A380 Crash

[uspilot]

SINGAPORE | Wed Nov 3, 2010 11:30pm EDT

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Qantas told CNBC television that a plane that crashed near Singapore was an Airbus A380. No other details were immediately available.
The plane can carry more than 500 passengers. Witnesses said they had heard an explosion over the Indonesian island of Batam.


Hope all are well....sad day....

 

[uspilot]

Better news

A Qantas A380 has been forced to return to Singapore's Changi Airport after pilots were forced to shut down one of its four engines.
QF32 was bound for Sydney when the engine failed.
A Qantas spokesman said the problems were with engine number two. She did not know why the engine had to be shut down.
The incident sparked widespread rumours over the internet through PPRuNe, that the plane had crashed, which Qantas said were wildly inaccurate.

 

[LongBeachTrijet]

Judging from the photo, the pilots didn't shut down the engine. It looks more like the engine blew itself up and the pilots simply put the switches in the right place

Qantas grounded the 380 fleet. Will they call Travolta for his 707 to help mitigate the lost capacity?

 

[dougdrvr]

Why are the nose gear dors open?

 

[LongBeachTrijet]

Inflight Pax Video

 

[flyboyike]

Why are the nose gear dors open?

Hydraulic failure. Speaking of that, it appears the Flying Halibut uses only two hydraulic systems and they run at 5000psi. Seems like not enough redundancy, especially in a piece of metal that huge.

 

[stupidpilot]

Qantas is reporting that they found oil leaks in three engines on their A380 fleet. Is this a load of BS? Isn't the A380 a fully computerized aircraft that will automatically shut down an engine due to high oil temp, low level or low pressure?

I don't know the Airbus as I have never flown one. Does anybody have some more knowledge about it's systems that can answer this better?

 

[WYOMINGPILOT]

This is why I fly Boeing!!!

​

From a Qantas mate who knows one of the flight deck crew.

This was just a brief summary.
Loss of brake anti skid system, and other undercarriage problems, tyres blown on landing, used all of Singapore’s 4000M runway.
QF spin doctors doing overtime in Sydney trying to keep the lid on all of this.
A380s grounded for more than just engine problems.

More to come. Scary stuff.



1. Bus #2 is supposedly automatically powered by Bus #1 in the event of Engine #2 failure - didn't happen.




2. Buses #3 & #4 will supposedly power Bus #2 in the even that the auto transfer from Bus #1 fails - didn't happen.




3. After some time the RAT deployed for no apparent reason, locking out (as a load-shedding function) some still functioning services.




4. One of the frequently recurring messages warned of the aircraft approaching the aft CoG limit (the procedure calls for transferring fuel forward), the next message advised of fwd transfer pumps being u/s. This sequence occurred repeatedly.




5. Apparently landing/approach speeds are obtained from the FMS, but there weren't anywhere near sufficient fields to load all the defects for speed corrections - the crew loaded what they thought were the most critical ones.




6. The crew commenced an approach NOT because they'd sorted out all the problems but because they were very worried about the way-out-of-tolerance and steadily worsening lateral imbalance.




7. The aircraft stopped with just over 100 metres or runway left, brakes temps climbed to 900C and fuel pouring out of the ruptured tank. Unable to shutdown #1 engine (as previously mentioned) but elected not to evacuate at the fire services were attending in great numbers.




8. The other comment from the source of the above (who was on the flight deck) was that the aeroplane did many things they simply didn't understand and/or failed to operate as expected.






​

 

[WYOMINGPILOT]

This is why I fly Boeing!!!

​

From a Qantas mate who knows one of the flight deck crew.

This was just a brief summary.
Loss of brake anti skid system, and other undercarriage problems, tyres blown on landing, used all of Singapore’s 4000M runway.
QF spin doctors doing overtime in Sydney trying to keep the lid on all of this.
A380s grounded for more than just engine problems.

More to come. Scary stuff.



1. Bus #2 is supposedly automatically powered by Bus #1 in the event of Engine #2 failure - didn't happen.




2. Buses #3 & #4 will supposedly power Bus #2 in the even that the auto transfer from Bus #1 fails - didn't happen.




3. After some time the RAT deployed for no apparent reason, locking out (as a load-shedding function) some still functioning services.




4. One of the frequently recurring messages warned of the aircraft approaching the aft CoG limit (the procedure calls for transferring fuel forward), the next message advised of fwd transfer pumps being u/s. This sequence occurred repeatedly.




5. Apparently landing/approach speeds are obtained from the FMS, but there weren't anywhere near sufficient fields to load all the defects for speed corrections - the crew loaded what they thought were the most critical ones.




6. The crew commenced an approach NOT because they'd sorted out all the problems but because they were very worried about the way-out-of-tolerance and steadily worsening lateral imbalance.




7. The aircraft stopped with just over 100 metres or runway left, brakes temps climbed to 900C and fuel pouring out of the ruptured tank. Unable to shutdown #1 engine (as previously mentioned) but elected not to evacuate at the fire services were attending in great numbers.




8. The other comment from the source of the above (who was on the flight deck) was that the aeroplane did many things they simply didn't understand and/or failed to operate as expected.






​

 

[Dornier 335]

This is why I fly Boeing!!!

Tell us more about the prefect and invincible Boeing, like 73 rudders, holes in fuselages, etc.

From a Qantas mate who knows one of the flight deck crew.

Says it all ...

Just wait until the Dreamliner flies the line

 

[overseas boy]

This is why I fly Boeing!!!

Probably more likely you never got offered a job flying airbii!!!
It's just a plane, if it was built in the USA you'd think it was great, it's not, get over it....

 

[WYOMINGPILOT]

More details!!!
Here are just SOME of the problems in Singapore last week aboard QF32.... I won't bother mentioning the engine explosion!.... oops... mentioned the engine explosion, sorry..... * massive fuel leak in the left mid fuel tank (the beast has 11 tanks, including in the horizontal stabiliser on the tail)* massive fuel leak in the left inner fuel tank* a hole on the flap canoe/fairing that you could fit your upper body through* the aft gallery in the fuel system failed, preventing many fuel transfer functions* fuel jettison had problems due to the previous problem above* bloody great hole in the upper wing surface* partial failure of leading edge slats* partial failure of speed brakes/ground spoilers* shrapnel damage to the flaps* TOTAL loss of all hydraulic fluid in the Green System (beast has 2 x 5,000 PSI systems, Green and Yellow)* manual extension of landing gear* loss of 1 generator and associated systems* loss of brake anti-skid system* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using normal method after landing due to major damage to systems* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using using the fire switch!!!!!!!! Therefore, no fire protection was available for that engine after the explosion in #2* ECAM warnings about major fuel imbalance because of fuel leaks on left side, that were UNABLE to be fixed with cross-feeding* fuel trapped in Trim Tank (in the tail). Therefore, possible major CofG out-of-balance condition for landing. Yikes!* and much more to come.......... Richard was in the left seat, FO in the right), SO in the 2nd obs seat (right rear, also with his own Radio Management Panel, so he probably did most of the coordination with the ground), Capt Dave Evans in the 1st obs seat (middle). He is a Check & Training Captain who was training Harry Wubbin to be one also. Harry was in the 3rd obs seat (left rear). All 5 guys were FLAT OUT, especially the FO who would have been processing complicated 'ECAM' messages and procedures that were seemingly never-ending!

 

[overseas boy]

wyoming we get you dont like airbus's! I remember another uncontained eng explosion it ended with a dramatic, very unfortunate crash with multiple loss of life. UA292.
The 380 kept flying. Even after multiple failures, most likely because several wiring looms had been cut after the enging debris penetrated the wing structure.
It's just a plane and we should be thankful there was not loss of life, not having a slanging match based on your slanted view of an aircraft you've never flown.

 

[WYOMINGPILOT]

MORE AIRBUS AND ROLLS ROYCE WOES.

(Reuters) - Engine maker Rolls-Royce (RR.L) has asked Airbus (EAD.PA) to return some Airbus A380 engines from production lines so it can use them to replace faulty ones on airplanes already in service.
The Airbus A380 -- the world's largest passenger aircraft with an average list price of about $350 million -- has been hit by safety concerns after a Rolls-Royce engine partly disintegrated mid-flight, forcing a fully laden Qantas (QAN.AX) plane to make an emergency landing in Singapore on Nov 4.
Rolls-Royce's move could be another blow to a much-delayed A380 programme as Airbus was scheduled to deliver over a dozen Rolls-Royce-powered A380s -- primarily to Singapore Airlines (SIAL.SI), Qantas and Lufthansa (LHAG.DE) by the end of next year.
"Until this problem is fully resolved I think the situation with the delivery of A380 to customers... will be in jeopardy," Standard & Poor's analyst Sukhor Yusof said

 

[WYOMINGPILOT]

wyoming we get you dont like airbus's! I remember another uncontained eng explosion it ended with a dramatic, very unfortunate crash with multiple loss of life. UA292.
The 380 kept flying. Even after multiple failures, most likely because several wiring looms had been cut after the enging debris penetrated the wing structure.
It's just a plane and we should be thankful there was not loss of life, not having a slanging match based on your slanted view of an aircraft you've never flown.

I Think you meant United 232. This crash was a DC-10 built by Mcdonnell-Douglas. The results of this crash caused aircraft/engine suppliers to redesign and ensure safety to try and avoid future uncontained engine failures.

 

[Dornier 335]

The "witness accounts" posted by Wyomingpilot sound dubious. Notice how everything about the A380 is described very negatively! No pilot would ever do this. Even the pilots that flew the J-41 (and hated the plane) at my previous airline never talked about their plane like this. Sounds like there's just another hater out in FI land.

 

[WYOMINGPILOT]

The "witness accounts" posted by Wyomingpilot sound dubious. Notice how everything about the A380 is described very negatively! No pilot would ever do this. Even the pilots that flew the J-41 (and hated the plane) at my previous airline never talked about their plane like this. Sounds like there's just another hater out in FI land.

I never said these were "Witness accounts" These were mates of mine sending me information. Just passing along information, you can decide for yourself whether the Airbus/Rolls Royce A-380 is safe.

 

[overseas boy]

yes it was UA 232 and the redesign was to contain a fan disk failure not a rotor disk failure. You can see the results also here.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1644738/posts

This one being GE


Wyoming you started your post with the "this is why i fly boeing"!

Stop the xenophobic rhetoric and base your discussions on fact and you'll have more credibilty.
The A380 is having some in service problems right now as is the Rolls Royce engine, I'm sure the moneymakers will sort it out though just like Boeing did with the 737 rudder issues.
I trust when you pax or jumpseat on a flight that the same holds true about the "flying boeing" nonsense and you decline to fly on the airbus?

 

[Dornier 335]

Wyoming you started your post with the "this is why i fly boeing"!

Here is another reason why you should not point the finger at just one party/manufacturer:

British Airtours Flight 28M

 

[WYOMINGPILOT]

Just passing along info. so don't kill the messenger.

How controllable was QF32 during the emergency?

November 21, 2010 – 11:33 am, by Ben Sandilands
There have been some fairly dramatic claims made about the controllability of QF32 after the disintegration of the inboard No2 Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine on November 4 after it took off from Singapore for Sydney.
While I was travelling and out of communications Airbus released a statement on this.
It has been described, I think fairly, as ‘defensive’ by some observers. But it is also a reason to use some common sense in considering this gravely serious in-flight incident.
Here is the Airbus statement:

A380 / RR TRENT 900 – QANTAS VH-OQA INCIDENT ON 4th NOVEMBER 2010.
FROM : AIRBUS FLIGHT SAFETY DEPARTMENT TOULOUSE
Subject: A380 / RR Trent 900 – Qantas VH-OQA incident on 4th November 2010
Our ref.: QF32 AIT 3, dated 17th November 2010
This AIT is an update of the AIT 2 following the in-flight engine failure during flight QF32 from Singapore to Sydney, on 4th November 2010.
This AIT has been approved for release by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) who leads the on-going ICAO Annex 13 investigation.
The second RR inspection program applicable to the Trent 900 engine family and covered by EASA Engine Airworthiness Directive has been published allowing continuous operations of the fleet. Together with its partners, Airbus is providing support to the operators for engine logistics to minimize interruptions to the fleet.
One single high energy fragment is considered from a certification requirement viewpoint. The damage assessment has established that the IPT disk released 3 different high energy fragments, resulting in some structural and systems damage, with associated ECAM warnings. Therefore the crew had to manage a dynamic situation.
Despite the situation, amongst the various available systems supporting the crew to operate the aircraft and return safely to Singapore were:
- Flaps remained available (slats were jammed retracted).
- All flight control surfaces remained available on the pitch and yaw axis.
- The roll control was ensured through: (a) on the left wing: inner aileron, spoilers 1, 3, 5 and 7; (b) on the right wing: mid and inner ailerons, spoilers 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7.
- The flight control laws reverted to Alternate law due to the loss of the slats and of some roll control surfaces. Normal law was kept on longitudinal and lateral axes.
- Flight envelope protections were still active.
- The autopilot was kept engaged till about 700 feet Radio Altimeter, time at which the crew took over manually. Flight Directors were ON.
- Manual control of engines 1, 3 & 4 was maintained till aircraft stop.
- Landing in SIN took place about 1 hour 40 minutes after the engine 2 failure with flaps in
configuration 3.
- Normal braking was available on both body landing gears with antiskid, and alternate braking without antiskid on both wing landing gears. The crew modulated braking in order to stop close to emergency services.
- After the aircraft came to a stop, the reason engine 1 could not be shut down has been determined: 2 segregated wiring routes were cut by 2 out of the 3 individual disk debris.
​

It would have been useful if Airbus had gone into more detail about any problems that were occurring in the capacity of the damaged airliner to transfer fuel between tanks, or in fact, the need to do so during what was a very cool headed and methodical handling of the stricken flight by its pilots.
However it ought to be obvious that the pilots were always aware of the fundamentals of maintaining stable flight while they dealt with the exceptional situation that they were in. The flight remained within the required control envelopes until it landed, and stopped where the crew wanted it to stop, beside the fire engines.
To infer that there was a risk of the centre of gravity causing them to lose control is obviously silly, since were managing all of the many risks that had arisen in a logical but timely manner, and they touched down when they chose to, and stopped where they chose to.
None of which is to say that the experiences of the QF32 won’t result in subsequent changes to the A380 to deal with such a catastrophic engine failure in the future. But the first step is to drag the mystery of what Rolls-Royce did to these engines, and why, and even to which ones, out in the open, and fix them.