QF121 Issue today

[Darren Butterworth]

Just listening to 2GB and they stated that the flight to Shanghai is returning to YSSY, unable to retract its gear.

Anyone know anything else?

Daz

[Darren Butterworth]

Just heard there was no issue on landing, so probably more a pain than anything.

Anyone know which AC and what the issue was?

[Philip Argy]

Here's the online report from about 1.40 pm:

Qantas plane turns back with faulty landing gear

A Qantas plane bound for China is returning to Sydney because of a problem with its landing gear.
The airline says the pilot discovered the gear would not retract after take-off and decided to cancel the journey to Shanghai as a precaution.
Qantas says the problem will not require an emergency landing.
The plane carrying 197 passengers is expected to touch down shortly after 2pm AEDT.

[Sarah C]

To add to the "drama", Channel 9 had "breaking news" showing it on the runway, saying there was an 'emergency' at Sydney Airport. It is stationary at the end of 16R at the moment, the helicopters are circling for pictures, it really isn't that exciting.

Rego is VH-EBG.

[Nigel C]

There was a Jetstar A330 do the same during the spotting weekend (surprised it wasn't mentioned here...). On that occasion it had a gear tilt sensor break on take-off, so the aircraft thought it was still on the ground and wouldn't retract the gear.

Perhaps this is the same sort of problem?

[Stephen Brown]

The airline says the pilot discovered the gear would not retract after take-off and decided to cancel the journey to Shanghai as a precaution.

Would have been a bloody slow trip to China if had decided to keep going.

[Philip Argy]

And the fuel may not have lasted the distance either!

Whilst I applaud Qantas' candour in announcing these things as they occur, sometimes I think it might be better to wait a couple of hours till the aircraft has returned and simply announce it very matter of factly as a normal run of the mill issue that crops up periodically.

The 'Emergency landing' headline is really not warranted unless there is at least a PAN PAN call. Of course here there was nothing of the sort and, so far as I am aware, no suggestion that the gear was not locked down for landing.

[Brian Noldt]

The aircraft shown on Nine's news break is VH-EBG

Brian

[Mike C]

I was wondering why QF129 was circling NOBAR for over an hour on PP.

[Nigel C]

The 'Emergency landing' headline is really not warranted unless there is at least a PAN PAN call. Of course here there was nothing of the sort and, so far as I am aware, no suggestion that the gear was not locked down for landing.

How do you know there was no call? There is nothing here to suggest otherwise.:confused:

Also, the fact that the aircraft landed nearly an hour after your quote that says Qantas advised an emergency landing wasn't required doesn't mean the situation didn't then escalate.
It would also seem strange that the aircraft appeared to require towing off the runway if there was no major problem...

[Charlie Carter]

From up here in Wahroonga there was an A330 over head with gear down and I commented that the gear isnt usually down that early. I don't know a rego but was a Qantas A330 with the new paint scheme. Doesn't narrow it down much, I know...

[Owen H]

G'day Nigel,

Depends what you call "major". I'd only be speculating, but the loss of a single hydraulic system (whilst not an emergency) could account for loss of gear retraction as well as loss of nose gear steering which makes unnecessary ground handling undesirable.

Only a guess though.

[Nigel C]

Hey Owen,

There's a post on Pprune also saying a hydraulic line broke, so it's probably a fair guess as you put it.

IIRC the loss of hydraulics accounted for China Eastern's A340 chucking a near U-turn on landing at Sydney a few years ago, so the potential was there for a more 'major' outcome.;)

Cheers

[Darren Butterworth]

Wow - just watching the Channel 10 late news, this minor issue was built up to be quite a drama with a mention and images of the A330 WA incident in Oct08 and the Jan 10 A380 problem. I’m not sure that this would be the leading story if it wasn’t the day they released last years FY results.

[Stuart Trevena]

Hi All,

Another incident involving an Airbus aircraft.

Are they Jinxed or something?
QF / Jetstar have had nothing but problems since they took delivery of these A330's + A380's

Also why doesn't Airbus have a Fuel Dump valve on their aircraft?
Is is to much $$$$ or did they simply forget?

Surely, dumping fuel is quicker than flying around for hours on end to get to the correct landing weight.

Having said the above, can someone please tell if Boeing have a Fuel Dump System on their B767 and B777 Range. To my knowledge the B743 and 744, do have one, But I stand to be corrected if I am wrong.

Stuart

[Adam P.]

Another incident involving an Airbus aircraft.

Could have (and has) happened to any type Stuart. This sort of thing (meaning air return for some kind of fault that may or may not include the dangly bits) happens more often than the general public may know.

If you're going to have a landing gear failure, this way - stuck down - is much better than the other I reckon!

[Nigel C]

Adam's right (for once;)). There is a lot more that goes on than gets reported in the media, but I was sure the next incident would involve REX...I mean hey, Qantas, Jet* and Virgin have been hogging the limelight quite a bit recently.:p

Actually, there has been a recent report, not yet reported by others here, about REX.
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/planes-to-keep-flying-with-crackprone-wheels-20100217-ocbh.html

[Adam P.]

Yeah I did see that one Nige, interesting that noone picked it at the time - I thought they were going to talk about wheels falling off entirely again...

[Owen H]

Stuart,

Even if you are dumping fuel, it can take a significant period of time to get down to max landing weight. Fuel can only be thrown overboard at a finite rate, and quite often it is a lot of fuel that needs to go out. When you consider you need to manage the non-normal situation, assess the aircraft and formulate a plan, and THEN start thinking about dumping/burning fuel, it all takes time.

There are reasons for not having jettison capabilitity - cost is a big one, as is maintenance. If you aren't often operating in situations where you need it then I can understand the reluctance to have it on some models.

Some 767's have fuel jettison capability, some don't. Even those that do only jettison from the centre tank, so even after you've got all you possibly can off the aircraft, you're still above max landing weight. The 777 certainly can have jettison, and I'd imagine its not an "optional extra" like it is on the 767. For the 747-400, you're looking at close to an hour of jettison time to get from Max Takeoff Weight (MTOW) down to Max Landing Weight. If you didn't jettison, you'd be looking at well over 5 hours holding to get below MLW.

Its worth remembering if it is a time critical emergency you can land overweight (upto max takeoff weight) with minimal problems (other than an engineering inspection), so jettson is only really to minimise disruption, and less so for safety reasons these days.

As far as I know, a jettison system is an "optional extra" on this model of Airbus.

[Andrew P]

From up here in Wahroonga there was an A330 over head with gear down and I commented that the gear isnt usually down that early. I don't know a rego but was a Qantas A330 with the new paint scheme. Doesn't narrow it down much, I know...

agree a QF A330 went over Pymble at about 2.05pm with its gear down

you be quite surprised the number that do have gear down by Pymble; a CX A330 the other day had its gear down (CX101)

very often it happens around 5.50am, as the plane is trying keep to minimum speed so it hits the runway spot on 6.00am (the curfew lift point)

[Owen H]

G'day Andrew - One of those silly parts of the curfew... instead of just letting the aircraft make an approach in its noise abatement configuration, we make it slow down using drag (and associated increase in noise), where it will pass over the suburbs at almost exactly the same time and height but making more noise. Gotta love logic!