Qantas Boeing [717] 'wrinkled' in hard landing in Darwin

[Platy]

InsidOne of the Capt's overulled the other on go - around and both balmed each other

...sounds familiar!

 

[NM]

How QF will explain $100 million in repairs vs a $35 million hull loss to its shareholders? Surely rational heads would prevail?

Where is Ms Jackson the accountant when QF needs her?

Perhaps by explaining that the $100M is a number reported in the media and not necessarily an accurate number.

 

[Yada Yada]

Also some rumours on the Crikey newsletter a couple of days ago.
Also three pics of the wrinkling.

Originally Posted by Part of the Crikey Article

Qantas says the jet, worth about $35 million, will be repaired, rather than cashed out by insurance as a write-off. Industry sources say this might cost it more than $100 million, but pride in this case comes after a heavy fall, and the airline doesn’t want to score its first ever jet hull loss.

Exactly my point above. The cost of repairs won't matter to QF. They are more concerned about keeping their reputation intact. I don't think they will have to justify this to anyone on the board - they all accept that their reputation is worth protecting. It's an asset after all.

 

[moa999]

And more from today's Crikey newsletter

CASA has refused to allow the Qantaslink 717 that was badly bent in a hard landing at Darwin on 7 February to be flown to Adelaide which has the nearest facilities for what will be a long and costly repair job. Qantas will now have to add to the cost of repairs by creating a special in-situ rebuilding facility for the jet which it is resisting writing off to avoid the stigma of recording its first ever hull loss of a passenger jet.

Photos from the previous Crikey letter also cross-posted on ppRune
NAT JET 717 mishap - Page 8 - PPRuNe Forums

 

[oz_mark]

Seems a remarkable amount of damage for a hard landing.

 

[serfty]

Here's a link to a page with some 'photos of NXE's twin:

• National Jet Systems VH-NXD (Ex VH-AFR VH-VQD ) - Airfleets

Looks like the 'wrinkling' may be just forward of the wing.

Hmmm, I'm trying to envisage the forces (especially the 'moments' that can amplify stresses) that caused this.

 

[maninblack]

The $100 million mentioned in the article is in reference to what was spent repairing VH-OJH after the Bangkok incident, not what will be spent on the repairs to the 717.

The 717 will probably not fly again. The sequence of events will look something like the following (or some variant on this depending on negotiations between QF, Allco and the insurer); QF will take a smaller insurance settlement in negotiation with their insurers, pay out their lessor on the existing value of the aircraft and take ownership of it thereby keeping it on the books at some nominal value and strip it for spare parts at a later date, but will at all costs avoid writing it off thereby deeming it a hull loss.

An interesting press release from QF.

About Qantas - Newsroom

Wonder if part of this attrition is the 2 geezers who bent the 717 at Darwin

 

[Evan]

Here's a link to a page with some 'photos of NXE's twin:

• National Jet Systems VH-NXD (Ex VH-AFR VH-VQD ) - Airfleets

Looks like the 'wrinkling' may be just forward of the wing.

Hmmm, I'm trying to envisage the forces (especially the 'moments' that can amplify stresses) that caused this.

Wow, i never expected the wrinkling to be there... i was thinking behind the wing when i heard about it as mentioned with the weight of the engines, but forward of the wing the weight of the engines would not as much to do with it. If you landed really hard and balance was even across the main landing gear instead of acking like a fulcrum it would sort of bend like a bananna ?? but make no sense with where the balance of the plane would be.

hmmmm, oh well we may never really know.

E

 

[straitman]

Makes me wonder if this has just accentuated a possibly established but unknown problem.

 

[oz_mark]

Makes me wonder if this has just accentuated a possibly established but unknown problem.

I have wondered exactly the same.

 

[JohnK]

Seems a remarkable amount of damage for a hard landing.

Does not look good.

Any updates on the investigation? Or are they not likely to release that type of information?

 

[straitman]

Does not look good.

Any updates on the investigation? Or are they not likely to release that type of information?

JohnK,

ATSB investigations usually take several months so don't hold your breath. I'll look at the web site for an update when I get a chance.

 

[codash1099]

I might know a bloke (good West Australian term ) who could panel beat it for them

 

[mainly tailfirst]

I might know a bloke (good West Australian term ) who could panel beat it for them

While they're at it, I hear Geoff Prosser is looking at expanding his engine re-con business again. :mrgreen:

mt

 

[oz_mark]

Preliminary report is out

200800641

 

[oz_mark]

Qantas pilots poorly trained - report | NEWS.com.au

THE pilot of a Qantas plane that hit a runway so hard that it "bounced" had two similar landings in the previous fortnight, a transport safety report says.


The Boeing 717, carrying 88 passengers, was descending at a rate of about 900 feet per minute when it landed at Darwin Airport on February 7, causing several creases in the fuselage and damaged landing gear, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) said.

See also: 200800641

 

[straitman]

Qantas pilots poorly trained - report | NEWS.com.au

Quote:

THE pilot of a Qantas plane that hit a runway so hard that it "bounced" had two similar landings in the previous fortnight, a transport safety report says.


The Boeing 717, carrying 88 passengers, was descending at a rate of about 900 feet per minute when it landed at Darwin Airport on February 7, causing several creases in the fuselage and damaged landing gear, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) said.

See also: 200800641

I find it interesting (but believable) that the NEWS.com.au article can incorrectly quote directly from a report :!:

The ATSB report had the landing at 1000fpm (not 900fpm) and

Aircraft damage
Damage to the aircraft included several creases to the skin on the fuselage above the wing area and underneath the fuselage behind the wing (Figures 3 and 4). Several longerons(5) in the rear cargo area were damaged. The left main landing gear and the outer left main tyre were also damaged.

Figure 3: Aircraft dimensions showing area of damage

(5)Longerons are longitudinal members which give the airframe its shape and provide a basis for the skin.

'Sorry I couldn't copy the diagram:!:

The article carefully mixes details from the ATSB report with those of a separate Qantas investigation and is unclear about which text is from which report. What I have gleaned from the report is that the two pilots on this occasion were most probably adequately trained and not indicitive of the article implication that they were part of the 'many were inexperienced in flying a Boeing 717' group.

 

[Mal]

I've noticed on some airliner tracking sites that this plane is marked as 'stored'.

Is this a synonym for 'written off, but the airline operator is just keeping it hidden away until they can dispose of it in other ways'?

 

[oz_mark]

i think it is code for be turned into a parts supply

 

[Jacques Vert]

I notice that the November Qantas Magazine shows the number of 717s as 13, whereas previous editions have shown 14.

Does this mean that QF have decided to write off the one damaged at Darwin, or have they sold it to NJS for them to worry about?

Regards,

James