A Qantas Airways Airbus A380, the "Nancy-Bird Walton" (VH-OQA), flight QF32, on a trip from Singapore Changi Airport (SIN) to Kingsford Smith Airport (SYD) in Sydney, Australia with 459 people aboard lost power on one of its four engines shortly after taking off, and was forced to make an emergency return landing in Singapore, showering debris onto houses and a shopping mall below the flight path, some of which fell in neighboring Indonesia. The incident happened on Thursday, November 4 at 9:51 a.m. local time.
The Australian carrier, whom many regard as the World's Safest Airline, according to AirSafe.com, because it has never suffered a fatal accident, came very close to an encounter with disaster, as the engine cover cowling and parts of the engine itself, on one of its Rolls Royce RB211 Trent 900 engines, specifically designed for the Airbus A380, disintegrated during flight.
Passengers reported hearing a "massive bang" or a "loud boom", and one described the incident as "the scariest thing I had seen". Qantas called the incident a "significant engine failure".
When asked by news media about how long the Airbus A380 will be sidelined, Qantas CEO Alan Joyce, replied "As long as it takes. We are being very cautious until we know exactly what caused this to happen."
Joining Mr. Joyce in their own caution, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) issued a warning last August over excessive wear in the Rolls-Royce engines used on the Qantas Airways Airbus A380, and similar equipment operated by other carriers. The August 4 directive also warned that problems with the engine could "result in loss of engine performance with potential for in-flight shut down."
The name Qantas is an acronym for "Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Services", started on November 16, 1920, making it the world's second oldest continuously operating airline. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, which was founded on October 7, 1919, is considered to be the oldest carrier.
This is not the first incident involving one of these engines. Similar mishaps have occurred to other Airbus A380 aircraft operated by Singapore Airlines (SQ), which owns eleven A380s, and Lufthansa (LH) which operates three A380s aircraft, with 12 more on order. Qantas is the third carrier to encounter such a power plant problem, and calls into question the reliability and safety of this model Rolls Royce engine.
Australia, which is known as the "Lucky Land", may have rubbed off some of that good fortune on Qantas, its national airline, which has flirted before with disaster. Three Qantas Boeing aircraft were forced to make emergency landings in 2008 when the planes developed large holes in their fuselage, one as big as 10 feet in length.
The Airbus A380, the world's largest commercial aircraft, is meant to replace the much older Boeing 747. It's a super jumbo twin deck plane capable of carrying over 500 passengers. Qantas owns six of them. A fatal accident with a full plane would be catastrophic.
Tell us your thoughts. Please leave comments below or by email and subscribe to get future updates. There is also expanded coverage of other recent news articles.
Comments
This may not be the cheapest airline much longer.
Originally posted on Linkedin AviationLink Group on 05 November 2010 at 3:02 PM, PDT:
Hi Joel,
I guess the key words here are "COULD HAVE" and what could have....didn't. The quote "could have resulted in the airlines first fatal crash is also not entirely correct either, yes the airlines first fatal crash in the modern jet era is correct, the airlines first fatal crash?, not necessarily....if you need to get the facts right, try reading "The Men Who Killed Qantas" is a very accurate incite into the airlines history and you will be amazed at the amount of incidents the airline has had in its early days of aviation.
Hi Stephen,
Excellent point. I have flown on Qantas often, both on domestic flights, and internationally, and always wondered how any carrier could beat the odds for so long. I definitely want to find out more. Thanks for sharing your expertise, and for taking the time to comment. It's always good hearing from you from Down Under.
Cheers,
Joel
National Desk - Airlines/Airport Examiner
http://www.examiner.com/airlinesairport-in-national/joel-siegfried
"Significant engine failure" is rather a quaint description..enjoyed reading this..
Cheers...
Originally posted on Linkedin AviationLink Group on 06 November 2010 at 2:54 AM, PDT:
One engine failed three others working normally and plane returned safely to runway.
What ifs are unhelpful at best and do nothing for our industry.
How about some praise for the crew and their professionalism and keep the negatives firmly directed at Rolls Royce.
The engines are Rolls Royce not Airbus or Qantas.
Thank you for your comments. I appreciate your point of view, but I take exception to them. The European Aviation Safety Agency warned about excessive wear on these engines last August 4. To isolate the incident and place the blame on Rolls Royce is overlooking the maintenance function of the operator. I'm not in a position to say that there is a fatal flaw in the design and engineering of these engines, but when such an engine explodes in mid flight, showering debris on the ground and people below, and scares the daylights out of 459 souls on board, then I think it's time to take the gloves off. It may be skill, or luck, or the grace of God, but I personally wouldn't like to be on such a flight, or hear about a similar incident.
Thanks again Dave, for your comments.
Received via email on Monday, November 8, 2010 at 5:05 AM:
Hi Joel.
I'm a member of Linkedin Aviation member group. I found your discussions regarding Qantas A 380 safety. But I'm interesting about your job - Airlines / Airport examiner. I'm living in Warsaw Poland - European Union member. Here in my country an Air Traffic of passenger, and cargo is growing up approx. 10 % per year. Now my country investing more money for building new airports in few
cities. Also this same process you'll see in East European region countries. Maybe it'll be a good new job for me.
FYI I'm a airlines, passenger planes lover, and I love travel a lot (I do this during my business trips).
My question is easy.
What I must do, to reach position of Airlines/Airport Examiner ?
Waiting for your reply.
Best regards
Christopher Dymecki
Warsaw / Poland
Dear Christopher,
Thank you very much for writing. It is always good to hear from my readers.
Let me try to answer your questions. As a journalist, I write for a news organization called Examiner.com who give their writers titles showing the topics they cover. That's why I'm called the Airlines/Airport Examiner. It is a specific title used by my company, rather than an academic field for which you might study at a University.
However, I would encourage you to follow your dreams and your passions. Everything that you mentioned, airlines, passenger aircraft, travel are all exciting and constantly evolving fields. I'm sure if you think about it, you will decide what aspects interest you the most. If it is writing about the subject, such as I do, then courses in journalism and languages would be helpful, along with a job at a local newspaper or magazine in Poland or abroad. Or, you may be more interested in the business of commercial aviation. If that's the case, then business and management courses, including accounting and finance, airport management, government regulations, etc. would be areas to consider.
An academic advisor at a university in Poland or elsewhere probably could offer you better suggestions. I think that the key to success in any job is enjoying what you do. You can learn a great amount from talking to those already working in the airline and travel industries and ask them for advice as well.
Please let me know if I've answered you questions. I also hope that you will follow my articles. I always post alerts on Linkedin, and you can also subscribe to get free email reminders every time a new story is published. Usually I publish 1-2 new articles each day, sometimes more. Just click on the link I provide at the end of each story. There's also such a link at the top of every Examiner page.
Please stay in touch. I've really enjoyed hearing from you.
Cheers and all good wishes,
Joel
Comment originally posted on Linkedin AviationLink Group approximately on 17 November 2010:
Are you suggesting that the maintenance is somehow deficient within Qantas? or indeed a warning from RR has been ignored?
Serious allegations if proven to be correct.......which I doubt.
Personally, I think it more prudent to wait for the official investigation to uncover the reasons for the engine failure and take any appropriate steps thereafter.
Anything else is, as I said before unhelpful at best and is baseless in fact.
Still, when did the facts get in the way of a good story huh? (deliberate journo dig)
Comment originally posed on Linkedin AviationLink Group on 29 November 2010 at 7:51 AM PST:
Here are just SOME of the problems in Singapore last week aboard QF32.... I won't bother mentioning the engine explosion!.... oops....mentioned the engine explosion, sorry......
* massive fuel leak in the left mid fuel tank (the beast has 11 tanks, including in the horizontal stabiliser on the tail)
* massive fuel leak in the left inner fuel tank
* a hole on the flap canoe/fairing that you could fit your upper body
through
* the aft gallery in the fuel system failed, preventing many fuel transfer functions
* fuel jettison had problems due to the previous problem above
* bloody great hole in the upper wing surface
* partial failure of leading edge slats
* partial failure of speed brakes/ground spoilers
* shrapnel damage to the flaps
* TOTAL loss of all hydraulic fluid in the Green System (beast has 2 x 5,000 PSI systems, Green and Yellow)
* manual extension of landing gear
* loss of 1 generator and associated systems
* loss of brake anti-skid system
* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using normal method after landing due to major damage to systems
* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using using the fire
switch!!!!!!!! Therefore, no fire protection was available for that engine after the explosion in #2
* ECAM warnings about major fuel imbalance because of fuel leaks on left side, that were UNABLE to be fixed with cross-feeding
* fuel trapped in Trim Tank (in the tail). Therefore, possible major CofG out-of-balance condition for landing. Yikes!
* and much more to come...........
Richard was in the left seat, FO in the right), SO in the 2nd obs seat (right rear, also with his own Radio Management Panel, so he probably did most of the coordination with the ground), Capt Dave Evans in the 1st obs seat (middle). He is a Check & Training Captain who was training Harry Wubbin to be one also. Harry was in the 3rd obs seat (left rear). All 5 guys were FLAT OUT, especially the FO who would have been processing
complicated 'ECAM' messages and procedures that were seemingly never-ending!
Comment originally posed on Linkedin AviationLink Group on 29 November 2010 at 9:17 AM PST:
All in a days work at the pointy end.
David
Comment originally posed on Linkedin AviationLink Group on 30 November 2010 at 2:02 AM PST:
I agree, classic sim scenario.
One can expect proximity damage after an uncontained explosion, and never fully expect what systems will be affected. Still, all of the damage mentioned above gives pause to evaluation of the damage tolerance of the design.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!