Qantas A380 and 747-400 emergency landings at Changi

[Nick C]

Could the vapour from the fuel dump?

nope. the black tube isn't spewing stuff out in the video (though the crew had to circle to dump fuel prior to landing)

found this picture to show you the difference


credits to the photographer

[FN-GM]

Could the vapour from the fuel dump?

[Nick C]

Definitely not a stupid question. It's possible that when the engine failed, it might have set the plane in an "emergency mode", where the hydraulics would only be used on flight critical components (such as the surfaces). The landing gear doors are considered non-flight critical.

more like hydraulic failure leading to a gravity drop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJN8Paj8I4g

what's that vapour? (clearly it's a puncture in the fuel tank)

not all the spoilers deployed. quite a clear indication of hydraulic lines being severed.

[globetrekker84]

This might sound a stupid question but why are the landing gear doors still open?

Definitely not a stupid question. It's possible that when the engine failed, it might have set the plane in an "emergency mode", where the hydraulics would only be used on flight critical components (such as the surfaces). The landing gear doors are considered non-flight critical.

zvezda, correct me if I'm wrong.

[FN-GM]

This might sound a stupid question but why are the landing gear doors still open?

[jhm]

Been trying to work out where at Changi the bird is on that shot.

Somewhere on runway 2 - the following from Changi apparently:

An A380 Qantas flight, QF 32, bound for Sydney, Australia, departed Singapore Changi Airport at 0956 hours today. For technical reasons, the aircraft turned back to Changi and landed safely at 1146 hours.

Changi Airport Group's Airport Emergency Service (AES) responded with six fire vehicles, in accordance with standard operating procedure for such incidents. In response to the pilot's request, checks were conducted on the aircraft by AES. Once the checks were completed, passengers and crew began disembarking from the aircraft at Runway 2. Buses were arranged to ferry them to the airport terminal. Disembarkation of all 469 passengers and crew on board was completed by 1340 hours.

Runway 2, which has remained closed since the landing, will reopen later today. Flights have continued to take off and land at Runway 1 and operations at Changi have, otherwise, not been affected.

[MAN Flyer]

Been trying to work out where at Changi the bird is on that shot.

[jhm]

It's really lucky none of this parts pierced the fuel tank as it would have been a potential catastrophe.

Speculation here:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4...ml#post6037776

that the hole in the wing meant that one of the engines could not be shutdown (hence why the fire crews were trying to drown the engine with water).

[Russ]

I have taken 3 QF A380 flights in the last 2 years. Last year I flew VH-OQA twice and VH-OQC once. The aircraft that suffered the engine failure is VH-OQA....

[globetrekker84]

Looks to me as if RR is in trouble. Just my opinion. Glad that nobody was hurt

RR is getting into more trouble since they are still trying to figure out what happened to the other uncontained engine failure for the 787.

[singaporu_kooku]

Well.. SQ apparently will delay its A380 flights, whatever that means...

http://www.singaporeair.com/saa/Util...up.jsp?msgId=1

[zilchster]

It's definitely an uncontained engine failure. Saw pics on a website where internal parts of the engine( compressor or turbine disc hub) was found in a house ! It's lucky none of this parts hit anyone as it will be sure (ugly) death being hit by any of these. Most engines only have the fan and first stage compressor sections protected with a kevlar exterior around the casings in case of a bird strike. Not the whole engine.
Foresee an AD or a SI coming up on RR Trent 900 engines and possible maintenance actions. Most likely culprit at this point in time would be fatigue cracks. Seems eerily reminiscent of an UA DC 10 incident in the US some years back.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/gallery-e...864448?page=19

It's really lucky none of this parts pierced the fuel tank as it would have been a potential catastrophe. And as SQDazz mentioned, QF A380s are maintained in house and to LH as well, if I'm not mistaken. So, out goes the outsourcing of the blame as well.

Looking at the damage done to the wing, it is lucky that the debris didn't pierce the fuel tank or the fuselage or anything like that. If that happens, I think that would be no survivors.

Meanwhile QF has said it will suspend its A380 flights. The SIN-LHR QF 0031 has been cancelled for today, not sure if other A380 flights will be affected.

Let's hope the root cause of the problem will be discovered, problem fixed, and air travel made safer after this incident.

But I wonder how SQ will cope if its 380 fleet had to be grounded ...

[Nick C]

Oh dear. How many 744's have SQ got in the desert ?.

none

current fleet of 10 Airbus A380-800 aircraft.

[feb01mel]

SIA says no plans to ground its A380 fleet

SIA says no plans to ground its A380 fleet

SINGAPORE : Singapore Airlines (SIA) said it has no plans to ground its current fleet of 10 Airbus A380-800 aircraft.

This comes after the Australian flag carrier, Qantas, grounded its fleet of A380s after one of its aircraft was forced to land in Singapore with engine trouble on Thursday morning.

In its statement on Thursday, SIA said its operations are continuing as normal.

SIA added that it is premature at this point to speculate on the cause of the incident, and it is awaiting advice from its aircraft and engine manufacturers as the investigation progresses.

In 2007, SIA was the first airline to fly the A380 superjumbo, which can carry more than 500 passengers.

Four other airlines currently fly the aircraft, including, Qantas, Emirates, Air France and Lufthansa.

This is not the first time that an A380 aircraft has encountered engine problems.

In September 2009, a Singapore-bound SIA A380 flight was forced to turn around mid-flight and head back to Paris after one of its four engines failed.

Separately, Singapore Changi Airport said it will reopen its Runway 2 later Thursday.

Airport authorities had to close Runway 2 earlier to facilitate an emergency landing for Qantas Flight QF32 which experiencing engine problem.

The A380 Qantas flight, bound for Sydney, Australia, departed Singapore Changi Airport at 9:56 am local time.

For technical reasons, the aircraft turned back to Changi and landed safely at 11:46 am.

Changi Airport Group's Airport Emergency Service (AES) responded with six fire vehicles, in accordance with standard operating procedure for such incidents.

In response to the pilot's request, checks were conducted on the aircraft by AES.

Once the checks were completed, passengers and crew began disembarking from the aircraft at Runway 2.

Buses were arranged to ferry them to the airport terminal.

Disembarkation of all 469 passengers and crew on board was completed by 1:40 pm.

Changi Airport Group said flights have continued to take off and land at Runway 1 and operations at Changi have, otherwise, not been affected.

- CNA /ls

Taken off Channel News Asia

[UMD]

Is it me or QF just doesn't have a lot of luck with A380? It seems to me that QF has more technical issues with its A380 than all the other operators. Whatever it is, I hope they will find the cause. I certainly do not wish for A380 to be grounded forever being one of my favourite aircraft to fly on now. Anyone knows, how many A380 does QF have at the moment? 5 or more? Would QF have enough aircraft to take over A380s during the period they are grounded?

By the way, early on QF's PR maintained that the debris on the ground in Batam did not belong to the aircraft despite all the pictures posted on the internet at the time showing the debris with QF marks on them.