Sydney Airport Message Board Sydney Airport Message Board  

Go Back   Sydney Airport Message Board > Spotting and Movements > Spotting and Movements


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 7th March 2010, 03:27 PM
Matt Coughran Matt Coughran is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tweed Heads [OOL]
Posts: 86
Default Viva Macau return to SYD?

Hey Everyone!


Just currently in my hotel room watching the aircraft.

At Approx 3:15pm Viva Macau "Jackpot 9600" departed from SYD on runway 34R
but returned at around 4:00pm again and returned to the bay.

No emergency services attended the 767 taxi'ing to the bay but did have to hold for around 10 minutes before entering.

If anyone has any info that would be great!

Cheers
Matt
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 7th March 2010, 05:01 PM
Blake Riley's Avatar
Blake Riley Blake Riley is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 101
Default

I was listening to ground frequency when they started taxiing in to
the bay, They stopped on the taxiway because at bay53 they had no ground power so they had to get a machine to supply ground power
to the aircraft at the gate.

As for the turn around back to sydney reason i heard the Pilot on ATC saying something to do with a having only 1 Generator and the eletrical systems, but maybe AJ or someone who has knowledge
about the 767 could say more.
and i believe Jackpot 9600 departed on 34L
__________________
http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=32017
__________________
Upcoming Flights:
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 7th March 2010, 06:02 PM
Matt Coughran Matt Coughran is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tweed Heads [OOL]
Posts: 86
Default

Thanks Blake! and apologies it was RWY 34L
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 7th March 2010, 08:34 PM
Fred C Fred C is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 483
Default

A bit of guessing here. I suspect the APU was broken from the statement that Bay 53 had no power and wouldn't do.

So, if a 767 takes off from SYD then one of the generators on the engine breaks that would mean you are down to one generator and you can't fly more than one hour from a suitable airport.
If the APU was working he would have started that and used the generator on the APU and had two sources of power.
Before he leaves SYD he will have to get the APU fixed and/or the generator on the engine fixed, or what ever caused the problem.
__________________
Regards,

Fred
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 8th March 2010, 09:17 AM
Peter Agatsiotis Peter Agatsiotis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: St Clair 60km from YSSY
Posts: 1,630
Default

B-MAY left this morning around 9:40 am.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 28th March 2010, 01:53 PM
Andrew P's Avatar
Andrew P Andrew P is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: near the old NDB at West Pymble and near RPLR
Posts: 749
Default

per another board:-

Saw on the news yesterday Viva Macau had to cancel two flights (one to Australia and one to Vietnam) because they could not pay for the fuel...

It's on the Hong Kong news because Hong Kong travel agents use them for cheap flights.

Anytime you can't pay for fuel it's very bad sign.
__________________
used to fly globally on business, now retired
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 28th March 2010, 02:09 PM
Sarah C Sarah C is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wishing I was under a flightpath
Posts: 1,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew P View Post
per another board:-

Anytime you can't pay for fuel it's very bad sign.[/I]
In the current edition of Aus Aviatin, there is quite a lengthy story on Viva Macau and the CEO/MD is very confident, saying thier MEL loads are quite good. Maybe the truth is somewhere between those extremes.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 28th March 2010, 03:08 PM
Robert S Robert S is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 283
Default

I'm always a bit suspicous when the "can't pay for fuel" rumours start, as these seem to be a popular choice when people at rival airlines (or elsewhere) want to start some FUD floating around.

Obviously in this situation an aircraft did an air return and was subsequently out of position. Not being able to pay for fuel was obviously not the cause of the air return. So if someone somewhere (even supposing it was in fact suggested in the HK media) is linking any cancellations surrouding this to the ability to pay for fuel, well, smells like FUD.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 28th March 2010, 04:33 PM
Ian Garton Ian Garton is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 51
Default

http://airwaysaviationnews.com/2010/...ds-operations/
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 28th March 2010, 10:34 PM
Robert S Robert S is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Garton View Post
At the end of the day, "not being able to pay for fuel" obviously doesn't connect to an aircraft in flight returning to the port of origin.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 07:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Sydney Airport Message Board 1997-2022
Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the Conditions of Use and Privacy Statement