Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Shackeng on 02 December 2010, 19:08:31
-
Received this from a mate with Qantas. I assume it is fairly accurate, given what has emerged since.
And they got rid of Flight Engineers to save money.....How many pilots did they have on the Flight Deck to sort this one out??? I really do give up on"progress" and the "Two-pilot" Flight deck... Last paragraph says "all the
guys were flat out". As this is a "TWO-PILOT" aeroplane then GHU if it had happened with just the TWO aboard...
*Subject:* A380 problems in detail, and good reason for "if it ain’t Boeing I ain't going!!!”
*Earned at least a year's salary in an hour or so. Everyone gave the pilots a glowing commendation for their
professionalism & they deserved it.*
Here are just SOME of the problems ******* had in Singapore recently aboard
QF32.... I won't bother mentioning the engine explosion!.... oops...
mentioned the engine explosion, sorry.....
* massive fuel leak in the left mid fuel tank (the beast has 11 tanks, including in the horizontal stabiliser on the tail)
* massive fuel leak in the left inner fuel tank
* a hole on the flap canoe/fairing that you could fit your upper body through
the aft gallery in the fuel system failed, preventing many fuel transfer functions
* fuel jettison had problems due to the previous problem above
* bloody great hole in the upper wing surface
* partial failure of leading edge slats
* partial failure of speed brakes/ground spoilers
* shrapnel damage to the flaps
* TOTAL loss of all hydraulic fluid in the Green System (beast has 2 x 5,000 PSI systems, Green and Yellow)
* manual extension of landing gear
* loss of 1 generator and associated systems
* loss of brake anti-skid system
* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using normal method after
landing due to major damage to systems
* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using using the fire
switch!!!!!!!!
Therefore, no fire protection was available for that engine after the explosion in #2
* ECAM warnings about major fuel imbalance because of fuel leaks on
left side, that were UNABLE to be fixed with cross-feeding
* fuel trapped in Trim Tank (in the tail). Therefore, possible major
CofG out-of-balance condition for landing. Yikes!
* and much more to come..........
-
If it ain't a Boeing then I'm not going? They're not doing so well with their upcoming Dreamliner.
Think I'll walk. Or take the boat.
-
I'm not be-littling the engine issue, but Quantas are playing a very unprofessional and dirty game at the moment. They are taking every opportunity to rubbish RR and 'leak' (or should I say shout from the rooftops) information early that should wait for offical reports. There is a political side game going on here by Quantas that is probably called "maximise how much money we can grab in compensation" from this, regardless of who it hurts. I'm all for openess where safety is concerned, but I'm pretty sure RR is also. There was a fantastic program on this year about the design and manufacturer of the Trent900, and their safety and testing is second to none. I've come across the type of customer that Quantas is showing to be, and they are not the customers you really want.
-
I'm not be-littling the engine issue, but Quantas are playing a very unprofessional and dirty game at the moment. They are taking every opportunity to rubbish RR and 'leak' (or should I say shout from the rooftops) information early that should wait for offical reports. There is a political side game going on here by Quantas that is probably called "maximise how much money we can grab in compensation" from this, regardless of who it hurts. I'm all for openess where safety is concerned, but I'm pretty sure RR is also. There was a fantastic program on this year about the design and manufacturer of the Trent900, and their safety and testing is second to none. I've come across the type of customer that Quantas is showing to be, and they are not the customers you really want.
Agreed. Let's wait for the official report and see what Quantas are hiding. ;)
Kevin
-
This is quite interesting.. Report with pictures
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/11/17/the-anatomy-of-the-airbus-a380-qf32-near-disaster/
-
This is quite interesting.. Report with pictures
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/11/17/the-anatomy-of-the-airbus-a380-qf32-near-disaster/
Very interesting blog, and excellent diagrams. :y
-
1 Bus #2 is supposedly automatically powered by Bus #1 in the event of Engine #2 failure – didn’t happen.
2 Buses #3 & #4 will supposedly power Bus #2 in the event that the auto transfer from Bus #1 fails – didn’t happen.
3 After some time the RAT deployed for no apparent reason, locking out (as a load-shedding function) some still functioning services.
4 One of the frequently recurring messages warned of the aircraft approaching the aft CoG limit (the procedure calls for transferring fuel forward), the next message advised of fwd transfer pumps being u/s. This sequence occurred repeatedly.
5 Apparently landing/approach speeds are obtained from the FMS, but there weren’t anywhere near sufficient fields to load all the defects for speed corrections – the crew loaded what they thought were the most critical ones.
6 The crew commenced an approach NOT because they’d sorted out all the problems but because they were very worried about the way-out-of-tolerance and steadily worsening lateral imbalance.
7 The aircraft stopped with just over 100 metres or runway left, brakes temps climbed to 900C and fuel pouring out of the ruptured tank. Unable to shutdown #1 engine (as previously mentioned) but elected not to evacuate as the fire services were attending in great numbers.
8 The other comment from the source of the above (who was on the flight deck) was that the aeroplane did many things they simply didn’t understand and/or failed to operate as expected.
:o
Sounds like the engine failure was just the tip of the iceberg. ;)
Kevin
-
How it stayed in one piece after all that damage is testment to the advances in structural engineering, mighty impressed with that :y
RR seem to be in the doo-doo over this one and if what the blogger says in correct then rightly so :o
-
This is quite interesting.. Report with pictures
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/11/17/the-anatomy-of-the-airbus-a380-qf32-near-disaster/
Well posted W - I found that very interesting. 8-) :y
-
This is quite interesting.. Report with pictures
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/11/17/the-anatomy-of-the-airbus-a380-qf32-near-disaster/
Well posted W - I found that very interesting. 8-) :y
When you see the pic in the newspapers of the hole in the wing you forget about all the systems and other stuff that are inside the wings.. Very scary a lot of damage went on inside the wing..
What would have happened if the debris came out sideways into the cabin and not up..
-
Normal crew on the flight deck would be two, they were, very, very, fortunate in their choice of extra crew, who were, a check & training Captain being checked by another!!!