AussieAl From Australia, joined Apr 2007, 33 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 18110 times:
Good to know that the aircraft is safely on the ground. A news flash on TV, Channel 7 Sydney, a few minutes ago was worded to leave the impression that the craft had taken off and was in the air. I suppose that is more dramatic and a teaser to get people to watch a later news bulletin.
Jerald01 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 161 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 8960 times:
Years ago I was in ATC at McGuire AFB in New Jersey (USA). A commercial B-747 had taken off from a USAF base in Germany, bound for McGuire. On take-off the crew heard several "pops", and determined they had blown at least five or six tires. Having a full load of fuel and over 350 pax on board, they decided to go ahead and cross the pond rather than turn around and land back at the departure base.
We in ATC were notified that this aircraft was coming our way, so we prepared as much as we could, as did the emergency response people on the base. Dozens of ambulances were called in, as well as doctors, nurses, dentists, and whatever else anyone thought might be needed.
A few hours later the aircraft showed up on our radar, right in front of a DC-8 that was going to Philadelphia and a C-141 that was also coming to McGuire. We knew that the main runway would be closed just as soon as the B-747 touched down, so we asked the crew of that aircraft if they would mind letting us get the C-141 down first. Their answer was a very firm "Yes, we would mind. We have a full load of passengers who are ready for this emergency landing and they want to get down NOW!"
Needless to say, we obliged. But it got really interesting as a couple of things happened that we hadn't thought of. First of all, the B-747 was landing on our long runway (of course), so that meant the C-141 would have to land on the shorter, cross-runway. But just as we were about to clear him to land, the DC-8, which was in front of the C-141, decalred an emergency and requested an immediate clearance to land at McGuire. Our controller cleared him to land on the cross-runway, and the C-141 was cleared to land behind him.
So, the sequence went this way: The DC-8 lands on the cross-runway and stops at the far end. The B-747 lands on the long runway (what a show of sparks that was! It lit up the whole area!). Then the C-141 lands on the cross-runway... and has to turn off into the grass alongside the runway in order to keep from hitting the DC-8 (who was stopped dead on the runway... out fuel!)
What a night!
"There may be old pilots, and there may be bold pilots, but there are darn few green cows"
That was by far the craziest story I have ever heard in aviation. I can only imagine what that night would have been like. I am kind of surprised the 747 captain wouldn't let C-141 ahead. It wasn't like their emergency was that impending due to the fact they crossed the Atlantic.
Bjwonline From Australia, joined Mar 2007, 94 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 8192 times:
It never ceases to amaze me how the Australian media and public jump on any minor incident with QF and turn it into a HUGE DISASTER! To take witness accounts from a dumbo who had never been on a plane before (as was done in one Australian news article) and think they know at what stage the plane was in takeoff is just ridiculous and frustrating!
Australian media is always more than happy to jump on any bad news of any large company and convince the public that it's all going so so bad, yet if anything was to ever really go wrong with that company (a la Ansett) then they would be the first to say how terrible Aussies were to turn their backs on such a good brand.
Quoting VikingA346 (Reply 10): Do we know if the aircraft hit debris and that's what caused the tires to puncture? As we all know, the concorde crashed because of debris on the runway that punctured the tire.
Not sure. Were there any CO flights earlier that afternoon?
KiwiinOz From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 2139 posts, RR: 5 Reply 21, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 8159 times:
Quoting QF108 (Reply 16): Question, how likely is it that the nose wheel was actually off the ground like I have read in an article and heard from passengers on Channel 7. If this was the case im thinking it was past V1.
Unlikely, probably just what it feels like from a passenger point of view
AJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2380 posts, RR: 26 Reply 23, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 7944 times:
Quoting CupraIbiza (Reply 15): Apparently the crew didnt have a choice. The rejected takeoff was implemented automatically by the computer as soon as the warning light
There is no automatic implementation of an RTO. When the Captain makes the decision to reject the takeoff the thrust levers are retarded to idle, the RTO function of the autobrakes activates, the Captain selects reversers to the interlocks, the speedbrake automatically deploys and full reverse is applied on any operating engine.
No computer made the decision to reject this takeoff.
ZuluAviator994 From Australia, joined Mar 2008, 510 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 7869 times:
This is Unfortunate.
My mum's supposed to fly to Australia on Thursday (Friday for you Aussies)
And she's flying on Qantas Flight 12, but nothing will happen I'm sure.
Lucky she didn't fly on this particular flight.
Shame to see Wunala like this though.
Good job Qantas for having the flight rescheduled as timely as possible.
If Speed is life, Altitude is life insurance. No one has ever collided with the sky.
25 ZuluAviator994: Geez, sounds like a regular day at the office doesn't it? Way to handle it well. Regards
26 CupraIbiza: Thanks for that. Its why I started it with "apparently" because I heard it on the local radio
27 AJ: No problem! There is a lot of misinformation out there about this event,
28 JetMech: I don't think it would be usable. First of all it would probably sustain mechanical damage from the wheel rim bearing down upon the carcass with the
29 Heathrow: Not wunala . I love her. Ah well, atleast she'll be back in comission soon
30 QANTAS077: grow up..some of the posts that carry on like the plane was written off sound exactly like half the garbage spread by Murdoch media, it had an incide
31 Zkpilot: not to worry the Vomit Comet is fine...
32 NG1Fan: Too many journalists, not enough news! NG1Fan
33 Asuflyer05: Wow I was out there Sunday and Monday. Would have been interesting to see.
34 HAWK21M: Only an RTO would cause the Tire deflation during T/O. Was wondering same too before reading the Article. regds MEL
35 EK413: Standard for the tires to deflate on a RTO... Its designed this way to prevent further damage to the aircraft and prevent a fire... Thank you... A st
36 WunalaYann: I knew my shoes weren't fitting too well today... But I did make it to the office, though.
37 Peh: Does anyone know which warning light illuminated? I'm thinking it must have been indicating something serious for the captain to abort the takeoff rat
38 EK413: Just an update for all... The aircraft VH-OEJ has returned safely this morning to SYD as QF012... EK413
39 Zkpilot: I just saw VH-OEJ in the heavy mx hanger at SYD today (is the fully enclosed hanger with scaffolding, jacks etc)... not sure if this was scheduled, or
40 EK413: The enclosed hanger has nil scaffolding, this would of been a normal routine check... As you already stated most longhaul carriers (BA,VS etc) aircra
41 CupraIbiza: Slightly off topic but I thought QF heavy MX was moving to AVV??
42 Zkpilot: The tail was enclosed in movable scafold, the nose was up on jacks and there was a lot of other scaffolding around which I don't normally see in the
43 Teamspeedy: OEJ flew out of Sydney this morning as QF11