There was one parked there on Monday night...not sure if it's the same one...I WAS on days off until I got the call to work tonight (O/T)

The nose whel being off the ground wouldn't be possible. Vr (rotation speed) occurs after V1 (go/no go speed) - anything after V1 is a go call.

Most airlines also normally have a further, lower speed (80 or 100kts commonly used) - any issue below that speed results in an abort while anything between that speed & V1 only results in an abort if it is a critical issue, due to the possible aircraft damage & higher risks a high speed rejection carry.

From what I read this morning (Fairfax papers only, refused to look at the news ltd stuff in relation to this...) it seems that everything that was meant to do something did it on this occasion. The tyres that were meant to burst did, the pilot stopped the aircraft safetly, that cabin crew kept every one calm and the pax seemed to stay calm and in control of them sleves through out the event.

Does anyone know what warning light went off to cause this?

Cheers

M

Low Coffee

...because the flight attendants had been pouring it down the drain again...

I also heard the ridiculous report (Channel 10 Adelaide) that over 100 passengers were thrown from their seats during the rejected take off. Fortunately, they reported, no one was injured. What a joke some of these so called news services are.

Just to clear up a point of contention, the B744 has fusible plugs fitted into all of the wheel rims that contain brake components. During a rejected take off, and subsequent heavy braking, the brake components become very hot; this heat is transferred into the rims thus heating up the gas in the tyres. If uncontrolled, the expansion of the gas will cause the tyre pressure to rise to the extent that the tyre will burst causing substantial damage. The fusible plugs allow a controlled release of the heated gas thus reducing the pressure within the tyres and preventing the tyres from bursting. Usually, this "over pressure" situation occurs after the braking has been completed, the heat transference is not immediate. In this case, I believe, the tyres deflated after the aircraft had vacated the active RWY onto a TWY or crossing RWY and was stationary.



Now, the interesting thing will be to find out why the crew rejected the take-off. In almost 35 years of working in control towers I have only seen one "real" rejected take-off; it was not a pretty sight. Saw plenty of "training" rejected take-offs, nowhere near as dramatic.

Glad to hear no one on board was injured.

What time did the flight arrive last night? The Qantas website is down at the moment so I could not search for it there.

1016pm was the arrival time for QF12

I was out at SYD this morning, saw Wunala (-OEJ) being towed to the MX area..and as I drove around past The Pond I couldn't see her, so I'm guessing she's being closely inspected behind closed doors.

Nonetheless, it was good to see her back on home soil and getting the care she needs! :)

Which flight number did -OEJ operate from LAX after getting her repairs?