Qantas A380 in Emergency Landing

scudzilla

A Qantas jetliner has made an emergency landing in Singapore with 459 people aboard, after one of its four engines shut down over western Indonesia. Skip related content
Related photos / videos
Quantas plane makes emergency landing Enlarge photo

It follows witness reports of a blast that sent debris hurtling to the ground. But the airliner denied there had been any explosion, and said the plane landed safely.

Indonesian broadcaster RCTI showed pictures of people in the western Indonesian island of Batam, near Singapore, holding a piece of debris believed to be from the plane.

Witnesses on the island reported hearing a large blast and seeing pieces of debris - including panels painted white and red - falling onto houses and a nearby shopping centre.

A Qantas statement said the double-decker A380 plane, which is capable of carrying about 500 passengers, experienced an "engine issue" soon after taking off from Singapore for Sydney.

It made a safe emergency landing in Singapore with 433 passengers and 26 crew on board, the statement said.

Qantas spokeswoman Emma Kearns in Sydney, Australia, said there were no reports of injuries and that the airline had not received any reports of an explosion on board.

Source : http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20101104/twl-quantas-plane-makes-emergency-landin-41f21e0.html


Sure we'll hear more over the next day or so

scudzilla

Qantas have now grounded all of it's A380's!!!

cyrusdvirus

37 in service worldwide, 1 engine casualty, 1 that squashed a bunch of tyres on a hard landing.

Unfortunately cos of the size of the beast every glitch (small or big) is gonna make headlines

SNAKEDOC

maybe it threw a blade or something. i doubt it was a bird strike that done that much damage.

pclancy

cyrusdvirus

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

maybe it threw a blade or something. i doubt it was a bird strike that done that much damage.

On one of those discovery shows they showed a deliberate bird strike on one of the Trents.

The bird damn near came out the other side roasted and ready to eat

adamski8

gatecrash wrote: »

37 in service worldwide, 1 engine casualty, 1 that squashed a bunch of tyres on a hard landing.

Unfortunately cos of the size of the beast every glitch (small or big) is gonna make headlines

37 aint that much and seeing as its only been operating since ~2007 and id say it didnt start off with 37 craft.
I would say any aircraft with an engine that explodes would make headlines!
and of course with ~500 people on board.

Passengers said the pilot spent at least an hour and a half circling in order to use up fuel ahead of the emergency landing. They said the landing itself was smooth.

that would have been scary.
could they not have fuel dumped? or is that what they would have been doing?

ednwireland

glad i'm not in the metallurgy dept at RR any more

this aint a good sign



looks like the turbine disc (could be damage after something else failed though)

mind the trent 1000 failed in august and destroyed a test bed

more info

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/432704-qantas-emergency-landing-singapore-5.html

Lapin

adamski8 wrote: »

that would have been scary.
could they not have fuel dumped? or is that what they would have been doing?

According to the news report on RTE's Morning Ireland today, the aircraft did spend some time dumping fuel prior to the emergency landing.

adamski8

Lapin wrote: »

According to the news report on RTE's Morning Ireland today, the aircraft did spend some time dumping fuel prior to the emergency landing.

would it have been actually dumping it or just using it up whilst flying?

Storm 10

adamski8 wrote: »

would it have been actually dumping it or just using it up whilst flying?

Of course they dump fuel to prepare for an emergency landing, you dont think they want to stay in the air for hours using fuel with an engine failure, its the only way to get rid of the fuel it reduces fire risk and the landing weight of the aircraft. The aircraft was only airborne 15 minutes when the incident happened so they would have had a full fuel load on board.

adamski8

well i aint so aircraft savy there storm, i only found out today that you can't land because of weight! surprised it takes so long to dump enough

sonic.trip

going on one of these in january, hasn't put me off. still can't wait to go on one . it landed safely in the end on one of the worlds safest airliners

BrianD

Second engine failure that Quantas have had recently. Other wasa 747 off San Francisco.

From a practical point of view, where do they put these aircraft when they land. I'd imagine the last thing any airport wants is an aircraft appearing at a gate with one of the engines half hanging on!

Artur.PL

http://www.perthnow.com.au/gallery-e6frg1vc-1225947864448?page=1

ian_m

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11691197

Video in link.

cyrusdvirus

adamski8 wrote: »

well i aint so aircraft savy there storm, i only found out today that you can't land because of weight! surprised it takes so long to dump enough

The fuel dump would be out a relief pipe from the tanks, it's not like a water bomber just opening it's doors and WHOOSH, it'd have to be regulated to maintain trim on the A/C too.

When you think about it, an aircraft that size, just 15 minutes after leaving, would have a fairly heavy fuel load.

munchkin_utd

gatecrash wrote: »

37 in service worldwide, 1 engine casualty, 1 that squashed a bunch of tyres on a hard landing.

Unfortunately cos of the size of the beast every glitch (small or big) is gonna make headlines

well, its also big news cos theres billions of euros riding on its successful introduction for EADS/ Airbus.

There are 2 engine variants on the aircraft, the Rolls Royce trent that failed today on the Quantas jet, or the Engine Alliance GP7200

Only Lufthansa and Singapore have taken delivery of planes with the Rolls Royce engine so you would wonder if they will also react to this failure on the Quantas A380??

(the other airlines like Emirates have a completely different engine so theres no issue with their planes)
for who has which engine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Airbus_A380_orders#By_customer

jmayo

scudzilla wrote: »

Qantas have now grounded all of it's A380's!!!

This is goping to be logistical nightmare for Quantas.
If you think about it a huge chunk of their flights are long hual.
Does anyone know if they still have some of the old 747s in service ?
Also they need form financial point of view to be back in the air before Christmas.

BrianD wrote: »

Second engine failure that Quantas have had recently. Other wasa 747 off San Francisco.

From a practical point of view, where do they put these aircraft when they land. I'd imagine the last thing any airport wants is an aircraft appearing at a gate with one of the engines half hanging on!

Some how I don't think you can ask for a gate aftyer you have engine blowout even if they have to get the passengers off first and foremost.
In this case that was done away from normal gates.

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2010/11/04/1225947/989571-singapore-australia-airline.jpg

An A380 is pretty hard to hide no matter where you put it at an airfield if there isn't hangar available.

gatecrash wrote: »

The fuel dump would be out a relief pipe from the tanks, it's not like a water bomber just opening it's doors and WHOOSH, it'd have to be regulated to maintain trim on the A/C too.

When you think about it, an aircraft that size, just 15 minutes after leaving, would have a fairly heavy fuel load.

These that type of fuel dump would cause greenies to have nightmares.

Discodog

Seems odd that it happened behind the main turbines that are protected by shroud. Bits are supposed to stay in & not fall on the ground or wipe out the wing. This could of been worse.

Feels different after that brilliant RR documentary. The workers at Derby will be very disappointed.

shamwari

Discodog wrote: »

Seems odd that it happened behind the main turbines that are protected by shroud. Bits are supposed to stay in & not fall on the ground or wipe out the wing. This could of been worse.

Feels different after that brilliant RR documentary. The workers at Derby will be very disappointed.

I believe you are correct - I understood that catastrophic failures like this are meant to be contained within the cowling. I'm beginning to wonder that with such a big engine and a lot of moving metal within it, if this is physlically possiblle

ednwireland

Discodog wrote: »

Seems odd that it happened behind the main turbines that are protected by shroud. Bits are supposed to stay in & not fall on the ground or wipe out the wing. This could of been worse.

Feels different after that brilliant RR documentary. The workers at Derby will be very disappointed.

they certainly will, theres gonna be some long nights
(i used to work there)

Steyr

munchkin_utd wrote: »

There are 2 engine variants on the aircraft, the Rolls Royce trent that failed today on the Quantas jet, or the Engine Alliance GP7200

Only Lufthansa and Singapore have taken delivery of planes with the Rolls Royce engine so you would wonder if they will also react to this failure on the Quantas A380??

(the other airlines like Emirates have a completely different engine so theres no issue with their planes)

Emirates, the biggest single-customer of Airbus A380, said it had no plans to ground its 13 superjumbos.

Lufthansa also said it would not ground its A380 jets, but it is understood the airline does use Rolls-Royce engines.

However, Singapore Airlines - which also uses Rolls-Royce - indictated it would delay all its A380 flights pending "precautionary technical checks".

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Qantas-Airbus-A380-Makes-Emergency-Landing-In-Singapore-After-Engine-Fails/Article/201011115794856?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_3&lid=ARTICLE_15794856_Qantas_Airbus_A380_Makes_Emergency_Landing_In_Singapore_After_Engine_Fails

Discodog

shamwari wrote: »

I believe you are correct - I understood that catastrophic failures like this are meant to be contained within the cowling. I'm beginning to wonder that with such a big engine and a lot of moving metal within it, if this is physlically possiblle

The documentary made a big play of how the main cowling would protect again a big fan blade breaking out. But looking at the pics the damage is more at the back of the engine like around the compressor. I would guess that RR were getting real time info back from the engine so that would mean that it was sudden. Had there been any prior warning the engine would of been shut down.

FlutterinBantam

Very informed posts there.


thanks everyone.

Tenger

jmayo wrote: »

This is goping to be logistical nightmare for Quantas.
If you think about it a huge chunk of their flights are long hual.
Does anyone know if they still have some of the old 747s in service ?
Also they need form financial point of view to be back in the air before Christmas...............

........These that type of fuel dump would cause greenies to have nightmares.

Maybe not as much as the media may think.
QF have 6 A380. SO they only need to sub in 6 similar aircraft (B747/B777) Obviously no aircraft can handle the same passenger load as the A380 so you will see all the QF A380 routes suddenly becoming full/overbooked. (QF A380=450 seats, B744=350-400[4 cabin versions], B744ER=307, A333=297) They may well have to increase frequency to carry all booked pax or transfer them onto BA flights.

QF have 3 stored B747,if they grounding goes on ofr more than 2-3 weeks they may have to get them back in the air.


In terms of the fuel dump. I was once told that this is actually less damaging to the atmosphere than burning the fuel. The dumped fuel gets vaporised into the air and thus dilutes across the atmosphere. Actually using the fuel causes hot exhauast gases at high altitudes which have a greater effect on cloud formation/climate changes/weather disruption than just dumping it. I'm open to being corrected on this, was told this by an ex commercial captain.

Rowley Birkin QC

I'm completely wrong here but from those pictures does it look to anyone else as if the hole on the top of the wing is the entry point for some kind of foreign body?

Any possibility that something travelled through the wing and blew off the debris found in Indonesia?

Sorry if that sounds like complete hokum to the technical people around here!

Steyr

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

I'm completely wrong here but from those pictures does it look to anyone else as if the hole on the top of the wing is the entry point for some kind of foreign body?

Any possibility that something travelled through the wing and blew off the debris found in Indonesia?

Sorry if that sounds like complete hokum to the technical people around here!

I understand where your coming from but if you look at the "exit" hole above the wing it shows the surface pushed out and up which means something travelled from under the Aircraft up thru the wing forcing it outwards, if it had come from above the wing and down into it the hole would have pushed the surface inwards and what you see on the top wing would be under the wing.

Rowley Birkin QC

Steyr wrote: »

I understand where your coming from but if you look at the "exit" hole above the wing it shows the surface pushed out and up which means something travelled from under the Aircraft up thru the wing forcing it outwards, if it had come from above the wing and down into it the hole would have pushed the surface inwards and what you see on the top wing would be under the wing.

And bang goes my CSi career. Cheers.

BrianD

Interesting link with the timeline of events. Seems that it was three and a half hours between the initial failure and the passengers finally embarking at Singapore. Though the plane seems to have landed just an hour and a three quarters after the engine failed.

The link points to a PDF

http://images.theage.com.au/file/2010/11/04/2026935/0511qantas.pdf

Foggy43

Signapores A380 due out at mid day today did not leave LHR.

I wonder do we know about this problem allready. The Trent 800's on the B777 had a problem simular to this. The engine inboard 'D' ducts disintigrating. Only difference I can see is on the B777 the only idication of a problem was the high fuel consmption on the effected engine. G-YMMP diverted into AMS because they would not have enough fuel to reach LHR. Total shocck when they saw the right engine. The were flying for 5 hours with the engine like this

http://fotopocket.nl/fpimages/2010/06/15/291a21ceb47cdcece40536df876f009a/IMG00046-20100615-1225.jpg

This brought mandatory special checks on the B777 Trent fleet. It was found the problem was about to hit other 4 aircraft. It took months to get replacement 'D' Ducts. It has been reported other airlines have had a problem similar to this but whether it is the same series engine I am not sure.

vulcan57

Just a thought, this incident happened over Indonesia, Isn't there a very active volcano there at the moment? I know that you would think that if one engine was affected then they all would, but who knows?

The main thing is that everyone survived. Qantas have a great safety record, never had a jet crash of any kind that has resulted in a fatality.

kona

Foggy43 wrote: »

Signapores A380 due out at mid day today did not leave LHR.

I wonder do we know about this problem allready. The Trent 800's on the B777 had a problem simular to this. The engine inboard 'D' ducts disintigrating. Only difference I can see is on the B777 the only idication of a problem was the high fuel consmption on the effected engine. G-YMMP diverted into AMS because they would not have enough fuel to reach LHR. Total shocck when they saw the right engine. The were flying for 5 hours with the engine like this

http://fotopocket.nl/fpimages/2010/06/15/291a21ceb47cdcece40536df876f009a/IMG00046-20100615-1225.jpg

This brought mandatory special checks on the B777 Trent fleet. It was found the problem was about to hit other 4 aircraft. It took months to get replacement 'D' Ducts. It has been reported other airlines have had a problem similar to this but whether it is the same series engine I am not sure.

AFAIK its the Trent 900 on the A380.

One of the pics above is a fandisc thats in two. Perhaps there was a flaw in the material, I remember a similar thing happened in the Salt Lake City crash i think.
Hopefully its something like this and not a design flaw, wouldnt fancy having to replace Discs and the like across the entire fleet using Trent 900s

Steyr

vulcan57 wrote: »

Just a thought, this incident happened over Indonesia, Isn't there a very active volcano there at the moment? I know that you would think that if one engine was affected then they all would, but who knows?

The main thing is that everyone survived. Qantas have a great safety record, never had a jet crash of any kind that has resulted in a fatality.

Irish CEO too interestingly enough.

jimbis

Steyr wrote: »

Irish CEO too interestingly enough.

I thought there was a bit of irish in him when i heard him talking alright!:)

empirix

kind of reassuring in a way though, taking a hit like that and staying up with little or no bother and then landing smoothly. scary though, would of broke the mini bar open myself,foolish i know:D

cyrusdvirus

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

And bang goes my CSi career. Cheers.

But Rowls, you'd look sooo good in a pair of Horatio Caine Sunglasses

iPlop

They're blaming a design fault in the RR engines for the problem.Does this mean every A380 will have to be grounded and checked?

Qantas fears engine design fault after A380 drama

Qantas said Friday a mid-air drama involving a flagship A380 superjumbo may have been caused by a design fault in its Rolls-Royce engines, raising questions over the giant long-haul craft.

Chief executive Alan Joyce said early investigations pointed to a "material failure or a design issue" in the Airbus plane's engines after one exploded minutes after take-off from Singapore, prompting an emergency landing.

"This is an engine issue and the engines were maintained by Rolls-Royce since being installed on the aircraft," Joyce told reporters at the Australian flag-carrier's Sydney headquarters.

"We believe that this is most likely some kind of material failure or a design issue... we don't believe this is related to maintenance in any way."

The comments are the first to shed light on Thursday's events, when engine casing rained down on an Indonesian town and the superjumbo with 466 people on board dumped fuel before returning to Singapore.

The drama has thrown the A380 -- the double-decker giant touted as the future of long-haul travel -- into the safety spotlight three years after it took to the skies.

Rolls-Royce urged airlines to carry out "basic precautionary checks" on its Trent 900 engines after the incident.

Some 37 of the giant planes are currently in use around the world.

Qantas has grounded its fleet of six A380s but Joyce said they could return to the skies within 48 hours if they come through eight hours of safety checks.

He added that some of the stricken A380's tyres burst during Thursday's emergency landing in Sinapore, but said that was "not significant".

Qantas said the plane had 440 passengers and 26 crew on board but no injuries were reported.

European manufacturer Airbus said it was sending a team to Singapore and would cooperate fully with the probe launched by Australian and French air accident investigators.

Singapore Airlines (SIA), the first airline to operate the world's largest passenger jet in 2007, said it resumed A380 flights "following precautionary checks".

Qantas, which has never had a fatal jetliner crash in its 90-year history, said the plane involved was the first A380 it received in September 2008, and recently underwent its first major maintenance check, in Germany.

The Australian flag-carrier delayed flights usually serviced by A380s between Melbourne and Sydney and Los Angeles, as passengers on the aborted trip resumed their journey to Sydney on replacement planes.

Witnesses told of hearing a loud "bang" shortly after take-off as the left-side engine blew, damaging the wing above. The pilot then dumped fuel and circled Singapore before landing.

"All of a sudden I heard a big bang, like a big gunshot bang, like a really loud gun," Tyler Wooster, 16, who was in a window seat above the wing, told Australian public broadcaster ABC.

"I couldn't see, obviously, what happened to the engine beneath, but I saw it shot a big hole through the wing... You could see how the the wing had peeled off."

After 18 months of production delays, the A380's first commercial flight, operated by SIA, was on the same Singapore-Sydney route in October 2007.

Since the launch, fuel and computer glitches have grounded several A380s and one Air France flight was forced back to New York after problems with its navigation system in November 2009.

In April, a Qantas A380 damaged tyres on landing from Singapore in Sydney, causing a shower of sparks.

As well as the 37 A380s now flying commercially, another 234 are on order from airlines, according to Airbus -- whose US arch-rival Boeing is banking on the smaller 787 Dreamliner competing for the long-haul sector.

ednwireland

kona wrote: »

AFAIK its the Trent 900 on the A380.

One of the pics above is a fandisc thats in two. Perhaps there was a flaw in the material, I remember a similar thing happened in the Salt Lake City crash i think.
Hopefully its something like this and not a design flaw, wouldnt fancy having to replace Discs and the like across the entire fleet using Trent 900s

you thinking of souix city kona ? uncontained turbine disc failure in the tail sheared through all 3 hydraulic systems damn amazing pilot nearly landed it as well, controlled the aircraft on throttling the 2 remaining engines just a stunning peice of aircraft control.

anyway that brought in a lot of traceability controls on major engine parts (cradle to grave) i think all turbine discs were x rayed as well (could be wrong on this memroy is hazy after 10+ years out)

kona

ednwireland wrote: »

you thinking of souix city kona ? uncontained turbine disc failure in the tail sheared through all 3 hydraulic systems damn amazing pilot nearly landed it as well, controlled the aircraft on throttling the 2 remaining engines just a stunning peice of aircraft control.

anyway that brought in a lot of traceability controls on major engine parts (cradle to grave) i think all turbine discs were x rayed as well (could be wrong on this memroy is hazy after 10+ years out)

Your right it was sioux city, think it was a L1011 or a Md-10 that it happend on, the fleet captain was onboard and he controlled the throttles. They did well.

Although, from the picture above its a fandisc less the blades, the one in sioux city still had the blades attached as far as i remember. I wonder what part of the engine let go, the LPT or the HPT.
Id imagine rolls royce have a fair idea what the issue is, if it was a design flaw then they would be gounded full stop.

kona

Sink The Banana wrote: »

They're blaming a design fault in the RR engines for the problem.Does this mean every A380 will have to be grounded and checked?

Qantas fears engine design fault after A380 drama

Qantas said Friday a mid-air drama involving a flagship A380 superjumbo may have been caused by a design fault in its Rolls-Royce engines, raising questions over the giant long-haul craft.

Chief executive Alan Joyce said early investigations pointed to a "material failure or a design issue" in the Airbus plane's engines after one exploded minutes after take-off from Singapore, prompting an emergency landing.

"This is an engine issue and the engines were maintained by Rolls-Royce since being installed on the aircraft," Joyce told reporters at the Australian flag-carrier's Sydney headquarters.

"We believe that this is most likely some kind of material failure or a design issue... we don't believe this is related to maintenance in any way."

The comments are the first to shed light on Thursday's events, when engine casing rained down on an Indonesian town and the superjumbo with 466 people on board dumped fuel before returning to Singapore.

The drama has thrown the A380 -- the double-decker giant touted as the future of long-haul travel -- into the safety spotlight three years after it took to the skies.

Rolls-Royce urged airlines to carry out "basic precautionary checks" on its Trent 900 engines after the incident.

Some 37 of the giant planes are currently in use around the world.

Qantas has grounded its fleet of six A380s but Joyce said they could return to the skies within 48 hours if they come through eight hours of safety checks.

He added that some of the stricken A380's tyres burst during Thursday's emergency landing in Sinapore, but said that was "not significant".

Qantas said the plane had 440 passengers and 26 crew on board but no injuries were reported.

European manufacturer Airbus said it was sending a team to Singapore and would cooperate fully with the probe launched by Australian and French air accident investigators.

Singapore Airlines (SIA), the first airline to operate the world's largest passenger jet in 2007, said it resumed A380 flights "following precautionary checks".

Qantas, which has never had a fatal jetliner crash in its 90-year history, said the plane involved was the first A380 it received in September 2008, and recently underwent its first major maintenance check, in Germany.

The Australian flag-carrier delayed flights usually serviced by A380s between Melbourne and Sydney and Los Angeles, as passengers on the aborted trip resumed their journey to Sydney on replacement planes.

Witnesses told of hearing a loud "bang" shortly after take-off as the left-side engine blew, damaging the wing above. The pilot then dumped fuel and circled Singapore before landing.

"All of a sudden I heard a big bang, like a big gunshot bang, like a really loud gun," Tyler Wooster, 16, who was in a window seat above the wing, told Australian public broadcaster ABC.

"I couldn't see, obviously, what happened to the engine beneath, but I saw it shot a big hole through the wing... You could see how the the wing had peeled off."

After 18 months of production delays, the A380's first commercial flight, operated by SIA, was on the same Singapore-Sydney route in October 2007.

Since the launch, fuel and computer glitches have grounded several A380s and one Air France flight was forced back to New York after problems with its navigation system in November 2009.

In April, a Qantas A380 damaged tyres on landing from Singapore in Sydney, causing a shower of sparks.

As well as the 37 A380s now flying commercially, another 234 are on order from airlines, according to Airbus -- whose US arch-rival Boeing is banking on the smaller 787 Dreamliner competing for the long-haul sector.

Hes pretty much stating the obvious, they wont know 100% until the engine is taken off and stripped and checked. Although they *should* have records from when the engine was overhauled, also the EGT readings from the engine would be another clue.
I think there will be some OTT reporting in the next few days. The engines and aircraft are designed to deal with events like this, and pilots are trained repeatedly in simulators to deal with such situations, Its just the problem was such a spectacular failure.

jmayo

ednwireland wrote: »

you thinking of souix city kona ? uncontained turbine disc failure in the tail sheared through all 3 hydraulic systems damn amazing pilot nearly landed it as well, controlled the aircraft on throttling the 2 remaining engines just a stunning peice of aircraft control.

anyway that brought in a lot of traceability controls on major engine parts (cradle to grave) i think all turbine discs were x rayed as well (could be wrong on this memroy is hazy after 10+ years out)

They also did redesign on the hydraulics as far I remember with some type of extra shutoff valves so that they would not lose all hydraulics.

Sink The Banana wrote: »

They're blaming a design fault in the RR engines for the problem.Does this mean every A380 will have to be grounded and checked?

Surely this should only affect the RR Trent engined 380s ?

The Engine Alliance GP7000s engined ones should be ok, although they might be checked even if only as a public reassurance operation.

kona

jmayo wrote: »

Surely this should only affect the RR Trent engined 380s ?

The Engine Alliance GP7000s engined ones should be ok, although they might be checked even if only as a public reassurance operation.

Aside from emrates, not many other airlines use the GP7000s

KungPao

And now a Qantas 747-400...in Singapore again!

What the hell?

Nforce

A Qantas airline jumbo jet has been forced to return to Singapore because of an engine problem.

The Boeing 747-400 turned back shortly after take-off from Changi Airport, airline officials said.

It comes a day after a Qantas Airbus A380 was forced to make an emergency landing at the same airport after one of its engines exploded.

Qantas grounded its six-strong fleet of A380s and an investigation is under way into what caused the blowout.

The latest incident affected Sydney-bound flight QF6, which was carrying more than 400 passengers.

"Shortly after take-off the captain experienced an issue with one of its engines," a Qantas spokeswoman said.

The plane managed to land safely, she said.

No further details were immediately available.

Earlier, Qantas said the engine failure on its flagship A380 may have been caused by a design fault.

CEO Alan Joyce said it was "an engine issue" and not one of maintenance on the two-year-old plane.

Rolls-Royce, the British firm which makes the Trent 900 engine involved, said it was checking all the A380s in service.

The engine blew up over western Indonesia, sending debris falling on to the island of Batam and leaving a trail of smoke.

Passengers were put on a relief flight to Australia early on Friday.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11702365

cyrusdvirus

Qantas are changing the main base of operations to Singapore..... They must be leaving Australia and becoming the Singapore Flag carrying airline.

It's the only logical reason.>>>>> TO THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES FORUM!!! :pac:

KungPao

BBC wrote: »

Passengers were put on a relief flight to Australia early on Friday.

I wonder if any of the passengers from yesterdays A380 flight got the 747 flight too.

That'd be crazy...two emergency landings in 2 days.

Tenger

KungPao wrote: »

And now a Qantas 747-400...in Singapore again!

What the hell?

Now that just really bad luck, 2 engine incidents in 2 days?
Damn you Murphy......


For RR this is a bad media incident. The new Trent 1000 they are building for the B787 had an uncontained engine failure a month or 2 ago, it was on a static frame during testing. So its very easy (for Qantas) to point the finger at RR and their engines.

Airbus will blame the engine telling us that the A380 was able to land safely afre such an occurance.


In terms of the CEO- Alan Joyce used to work for Aer Lingus. I think he is originally from Tallaght.
Look at how well the Irish are represented in World aviation: Willie Walsh at BA, MoL at Ryanair, Joyce at Qantas, James Horan at EY and Tony Ryans GPA leasing company was a trendsetter for type of business. I can't remember his name but an Irishman is CFO with Air Canada.

munchkin_utd

interesting article, and if it is a maintenance problem then ALL trent engines will have to be looked at, not just Quantas.

Qantas sent the A380 to the Lufthansa plant in Germany, where the plane was overhauled and engine maintenance done by Rolls-Royce. These arrangements were confirmed by Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/centralising-maintenance-no-adjunct-to-improving-safety/story-e6frg6zo-1225948551568

CaptainSkidmark

I taught there is a irish man running emirates?

Steyr

gatecrash wrote: »

But Rowls, you'd look sooo good in a pair of Horatio Caine Sunglasses

But as he would say "I'm afraid I was very, very drunk!"



:pac: