Faulty equipment downs Qantas jets

Greg McDonald · #1 29th October 2008, 06:17 PM

From ninemsn.com.au. Slightly sensationalised headline I think...

QANTAS has been forced to bring down two planes in one day after they suffered equipment failure in mid-flight.

The first incident saw a Qantas flight "piggyback" an Air New Zealand plane and divert to Auckland after its weather antenna stopped working three hours out of Los Angeles.

In a rare and extraordinary sight, passengers awoke to a high-altitude dawn with a close-up view of the Air New Zealand jet off their left wing.

Over 280 passengers on board flight QF12 arrived in Sydney four hours late after repairs to the aircraft in New Zealand.

A Qantas spokesman said passengers were not in danger and the flight continued in safety to New Zealand.

"The weather antenna wasn't working to their full satisfaction," the spokesman said.

"They chose the safest option to divert to Auckland, which had preferable weather to other diversion options, coupled with the fact the Air New Zealand plane was there to provide guidance.

"The aircraft were vertically separated at all time and governed by air traffic control."

The Air New Zealand flight was 35km away from the Qantas plane when the captain made radio contact asking for assistance.

The two planes came within a couple of thousand feet of each other as weather updates from the Air New Zealand flight were relayed across radio to the Qantas plane.

In the time it took to arrive in Auckland, a replacement antenna was flown across the ditch from Sydney and used to repair the faulty antenna.

In a separate incident, a Qantas 767 bound for Sydney was forced to turn back to Melbourne Airport with landing gear problems. Officials said Qantas flight 434 landed safely without incident.

It is understood the drama began when an "unsafe gear" warning sign was triggered, prompting the crew to take precautionary action.

Jack B · #2 29th October 2008, 06:30 PM

I believe the aircraft was VH-OEB

Rhys Xanthis · #3 29th October 2008, 06:35 PM

I dont believe the radical headline..

Sarah C · #4 29th October 2008, 07:37 PM

Headline writers can write anything - you read that and you think the aircraft actually crashed. They generally use that term 'downs' when a light aircraft, like a Cessna has an accident. They did the same thing for the QF78 a couple of weeks ago - headline writers must think they have to be a sensational as possible.

AdamC · #5 29th October 2008, 08:46 PM

My five cents worth.

Ok aircraft loses weather radar, just happens to be a qantas jet. Why would some *^&% head ring the media.

Would you just be happy knowing that your still going to arrive at your destination. I'm sure an aircraft could still operate without it's weather radar, knowing that ATC can help them with regard to weather updates. Pretty sure you they don't need the weather radar to land (someone please correct me if i'm wrong) as far as i'm aware.

I think this is starting to become a joke, some people must enjoy knowing that a story on the news is because of them.

Brian Wilkes · #6 29th October 2008, 11:08 PM

Down here in Melbourne theres a $50 fee or reward I spose to anyone who calls a un named news network to report a Qantas problem and or a delay!

Kelvin R · #7 30th October 2008, 06:31 AM

I was 3 hours late into MEL yesterday on QF. I should call and collect my reward. At least I will get some sort of compensation then considering I was meant to arrive at 10am and ended up arriving at 1pm.

Robert Zweck · #8 30th October 2008, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamC

I think this is starting to become a joke, some people must enjoy knowing that a story on the news is because of them.

This indicates where our society is at...everyone wants to be noticed or have some claim to fame.

No different from grafitti which is a cry for help from someone wanting to be noticed....or crying out for attention.

Don't look over there, look at me!

Andy N · #9 30th October 2008, 10:34 AM

Presumably the lack of radar was a big enough issue for the plane to need to follow the Air New Zealand plane and get updates and then land in Auckland instead for repairs.

I don't doubt it's been overblown in the media though, nothing new there. Nothing wrong with any passengers making a quick buck out of it either - the one guy I read/saw in the news was very complimentary about the way the Qantas staff handled it.

Raymond Rowe · #10 30th October 2008, 05:30 PM

No weather radar in a DC3 and passengers who have flown them have had to live with the weather. come back from Sydney one night on a 3 and one of the worst weather storms you could fly in. We made it back.Passengers of today are just to soft.