'Jinxed' Qantas plane replaced by A380

[Slats7]

'Jinxed' Qantas plane replaced by A380 | Travel News | News.com.au

QANTAS will retire the troubled jumbo jet involved in a mid-air explosion last year and an engine shutdown that forced the pilot to divert to Perth on Wednesday.


The airline says the 18-year-old Boeing 747 will be paid off from commercial service in November along with four other ageing jumbos as part of the carrier's fleet replacement program, reports The Advertiser.

It was already planned to be retired in November but the media try and make it look like the retirement has been forced by this incident.

 

[Warks]

I can't say I would have been rushing to book a flight on it.

 

[straitman]

I can't say I would have been rushing to book a flight on it.

I can't see why:!:

The two incidents are as related as having a gas bottle explode in the boot of your car and then some months later having an engine fuel line leak.

Would you call the car jinxed:?:

 

[Slats7]

I can't say I would have been rushing to book a flight on it.

Would you not board if you found out you were flying on this aircraft when you arrived at the airport?

 

[codash1099]

Hardly worth repairing after the oxygen bottle incident, was it? It did however save QF's record of not having a write-off.

 

[straitman]

Hardly worth repairing after the oxygen bottle incident, was it? It did however save QF's record of not having a write-off.

Agreed:!:

 

[Warks]

I can't see why:!:

The two incidents are as related as having a gas bottle explode in the boot of your car and then some months later having an engine fuel line leak.

Would you call the car jinxed:?:

Ya gotta think of the karma man! Everyone would be with the negative waves! That's gotta end badly!

 

[straitman]

Ya gotta think of the karma man! Everyone would be with the negative waves! That's gotta end badly!

Mmmmmm:!:

If you say so. :shock:

 

[harvyk]

Would you call the car jinxed:?:

Maybe... The word lemon would certainly come to mind...

I fail to see what the big issue is, the way I see it is that plane has a fault, pilots make a decision, plane lands safely at alternative airport in accordance with their training, everyone is fine...

I have to admit, I'm not looking forward to the day that QF makes it's last B747 flight... I prefer them over the A380...

 

[oz_mark]

I can't see why:!:

The two incidents are as related as having a gas bottle explode in the boot of your car and then some months later having an engine fuel line leak.

Would you call the car jinxed:?:

More likely in the case of the car. In the case of the plane, we don't even know if the engine in this case was even on the plane at the time of the incident. Car engines get changed less often

Actually, I am sure that if you were to follow the service history of any plane, you'd think they were all jinxed. Just that sometimes the problems aren't so spectacular.

 

[docjames]

If you go the the atsb website there's a weekly summary of similar incidents. If they reported even every pax a/c >50 seats, there'd be no room for any other news.

Most recent:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/690644/aws210809.pdf


The only reason this made any news is because
- nonews love having a go at QF
- it's a 747 (ie high capacity)
- it's the same 747

I'd suggest if one doesnt want to travel on an a/c that's ever had a mechanical fault of some sort, you're not going to be left with many choices of a/c, airlines or flights. The DJ compressor stall on takeoff is just as worrying as a 744 losing one engine (if not more so!). Or the 737 with windshear on approach to ADL would be a worry too.

 

[Oneworldplus2]

Just a quick question.
747's can fly with only 3 engines in operation.
Why couldn't the 747 just have continued to Sydney? Was there a fuel leak that might have drained all the fuel? Or not enough fuel to get to the final destination?

BA 9 incident
British Airways Flight 9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Another BA incedent.
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news...l-reports-ba-747-3-engine-lax-man-flight.html

 

[oz_mark]

Just a quick question.
747's can fly with only 3 engines in operation.
Why couldn't the 747 just have continued to Sydney? Was there a fuel leak that might have drained all the fuel? Or not enough fuel to get to the final destination?

I guess the pilot decided it was the best option. Here are the rules.

As I read it, you go to the nearest airport, unless you can justify going somewhere else.

 

[docjames]

I'd prefer the pilot to go to nearest suitable airport. You never know if there may be another engine affected, another problem arise.

 

[markis10]

Maybe... The word lemon would certainly come to mind... ..

Speaking of lemons, I wonder if the ugly sisters are also slated for retirement?

 

[mannej]

The plane becomes more inefficient with 3 engines, so there may be fuel issues if there is a need to hold etc.

I was on vh-qpa in feb, and if it wasn't for some investigative work I wouldn't have known that it was the same A330 involved in the mid air scare on oct 7 08. I wouldn't have any qualms even if I knew.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[straitman]

The plane becomes more inefficient with 3 engines, so there may be fuel issues if there is a need to hold etc.

Not necessarily, BUT it does become a major issue if they lose a second engine.

 

[oz_mark]

Not necessarily, BUT it does become a major issue if they lose a second engine.

Although not as major an issue as would be the case if you started out with two engines!

 

[straitman]

Although not as major an issue as would be the case if you started out with two engines!

I guess so.

 

[Warks]

I can't say I would have been rushing to book a flight on it.

Well to put it another way, it's not like it's the last steam service from Sydney to Newcastle.



Anyone with the slightest phobia about flying is better off not knowing the history!