It is in Sydney and will be back in service in December.

ATSB preliminary report due out tomorrow
 

This media release just out from ATSB:

Actual report is at: http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...070_prelim.pdf

Not materially different from the initial report. More detailed investigation of the ADIRU-1 failure and its impact on other systems is about to be conducted on a multi-agency (Australian, French and USA) basis.

It seems to me that there is a logic bug or multiple logic bugs in the A330's avionics such that redundant components are not switched in, or their input is not preferred, when a fault has been detected in a primary component. The aircraft had 3 ADIRUs only one of which was determined to be faulty, yet the faulty ADIRU-1 was not thereafter ignored and the two working redundant ADIRUs were not utilised in the way that one would have expected the system to operate. Basically the physical redundancy was not utilised by the avionics logic as a consequence of which spurious data spikes continuously interfered with various components of the avionics, including aural and visual warning alarms on an ongoing basis until landing in Learmonth. These included concurrent stall and overspeed alarms and warnings, and an ECAM with a display that continued to scroll multiple warnings and information so fast that the flight crew was unable to interact with them.

This is truly a scary scenario that, no matter how low the probability of recurrence exists, requires exhaustive investigation and, in my view, a rethink of how these systems are tested before certification.

You forgot the mention of:

The ATSB has received many suggestions from members of the public to consider the effect of various external sources of electromagnetic interference on the aircraft, particularly any transmissions by the Harold E. Holt very low frequency transmitter near Exmouth, WA. Initial analysis suggests it is unlikely that any transmissions from this facility could affect systems on board an aircraft flying near the vicinity. However, further assessment of this possibility and other possible sources of external electromagnetic interference will be examined.

With a transmission power of 1000 kilowatts, it is the most powerful transmission station in the Southern hemisphere.

When it happened I did look into the station and researched many other boards, but everyone came back with it would not cause issues with an aircraft.

Now the ATSB has included it.

Another A330 ADIRU error!
 

This appeared on the ATSB website this afternoon:

This is now more serious than before and requires deeper investigation of what could be shaping up as Australia's own Bermuda Triangle!

This appears to be the third such event as a B777 of Malaysia Airlines had problems on 1 August 2005 ; http://aviation-safety.net/database/...0801-1&lang=fr refers.

It does seem odd that two QANTAS A330s have been affected in such a short time and I wonder why other carriers are not experiencing similar problems as I presume this is happening on a major airway to Singapore.

Could there be quality control problems at Airbus, QANTAS or the manufacturer which have failed to detect faults in the nav system ? Or perhaps new equipment has been installed at the Harold E Holt Communications Station which may be under test or when operational under certain circumstances MAY be affecting the nav systems in the QF aircraft. Are these unique to QF or are the same systems installed in other aircraft ?

Whatever the causes, an investigation should be conducted immediately but I very much doubt that the USN would be too forthcoming about any
equipment at its base.

perhaps our American friends can stick their spying equipment on the recently retired USN John. F Kennedy and stick it in the middle of the Indian Ocean?

Diego Garcia? Or does the US know something we don't about it's effect on aircraft

me smells a conspiracy:p

Bermuda triangle shaping up?
 

This News Limited report makes the Harold Holt transmission issue seem less likely, despite the fact that to this day more mystery still surrounds the real Harold Holt's disappearance than any X-files episode:

And for those who are taking a greater interest in the Very Low Frequency transmission base, here's some background of unvouched accuracy:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ty/exmouth.htm

Geez, Phillip
Can you explain to us mere mortals the link between that story, the QF incident and your reference to Portsea 1967?

Mystery is the missing link
 

From the link in my previous post:

One of the issues the ATSB is investigating is whether the VLF transmissions from the HHUNCB could adversely affect the avionics which has behaved erroneously on two occasions within two months within 350 km of the base.

The C-17 story is of interest because of its proximity to the HHUNCB and the fact that VLF transmissions appear not to have been implicated, thus increasing the mystery of the frequency of unusual incidents occuring within 400 km of the HHUNCB.

Sorry if the common thread was too obscure - perhaps you're too young to remember HH's drowning mystery? Popular mythology is that he was taken by a foreign sub - the kind that communicates via VLF.

Hmmm ...

A report on another Board mentioned that the C17A was carrying 70 pax and equipment from Learmonth to Townsville when fumes & leaking fuel were
discovered coming from a vehicle onboard the aircraft. Hence the return to Learmonth.

WA Today had coverage and local radio 882 6PR also reported the incident.

And the RAAF activated Learmonth as an operational base a few days before Christmas and sent several hundred personnel and two P3C Orions there to provide an enhanced surveillance and response capability, as part of Operation Resolute, after several incidents of unauthorised boat arrivals and illegal fishing activities in Australia's territorial waters.

So I think we can rule out interference from North West Cape.

And re the disappearance of Harold Holt. I was a teenager living in Melbourne at the time and familiar with the Portsea Back Beach and Cheviot Beach where Holt disappeared. That area can be nasty at the best of times and I just think that Holt got into difficulties and drowned, his body being swept away. He wasn't the first nor was he the last to disappear in those treacherous seas.

Pretty scary if the VLF transmitter is effecting a/c like this! Wonder what else they are doing at HEH because there are many VLF sites around the world that seem to operate without too much trouble and thounsands of airbus a/c that operate without issue.

Indeed HMAS Harman in Canberra (Belconnen site) was once the site of a VLF transmitter and was directly under one of the outbound paths a/c used to take from CBR-MEL. Ansett A320's regularly flew through this area.

It does seem as if there is some interferance problem with something that is going on up that way.

What do you base that one? Still sounds pretty likely to me. It isn't as if these faults in A330's are regular occourances, yet here are two in the same general location within a short period of time. I was once taught once is bad luck, twice a co-incidence, 3 times enemy action.

Hi Ash

I referred specifically to the incident involving the C17 which returned to Learmonth after fumes and leaking petrol came from a vehicle onboard.

I didn't make any mention whatsover of the incidents involving the A330s which appear totally unrelated to that with the C17.

Oh yeah, cannot see how anyone could have ever linked the two. Now if the C17 was the same type of incident then maybe.

ATSB report just released
 

The ATSB has released an updated report this morning:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...70_interim.pdf

Damn that's a lot to take in... and continues to raise new questions as well as a very sobering reminder about not just keeping your seatbelt fastened but not being overly liberal with the meaning of "fastened loosely" as some pax seem to do, ie. loosening it as much as they can.

Second interim ATSB report
 

The ATSB will be releasing its second interim factual report on Wednesday morning: http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/2009/alert/2009_14.aspx

The first report foreshadowed the contents of the second report:

ATSB 2nd interim factual report released
 

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/748444/ao2008070_ifr_2.pdf

Extract from the report:

Quote:

Despite extensive testing and analysis, the reason why the ADIRU started providing erroneous data (spikes) during the 7 October 2008 flight (or the 27 December 2008 flight) has not been identified to date. Nevertheless, the crew operational procedures that were provided by Airbus in October 2008 (and modified in December 2008 and January 2009) significantly reduced the chance of another in-flight upset by limiting the time that a faulty ADIRU could output angle of attack spikes. Airbus is also modifying the FCPC software used in the A330/A340 fleets to prevent angle of attack spikes leading to an in-flight upset.

Legal action against Airbus & Northrop-Grumman
 

This news story out today about a class action commenced in USA against Airbus as well as Northrop-Grumman (the maker of the ADIRU):
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...20/3015989.htm.

The 'evidence' they apparently plan to use is the second interim ATSB factual report at: http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/1363394...8070_ifr_2.pdf

The action has been filed now before the 2 year statute of limitations expires on 7 October.

What I find wierd though is, it has been filed by a US Attorney in a US Court as, under US Law, they can get more compensation. Source: - YAHOO

the part in question was manufactured in the US...I think you will find that this is integral to the case.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/

check tomorrow, there was a segment on the case tonight on ABC radio.

Ahhh... ok... I hadn't thought of that side of things... I just thought of it being a French AC with an Australian Operator over Australia that it wierd to be heard in a US Court!

there was a story on the 7.30 report about it too

ATSB final report released
 

Access via this link:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...-2008-070.aspx

Seems to me that the crew did a great job in dealing with this emergency, both tech Crew and Cabin Staff.

Pilots with a lot of experience between them. Did I read right where it indicated one of the cabin crew had 37 years experience. That is a mighty knock in anyones book. He or she would have started back in the 70's.

I am firmly in the camp that subscribes to the theory that pilots must be and continue to be adequately paid to reflect the huge responsibility they carry each and every time they fly. I am a bloody nervous flyer and I want my pilots well paid and well trained.

Good job

Great airmanship
 

No question - very well handled when they couldn't trust what the instruments were telling them. The fundamental rule was followed - someone needs to fly the plane! And that's exactly what the Captain did while others attended to other duties.

As I commented early in this thread, fly by wire is great until the wire 'breaks'. Hopefully safety critical avionics software will be vastly better in the future as a result of this very conscientious ATSB report - all 313 pages of it.

To be honest i think the only ones that can claim for physical injury are ones that were not seated.

Any one that was seated, knows as stated by almost every airline that they have their seat belt on, for this very reason.

Faulty avionics was the cause
 

Not wearing a seat belt during cruise might be contributory negligence but it is not disentitling, especially given that there had been not a skeric of turbulence.

Bit of a look at the human side of the incident

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/good...10-gw26ae.html

Also a good account of the concerns many pilots have of Airbus's computer priorities over humans design.

ATSB questions still unanswered ...
 

http://yssyforum.net/board/showpost....&postcount=148 :confused:

If you have not read Captain Kevin Sullivan book on QF72. I would suggest you get a copy. It is an easy book to read and an amazing story. A very courageous crew