Two-metre hole appears in the side of Qantas 747 in mid-air

[Beachlover]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/twometr ... 14182.html (http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/twometre-gash-in-qantas-scare/2008/07/25/1216492714182.html)

Good thing these 747s are well made... things would've gone very badly if the plane broke apart

OK, I'll be the first to say it: what does this have to do with Thailand?

[Beachlover]

Admittadly... only partly related to Thailand.

Qantas flies to Thailand right?... And most members on this board fly a few times a year right?

[jinks]

It now has a moved link to Global... our members fly globally :)

[lonelywombat]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/twometre-gash-in-qantas-scare/2008/07/25/1216492714182.html

Good thing these 747s are well made... things would've gone very badly if the plane broke apart

From Heraldsun Melbourne Saturday

THE Qantas plane forced to make an emergency landing in the Philippines after a massive hole opened up in its fuselage had been plagued by a history of corrosion.
News Limited reports today that engineers discovered a large amount of corrosion in the Qantas jumbo during a major refurbishment earlier this year.

The 17-year-old Boeing 747-400, registration VH-OJK, received a new interior at Victoria's Avalon Airport in March.

Aviation sources said aircraft engineers had noted a "lot" of corrosion during the refit, the report said.

QF Flight 30 from London to Melbourne had left Hong Kong airport yesterday after a stopover at 9am local time, (11am AEST), when an explosion ripped through the plane's underside.

Some of the 346 passengers aboard told of how debris flew through the cabin and oxygen masks dropped down.

The crew brought the plane down to 10,000 feet and requested an emergency landing in Manila, where emergency crews were on hand when it touched down safely.

Qantas said it had arranged for a replacement plane to fly to Manila to collect the passengers return them immediately to Melbourne.

The replacement Boeing 747 was expected to leave the Philippines capital shortly after 11pm local time last night (0100 AEST today), to arrive in Melbourne this morning (AEST).

[Beachlover]

I think these planes are supposed to be retired... but they keep them on because the A380 is way behind schedule...

[Smiles]

Looking at those photographs I'm surprised the right wing stayed on. Could be mistaken, but I believe Qantas has the enviable record of having had no crashes in it's history ... and it's been around a long time. Wonder if the landing could be considered a technical 'crash' landing? I'm sure the passengers thought so :blackeye:

Oops, I take that back. Got intrigued after writing the above and looked up Qantas's record. They have had a few crashes, one being in Bangkok in 1999. But no fatalities on any of their few crashes ( http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi-bin/airl ... as+Airways (http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi-bin/airline_detail.cgi?airline=Qantas+Airways) ). I guess that's the enviable (and lucky) part.

A fascinating eye witness account of an horrendous sidewall blowout on another 747 at 20,000 feet: http://www.airdisaster.com/eyewitness/ua811.shtml

Cheers ...

[Irish1972]

Have a video shot from inside the plane!

I think these planes are supposed to be retired... but they keep them on because the A380 is way behind schedule...

Don't you just love how those Boeing lovers can turn anything, to an attack on anything that flys that doesn't come out of Seattle.

[Beachlover]

I think these planes are supposed to be retired... but they keep them on because the A380 is way behind schedule...

Don't you just love how those Boeing lovers can turn anything, to an attack on anything that flys that doesn't come out of Seattle.


Mate, I'm not a "Boeing Lover"... in fact I prefer stuff that DOESN'T fly out of the states!

Airbus isn't the only supplier, which has had delays... The Boeing Dreamline is behind schedule too (though because this isn't as lage a plane, the implications of these delays haven't been as bad as the implications of delaying the giant Airbus).

[Beachlover]

Looking at those photographs I'm surprised the right wing stayed on. Could be mistaken, but I believe Qantas has the enviable record of having had no crashes in it's history ... and it's been around a long time. Wonder if the landing could be considered a technical 'crash' landing? I'm sure the passengers thought so :blackeye:

Oops, I take that back. Got intrigued after writing the above and looked up Qantas's record. They have had a few crashes, one being in Bangkok in 1999. But no fatalities on any of their few crashes ( http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi-bin/airl ... as+Airways (http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi-bin/airline_detail.cgi?airline=Qantas+Airways) ). I guess that's the enviable (and lucky) part.

A fascinating eye witness account of an horrendous sidewall blowout on another 747 at 20,000 feet: http://www.airdisaster.com/eyewitness/ua811.shtml

Cheers ...

Yeh, the record is that Qantas have never had a single fatality or plane written off from a crash...that is, since WW2 when the Japanese were shooting them down... Qantas is the only major airline in the word, which can say this. Amazingly, not even Singapore Airlines or Cathay can say this.

This might change now... if they decide to "write off" this plane.

Admittadly... only partly related to Thailand. Qantas flies to Thailand right?... And most members on this board fly a few times a year right?Yes, and Bangkok's the only place where Qantas has ever had a crash landing. And why is it that Qantas now only has one flight a day in either direction through Bangkok (previously it was their main Asian hub)? Because the Thais were so completely useless in responding to that emergency (or so a couple of my chums in Qantas senior management tell me)

[lonelywombat]

Admittadly... only partly related to Thailand. Qantas flies to Thailand right?... And most members on this board fly a few times a year right?Yes, and Bangkok's the only place where Qantas has ever had a crash landing. And why is it that Qantas now only has one flight a day in either direction through Bangkok (previously it was their main Asian hub)? Because the Thais were so completely useless in responding to that emergency (or so a couple of my chums in Qantas senior management tell me)

Not 100% correct Qantas and BA have each a flight each way daily and you can get allocated a BA flight when booking through Qantas web site. BA no longer maintains a presence in OZl Also Qantas Jetstar flies into BKK twice a week,non stop from Melbourne.
Passengers from OZ wishing to fly to Phuket or Koh Samui now can fly direct to Phuket . This takes even more pressure
on the BKK flights

Not 100% correct Qantas and BA have each a flight each way daily and you can get allocated a BA flight when booking through Qantas web site.Gosh - and I can get a flight on Qantas via the BA Web site and I can get a flight on American via the Qantas Web site too. Code-share has nothing to do with the question, which is Qantas aircraft, owned and maintained by Qantas

[Hmmm]

For those of you into human factors engineering, or just like a good cock-up story, the tale of how Qantas' flagship QF1 from Sydney to London ended up on the golf course at the end of Don Muang in 1999 makes interesting reading - tired or less experienced pilots making questionable decisions, poor communication in the cockpit and from local controllers, fast and high approach, sudden unexpected very bad weather, airlines changing operating procedure without consulting aircraft manufacturers, slow response from ground services, etc.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv ... 04538.aspx (http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/1999/AAIR/aair199904538.aspx)
(complete report under 'Factual information')
Summary here:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/editorials/e00012.aspx

Qantas was very lucky then, and lucky again yesterday.

[Beachlover]

For those of you into human factors engineering, or just like a good cock-up story, the tale of how Qantas' flagship QF1 from Sydney to London ended up on the golf course at the end of Don Muang in 1999 makes interesting reading - tired or less experienced pilots making questionable decisions, poor communication in the cockpit and from local controllers, fast and high approach, sudden unexpected very bad weather, airlines changing operating procedure without consulting aircraft manufacturers, slow response from ground services, etc.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv ... 04538.aspx (http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/1999/AAIR/aair199904538.aspx)
(complete report under 'Factual information')
Summary here:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/editorials/e00012.aspx

Qantas was very lucky then, and lucky again yesterday.

Gotta say... as a major airlne with a huge number of flights everyday 365 days a year... to have avoided any fatalities or aircraft write offs for well over 50yrs is amazing... it's like the cat with 9 lives.

Not even Singapore Airlines.... supposably the airline with the newsest planes and best safety have managed to maintain this kind of record (they've had 1 major fatal crash - losing 80+ lives and one of their subsidiaries, SilkAir had a crash where they lost 100+ lives).

[Beachlover]

Admittadly... only partly related to Thailand. Qantas flies to Thailand right?... And most members on this board fly a few times a year right?Yes, and Bangkok's the only place where Qantas has ever had a crash landing. And why is it that Qantas now only has one flight a day in either direction through Bangkok (previously it was their main Asian hub)? Because the Thais were so completely useless in responding to that emergency (or so a couple of my chums in Qantas senior management tell me)

might be because singapore airlines is kicking their asses... their fares are always lower and the service is better in Singapore Air... and they have newer planes with more room... and more frequent flights between Sydney/Bankgkok/Singapre

And why is it that Qantas now only has one flight a day in either direction through Bangkok (previously it was their main Asian hub)? Because the Thais were so completely useless in responding to that emergency (or so a couple of my chums in Qantas senior management tell me)

It is clear that hummingturd has lost what's left of his marbles if he thinks that major airlines make such route decisions based on anything other than economics.

Gotta say... as a major airlne with a huge number of flights everyday 365 days a year... to have avoided any fatalities or aircraft write offs for well over 50yrs is amazing... it's like the cat with 9 lives.
I've heard that QF spent a LOT of money "repairing" that 747 that ended up in the Don Muang golf course -- more than the aircraft was even worth -- just to be able to keep claiming they had no aircraft write offs.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

Beachlover is correct-the only thing that prevented this from being a true disaster is that the 727's are one of the best planes ever built.

There is a theory-that passenger airplanes become safer the longer they fly over the years as the high altitude and pressure tends to "weld " the metal together thus people can be needlessly alarmed at the age of an airliner.

What this seems to prove -as Qantas maintenance crew have so often said ( as they keep being made redundant) that cheaper maintenance crews who bid for contracts in other countries will not apply the same safety standard that Qantas is renowned for-and as it's the most profitable airline in the world-they are taking risks with their reputation.

However all these planes are to be soon replaced as Qantas is updating it's entire fleet .

I don't know about anyone else but whenever I've booked a flight from either Sydney , Melbourne or London on Qantas-you are just as likely to end up on a BA plane-they interpose their passenger lists.

[lonelywombat]

Qantas are going to ground over the allegations of faulty oxygen masks .

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cut and paste Melbourne Age breaking news
July 27, 2008 07:32am Sunday

IT'S been revealed that frantic passengers struggled to use faulty oxygen masks as Qantas flight QF30 dropped 19,000 feet when an explosion ripped a hole in the plane's fuselage.

QF30 was on its way to Melbourne from London via Hong Kong and was due to arrive in Melbourne on Friday evening.

Passengers arriving at Melbourne International Airport yesterday told of desperate attempts to put their passports in their pockets in case the plane crashed, of children turning blue as their mothers frantically tried to fit their oxygen masks, and of 10 minutes of sheer terror as the plane dived.

As passengers were reunited with loved ones, aviation experts offered several theories about possible causes of the mid-air explosion, including:

- Oxygen cylinders rupturing.

- Corrosion and weakening of the plane's aluminium skin, making it susceptible to bursting under the enormous pressure of cruising at altitude.

- A deliberate or accidental explosion caused by something in a passenger's luggage.

However, a source close to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority said exploding oxygen cylinders were the likely cause of the rupture, and would be the main focus of the investigation, as they were stored in the exact location of the explosion and there were no signs of fire.

St Kilda architect David Saunders described the moments after the explosion as utter panic.

"The oxygen masks were f**kd,'' Mr Saunders told The Sunday Age at Melbourne International Airport, after an emotional reunion with his mother and sister.

"The elastic was so old that it had deteriorated. I was trying to get my passport, and every time I got my passport the mask fell off and I started to pass out.''

In some parts of the cabin, the masks didn't drop down at all, he said. "A guy just went into a panic and smashed the whole panel off the ceiling to get to the mask.

"The kids were screaming and flailing. Their cheeks and lips were turning blue from lack of oxygen.''

Another passenger, Paula Madejon, said she had to share her mask with two other people, and, in the row behind her, nobody had a mask.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

As you are an Aussie lonelywombat you would be fully aware of Qantas's extraordinary history as one of the oldest and best commercial passenger airlines.

I had shares in Qantas as I lived in Sydney for a while but I've sold them since. I particularly don't like their current Chairman Geoff Dixon and the way he and his and his board tried to flog off the airline to one of those corporations that rip the guts out of an entity-and score themselves huge million dollar bonuses at the same time.

Qantas now joins my list of companies whose shares I avoid-the other being News Ltd-owned by the American ex-Dirty Digger Rupert Murdoch.
As my broker said when I once inquired if they were a good investment.."built on a sea of debt-best avoided"

But have you lonelywombat ever encountered the grandest Qantas trolley dolly-Prince Lorenzo Montesini ?..you would need to travel in first class-I've only ever made it to business class.

He claims to have an Egyptian title that pre-dates the British Monarchy who he looks down as "johnny come latelies"..( well he would look down on them in Buck House as he flies overhead serving champagne).

I was once invited to his small terrace house in Wooloomooloo for a dinner party where the walls were lines with supposed ancestral portraits ( who looked decidedly un-Egyptian). He was fun though, but I fled when he announced after dinner " I have a special treat for everyone-2 Bette Davis films we can watch "!

You may also re-call he was to marry an heiress named Primrose Potter in a high society wedding in Venice but ran off with the best man the night before their nuptials !!

What this has got to do with the hole in the Qantas jet is a mystery though..but you never know..maybe Lorenzo was serving canapies in first class when it happened ! :cheers:

would look down on them in Buck House as he flies overhead serving champagne).

The only people who overfly the Duke of Buckingham's palace, dear, are the the RAF. This is because the Duke has generously allowed some Germanic squatters to use it for some time.

[Beachlover]

Apparently there is only 12 minutes worth of Oxygen available for each mask....

I think if you need any more than 12mins to get down to breathable altitude you're a screwed anyway!

[Bob]

There is a theory-that passenger airplanes become safer the longer they fly over the years as the high altitude and pressure tends to "weld " the metal together thus people can be needlessly alarmed at the age of an airliner.


Hardly. Long term, the continual movement of the aluminum skin caused by the continual re-pressurization of the aircraft causes the aluminum to crack....and that metal fatigue has caused many serious incidents. That's why they check for cracks regularly and replace skin panels when needed. Sounds like an Alfred E. Newman theory..... :clown:

This hasn't been a good week for Quaint-arse. Yesterday their new check-in/baggage-handling system, implemented over the weekend, caused long delays for many passengers (that'll teach 'em to check luggage - I never do) and apparently they can't even close the doors properly now - http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/more- ... 80926.html (http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/more-trouble-for-qantas/2008/07/29/1217097180926.html)