36 hurt in Qantas mid-air incident

36 hurt in Qantas mid-air incident

www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

QANTAS, one of the world's most famous and longest running airlines... until recently, it has been fairly trouble free and has not had a single death.

Yet, lately, they've been hit with some bad luck!

What can make a passenger Airbus experience a 'sudden change in altitude'? Turbulence? I guess we'll have to wait for the report.

It makes me wonder if there's more behind the QANTAS bad luck than meets the eye? Who knows! I'll still fly them!

www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

Yep, they have had some really bad luck, reason???

Offshore maintenance is one of the things, the Civil aviation authority has already slapped them on the hand. I think last incident they had some oxygen bottles blow up or it might have been one of the jets cut out.

Anyway the big Q is well known for cutting corners where possible.

I agree

One liner... but the truth is just that

Thats what happens when you outsource maintenance overseas. Sure Qantas are saving money, but safety is what is being comprimised. If it continues it wont be too long before a Qantas plane crashes and kills people.

The odds are, that in the long-run it will happen. Try as much as they like, QANTAS can't fight the central limit theorem and the law of averages!

I hope I never see it happen, nor have family on the plane that comes down...

So take the time, and email the Aussie Icon.....and lets keep
the planes maintained by us.... aussies... with the perfect record.

Mungo

reply to post by tezzajw

---

Agreed, its a terrible thing to consider, but cutting costs on maintenance will speed a disaster up. I dont understand why Qantas continues with this...
Well I do see why = $$$.

This has happened before many times, to many airlines. It has nothing to do with the maintenance. It's clear air turbulence, and it can't be predicted. They've been working on new ways to try to see it before the plane gets to it, but they so far don't have a reliable system in place. It usually happens over the Southern Pacific, or out near Japan. I've seen planes lose as much as 10,000 feet when they hit CAT.

This has happened before many times, to many airlines. It has nothing to do with the maintenance.
Unquote.


Not to us... up until "they" decided w could do it cheaper o'seas.

I would say that's what happens when you hit severe turbulence not properly strapped in.

Would you care to bet on that? When I get home tonight I'll research all the accidents that Qantas has had over the years. Qantas has had MANY accidents, even before they outsourced maintenance, just that none of them were "crashes". And you CAN'T say that Clear Air Turbulence is caused by outsourcing maintenance because it's a natural phenomenon.

thread already started here -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Ivar_Karlsen

---

That may be true, but Qantas has had a number of incidents since outsourcing maintenance, and I do agree it could be due to the altitude. But I see a pattern here and guess imo its related.
Plus this quote in the article. Why wouldnt you confirm its turbulence if its turbulence?

reply to post by leearco

---

reply to post by mungodave

---

Zaphod was talking about clear air turbulence which, although rare, is not unheard of. Why don't pilots tell us? One thing you must understand, pilots and airlines never, ever, talk about accidents to the press - usually out of fear of prosecution, or simply because it hasn't been investigated. Besides, stories like this happen every few weeks or months and it's always turbulence. Furthermore, maintainence don't cause aircraft to suddenly drop like that.

[edit on 7/10/2008 by C0bzz]

Because standard procedure is not to confirm anything before a accident/incident is properly investigated.

I've flown in Airbus jets before. The one in the OP incident seems to be one of the larger models. The smaller models, the ones that I've flown in, seem to bounce around a whole lot in turbulence. Just drop however many feet with ease.

I guess I've had the wrong impression about the size of planes being a factor when it comes to turbulence. I thought smaller planes were more susceptible. Guess not.

The most possible reason is that it might have stalled, the pilots must have either accidentally deployed the flaps or the air brakes, which would have caused the aircrafts speed to reduce less than that of rotation speed causing it to stall.

Just saw this on the news update, unbelievable! Qantas better get there act together before the new Airbus A380 arrives.....

We wouldn't want any accidents on the A380 now would we?

Please read the thread. A380 is in service.

www.airliners.net...




Negative. Aircraft at cruise altitude are on autopilot & autothrottle - even if speed brakes or flaps were powerful enough, which they are not, the autoflight system would adjust. Furthermore, Airbus fly-by-wire makes stalling the aircraft impossible.

The most likely cause was clear air turbulence which the airline has no control over.


It is very difficult if not impossible to gauge the susceptibility of an aircraft to turbulence, because external factors, like weather, skew the results - Airbus aircraft are unlikely to be any more susceptible than any other aircraft of similar design. Aircraft susceptibility to turbulence is usually a function of wing loading ( How much weight a given area of wing lifts ), so obviously gliders are the worst and... a plane like the F-104 would be the best.



Other examples of Clear air turbulence...:




[edit on 7/10/2008 by C0bzz]