Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
QF A380 Stuck At LHR 11th July  
User currently offlinehotplane From UK - England, joined Jul 2006, 1038 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 17880 times:

VH-OQB is currently sitting at LHR having turned back on the luchtime QF32 departure due to a technical issue. It originally departed around 1230L, with the pilot declaring a problem shortly after. The aircraft then circled for 3.5 hours to burn fuel before returning to land on 27R at 1600L. It was due to leave again at 1645L as QF32D but as of 2350 is still here.


?
28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineshamrock321 From Ireland, joined May 2008, 1596 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 17568 times:

Ouch, imagine flying around for that amount of time and not having gone anywhere! Any update on it?

User currently offlineseamefly From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 317 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 17544 times:

3.5 HOURS to burn fuel??? I thought my emergency landing in/out of NRT with 45 mins. dumping fuel on a 742 was long enough !!

User currently offlineB6A322 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 291 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 3 days ago) and read 15924 times:

According to AV Herald, the aircraft turned back due to flight attendants reporting "unusual noise from the cargo hold". The flight turned back as a precaution.

Following an inspection of the aircraft, nothing abnormal was found with the aircraft.

However, due to a crew time out, the aircraft had to be overnighted in LHR. Guess she'll be having a 24 hour delay. Ouch.

Here's the link: http://avherald.com/h?article=42e298bd&opt=0

[Edited 2010-07-11 23:24:27]


The content I post is solely my own opinion. It is not an official statement by/of/for nor representative of any company
User currently offlineimag From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2007, 197 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 15793 times:

thanks for that post... i saw it come into land at about 1600 but when i looked last night i couldn't find any info...

User currently offlinejetfuel From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2215 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 15305 times:

Seems an odd reason to return.


Where's the passion gone out of the airline industry? The smell of jetfuel and the romance of taking a flight....
User currently offlinebohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 15265 times:

Quoting B6A322 (Reply 3):
According to AV Herald, the aircraft turned back due to flight attendants reporting "unusual noise from the cargo hold". The flight turned back as a precaution.

Following an inspection of the aircraft, nothing abnormal was found with the aircraft.

I'm curious to know what "noise" the flight attendants were hearing. I'll bet it turns out to be one of the aircraft systems operating normally.


User currently offlinespeedmarque From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 684 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 15053 times:

Quoting bohica (Reply 6):
curious to know what "noise" the flight attendants were hearing. I'll bet it turns out to be one of the aircraft systems operating normally.

Er, actually cabin crew are experts in how the cabin sounds at any stage of flight. We spend hours and hours in the same place and know when a noise isn't normal.


User currently offlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 781 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 12551 times:

A comment on the aforementioned AV Herald site states...

'It was caused by the panel that covers the area that is used to connect the toilet service unit to the aircraft. It wasnt closed properly and then started to flap about eventully detaching. I guess the flaping noise hitting the aircraft was heard.



The upside was that it was the first time I had seen three A380s parked next to each other at LHR, different airlines as well!

[Edited 2010-07-12 03:57:10]

User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 11984 times:

Quoting bohica (Reply 6):
I'll bet it turns out to be one of the aircraft systems operating normally.

Better the flight attendants reporting a strange noise that turns out to be nothing than the other way around.

I have heard the odd story of cabin crew not reporting hearing a loud bang in the back during takeoff as the aircraft had a tailstrike which the pilots did not hear or notice, and the aircraft proceeded to destination with a bad case of diaper rash...



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineHonza From Czech Republic, joined May 2005, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 11628 times:

Quoting hotplane (Thread starter):
departed around 1230L, with the pilot declaring a problem shortly after

..approximately 2h after departure, over Krakow, Poland.

We were all expecting to see 6-contrail Mryia-like Airbus  , but this is what it looked like:
http://www.planes.cz/cs/photo/108186...qantas-qfa-qf-nad-prahou-prg-lkpr/


User currently offlineaogdesk From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 935 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 10547 times:

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 8):
'It was caused by the panel that covers the area that is used to connect the toilet service unit to the aircraft. It wasnt closed properly and then started to flap about eventully detaching. I guess the flaping noise hitting the aircraft was heard.

So, in essence, a 24 hour delay because the lav dump guy couldn't take two seconds to properly close the access panel?

Ouch.


User currently offlinebonusonus From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 10290 times:

Quoting Honza (Reply 10):

If they dumped fuel, what was the reason for circling for three and a half hours?


User currently offlinezkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4817 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 10173 times:

Quoting speedmarque (Reply 7):
Quoting bohica (Reply 6):
curious to know what "noise" the flight attendants were hearing. I'll bet it turns out to be one of the aircraft systems operating normally.

Er, actually cabin crew are experts in how the cabin sounds at any stage of flight. We spend hours and hours in the same place and know when a noise isn't normal.

  
Also likely that an SO would have been sent back into the cabin to investigate.

Quoting francoflier (Reply 9):
Better the flight attendants reporting a strange noise that turns out to be nothing than the other way around.

   exactly. CRM.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineMYT332 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 9112 posts, RR: 70
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 9962 times:

Quoting bonusonus (Reply 12):
If they dumped fuel, what was the reason for circling for three and a half hours?

Typical hold time at LHR.


  



One Life, Live it.
User currently offlineqqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2271 posts, RR: 13
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 9668 times:

Quoting francoflier (Reply 9):
Better the flight attendants reporting a strange noise that turns out to be nothing than the other way around.

Lets not forget the loud "bang" flight attendants heard a couple of years ago just after takeoff from DFW to CDG on an AA 767-300. The pilots decided it was a cargo shift and continued the flight. After landing in Paris, they were notified by ATC that a large panel was missing from the bottom of their a/c. It turned out to be an access panel for the a/c system, near the landing gear and not structurally significant, but still, a return was most certainly warranted had they known the full extent of what occurred.

http://cbs11tv.com/local/AA.damaged.plane.2.718483.html

Or another time I was on an aircraft and there was a loud grinding sound and vibration under the floor between the aft galley and rear lavs -- it could be heard and felt ten rows into the cabin. When reported to the pilots (we were still on the ground, at the gate) the FO came back to check it out. He quickly deemed the noise was "normal" and went back to the cockpit. The crew protested, questioning how intimate his knowledge was with the aft cabin of the a/c. The captain heeded our protests and called maintenance, which subsequently found the motor for the lav blower had nearly disintegrated and was grinding metal on metal. It easily could have started a fire had the motor run enough or long enough. The short term fix was simple: pull the circuit breaker and write it up in the logbook. The lavs were still functional above 10,000' as they use pressure to create the suction. Below 10,000' feet they use their own blower to create suction, so the lavs simply weren't usable below 10,000'.

It is always prudent to err on the side of caution, than otherwise. Especially in aviation, where second chances are rarely afforded.



The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
User currently offlinefn1001 From Moldova, joined Sep 2008, 234 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 8911 times:

Quoting Honza (Reply 10):
Quoting hotplane (Thread starter):
departed around 1230L, with the pilot declaring a problem shortly after

..approximately 2h after departure, over Krakow, Poland.

We were all expecting to see 6-contrail Mryia-like Airbus , but this is what it looked like:
http://www.planes.cz/cs/photo/108186...qantas-qfa-qf-nad-prahou-prg-lkpr/

Thank you for sharing!

Were only 2 engines running and making contrails or do we see the fuel coming out of the tanks?



Mai bine să-ţi fie rău decît să-ţi pară rău.
User currently offlineMadDogJT8D From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 397 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 8592 times:

Actually, turning back due to an unusual noise caught by FA's isn't uncommon at all. A few years back, I was flying AAL667 JFK-SXM on a 757 and we got on the runway, began running up the engines, when we throttled down and exited the runway. When we returned to the gate, I spoke with the captain and he informed me that the FA in the rear galley had heard a loud clanking sound underneath the galley on run-up. When mx came onboard, they found that a potable water tank had come loose from its bracket and was clanking around - definitely something you want fixed.

I concur, FA's are some of the best judges as to normal and abnormal noises onboard the aircraft - in most instances.


User currently offlineozglobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2715 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 8094 times:

Quoting hotplane (Thread starter):
The aircraft then circled for 3.5 hours to burn fuel before returning to land

This is completely at odds with the account in the linked article which states fuel was DUMPED not BURNED and that the plane returned 110mns later, NOT 3,5hrs!!



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7958 times:

Back in 2000 I was flying home from college on an AA 767-200 BOS-DFW. We were taxiing out to the runway and I noticed liquid spewing from the #2 engine. The pilots throttled up and it would spew more. Luckily, the F/A's were still running about while we were taxiing and I pulled one of them to the side and told her. We stopped short of the runway and returned to the gate, with said engine shut down. The flight eventually went tech and we were divided up into a 757 flight to DFW and an MD-80 flight to DFW.

UAL


User currently offlineB6A322 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 291 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7818 times:

Quoting bonusonus (Reply 12):
If they dumped fuel, what was the reason for circling for three and a half hours?

On a fully loaded A380, My guess is that it takes quite awhile to dump fuel.

Quoting ozglobal (Reply 18):
the plane returned 110mns later, NOT 3,5hrs!!

110 divided by 60 is 3.5! Didn't you pay attention in basic mathematics :P
Just kidding - Probably a simple calculation error.



The content I post is solely my own opinion. It is not an official statement by/of/for nor representative of any company
User currently offlinespeedmarque From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 684 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7718 times:

Quoting B6A322 (Reply 20):
110 divided by 60 is 3.5! Didn't you pay attention in basic mathematics :P
Just kidding - Probably a simple calculation error.

Er.............look again at YOUR calculation.........

How would you like your humble pie served sir.

Cheers

[Edited 2010-07-12 10:18:05]

User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7645 times:

Quoting B6A322 (Reply 20):
On a fully loaded A380, My guess is that it takes quite awhile to dump fuel.

I'm seriously doubting that it took 3.5 hours or even 2 hours to dump fuel. It simply doesn't take that long to get down to landing weight, and it shouldn't take that long with those things on full blast.

They were over Krakow when they decided to turn back and were approximately 2 hours into the flight, so it's probably safe to say that whoever reported this didn't take into account that they flew back to LHR from Krakow. 110 min was NOT spent dumping fuel.

UAL

[Edited 2010-07-12 10:22:24]

User currently offlineB6A322 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 291 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7645 times:

Quoting speedmarque (Reply 21):

How would you like your humble pie served sir.

I was kidding... well maybe I should have checked my work again, but served fresh out of the oven with whipped cream, please!

Correct answer should be 10 minutes shy of two hours. 



The content I post is solely my own opinion. It is not an official statement by/of/for nor representative of any company
User currently offlinespeedmarque From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 684 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7616 times:

Quoting B6A322 (Reply 23):
I was kidding... well maybe I should have checked my work again, but served fresh out of the oven with whipped cream, please!

Correct answer should be 10 minutes shy of two hours. 

Good choice! Although over here in England I would have custard.

Cheers


25 pylon101 : Isn't it an access to cargo bay on A-380? I guess this is not. I have never thought of it. But it could be. Like in a movie with Jodie Foster. And in
26 Panman : Yeah you can access the cargo bay. But once there then what? You can't access exterior panel access doors through the cargo bay. Well you can but it
27 jetfuel : Credit points to QF for putting safety first. There would be some other airlines that would have said "there's nothing abnormal showing in the flight
28 crownvic : From what an Airbus A380 Managing Tech told me at QF, the A380 is one of the few a/c that can land MTOW, so based on this information, a fuel burn off
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Major QF Systems Outage At LHR - 16 July 06 posted Sun Jul 16 2006 17:13:17 by LHR777
QF A380 Emergency At SYD Yet Again posted Wed Mar 31 2010 02:44:45 by KLXA380
SQ A380 Failed T/O At LHR 11Jan10 posted Tue Jan 12 2010 12:39:14 by Otnysaslhr
AC 857 - Stuck At LHR posted Sat Jul 11 2009 08:14:56 by Liverpool03
The New Concorde A380 Model At LHR posted Sun May 17 2009 03:02:02 by Pjack
A380 Times At LHR? posted Sat Apr 4 2009 16:02:25 by Virginblue4
Another EK A380 Tech At LHR posted Tue Feb 3 2009 15:55:01 by Leezyjet
Which Terminal Will Qantas A380 Use At LHR? posted Tue Nov 18 2008 01:51:36 by SeansasLCY
SQ & QF A380s Rendezvous At LHR, SIN Or SYD? posted Wed Oct 22 2008 07:47:48 by Richardw
Air India Boeing 743 At LHR 11th Apr posted Thu Apr 12 2007 12:39:34 by TheBigOne