Qantas Link 717 hard landing Darwin
Registered User **
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 52
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually I agree H&D
There could be a multitude of reasons for a hard landing apart from the implied pilot error.
Lets give this pilot the benefit of the doubt.
Best,
Sicknote
There could be a multitude of reasons for a hard landing apart from the implied pilot error.
Lets give this pilot the benefit of the doubt.
Best,
Sicknote
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
helen-damnation - In case you are interested, 'slander' applies to spoken words and 'libel' to written statements. I would agree, however, that to make a statement like this you need to be very certain indeed of your facts. Time will tell if these comments were indeed libel or an accurate representation of the situation. If true, there will be a lot of people in senior management with some explaining to do.
Last edited by Norman Stanley Fletcher; 6th Mar 2008 at 01:30. Reason: Just to say that the original post I referred to has either been heavily edited or removed completely!
Bottums Up
Something for every one?
Well for the doomsdayers, looks like it's repairable.
And for the conspiracists, the repair bill will no doubt be some factor [insert your choice] above the market value!
And for the conspiracists, the repair bill will no doubt be some factor [insert your choice] above the market value!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnMcGhee
've been meaning to ask on this forum for some time: "Why" do the QF drivers all throw it at the ground? We have the smoothest flying conditions in the world, yet every one ends with an almighty thump! SQ drivers don't do it, BA drivers don't do it, Thai doesn't do it, Gulf Air, Air NZ, Air China, China Southern...
A few concepts to throw your way. Google some of them.
Rear mounted engines
Stiff legs
Short runway
Remote from extensive ground lighting = black hole approach
Visual approach guidance lights all show PINK to pilot on final approach. ALCAN replaced accurate but expensive T-VASIS with cheap but near-useless PAPI installation that gets covered by the red bauxite dust. Letter of the law only.
High performance jet, often near max landing weight.
Monsoon conditions that can dump 80+mm of rain in an hour on an ungrooved runway. Standing water.
Implicit instructions to not have Qantas passengers disembarking in the runway end safety zone. Less complaints if the walk to the terminal is short, you see. Therefore take firm touchdown and controlled braking over possible botched attempt at soft touchdown translates to floating and mainwheels in the mud.
Its pretty much the same bunch of pilots that flew you guys around in the 146's for years. Back then the complaints were - its slow and it will poison us. Now you have an aeroplane that is fast, and despite local prejudices, has far better on-time dispatch performance.
Commercial department reports show that the 717 fleet has bettered all other QF fleets in on time dispatch reliability. Flight data analysis shows 717 is third, not top, of the list of average G forces of the QF fleets.
But lets not let the stats get in the way of a good whinge.
Complaining is the local pastime. How bout we get rid of those pesky 717s and get Airnorth Metros back in there?
Last edited by ITCZ; 14th Feb 2008 at 08:03. Reason: Cooler heads prevail.
Yes, Finally a good reply on this forum. Many factors for harder touch downs. Just look at 737's, the NG's nearly allways are harder. Same folks put a 500 down like a pillow. Or those naughty dash-8 drivers that "slame" it in every time, just look at the gear design!!! Anyway, lifes good 
Well for the doomsdayers, looks like it's repairable.
http://www.jacdec.de/news/news.htm
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't count on it.
Did you read the discalimer at the top of the page???
"The below information includes unofficial information and should be treated as this. Editors cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions caused by any information source mentioned herein. The nature of the following information should be regarded as preliminary."
Did you read the discalimer at the top of the page???
"The below information includes unofficial information and should be treated as this. Editors cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions caused by any information source mentioned herein. The nature of the following information should be regarded as preliminary."
Bottums Up
gwillie
Are they doing their investigation by remote control?????????? Try here for the ATSB link which shows the investigation is "continuing".
The Townsville refueller (the font of all knowledge) said Mr Boeing said that he'd seen worse.
Sorry if you're disappointed.
Are they doing their investigation by remote control?????????? Try here for the ATSB link which shows the investigation is "continuing".
The Townsville refueller (the font of all knowledge) said Mr Boeing said that he'd seen worse.
Sorry if you're disappointed.
Last edited by Capt Claret; 14th Feb 2008 at 05:01. Reason: typo & composition
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am curious. Are there trees or structures that blank out the wind at this airfield?
High Sink Rates and recovery from said high sink rates takes a handful of power and a sharp eye.
at KIAD (dulles airport washington dc) there is a "high sink rate" area when landing south on one six left... trees blank the wind. If you are ready for it a handful of thrust can save the landing.
High Sink Rates and recovery from said high sink rates takes a handful of power and a sharp eye.
at KIAD (dulles airport washington dc) there is a "high sink rate" area when landing south on one six left... trees blank the wind. If you are ready for it a handful of thrust can save the landing.
Need To Speed
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia (Brisbane)
Age: 56
Posts: 114
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sevenstrokeroll
From memory (last one in the early 90's) Darwin's runway 11/29 doesn't have any obstacles around that would cause any air disturbances but the runway itself has quite a stepped slope up from the southern end and i remember a couple of F/A-18 drivers blowing a couple of tyres after high sink rates when we arrived for an exercise for Pitch black 87.
Of course, if there was a CB in the vicinity, the disturbance from them can travel quite a distance and from all accounts the weather was pretty bad and it is the wet season.
Marty
I am curious. Are there trees or structures that blank out the wind at this airfield?
Of course, if there was a CB in the vicinity, the disturbance from them can travel quite a distance and from all accounts the weather was pretty bad and it is the wet season.
Marty
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Slaving away in front of multiple LCDs, somewhere in the USA
Age: 69
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to this, it's going to be repaired...
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-23349,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-23349,00.html
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central London
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas never crashed?
That should read; Since 1961 Qantas has not had a fatal accident.
The never crashed myth only relates to the fact that the company has never lost a jet airliner. Between 1927 and 1951, Qantas had eight fatal accidents with the loss of 62 people. Half of these accidents occurred during World War II, when the Qantas aircraft were operating on behalf of the Royal Australian Air Force.
On 7 April 1949, Avro Lancastrian VH-EAS swung on landing at Dubbo during a training flight, causing the gear to collapse. The aircraft was destroyed by fire.
On 24 August 1960, Super Constellation VH-EAC crashed on take off at Mauritius en route to the Cocos Islands. Take off was aborted, the aircraft ran off the runway, and was destroyed by fire.
On September 23, 1999, Qantas Flight 1 a 747-400 VH-OJH overran the runway in Bangkok. The accident occurred while landing during a heavy thunderstorm. The aircraft ended up on a golf course. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau criticised numerous inadequacies in Qantas' operational and training processes.
On April 21, 2000, a 747-300 VH-EBW was damaged when its landing gear collapsed while taxiing at Rome.
And now they have this one at Darwin to add to the list
That should read; Since 1961 Qantas has not had a fatal accident.
The never crashed myth only relates to the fact that the company has never lost a jet airliner. Between 1927 and 1951, Qantas had eight fatal accidents with the loss of 62 people. Half of these accidents occurred during World War II, when the Qantas aircraft were operating on behalf of the Royal Australian Air Force.
On 7 April 1949, Avro Lancastrian VH-EAS swung on landing at Dubbo during a training flight, causing the gear to collapse. The aircraft was destroyed by fire.
On 24 August 1960, Super Constellation VH-EAC crashed on take off at Mauritius en route to the Cocos Islands. Take off was aborted, the aircraft ran off the runway, and was destroyed by fire.
On September 23, 1999, Qantas Flight 1 a 747-400 VH-OJH overran the runway in Bangkok. The accident occurred while landing during a heavy thunderstorm. The aircraft ended up on a golf course. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau criticised numerous inadequacies in Qantas' operational and training processes.
On April 21, 2000, a 747-300 VH-EBW was damaged when its landing gear collapsed while taxiing at Rome.
And now they have this one at Darwin to add to the list
Last edited by Phil Space; 15th Feb 2008 at 02:09.