Qantas 747 forced to return to Bangkok after engine problem

[medhead]

Every incident (mechanical or other) QF have increases the chances of a catastrophic failure of one of their mechanisims, we just hope that mechanism that fails is not one that stops passengers safely alighting the aircraft. This is simple risk modeling not scare mongering.

As others have said, the chance of a catastrophic failure doesn't change, with every incident. It is always the same as the same protective systems are in place for every flight. The same protections that ensured incident A wasn't catastrophic will ensure that a similar incident in the future isn't catastrophic. It would be incorrect to assume that because one incident has occurred the next incident is going to be catastrophic because that earlier incident occurred. In addition there are multiple layers of protection. A catastrophic incident will occur when multiple layers fail to protect as they should do. The occurrence of minor incidents tells me that the layers are not failing and that actually provides confidence in the system. The big hope is that Qantas is learning from these incidents and are making any relevant corrections.

 

[reductionist]

"they (QF) are due for a major incident. Not because of recent activity, but because stastics say they will"

With all due respect to yourself and your pilot friend I'm glad that someone who thinks "statistically" QF is due to for a catastrophe is not partaking in the 747 programme.

You see this down at the casino all the time. People walk up to a roulette table and see the last 5 results have been red so they dump a whole bunch of chips on black.

 

[serfty]

With all due respect to yourself and your pilot friend I'm glad that someone who thinks "statistically" QF is due to for a catastrophe is not partaking in the 747 programme.

You see this down at the casino all the time. People walk up to a roulette table and see the last 5 results have been red so they dump a whole bunch of chips on black.

Absolutely! Now, here's some basic stats (Ignoring zero's/green numbers):

• The odds of red coming up on any one spin 1:2.
• The odds of red coming up on five consecutive spins: 1:32
• The odds of red coming up on a spin immediately after it has already come up on five consecutive spins: 1:2.

 

[medhead]

Absolutely! Now, here's some basic stats (Ignoring zero's/green numbers):

• The odds of red coming up on any one spin 1:2.
• The odds of red coming up on five consecutive spins: 1:32
• The odds of red coming up on a spin immediately after it has already come up on five consecutive spins: 1:2.

One minor pedantic point, the odds of red coming up are slightly less than 1:2, due to the green 0, something like 48.5%. But the odds of the 6 consecutive red is still ~48.5%

The 0 is the reason the house always wins even on roulette.

 

[JohnK]

One question that needs be asked of QF

'Are the near misses simply near misses, perhaps not this issue, or are the near misses the result of poor management?'

If they are simply near misses then statistically the chance is there for a major one but I would not worry and still fly QF or any other airline.

If the near misses are the result of poor management then I am worried and would need to seriously consider whether I should be flying QF in future.

 

[drron]

All I can say is that the Manilla 747 incident and the recent A380 incident on many other airlines would have been a catastrophic incident.The skill and training of QF Captains prevented serious consequences-in that respect I know which airline I would rather be on.
As to this BKK incident-isn't this an example of what jb747 was talking about in the thread on QF safety-as safety is paramount the captain took the safe option not the commercial option.

 

[oz_mark]

One minor pedantic point, the odds of red coming up are slightly less than 1:2, due to the green 0, something like 48.5%. But the odds of the 6 consecutive red is still ~48.5%

The 0 is the reason the house always wins even on roulette.

I suspect that's why serfty said 'ignoringzero's/green numbers'. Anyway, a little anecdote.

I, as a youngster, used to be terrified of flying and I used to reasoning that they were due for a catstrophe as an argument not to go somewhere. That was in 1974!

 

[NM]

Absolutely! Now, here's some basic stats (Ignoring zero's/green numbers):

• The odds of red coming up on any one spin 1:2.
• The odds of red coming up on five consecutive spins: 1:32
• The odds of red coming up on a spin immediately after it has already come up on five consecutive spins: 1:2.

Of course that is assuming there is no other external influence operating. One could argue that past statistics relating to and event may impact future probability of a similar event occurring if there is an underlying culture or systemic problem at the airline that was the cause of the previous events.

Similarly after an event, if the culture or systems are changed in response to identifying the cause of the event, one could expect that the probability of that even re-occurring is reduced.

I have seen nothing that would suggest to me that the statistical probability of an event happening at Qantas is increased as a result of previous historic occurrences. In fact I would suggest the opposite, in that the culture and systems/procedures at Qantas is such that the repeat of previous events such as VH-OJH excursion at BKK are less likely to happen as a result of lessons learned and implemented.

 

[medhead]

I suspect that's why serfty said 'ignoringzero's/green numbers'.

:!: I really need to learn to read. what a goose!

 

[mannej]

Does nearly missing something mean you have hit it?;-)


Sent from my iPhone using AFF Mobile

 

[gumpy]

Wow some people's love for QF is blind...

The number of recent issues QF has had is rediculous... I'm sad I have to fly with them for work. if it were my money i'd place it else where...

 

[Mal]

The number of recent issues QF has had is rediculous... I'm sad I have to fly with them for work. if it were my money i'd place it else where...

The number of incidents that they have had is no different to any other major carrier in the world flying the same types of planes etc.

It's our pathetic Australian media which seems to think that every last "hiccup" is newsworthy.

 

[gumpy]

The number of incidents that they have had is no different to any other major carrier in the world flying the same types of planes etc.

It's our pathetic Australian media which seems to think that every last "hiccup" is newsworthy.

As much as I'm glad that QF don't push on when there are issues... I don't feel these are just hiccups... Hiccups are things that delay a flight by an hour... like they messed up the catering...

And yes the Aussie media do pick on QF but if DJ, Tiger or anyone else flying in Australia messed up they'd report it as well right?

I don't like engine issues... cabin pressure issues fine... unless there's a massive hole in the place no one dies but I just don't like engine issues...

 

[nlagalle]

Wow some people's love for QF is blind...

The number of recent issues QF has had is rediculous... I'm sad I have to fly with them for work. if it were my money i'd place it else where...

That should read the number of incidents reported is ridiculous. Read avherald to get some perspective. I fly QF for work and won't be changing anytime soon.

 

[Mal]

And yes the Aussie media do pick on QF but if DJ, Tiger or anyone else flying in Australia messed up they'd report it as well right?

The problem is that they are fixated on Qantas. Other airlines seem to get away with a lot more before being reported on.

Look at the media coverage that Emirates got for their "massive near miss" in Melbourne in 2009. I believe this was the most serious (large plane) aviation issue in Australia for that year... and it came very close to a huge crash. Yet the media wrote a couple of small articles, and then shut up about the issue.
Investigation: AO-2009-012 - Tailstrike - Melbourne Airport, Vic., 20 March 2009 A6-ERG, Airbus A340-541

There was a relatively damning report against Jetstar released by ATSB today (poor crew training for a certain type of issue). Will this make the media tomorrow with the same gusto?

 

[oz_mark]

I fly QF for work and won't be changing anytime soon.

I think on OH&S grounds, your employer should put you on a different airline :mrgreen:

 

[mannej]

Wow some people's love for QF is blind...

The number of recent issues QF has had is rediculous... I'm sad I have to fly with them for work. if it were my money i'd place it else where...

I don't think it is a case of blind love. I think it's more a case of selective reporting from the oz media. MH had an engine IFSD on a flight to PER, turned around, took off again with a replacement which indeed had another IFSD. Was it reported in the Malay media? Nothing at all.
The media does not offer any context with it's reporting (apart from a select few). Why could Geoff Thomas quote QF having the least amount of IFSD's in the world after QF32?

My point being is that things aren't necessarily as bad as what is portrayed, and that all these incidents end in the same manner


Sent from my iPhone using AFF Mobile

 

[medhead]

And yes the Aussie media do pick on QF but if DJ, Tiger or anyone else flying in Australia messed up they'd report it as well right?

The short answer is no.

Mal provided the long answer

 

[nlagalle]

As much as I'm glad that QF don't push on when there are issues... I don't feel these are just hiccups... Hiccups are things that delay a flight by an hour... like they messed up the catering...

And yes the Aussie media do pick on QF but if DJ, Tiger or anyone else flying in Australia messed up they'd report it as well right?

Actually they don't, if you were to compare what was reported in the paper compared to incidents, Qantas gets smashed everytime. I think even the public are a bit sick of it too when you read some of the comments.

 

[drron]

Wow some people's love for QF is blind...

The number of recent issues QF has had is rediculous... I'm sad I have to fly with them for work. if it were my money i'd place it else where...

No.I joined Aadvantage in 2002.From then my preferred method of leaving Australia was JAL-unfortunately they have now axed the BNE service.Domestically I fly DJ.So definitely not a Qantas lover.Yet I still think the media reports on QF incidents(with some exceptions)are massive mis reporting-and yes I regularly review the Aviation Herald.