QF72 Lawsuit

[docjames]

I believe the pilots are part of the class action i.e., they are also suing.


Edit: Just heard an interview with the US lawyer - 3 pilots and some of the FA's have joined the class action.

Three pilots - does this leg carry relief crew? I thought it was only over (scheduled) 8hrs that a third crew member was carried?

 

[thewinchester]

I can't find anything noted on the ATSB website yet, but I may not be looking hard enough as the last weekly summary I can find is for mid-August

What they may be referring to is this, taken from page 2 of interim report #2:

Comparison with other A330 events
As advised in the first Interim Factual Report there have been two other events with similar anomalous ADIRU behaviour:

• 12 September 2006, involving the same ADIRU in position 1 (serial number 4167) and, the same aircraft (VH-QPA) as that involved in the 7 October 2008 accident

Now I'm surprised this isn't on the ATSB database, and I can't find anything on Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department website either. According to Wikipedia, this was QF68 flying HKG-PER on the aforementioned date.

I can't state with confidence if the QF68 investigation has been rolled into QF72, albeit this would be unlikely.

Three pilots - does this leg carry relief crew? I thought it was only over (scheduled) 8hrs that a third crew member was carried?

According to the report, there was a Pilot-in-Command, Co-Pilot/1st Officer and Second Officer on the rostered crew. The Second Officer was on a commercial pilots license, with only 480hrs on the type - so would he have been along for the ride to lift up his experience??? Anyone with more knowledge here able to explain this one?

 

[mannej]

I am aware of the QF68 incident, I was just intrigued by claims of another ADIRU failure on QPA August 2010 in the PerthNow article

I am wondering if it is true (as I can't find any paper trail or media coverage), not been released yet, or just spin by the lawyer?

 

[odysseus]

This one's getting a lot of press locally, and I haven't heard of others. The US attorney particularly made a lot of noise about Airbus being deficient.

Have there been lawsuits in other situations with similar symptoms i.e. violent falls (although due to turbulence where this doesn't seem to be), such as United?

 

[jb747]

According to the report, there was a Pilot-in-Command, Co-Pilot/1st Officer and Second Officer on the rostered crew. The Second Officer was on a commercial pilots license, with only 480hrs on the type - so would he have been along for the ride to lift up his experience??? Anyone with more knowledge here able to explain this one?

That level of experience and licence is quite normal for a new S/O. They're never carried 'for the ride'.

Whilst the sector itself would not have required a heavy crew, you need to look at the entire pattern of flying that the crew had been doing. For instance, on the 767 it was common to do both legs of the Singapore Perth, and I presume the A330 would have been doing similar, and that throws up a day well over the two man limit. There are also limits on the number of hours flown over the previous week that can also trigger the need for an extra man. Anyway, you need to look beyond that single sector.

 

[docjames]

That level of experience and licence is quite normal for a new S/O. They're never carried 'for the ride'.

Whilst the sector itself would not have required a heavy crew, you need to look at the entire pattern of flying that the crew had been doing. For instance, on the 767 it was common to do both legs of the Singapore Perth, and I presume the A330 would have been doing similar, and that throws up a day well over the two man limit. There are also limits on the number of hours flown over the previous week that can also trigger the need for an extra man. Anyway, you need to look beyond that single sector.

Ah, didnt realise they would do both directions immediately without rest in SIN.

Thanks for clarifying jb747.