The sight no flight passenger should see

[VHOEJ]

Just imagine if this was another airline - the media would have been at the airport interviewing the passengers:

IT WAS when they looked out the window that the fear set in.

Airline passengers braced for their lives when their flight made a sudden U-turn and they saw an idle propeller just "swinging in the breeze".
The Daily Telegraph reports passengers on the REX flight from Griffith to Sydney then spent a tense hour in a holding pattern before the plane made an emergency landing.
"You're up there with just one engine so you're just relying on it hoping nothing goes wrong ... it's a very unique experience," passenger Justin Sanson said.
"The landing was fine, nothing out of the ordinary except for the flight attendant screaming 'Heads down and stay down'.


Read more: The sight no flight passenger should see | News.com.au​

 

[pauly7]

I'm sure it was Qantas' fault somehow

 

[Justinf]

Propeller 'swinging' in the breeze sounds like it was only semi-attached. Truth it was slowly rotating due to the drag.

 

[markis10]

I Wonder what the reason is for the holding pattern for an hour, does not make sense with a feathered prop and a stack of SF340 suitable alternates?

Maybe they had to wait for the services to arrive, REX has had a few IFS's now.

 

[docjames]

I Wonder what the reason is for the holding pattern for an hour, does not make sense with a feathered prop and a stack of SF340 suitable alternates?

? get down to max landing weight (do Saab340s have fuel dump provison - I'd have thought not).

Still, you'd think you'd just land overweight and do the required checks afterwards.....:?:

 

[markis10]

? get down to max landing weight (do Saab340s have fuel dump provison - I'd have thought not).

Still, you'd think you'd just land overweight and do the required checks afterwards.....:?:

Don't think so, there is only 200KG between MTOW and it's MLW if it's one of their B+ models, that's 15 minutes of fuel burn worst case and I doubt it was at MTOW.

 

[docjames]

Don't think so, there is only 200KG between MTOW and it's MLW if it's one of their B+ models, that's 15 minutes of fuel burn worst case and I doubt it was at MTOW.

I knew you'd know that sort of detail markis10!

Wow, wonder what the reason is, an hour circling seems weird on one engine. Unless the "hour" was as judged by a passenger, when perhaps the real amount of time was less (but felt like an hour).

Presumably there'll be an atsb inestigation so will have to remember to look that up once complete.

 

[jb747]

Well, I'd much rather see a feathered prop out there, than one that isn't, and is being driven by the airflow.

Time seems to expand for passengers, whilst it compresses for the crew.

Whilst I have no idea of what procedures the crew needed to carry out, it's worth noting that there is no compunction to land the instant the weight hits MLW. You land when you are ready. A rushed approach is much more likely to go wrong than one that is coldly calculated over a couple of runs around a holding pattern.

 

[medhead]

Well I finally read this just now as the U-turn and holding pattern (assumed they were holding at SYD) was confusing me.

Anyway, reading the story and despite the headline, reading further in it says they were holding for 40 minutes, took off at 10am, flew 53 km, turned around and landed at 11:16am. I wouldn't expect Griffith to be a particularly busy airport so I expect they were just taking their time to land (as mentioned already)