The first recorded major incident for an A380 - QF 32, departing SIN, suffered an incident today where the number 2 engine appears to have exploded inflight, showering debris over a small Indonesian village. Aircraft returned safely to SIN, minus a section of the engine and cowling, and with penetration damage to the port wing. No injuries. Great pics available
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/qantas-jet-engine-fails-witnesses-tell-of-hearing-explosion-20101104-17f49.html
Airframe appears to be VH-OQA, "Nancy-Bird Walton" which was QF's first A380 (and also the one that grounded me at LAX last year because of an engine problem!!)
QF has now suspended all A380 services. The aircraft involved had recently returned from its first C-check at Lufthansa Technik.
JackyLek - 04/11/2010 07:01 GMT
Seems like Qantas is the only A380-company that have many and serious problem with this aircraft. EK and SQ only have minor problems but not like this . And with the 747 over Manila .... many episods now
an extremely serious incident, but controlled sufficiently for a safe evacuation without the need for the emergency chutes (from the pictures I have so far seen).
Most importantly of all, all passengers and crew walked off safe and sound. Thank G-d.
BABenji - 04/11/2010 08:35 GMT
Naturally I echo the sentiment of Mr Sinclair but this recent record of major incidents is quite remarkable. What is it about Qantas??? I can think of four now in recent months/years.
I hope they aren't grounded for too long. I love the J class hard product on their A380 (most comfortable bed in the sky).
Binman62 - 04/11/2010 10:47 GMT
a serious incident certainly (probably broken fan blade which should have been contained by engine housing) but I do think grounding the fleet is serious over reaction by Qantas and looks like it was done without reference to either airbus, rolls royce or SQ. SQ flying with same engine type, so one would expect an industry wide response with full support of airbus, rolls etc. How Qantas can re launch the fleet with full public confidence will be a major issue for them given their knee jerk reaction, the fact that it was just maintainined and that they have an unfortunate recent incident record.
(Post edited as originally written on hand held device.)
Tristans - 04/11/2010 11:08 GMT
Bloody Hell. I was on that plane from LA QF12 leaving last Sunday October 31st. Not many places to land between La and Sydney,
craigwatson - 04/11/2010 11:14 GMT
Tristans - it does not really matter, it could have made the whole journey on the 3 remaining engines anyways ( although they still would have diverted as a precaution, but not to much of a worry even if it was hours away )
pomerol - 04/11/2010 11:29 GMT
Binman62
A serious incident it certainly was, but, I think your criticism of Qantas is a little premature, Qantas would have based their decision to ground the A380 fleet, on all the available information they had before them (we have virtually none), you may well be right on the probable cause, but if you are it would be certainly a fluke, untill we know the exact cause any criticism is just wild speculation.
Binman62 - 04/11/2010 13:02 GMT
Pomerol.... The point I was trying to make was that QF appear to have done this without the support or backing of either Rolls Royce, as engine manufactures, or Airbus who make the airframe. The pictures of the damage seems to suggest that it was an uncontained engine failure with debris puncturing the wing and as such puncturing the fuel tank. This makes it an exceptionally serious matter but not simply for QF.
It is of course entirely a matter for Qantas if they choose to ground a fleet but it sends out really mixed messages to the travelling public and can errode confidence. What is it QF knows that SQ do not? being just one question.
In any event, even a catastophic failure such as this, is not uncommon and has not lead to the grounding of entire fleets.
Are QF engineering procedures at Frankfurt (where it was recently maintained) now in doubt? Is it safe to fly SQ A380 or indeed any A380 or is it only those with RR engines manufactured in Derby that are an issue.?
To ground a fleet is a serious step and when it is done on the basis of a single incident and so soon after it happened, then (IMHO) that is a serious over reaction as it could not possibly have been made with all the salient facts to hand and has not taken into account the recovery process which will now be required to rebuild confidence in both Qantas and the QF A380 fleet in particular. If it leads to the grounding of all RR powered A380 then QF may just dodge the bullet of bad publicity but I cannot imagine that senior people in Derby and Tolouse will be very happy with an Irishman in Sydney today.
pomerol - 04/11/2010 13:35 GMT
Binman62
I am sorry, the only thing you have said that I can agree with is (This makes it an an exceptionally serious matter), the rest is all conjecture and speculation.
I can not imagine Qantas taking such a measure, In a knee jerk reaction, the potential cost of this must be frightening.
We will find out soon enough, what the true cause is.
Potakas - 04/11/2010 13:55 GMT
Singapore just grounded its a380s too
Binman62 - 04/11/2010 14:01 GMT
Have just heard from a collegue on SQA380 at LHR due to depart at 12.30 that they have been delayed. Initially told it was IFE problem but now being told connected to QF incident.
Update from Bloomberg
Nov. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Singapore Airlines Ltd. delayed flights with its Airbus SAS A380 superjumbos after Rolls-Royce Group Plc said the model’s Trent 900 engines should be checked following a mid-flight explosion on a Qantas Airways Ltd. plane.
Singapore Airlines, which has 11 A380s, has been advised by Rolls and Airbus to carry out “precautionary technical checks,” spokesman Nicholas Ionides said in an e-mail. Deutsche Lufthansa AG, the only other carrier with superjumbos powered by Rolls turbines, said its aircraft are operating services as normal
Potakas - 04/11/2010 14:04 GMT
Breaking News: Singapore Airlines temporarily halts flights of its fleet of 11 Airbus A380s to carry out precautionary checks.
From CNN
Good to see that good business sense and professional approach to risk management is prevailing.
I for one cannot imagine that Airbus was anything but supportive of the 'Irish CEO in Sydney' 's prompt action to preserve QANTAS and the A380's zer0-fatality record.
In the face of scare-mongering by CNN in the small hours for the eternity while QANTAS got their plane down, and the mad hour which followed with passengers posting wing-damage on U-Tube and i-report, and astounded Indonesians displaying jagged metal which came out of the sky, this Irishman made a very appropriate live public broadcast.
Don't we just wish that a Pan-Am exec had been in a position to make such a speech to astounded residents of Lockerbie?
The parochial PR machine was in full swing also pointing out that both RR and GE make engines for the A380, and the incidents so far seem to be unique to RR. Maybe just British open-ness (naivety), but don't miss the reality that the US aviation oligopoly never misses an opportunity to bad-mouth the europaeans.
LondonCity - 04/11/2010 15:34 GMT
According to departure info posted on heathrow.com, SIA's morning A380 service to SIN (which should have left at 1055) is delayed until 1800.
The webcam at ZRH shows SIA's A380 1055 departure for SIN still on the ground and under inspection:
http://cam4.unique.ch/cam.cgi?x=31.00&y=-6.00&z=2&l=1&i=1288882021
Binman62 - 04/11/2010 15:42 GMT
Age-of-Reason. I cannot see neither the business sense nor the professionalism that you refer to in any CEO making such a decision with almost no information beyond that a serious incident occurred.
In doing so he gave the Americans the very publicity that Airbus would almost certainly wish to avoid and he almost certainly did so without input from RR. That he has not been followed or supported in his decision by SQ (they appear to have delayed flights rather than ground the fleet with SQ317 for example at LHR delayed 4.5 hrs at the moment.) suggests that this might be his “Ratner” moment, in that effectively he doubted the safety of his own product and said so publicly. As a result I think Qantas have snatched a PR disaster from the jaws of a PR victory.
Clearly these are my personal views and based on nothing more than what I have seen and read on the news, as such they are speculative but in the absence of public comment from Airbus or Rolls Royce surely not unreasonable.
Potakas - 04/11/2010 15:52 GMT
Binman i agree in all you said about the PR outcome, but i think it is the proper decision to do, as unfortunately he has no clue why the engine ''exploded'' , i don't think that they should fly planes that maybe their engines could explode without a reason, when they will understand what happened then they could decide if the RR engines remain safe.
Regards
Potakas
Oh dear, gents! You really are a naive bunch and i hope none of you are in positions with responsibility for my safety as a passenger.
Get real - if a loaded A380 falls out of the sky due to a manufactured part failing it's the end of Airbus, and the affected airline. And rightly so.
And given the news stories of the 2nd and 3rd Nov2010 then suffering a bomb-initiated crash would be little better.
Did you understand my words about Pan-Am?
I'm surprised nobody has conjectured that a speck of dirt from Krakatoa caused the engine-failure ....
