Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

QF aborted take off LAX - update

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

QF aborted take off LAX - update

Old 16th Jun 2008, 05:43
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: China
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
QF aborted take off LAX - update

The following appears to be the latest info on the aborted take off in LAX (May 2008)

http://news.smh.com.au/national/manu...0616-2ra0.html

What is the conflicting information?
DaHai is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2008, 03:39
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... It's Permanent!
Posts: 4,256
Received 153 Likes on 76 Posts
The 'news' story has been completely botched up by the reporter.

They're talking about two completely different incidents as if it was one.

A tyre failure/subsequent loss of one hydraulic system, where the aircraft continued to Brisbane.

And the other was an aborted Takeoff in LA.

Journalists!!
Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2008, 05:16
  #3 (permalink)  
RWA
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Capn Fathom
They're talking about two completely different incidents as if it was one.
With respect, I don't think so. Definitely talking about the first one, in March. The key parts of the story appear to be:-

"The Sydney-bound plane, with 232 passengers and crew aboard, was moments from lifting off in late March when the pilot noticed a warning light in the cockpit." - and:-

"The conflicting information between the FCOM and the FCTM regarding hydraulic system pressure loss created the potential for confusion by flight crew," the bureau said." - and:-

"The operator suggested to the manufacturer that, if it was not policy to land at the nearest suitable airport in the case of a single hydraulic system failure, the FCTM text be either clarified or deleted," the bureau's report said."

My guess is that the blown tyres were the result of the RTO, not the cause. And (guessing again) that one manual says you should RTO or divert if one hydraulic system quits, and the other says that you don't need to.
RWA is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2008, 06:08
  #4 (permalink)  
A jolly roger
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 5' 11 AGL
Age: 68
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RWA,

The ATSB report that the news item mentions is for the hydraulic failure & continuation to Brisbane only. The tone of the news story seems to imply that the RTO was in the report.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...007051_001.pdf
Oceanz is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2008, 14:02
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Could the burst tyre have been caused by the 192 extra passengers who materialised between the first and second reports?

Matt.
Matt35 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.