Midair engine malfunction hits Qantas jet

[NM]

Here we go again. From news.com.au:

A QANTAS jet serviced days ago in Hong Kong had to turn back to Perth yesterday after the crew was forced to turn off one of its two engines.

Fairfax newspapers say the Airbus A330 with 168 passengers en route to Singapore returned to Perth when an engine oil warning light flashed in the coughpit.

Aviation sources told Fairfax the engine starter motor sheared off because no oil had been put into the motor after its overhaul.

At least the HKG based maintenance folks seem to know how to tow aircraft around an airport in a manner that does not result in significant repairs needed to two aircraft.

 

[straitman]

I just love the way the media us some terminology. It's not possible to just 'turn off' a turbine engine :!:

One does wonder however what happened to the post maintenance inspection and the daily oil level check

An expensive lesson at well over $1million :!:

 

[NM]

An expensive lesson at well over $1million :!:

Lots of expensive maintenance lessons being learned recently - including repairs to a 744 forward pressure bulkhead and a 744 wing.

 

[straitman]

Lots of expensive maintenance lessons being learned recently - including repairs to a 744 forward pressure bulkhead and a 744 wing.

So who's an angry shareholder :?:

 

[NM]

So who's an angry shareholder :?:

Not me. No QF shares in my very limited portfolio. I have always worked on the adage that the best way to get a small fortune from the airline industry is to start with a large fortune. And since I have yet to be in a position to meet the starting criteria, I am happy to say I have not attained the end result either.

But of this one is found to be the result of a failure by an external maintenance provider, QF may not have to foot the entire bill. But there are likely to be lots of questions about this one before any blame can be properly apportioned.

 

[straitman]

Not me. No QF shares in my very limited portfolio. I have always worked on the adage that the best way to get a small fortune from the airline industry is to start with a large fortune. And since I have yet to be in a position to meet the starting criteria, I am happy to say I have not attained the end result either.

Me neither :!:

But of this one is found to be the result of a failure by an external maintenance provider, QF may not have to foot the entire bill. But there are likely to be lots of questions about this one before any blame can be properly apportioned.

If this occurred several days after maintenance I still ask what happened to the daily oil checks which is Qantas policy :?:

Many operators believe that daily is insufficient as turbine engines can often use moderate amounts of oil in normal operation.

 

[NM]

If this occurred several days after maintenance I still ask what happened to the daily oil checks which is Qantas policy :?:

Exactly! So just how blame is apportioned in such a case could take some time and negotiation to complete. But of course, this is all speculation at this time

Many operators believe that daily is insufficient as turbine engines can often use moderate amounts of oil in normal operation.

Reminds me of one of the problems with some old internal combustion engines that, near the end of their life, limited the range of the aircraft based on oil consumption and not fuel consumption. Just look at the HARS Connie for an example .

 

[Evan]

Do they mean oil in the engine or is there some different oiling system for the starter ?
I have often see ground crew doing the oil checks on QF A330's and even see them do a top up before on CX birds. so what gives ? as Straitman said, daily oil checks....

E

 

[Mal]

Note that once again, the article has been sourced from AAP . These days, they seem to be the main scare mongers when it comes to Qantas articles.

As they publish themselves on their own AAP website:

AAP news stories do not take a political line, nor do they make assumptions.

They are balanced, accurate and fair. Our journalists are told: Get it right then get it first … never sacrifice accuracy.

I think I've read many AAP articles in the last few weeks which don't follow that.

 

[Mal]

On a similar vein:
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24729014-3102,00.html

Qantas jet drama at Brisbane airport
Anna Caldwell

November 30, 2008 10:10am

A QANTAS flight from Singapore has touched down safely at Brisbane Airport - after its hydraulic steering system reportedly failed mid-flight.

Fire crews were on standby at the international terminal as Qantas flight QF42 landed around 10.00am.

Emergency services had received reports that the aircraft's hydraulic steering system - used to control the plane once it touches down - had failed.

But the plane - with an unknown number of passengers on-board - seemingly landed without incident.

Always interesting to read the anti-Qantas stories. "seemingly landed without incident" ? Huh? Sounds like a writer at the Courier-Mail was upset she didn't get to witness a massive incident.

 

[Dave Noble]

On a similar vein:
Qantas jet drama at Brisbane airport | The Courier-Mail



Always interesting to read the anti-Qantas stories. "seemingly landed without incident" ? Huh? Sounds like a writer at the Courier-Mail was upset she didn't get to witness a massive incident.

Would seem to be a pretty reasonable way to describe it if reporting based on having watched it land. It may have appeared to land without incident but that doesn't mean that there were no issues that were not visible from outside

Then again it seems to be a new sport to pick on the media

Dave

 

[serfty]

... It may have appeared to land without incident but that doesn't mean that there were no issues that were not visible from outside ...

... seemingly landed without incident. ...

I guess that could be said for many many flights to/from/around Australia on any given day.

The journalistic implication is that it is unusual for this to happen - c.f. landing without incident.

 

[drron]

Would seem to be a pretty reasonable way to describe it if reporting based on having watched it land. It may have appeared to land without incident but that doesn't mean that there were no issues that were not visible from outside

Then again it seems to be a new sport to pick on the media

Dave

Well the media make a sport out of picking on others.
As well in this particular case surely the reporter had talked to someone at Qantas and been told that the landing was without incident therefore seemingly would be inappropriate.
Of course she may not have spoken to qantas therefore it would be innapropriate she remains a journalist.

 

[Evan]

<..>
Of course she may not have spoken to qantas therefore it would be innapropriate she remains a journalist.

so true !

 

[Dave Noble]

Well the media make a sport out of picking on others.
As well in this particular case surely the reporter had talked to someone at Qantas and been told that the landing was without incident therefore seemingly would be inappropriate.
Of course she may not have spoken to qantas therefore it would be innapropriate she remains a journalist.

She may actually be being accurate in the use of the word 'seemingly'. If she had no expert knowledge to determine personally whether it did land entirely without incident , then it is entirely appropriate

Then again, yet another trivial reason to try and attack the press.

Dave

 

[serfty]

... Then again, yet another trivial reason to try and attack the press.

... as distinct from (the press) having another trivial reason to try and attack Qantas.