Smoke fills cabin before plane dumps fuel in Port Phillip Bay

[Mal]

The media has picked up the seriousness of the incident now:

Emirates jet close to major &squo;aviation disaster&squo; | The Courier-Mail

AN Emirates plane came just centimetres from crashing at Melbourne Airport, authorities have revealed.

The fully-laden jet carrying 225 passengers and bound for Dubai last month had to use the entire 3,600-metre-long runway 16 but failed to become airborne until the last moment, News Limited reports.

...

"It was as close as we have ever come to a major aviation catastrophe in Australia,'' an aviation official told News Ltd.

 

[munitalP]

I am still stunned by this near miss and the fact that "No News" will run a full spread on a QF flight that runs out of loo paper yet still only scrapes the surface on this story...

If my company had a "near miss" with similar possible outcome (e.g. 200 ppl dead), we would be in court with OHS right up us, not to mention any other ambitious government department who wanted to have a go... :!:

Is this testiment to the quality (or lack of) of the jurno's in this country that when a major story breaks, if it means getting off their backsides and getting out to find out what rearly happened - its too hard?

This affects most of us on this forum, it happened at my local airport and it could have happened to me (just not on an EK flight - I won't fly with them).

Is this a major "hush up" in the aviation industry in Australia?

It does concern me...

Mr!

:shock:

 

[turtlemichael]

I am still stunned by this near miss and the fact that "No News" will run a full spread on a QF flight that runs out of loo paper yet still only scrapes the surface on this story...

If my company had a "near miss" with similar possible outcome (e.g. 200 ppl dead), we would be in court with OHS right up us, not to mention any other ambitious government department who wanted to have a go... :!:

Is this testiment to the quality (or lack of) of the jurno's in this country that when a major story breaks, if it means getting off their backsides and getting out to find out what rearly happened - its too hard?

This affects most of us on this forum, it happened at my local airport and it could have happened to me (just not on an EK flight - I won't fly with them).

Is this a major "hush up" in the aviation industry in Australia?

It does concern me...

Mr!

:shock:

I tend to disagree with your conclusion though I have no problem with your rationale.

It seems to me that the outcome here to date is what we should expect. There has been a serious incident, it has been reported with some indication that it was serious, possible explanations have been put forward (pilot error, incorrect loading, cargo shifting etc), the resignation of the pilots has been covered and we are waiting for the inquiry to report. That all sounds very good reporting to me. Anything further that a reporter says will, at this stage, be either supposition or scare mongering.

Now the bad part. It's sad but probably true that Aussie journos have so far got this EK one right but it is for the reasons you state - they are lazy, derivative and generally a pimple on the backside of a noble profession.
Compare this with Qantas where there are political points to be scored and reporting anything bad is sure to sell more papers.

My conclusion is they have accidentally got the reporting of this serious EK incident right so far. It is the reporting of all the comparatively minor Qantas (and DJ for that matter) incidents they have got wrong. When the EK report comes out and if, as many of us suspect, it does show a very very near miss and a major human failure, the gloves will come off as the journos will have been hit in the face because someone else will have done the work for them.

 

[NM]

I don't think there is a conspiricy or cover-up by the ATSB, Melbourne Airport or Emirates. I think its the just that the media editors don't believe the story is going to sell more advertising space like a story about Qantas running out of loo paper is certain to do.

I am greatly interesting in reading factual and accurate information about this accident. However, I do not expect to find such information in the media and will need to regularly monitor the ATSB site for information updates. But information from the ATSB is not going to come quickly, so its going to be a long wait.

If this story had the same media coverage as say a Qantas 747 suffering an explosive decompression and lands in Manila with a huge hole in the side, or a Qantas A330 that decided to climb and descend without pilot instruction over the West Australian coastline, we would by now have a greater understanding of the issues that lead to the very near catastrophe (sorry, I can't call it a near miss).

 

[oz_mark]

Now the bad part. It's sad but probably true that Aussie journos have so far got this EK one right but it is for the reasons you state - they are lazy, derivative and generally a pimple on the backside of a noble profession. Compare this with Qantas where there are political points to be scored and reporting anything bad is sure to sell more papers.

While I do tend to agree with your assessment of Aussie journo's, my view is that this situaition has been driven by the chief editors of some papers. My experience over time is wth The West Australian, and on can easily perceive the role that editors influence over the quality of reporting in a paper.

Of course, they are bound by the fact they need to sell papers. And a Qantas flight with a blocked loo is going to sell more papers than a story about an Emirates flight that almost turned into a gigantic fireball.

My conclusion is they have accidentally got the reporting of this serious EK incident right so far. It is the reporting of all the comparatively minor Qantas (and DJ for that matter) incidents they have got wrong. When the EK report comes out and if, as many of us suspect, it does show a very very near miss and a major human failure, the gloves will come off as the journos will have been hit in the face because someone else will have done the work for them.

It is interesting that this report comes out now. I understand ICAO give a 30 day time line to get the interim factual report out, which would mean it is a week or so away now. Best wait to see what is in that, I think, although I would say the ATSB has gota very good handle on what happened and what almost happened by now.

 

[pauly7]

My conclusion is they have accidentally got the reporting of this serious EK incident right so far.

Apart from some news sites showing incorrect pictures of the 'aircraft in question' - they showed an A380 and called it an A340.

Sigh.

 

[possumoz]

Emirates' accident scare probe continuing - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Seems some journos may...just may be getting ther point.just a little bit..but then it is a Sunday of a long weekend...:shock:

 

[Dave Noble]

Emirates jet close to major 'aviation disaster'

An Emirates plane came just centimetres from crashing at Melbourne Airport, authorities have revealed.

The fully-laden jet carrying 225 passengers and bound for Dubai last month had to use the entire 3,600-metre-long runway 16 but failed to become airborne until the last moment, News Limited newspapers say.

Full article at Emirates jet close to major 'aviation disaster' | theage.com.au

Dave

 

[samh004]

Re: Emirates jet close to major 'aviation disaster'

Isn't this the same as this.

 

[Evan]

Re: Emirates jet close to major 'aviation disaster'

Yes, thats the same incident. (sorry accident as its being called now for a good reason) I still cant understand (more i am amazed rather than not understanding) how they lifted off the runway at the end and traveled 100+ meters at a height of only about 50-70cms.

E

 

[samh004]

I assume this'll be merged or locked, but in reply to your amazement, I read somewhere that the weight of the aircraft was underestimated or something. Can't recall exactly where I read it but I assume it'll be in the thread.

Still seems a little odd, especially if it wasn't the pilots fault that the plane was overweight. Because they "retired" didn't they?

Edit: Low and behold, it was merged.

 

[oz_mark]

Re: Emirates jet close to major 'aviation disaster'

Yes, thats the same incident. (sorry accident as its being called now for a good reason) I still cant understand (more i am amazed rather than not understanding) how they lifted off the runway at the end and traveled 100+ meters at a height of only about 50-70cms.

It is classified as an accident by the ATSB. Details are here 200901310.

I assume they will be publishing the interim report soon.

 

[Nigelinoz]

There are conflicting reports about what Emirates are going to do with the aircraft,some are saying that it is so badly damaged that they are considering writing if off whilst a contact who works at Melbourne airport has heard that they have been doing the calculations for a unpressurised,low level flight back to the manufacturers base at Toulouse.

 

[samh004]

There are conflicting reports about what Emirates are going to do with the aircraft,some are saying that it is so badly damaged that they are considering writing if off whilst a contact who works at Melbourne airport has heard that they have been doing the calculations for a unpressurised,low level flight back to the manufacturers base at Toulouse.

Wow shows how much I know about planes. I saw the photos of the damage and didn't think it was that bad.

 

[Evan]

Wow shows how much I know about planes. I saw the photos of the damage and didn't think it was that bad.

Presure bulkheads are are critical to the integrity of the airframe and as such must be repaired correctly.

JAL123 crashed after a rear presure bulkhead failure as a result of a poor prior repair required due to a tail strike 7 years earlier.

520 died (only 4 lived, maybe more if the Japanese self defence had not taken till the next day to get there, the USAF had a helicoper on site in 20 minutes that may have saved more lives after the crash but was requested not to assist by the Japanese)

 

[thewinchester]

Presure bulkheads are are critical to the integrity of the airframe and as such must be repaired correctly.

JAL123 crashed after a rear presure bulkhead failure as a result of a poor prior repair required due to a tail strike 7 years earlier.

520 died (only 4 lived, maybe more if the Japanese self defence had not taken till the next day to get there, the USAF had a helicoper on site in 20 minutes that may have saved more lives after the crash but was requested not to assist by the Japanese)

I know that Boeing have a team who will fly to anywhere in the world to pull off this kind of complex work 'in the field', if Airbus has an equivalent group (likely but can't say with certainty), I'd be half surprised they'd take it back to Toulouse and not just do the work at MEL. Surely there'd be suitable hanger space they could rent for the duration of the work.

 

[samh004]

Surely there'd be suitable hanger space they could rent for the duration of the work.

Or relocate to any other airport in Australia on an un-pressurised flight, if hangar space isn't available/too expensive.

 

[munitalP]

The aircraft has been moved to the John Holland standing area - it looks like it's waiting for a spot in the shed.

I snapped this pic yesterday while out for a drive with Mrs! - and no I'm not an airport freak, we came past the airport to get McD's and took the back way out of the airport...

I also had a look at the localising radar, the brick building refered to is at least 30m away from the stack - a little creative license used somewhere to infer that the aircraft missed a building by cm...

I would have been more concerned parked just prior to the corner beside the perimiter fence - that would have been exciting!

Also noticable is the security car parked next to the aircraft.

 

[NM]

I know that Boeing have a team who will fly to anywhere in the world to pull off this kind of complex work 'in the field', if Airbus has an equivalent group (likely but can't say with certainty), I'd be half surprised they'd take it back to Toulouse and not just do the work at MEL. Surely there'd be suitable hanger space they could rent for the duration of the work.

It will all come down to cost. Is it cheaper to fly the people, tools and materials to Melbourne for the duration of the fix, paying travel and living expenses etc, or is it cheaper to ferry the aircraft to where the people, tools and materials already exist?

Someone has to pay, whether is it Emirates or their insurer. And you can be certainly they are doing the numbers on the best (read lowest cost) way to undertake the necessary repairs, and comparing that with the book value of the aircraft. Under the current global conditions, I doubt EK are desperately short of air frames, so there is probably little incentive to rush the repair.

Also note the ATSB is unlikely to allow the aircraft to be moved or repaired until they have completed at least the initial part of their investigation.

 

[Evan]

Is that a B727 in the background ? i did not know there was many still around doing freight duty, only a couple of hush kitted ones i seem to recall.

And a DC-3 ? who owns that ? wonder what it is used for.

E