15 injured in ‘serious’ stall alert incident on Qantas flight
 

Sounds quite sensationalised, but... a close call?

Qantas incident, Melbourne to Hong Kong, serious stall alert

"FIFTEEN passengers were injured on a Qantas flight from Melbourne to Hong Kong after a serious stall alert last Friday, it has just emerged.

Authorities will now begin a serious incident investigation after a ‘stick shaker’ warning activated on the QF29 service on April 7.

Stick shaker is an industry phrase used to describe a stall warning, where the controls shake to warn the flight deck of an imminent stall.

Details of the in-flight incident, which took place at the end of the Boeing 747’s 9.5 hour flight, some 110 kilometres south of Hong Kong, have only just emerged."

"Geoffrey Thomas, an aviation expert, told The Australian that such an incident was.."

With or without Geoffery Thomas's "expert" testimony, Stick Shaker + 15 injured = smoke + fire

On autopilot???
 

According to the report in the Sydney Morning Herald (from newswire AAP...) which got it from the ATSB https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...r/ao-2017-044/ the aircraft was in the Hold at 22,000 feet and on autopilot at the time.

My question is "How is it that the autopilot could get the aircraft into this condition?" Does this suggest it may have been in the wrong mode?

15 Injured After Stick Shaker Incident QF29
 

15 Injured after a Melbourne to Hong Kong Flight.

Reportedly on Apr 7th.

QF29 - Boeing 747, 110kms south of HK.


"The flight crew disconnected the autopilot and maneuvered the aircraft in response,” the Australian Transportation Safety Bureau (ATSB)..."

“Fifteen passengers received minor injuries. As part of the investigation, the ATSB will interview the flight crew and gather additional information.”

I was on this flight, severe vibration and a loud vibrating whooshing sound and then plummeting turbulence came out of no where, many passengers and crew hit their heads on the roof, overhead compartments opened and our bags from under the seat in front of us ended up behind us. There were also smoke alarms going off at the rear of the plane.Crew were initially running down the isles to see if there was any fire but said it was a false alarm due to turbulence, it would turn off and then start again the whole way into landing. It was very scary to say the least. Crew said we hit the wake of another plane, I don't know but I'm thankful we landed safely.

Oh bugger. Qantas was going to keep this one hush hush

How does 15 people get injured from a stall alert? Or did the plane actually stall and I'd guess there might be a period of 0g? And the recovery might be a bit strange?

Aviation Herald is saying the aircraft was just entering a hold at FL220 when stick shaker activated. Autopilot was disconnected and the altitude fluctuated almost 2000ft in the recovery.

Accident: Qantas B744 near Hong Kong on Apr 7th 2017, stick shaker activation in holding pattern injures 15 passengers

We will know when the report(s) are released. Until then there could be 1000 different reasons conjectured.
It probably wasn't the alert, but subsequent recovery actions that would likely cause injury, but that is pure speculation on my behalf :) . I will be waiting for the report.

Fairfax gets the soft story drop
 

Still a lot of questions which is probably why Fairfax was given a soft drop almost a week later in an effort to flatten the story - the 'say nothing' lessons learned ex QF32 clearly have been forgotten

Crew operated back although at least one CC suffered injuries. Understand that crew de-brief didn't happen and CC & pax were told it was turbulence.

If Avionics and FMS was the cause of a/c condition then I would want more than an LAME ramp check in HKG

Report v data will be very interesting

AT

I don't know the details but I can see a scenario where min speed entering a hold and wake turbulence could cause a combination of jet upset, 'turbulence', pax injuries, etc. I got caught in some wake behind another Dugong into DXB. We ended up at 25 degrees AoB very quickly before the A/P let go. There was little time to react as it occurred.

I was under the impression that the ATSB had to have a preliminary report released within 30 days of the incident.

Because they were not using their seat belts. QF announce on the PA that it is a requirement to have your seat belt fastened when seated even if the sign is switched off. Obviously some people would be moving around, especially cabin crew, but the injury toll would almost certainly have been lower if everyone in their seat was properly restrained.

Would have been clackers going off everywhere, mate.

A 747 getting into trouble from wake turbulence?

Okay.....

Bit low for a jet stream, but if they are at min speed to avoid flying a heap of circles I'm assuming a sudden wind change can cause some issues.

Will be an interesting read.

The old "turned downwind from a headwind at low speed" chestnut. Yawn.

Whaaaaaa? Do you even fly bro?

Wake turbulence is not a jet stream issue, it's caused by another aircraft, presumably 1000' above burning circles with you. And yes a 747 is very susceptible to it. :ok:

I know that FR24 doesn't have a great deal of data resolution, but the minimum IAS as they enter the hold seems to be around 226 KIAS. I haven't flown the 747 for a long time, but I'd have thought that was nowhere near the stick shaker activation.

Given the weird winds with wake turbulence (if thats what it was) i would guess its pretty easy to get to an AoA limit in a short period of time.