Completely different circumstances, it wasn't a fire incident and plenty of en route alternates.
Mind you not helped by the crew fuel system finger trouble at end of flight. Plenty of fuel on board but in the wrong tanks. Unnecessary diversion to Manchester.
A 3 engine 747 has more options than a for example, a 767 with all engines running!!

QF bashing aside, nice work by the crew, all down safe and sound which is the ideal outcome :-)

What is this with some news media using capital letters for emotive words all the time? Not simply shouting, but deliberately trying to start panic thoughts, it seems. Fragile society we have...

Well the ABC seems to have reported it well. "Pilots shut down engine" and "Appearing to spark" were the most dramatic words.

And linked to a twitter vid from a pax of the sparks. No "we're going to die" or other stuff, just the QF spokesman with the usual line.

Well done.

The question remains if it's actually newsworthy, but once it's in the open, it's of enough interés that they have to report it

Don't know about that, they certainly wet-leased Aer Lingus 747s for MAN-MEL and LHR-MEL flights during peak periods.

Ch 7 headline has gone from engine exploded yesterday morning to spark flew from engine this morning.

AP,

The Classics were ferried between LHR and Dublin for their checks but I can't recall how many times it was done but quite a few.

As for the wet lease, MAN was not a planned destination. They turned around at LHR.

OK, I stand corrected but my question would be so what... none of them fell out of the sky so obviously whatever was done was done competently. I think Australian Engineers are very good and I know there have been problems in SIN (which QF don't use anymore, but funnily enough VA do and no one says peep about it). This thing that nothing done off shore can possibly be as well done as here is just a fallacy... there have been plenty of errors over the years by Australian engineers who are after all, human. Some of the constant bleating about safety makes one think the JFK assassination would be blamed on off shore maintenance if possible. Not saying you're saying that, just a general comment.

Ah, yes....the dreaded engine failure in a 4 engine aircraft which, according to the media, is yet another event of earth shattering proportions. :eek::eek:

Loud bang.....flashes of flame. Compressor stall...????

These engines are always "on fire". You just can't normally see it and being "on fire" simply means that it's hot in the "cold" section.....it isn't always necessarily all that dramatic.

Most likely a standard engine shutdown on an aircraft with four engines requiring no departure from normal operational changes other than return

.....your welcome.

My welcome drink? Snack? Door gift? Raffle ticket?

Qantas says it's Qantas.

https://www.qantas.com/au/en.html

Huh? The guy above my post spelt it QUANTAS.....then changed it.......

What are you on about?

Not seeing the original pre-amended post, it looks like you are telling people that it should be all upper case....

I have it on good authority that this was not a compressor stall.

The report should be interesting - that is the one CH7 Brisbane reports that Boeing are doing on the incident.

Apologies (?) - that was me :rolleyes:

Back to the matter at hand I have it also a "good authority" that this was a significant engine failure. Well handled by all concerned but definitely newsworthy, at least in PPRuNe !

I didn't see any Quantas and thought you were being pedantic about it being all caps.

Ooooh significant
Im ready for another novel

FWIW VH-OQG hasn't flown since...

They must be doing live novels readings

Anyone else heard this was a loan engine from RR but it flew a 'bit' longer than RR had 'originally' recommended?