Another QF 380 incident

[drron]

I wonder when No news will catch up.
Incident: Qantas A388 at London on Dec 4th 2009, nose wheel steering failure
"A Qantas Airbus A380-800, registration VH-OQA performing flight QF-31 from Singapore (Singapore) to London Heathrow,EN (UK), suffered a nose wheel steering failure while landing on Heathrow's runway 27L. The airplane slowed safely, but could not vacate the runway and needed to be towed to the apron.

The airplane needed spare parts to be flown in resulting in a delay of 10 hours. The airplane is currently enroute estimated to reach Singapore with a delay of 9 hours.

The airplane had encountered a similiar nose wheel steering problem on July 4th 2009, see Incident: Qantas A388 at London on Jul 4th 2009, failed nose gear steering."

 

[NM]

I bet that caused a few go-arounds and headaches for LHR ATC for a while.

 

[Mr Ed]

There will always be something go wrong on such a big new plane. Even having all the cough retentive people in the world building and double checking and everything else that must go on with such a big build will not iron out all the bugs.

 

[samh004]

Did the 747 initially have similar problems?

 

[straitman]

Did the 747 initially have similar problems?

I don't know but do not see the relevance. The 747 had some problems but whether they are/were the same does not matter.

 

[markis10]

I don't know but do not see the relevance. The 747 had some problems but whether they are/were the same does not matter.

Dont think its relevant at all, the level of technology in the A380 by comparison to the 747 means you are naturally going to have more issues. Perhaps a comparison to the dreamliner when it enters service might have some significance when it enters commercial service late as well in the next few years.

 

[ejb]

Did the 747 initially have similar problems?

I don't know but do not see the relevance. The 747 had some problems but whether they are/were the same does not matter.

Dont think its relevant at all, the level of technology in the A380 by comparison to the 747 means you are naturally going to have more issues. Perhaps a comparison to the dreamliner when it enters service might have some significance when it enters commercial service late as well in the next few years.

Guys,

I think Sam was merely asking if the B747 had initial problems when first entering service, and I think it is very relevant.

Yes the B747 did have problems from what I have read and eventually most were overcome with design changes. The A388 has had problems and I am sure that Airbus will iron out the dramas in the coming years.

All new equipment has dramas, look at the early releases of some cars, and over the first months and years they overcome them with design changes/software fixes until they are more reliable.

People think that everything should work perfectly from day one but it all takes time to perfect.

My 2c worth.

ejb

 

[holdenvxman]

Did the 747 initially have similar problems?

One of the major problems I can recall was a UA 747 that had a rapid decompression with a cargo door blowing out, some standing and sitting near the hole lost their lives. The floor was with the locking mechanisms on the cargo door. All 747's were req to change the mechanisms.

 

[Dee Thom]

One of the major problems I can recall was a UA 747 that had a rapid decompression with a cargo door blowing out, some standing and sitting near the hole lost their lives. The floor was with the locking mechanisms on the cargo door. All 747's were req to change the mechanisms.

The DC10 also had big problems with cargo doors, resulting in three or four crashing with zero survivors, it took the Douglas Company a while to fix the issues, and though the DC10 was finally an excellent aircraft, airlines were reluctant to buy them, due to customer fear. Most ended up as freight carriers...............

Cheers Dee

 

[mannej]

The DC10 also had big problems with cargo doors, resulting in three or four crashing with zero survivors, it took the Douglas Company a while to fix the issues, and though the DC10 was finally an excellent aircraft, airlines were reluctant to buy them, due to customer fear. Most ended up as freight carriers...............

Cheers Dee

There were 2 incidents resulting from the Cargo Door problem. AA96 everyone survived the incident, whilst Turkish 981, 346 people lost their lives. MDD was aware of the possible problems with the cargo doors during testing, and chose to ignore the issues.

As for the point with the 747 v 380 and the amount of technology, it is all relevant. The 747 would have been in the same boat as the 380 with how advanced it technology was. I agree withejb on this one

 

[markis10]

As for the point with the 747 v 380 and the amount of technology, it is all relevant. The 747 would have been in the same boat as the 380 with how advanced it technology was. I agree withejb on this one

Point being the complexity of todays aircraft versus those designed 30-40 years ago is very different, the more complex the aircraft the problems you are likely to have, so a direct comparison is difficult to make. As mentioned the DC10 had significant design issues, not only with its door, AA191 and UA232 are good examples of that where design was a factor, I will never forget the photo I saw as an ATC of AA191 upside down meters from the ground. TWA800 is a good example of a flaw that affects all widebody aircraft that first became apparent in the 747-100. In that time there has also been major changes in maintenance and ground handling procedures to complicate things further. The A380 is an evolution of the concept first brought to reality by the likes of the 747 and DC10, one hopes the lessons from being the first have already been learned in that context.

 

[mannej]

Markis 10, yes that is completely true, but the point is not comparing the technology of today compared to yesterday, it is that the 747 would have been revolutionary 40 yrs ago, so in relative terms, the technology would have been complex compared to existing aircraft of the 50's, which is the same as the 380 in terms of existing aircraft (747 included).

So Sam_h, and EJB are not trying to compare the original 747's technology compared to the current 380 technology, but are stating how it is all relative.

FWIW, Those Nose wheel steering failures aren't isolated to just the A380, I have been delayed 8+hrs on an A330 with a Nose wheel steering failure

 

[markis10]

Markis 10, yes that is completely true, but the point is not comparing the technology of today compared to yesterday, it is that the 747 would have been revolutionary 40 yrs ago, so in relative terms, the technology would have been complex compared to existing aircraft of the 50's, which is the same as the 380 in terms of existing aircraft (747 included).

Perhaps we just have to agree to disagree , the 747 and DC10 were the first of a completely new cateogry of aircraft, the widebody heavy, lets not forget the 747 was also designed to have dual decks running the entire length of the aircraft just like the A380, the A380 is hardly revoluntionary by comparison and is more a result of evolution!

I also doubt you can say the 747 was more complex than the aircraft of the 50's, after all the Concorde and F111 we both started before the 747 in the late 50's and by the nature, had more complex designs, as evidenced by the time the F111's spent in storage while they fixed some serious issues (and why we had F4 phantoms in the RAAF for a number of years). I would suggest comparisons to the A340 would be more apt when talking about the A380!

 

[straitman]

I don't know but do not see the relevance. The 747 had some problems but whether they are/were the same does not matter.

... and now we are back to what I said in post #5.

Elaborated, all new aircraft, cars, boats etc have issues, but we very quickly learn what the issues are, fix them and move onward. It does not matter whether they are the same or different. When ever each of the types mentioned came into being they were the latest and greatest and as such are susceptible to human design error and mechanical failure. What matters is how we deal with these issues and how we incorporate appropriate procedures to ensure that the issues are minimised and that safety is enhanced.