generator problems, Eng EEC & P2/T2 probes defects all immediately after leaving a C Chk at an MRO.

The only reason this is raised in because generally a post check aircraft (from In-house) was in very good condition with very few holds and MEL's. I am confused at the decisions by management but reading these threads it seems they are not interested in sensible rationale.

Is Qantas choosing the special 30% discount C Checks on offer from these MRO's as one would imagine they are capable of very good work but QF aircraft seems to have a high incident of issues after receipt. The ALAEA have good reason to make a noise, where are CASA?

Whats with all these references to Cafe De Suda?

AH and hcmcmcclow

In most cases I think AH is right about the ridiculous drivel written by aviation journalists, but in this case I don't think the ABC article is too bad.

If you fly for a living then I guess most incidents are pretty ho-hum ?? But I'm SLF (albeit with an Engineering degree and an interest in aircraft) with quite a bit of business and holiday air travel under my belt, and I don't like anything out of the ordinary. I remember feeling quite apprehensive when on a flight from Sydney to Auckland we abruptly leveled off at 5000 feet or so on the climb out from Sydney. It wasn't until the pilot announced that ATC had told us to level off and the climb would re-commence in a few minutes that I felt comfortable again. If I had been on the flight in question I would have felt a teeny bit apprehensive, and I'm sure I wouldn't have been the only one. So I do think you were being a little bit hard on Sunfish, even if he wasn't all that polite to you !

Meanwhile the damage to the Qantas brand continues. It's not just the media reporting of each small incident, but it seems to me also the hypocrisy of highly paid management taking on its workforce in a very public attempt to cut pay, conditions and staff numbers. Gee, I wonder if they could be trying to get rid of Australian staff, and then hire staff offshore at much lower wages and conditions ??

hcmcmcclown:

I spent enough time in the airline engineering maintenance and defence aerospace industries to gain a little knowledge, and that included spending a great deal of time working out what had failed/worn out prematurely and what we should do about it. For example like the rotten sprag clutch in the Airresearch starter on F28 APUs. We went through Sixty starters at about Ten grand each. The pilots ended up running the Port engine during stopovers in case they couldn't get a start.

Here is a question for you: Have you ever seen a tread separation beat the shyte out of a set of flaps and the wheel well contents like flap motors, gearboxes, hydraulics and spoiler and aileron controls? I have.

An "unraisable landing gear" is only a joke after you are back in the terminal and the gear has been pinned.

Sunfish,

I do agree with you to a certain extent, any problem onboard the aircraft should be taken seriously. What I have a big problem with it the way these things are reported i.e. Big Font headline 'QANTAS AIRCRAFT IN MID AIR SCARE!!!'. This kind of stuff happens all the time worldwide but the Australian Press when it comes to Qantas tend to sensationalise things and that is what annoys me. I mean for christ sake it was 'breaking news' on sky news in OZ with a live feed when a Jetconnect (Qantas) 737 landed at Sydney with a stuffed fuel crossfeed valve. If the media keeps reporting this kind of crap then the public get a totally unrealistic view on how serious these things are. :ugh:

Yes and in all cases the gear retracted/extended properly. How did you think it beat the shyte out of the wheel well contents.