Qantas Heavy Landing At Sydney?
 

Channel 9 are "reporting", that a Qantas B747 arriving in Sydney from Singapore this morning, did a heavy landing causing wheel fires.

Luckily no serious injuries.

Now there are some more details on my earlier story...........


Two Qantas passengers injured in emergency landing

The Age
July 2 2003


Two passengers were slightly injured after a Qantas jumbo jet made an emergency landing and was evacuated at Sydney airport this morning.

Police said the right hand side wheel of QF6 from Singapore caught fire and passengers were evacuated down the emergency chute.

"The plane was evacuated using the chute, all the passengers came down the chute," she said.

"Two passengers sustained injuries during that procedure, one has been taken to Prince of Wales Hospital," she said.

All the passengers were undergoing "disaster victim register" to ensure everybody has been accounted for, she said.


A passenger on the flight, Jasper Byrne, 27, said there was panic on the plane when they were told to evacuate.

"People were literally crying when they got off," Mr Byrne told AAP.

"Someone was having an asthma attack when she got off."

He said about 10 to 20 people at the rear of the plane had to exit via the emergency shute although Mr Byrne said he was lucky and didn't have to because he was seated near the front of the plane.

"It was quite traumatic really, definitely for the older people I think," he said.

The passengers were not told why they had to evacuate and he said they could not tell that anything was wrong from inside the plane although from outside he said "we could see something".

Charles Knight, 44, from Sydney's northern beaches was waiting for his sister's family to arrive when he first heard media reports that something was wrong.

He said his brother-in-law phoned him to let him know everything was okay but other people waiting were "really worried".

"I think there are some really worried people here and I think it's quite unnecessary for that to be the case," he said.

It was more than an hour after his brother's phone call before the airport made any announcement that there had been a problem with the flight which originated in Frankfurt.

- AAP

The poor misguided Joe- Public. You'd think the thing crashed.
Thanks Oz media.

Just watched Michael Sharp from QANTAS rip into Sky News for their reporting of the incident. In particular he was cranky about their reporting of emergency landing, heavy landing, injuries etc He was on the line during the report and when they crossed to him he let fly.

Tuned in to the 9.00 am Sky News report to hear this response from Michael Sharp. Funnily enough, it wasn't there. Instead I heard:

"The landing gear burst into flames after making an emergency landing" - doesn't sound anything like the reported smoke coming from the gear after arriving at the gate.

"The Captain sounded the fire alarm" - I can't remember a "fire alarm" on the 744.

The passengers were evacuated through the side doors" - as oppposed to the front and back doors?

Ah yes, it's good to see that journalism standards regarding aviation incidents (by some organisations) has maintained its usual standard. While this was undoubtedly, a significant safety-related event, it in no way justifies this type of sensationalist reporting.

:* :* :*

Not being familiar with airliner disembarking procedures, can somebody explain why the chutes etc were used? Did the crews use the chutes as well?

Someone with calm disposition maybe?

Probably not connected, but something big and quite low went over the southern suburbs just after 5 today, spooling up and down. Woke quite a few of us up. Maybe just a visual approach or something, cloud was quite low.

I liked the passenger reports of the fire engines spraying water on the brakes - last thing I was taught to do with a brake fire/overheat.

Water + hot brake = bang

Dry powder was the go IIRC

sprocket - I guess that the crew decided it was an evacuation as opposed to a precautionary disembarkation so ordered the fun park deployed.

I have to say I've always been a bit concerned about ever having to ride the upper deck slide, looks like a bit too much fun for me.

I'm curious as to whether the crew had some sort of psychic ability and knew there would be a fire AFTER landing, therefore making an emergengy landing essential?

When will the w*nkers be filtered out of the media?

Be interesting to see the facts as they are produced. An evacuation is a big call so they must have assumed the problem to be of significant importance.

A Qantas spokesperson, was just saying on Sky News, that Qantas fully backed the decision to evacuate the Aircraft, in the interests of safety.

He also said that the only injuries were caused by a slide that did not operate properly.

Pimp Daddy, I think you will find that water mist spray is the norm for brake fires these days after the fusible plugs have deflated the tire. Especially carbon brakes on the
-400.

Thanks for that - been a long time since I did fire training as a young fella.

Me too and as far as I knew water on brake fires was a no no until I was involved in a V1 abort at Haneda many years ago. We taxied off the active and all main wheels deflated with brakes glowing red hot which the Japanese fire crew promptly doused with water. I got somewhat upset and filed a report but in reply it was pointed out that water mist was the suitable extinguishing agent for brake fires. I am presuming of course that the QF wheel/wheels were deflated?

In the article above it states "The plane was evacuated using the chute, all the passengers came down the chute," she said, but then in the same article, "He said about 10 to 20 people at the rear of the plane had to exit via the emergency shute although Mr Byrne said he was lucky and didn't have to because he was seated near the front of the plane."

What the??? nice reporting...

I really don’t understand your problem. The thread was supposed to report on a B747 having a wheel fire.

I have just spent 5 minutes reading a hole lot of bull$hit.

Come on, the media is useless when it comes to aviation incidents.

My point is, most of us know this fact. Why do we have to keep submitting the garbage they spread?

Question: Was the gear on fire before the landing? Why was it an emergency landing?

Most average laymen think this way, don’t they?

:8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8 :8

Agreed Props!

I am surprised that those idiots covering this story were not able to work in a hijacker scenario.

Come on you journalistic ****wits where's your sense of adventure!

Of greatest concern to me is this courtesy theage site
Is it just me, or does that strike people as a stupid thing to say? I would expect the safety equipment to work!

Far be it for me, to even presume to know, what the Qantas aircraft operations executive general manager meant. ;)

However, he may be trying to say that there are more than enough chutes/rafts on board each Aircraft, to allow for the fact that sometimes some of them may not work properly.

In the same way that one would hope that they have more than enough fire extinguishers, and oxygen bottles etc on board. :D

More morons in the media. This time Ch10

Some 12 hours after the fact you wouldn't think they would be reporting "a fire in the brake compartment of the nose gear".