SQ A380 Returns To LHR
 

2345 20 May/'11

Flightradar24.com's Photos - Wall Photos | Facebook

Engine failure
Unable to dump fuel
Overweight landing
8 wheels on main/body gear replaced.

Why'd it land in the water?

Why was it unable to dump fuel? Engine failure should not prevent dumping fuel, or was it more than an engine failure?

Just wondering why the only source I've found about this is Flightradar. No info on Avherald and in the mainstream media. Should be a quite big deal reporting about it considering the past.

This one is very hush hush for some weird reason. Media ban implemented !
22 hrs delay.
The engine was changed.

Talking to SQ crew yesterday the A380 has had more than it's fair share of turn backs after take off, for various reasons and this has earned it the nick name of "The 180".

A contained engine failure on a four engine aircraft is usually no 'big deal', being unable to dump fuel is.

Exactly who had the authority to issue a 'media ban'?

LOL:)

BTW Very curious about the fueldump issue.

I know an urban legend of an early 'bus starting to dump fuel by itself when the pilots were fiddling the FMS with a simulated diversion. Since the aircraft was above MLW it decided to get rid of some weight....

Wonder if any of both stories is true...

Where did they change the engine, it certainly wasn't done at Heathrow.

The airplane is not building a lot of confidence.

Is it a 180 or an A180? :rolleyes: :D

SIA321 turn around LHR
 

Hi
Incident: Singapore A388 near Amsterdam on May 20th 2011, electrical problems

http://www.pprune.org/spectators-bal...eturn-lhr.html

Best Regards

As it appears to be unmanned transport's mission in life to prove RR's triple spool engines, and apparently also the A380, an inferior product I would bring somewhat more than a pinch of salt when digesting any of his posts.

Anyhow, as the MLW and MZFW delta across all the weight variants of the A380 is between 20 and 25 tonnes and it is not possible to dump fuel from the engine feed tanks (which have a combined capacity of around 91 tonnes) it does not take a slide rule to figure out that the purpose of the jettison system is not to bring the weight down to MLW or below.

The A380 is a good product, just has a few teething problems like the others that went before it.

Any news on that hush hush extremely rapid engine change?

KBPsen
 

You and I must be the only ones here to know what is a slide rule.

It went the way of carbon paper. But it taught me so much.

Be it engine or electrical related seems rather serious, especially in view on the overweight landing.

Not really... If the FCOM says you can do it, there's no reason why you shouldn't. As I've always understood it, electrical glitches are fairly common in the first couple of years of service...

oldchina:


The slide rule was great but carbon paper sucked.

For your info carbon paper is still widely used in India

In my experience, electrical glitches are more common in the last couple of years of service.

vapilot2204 said "In my experience, electrical glitches are more common in the last couple of years of service."

A sure sign of a rushed production line.

This incident does seem weirdly covered up. "The passengers were in no danger." Nonsense, they blew 8 tires on landing! That's danger!

-drl