JQ12 Diverts to Guam
Some of our friends on the Freight Dogs forum may be able to explain how that happened. 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mel
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diversion to Guam
Our flight from Narita to the Gold Coast (JQ12) was diverted on Sunday after the aircraft displayed an indicator message relating to oil pressure. The 787 landed safely in Guam (the nearest airport), and remains there while it’s inspected by our engineers. We arranged an alternative aircraft for our customers to continue their journey, and they arrived in the Gold Coast on Monday morning. Our Engineering team are currently working with engine manufacturer GE to replace the engine and understand what occurred. We expect the aircraft will be back in service by next week. Thank you to all involved.
For the avgeeks
Our Social Wrap provides insight in to what our customers say about us on social media. This week, it’s the avgeeks, plane spotters and aviation community that lit up social channels with the very rare departure of an Antonov An-124 aircraft from Melbourne Airport, which was taking a GEnx engine to Guam for our 787 (see story above). Our team also shared their photos of the exciting event on Yammer–see them here and here (thank you Stephen Capron).
Our flight from Narita to the Gold Coast (JQ12) was diverted on Sunday after the aircraft displayed an indicator message relating to oil pressure. The 787 landed safely in Guam (the nearest airport), and remains there while it’s inspected by our engineers. We arranged an alternative aircraft for our customers to continue their journey, and they arrived in the Gold Coast on Monday morning. Our Engineering team are currently working with engine manufacturer GE to replace the engine and understand what occurred. We expect the aircraft will be back in service by next week. Thank you to all involved.
For the avgeeks
Our Social Wrap provides insight in to what our customers say about us on social media. This week, it’s the avgeeks, plane spotters and aviation community that lit up social channels with the very rare departure of an Antonov An-124 aircraft from Melbourne Airport, which was taking a GEnx engine to Guam for our 787 (see story above). Our team also shared their photos of the exciting event on Yammer–see them here and here (thank you Stephen Capron).
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the Etops question, I was under the impression that Etops was not simply a Manufacturer/ Airframe concern,but the Individual Operator had to demonstrate a satisfactory period of operating a particular Engine/ Airframe combination.
I recall when QF first started operating the A330 it was not Etops approved until those parameters had been satisfied...accordingly the A330 remained a domestic vehicle for a considerable period prior to being utilised Internationally. This despite the fact that the Engines on the A330 were Identical with those on the 767 which was happily plying the skies with 180 min Etops approval .
One can but wonder how this affects Jet* operation of the Dreamliner in these circumstances .
I recall when QF first started operating the A330 it was not Etops approved until those parameters had been satisfied...accordingly the A330 remained a domestic vehicle for a considerable period prior to being utilised Internationally. This despite the fact that the Engines on the A330 were Identical with those on the 767 which was happily plying the skies with 180 min Etops approval .
One can but wonder how this affects Jet* operation of the Dreamliner in these circumstances .
One can but wonder how this affects Jet* operation of the Dreamliner in these circumstances .
In addition, the 787 (also the A350) were certified for "early ETOPS" - basically more testing is done during the certification phase to demonstrate the ETOPS capability at EIS. This was originally done for the 777 (I was involved at the time, and we literally had to invent it as we went). Early ETOPS simplifies the ETOPS approval process for the individual operators, although they still need to present a plan acceptable to the local authorities before they can begin ETOPS operations.
BTW, the A330 engines were NOT identical to the 767 - they were higher thrust derivatives of the 767 engines.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone kept track of the problems Norwegian has had with their 787 fleet?
Many late or cancelled flights due to technical stuff. No inflight engine shutdowns yet - have they been lucky so far?
Many late or cancelled flights due to technical stuff. No inflight engine shutdowns yet - have they been lucky so far?
You are correct. The map you are looking for is here. As you correctly assume, the really, really long ETOPS routes run across stretches of ocean that are largely devoid of shipping.
In any case, having traversed the Southern Ocean in a ship a couple of times, let me tell you, it doesn't matter. Forget about any successful ditching in these waters, ain't gonna happen. This is not the Med....
In any case, having traversed the Southern Ocean in a ship a couple of times, let me tell you, it doesn't matter. Forget about any successful ditching in these waters, ain't gonna happen. This is not the Med....
Judging by the number of times an aircraft operated properly under today's ETOPS regulations has ditched in the ogin due to engine failure (AFAIK, none), one would certainly say that the regulations work as intended.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Article says 320 stranded and the plane was a 787-8. Pardon me asking, but is Jetstar (which I know is a high density airline) really able to fit that many on this plane? If so, they are giving AC Rouge a run for their money on sardine service.
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UA had a rash of incidents, mostly electrical if I remember correctly.
ANA has mostly engine management system and brake system issues. ANA stopped publishing details.
AI has been vocal from beginning, but was discounted as internal mx issues, mainly software, spoiler actuators and windshield cracks. There are unconfirmed rumors VT-ANI wingbox was reworked. AI also has very early revisions of GEnX, one frame with both faulty engines, lot went through rework, but GE has been very proactive.
BA had some of the weirdest issues. One IFSD.
Brunei had problems with both engines.
Keep in mind, none of these caused any flight safety issues. It is mostly heartburn and revenue loss for airlines.
Even though battery got most attention, I think software in general and spoiler actuator system are still the culprits. By the time it lands there are so many messages, line mx has to make sure is it a false warning (or) bad sensor (or) bad component and remediate.
Rest of the issues kind of settled.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
The Australian news papers are reporting that the cause of the engine shut down, and subsequent diversion, was due to an issue related to a transfer gearbox.
This is a link to the relevant article.
This is a link to the relevant article.
Great posts as always tdracer, pleasure to read. Out of interest, can a 777F take a Trent 1000/GEnx or are you stuck with the 4 holers mentioned above?
Out of interest, can a 777F take a Trent 1000/GEnx or are you stuck with the 4 holers mentioned above?
I'm not as familiar with the Trent 1000 so I can't really comment.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's some shipping info on the Trent XWB engine (from VRR, the pallet manufacturer):
The engine stand that the Trent 1000 engine is shipped on is based on a 196x125 inch pallet. This is a non-standard size in the aviation cargo industry, but it can still be loaded onto some types of airplane. In this case, it’s often a B747 or B777 freighter aircraft. The engine, including the transport frame, just fits through the door of these planes, leaving us with only 1 inch of headroom to construct a solid and rigid pallet.
fwiw The A350 inlet cowl only has 3 inches clearance when going through a B744F nose door.
The engine stand that the Trent 1000 engine is shipped on is based on a 196x125 inch pallet. This is a non-standard size in the aviation cargo industry, but it can still be loaded onto some types of airplane. In this case, it’s often a B747 or B777 freighter aircraft. The engine, including the transport frame, just fits through the door of these planes, leaving us with only 1 inch of headroom to construct a solid and rigid pallet.
fwiw The A350 inlet cowl only has 3 inches clearance when going through a B744F nose door.
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Relief B744s were also able to ferry a spare engine.
Business Jet manufacturers are able to serve customers.
Even Twin Otters to South Pole are better prepared.
So lot of airlines purchased without reading the fine print that they may need stock 6 different windshields(multiple quantities) and a premium logistics contract with Volga-Dnepr or some other IL-76 operator at the least, or it will take 15 days for UTC to weave and bake a reverse thruster.
