QF52 turns back to SIN last night - gear wont retract

Status
Not open for further replies.
Speaking of the Av Herald this is there report on the problem.
Av Herald said:
Incident: Qantas B744 at Singapore on Jun 3rd 2011, could not retract gear
Av Herald said:
By Simon Hradecky, created Saturday, Jun 4th 2011 06:58Z, last updated Saturday, Jun 4th 2011 06:58ZA Qantas Boeing 747-400, registration VH-OJI performing flight QF-52 from Singapore (Singapore) to Brisbane,QL (Australia) with 344 passengers, could not fully retract the landing gear after departure from Singapore and returned to Singapore for a safe landing about 50 minutes after departure.

Cheers
N'oz
For those who are theorising undercarriage pins, this article is a possible clue. The article implies that the undercarriage was able to be partially retracted. I do not know about the 747 but most aircraft cannot retract the gear any significant amount with the pins left in.

--- A by product is many/most pilots would have to admit to leaving the pins in at least once during their career :!: :oops: ---
 
If the plane did have the nosewheel pin in place after landing at SIN surely all the engineers would need to do is just remove the pin so the aircraft could be on its way again?

That wouldn't warrant an overnight in a hotel for all pax as I'm sure both flight and cabin crew would have been well within their flight & duty limitations.
 
Australia's highest-earning Velocity Frequent Flyer credit card: Offer expires: 30 Apr 2025
- Earn 100,000 bonus Velocity Points
- Get unlimited Virgin Australia Lounge access
- Enjoy a complimentary return Virgin Australia domestic flight each year

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

If the plane did have the nosewheel pin in place after landing at SIN surely all the engineers would need to do is just remove the pin so the aircraft could be on its way again?

That wouldn't warrant an overnight in a hotel for all pax as I'm sure both flight and cabin crew would have been well within their flight & duty limitations.

Would it not depend on how heavy the aircraft came in, as I'm guessing that dumping fuel for an hour only, puts it overweight for a landing? There may have been all sorts of checks that needed to be done if so.
 
Would it not depend on how heavy the aircraft came in, as I'm guessing that dumping fuel for an hour only, puts it overweight for a landing? There may have been all sorts of checks that needed to be done if so.
I guess it wouldn't have been very heavy to begin with, as they wouldn't fill up the tanks completely for a SIN-BNE sector.
 
I guess it wouldn't have been very heavy to begin with, as they wouldn't fill up the tanks completely for a SIN-BNE sector.

There is every chance the aircraft was very heavy, MTOW is 412T while MLW is 295T, I would not be surprised if the aircraft was at least 340T or greater, less fuel often means more cargo so flight length is not a great indicator!
 
I'm just worried about QF... too many of these incidents... =/

I will continue to fly them but geez...
 
I'm just worried about QF... too many of these incidents... =/

I will continue to fly them but geez...
Do you have any reason to believe that Qantas proportionally has any more of 'these incidents' as you call them, than any other airline?
 
I'm just worried about QF... too many of these incidents... =/

I will continue to fly them but geez...

It's more of the media reporting incidents that not so long ago weren't reported...
 
Landing gear pins were mentioned elsewhere, simply because if I have a problem involving them, then it's my fault. That's far from the only issue one can have with the landing gear...but it's the only one that's a bit hard to explain.

There are lots of safety systems tied up with the landing gear. Various switches have to be made for the aircraft to decide that it is in flight, and for it to even allow gear retraction. These switches can also involve lots of other systems (for instance, reverse thrust, ground spoilers, even engine idle speeds). An aircraft that thinks it's on the ground, when it's in the air, or vice versa, can be quite a handful.

During the retraction sequence, various parts of the gear tilt, doors open/close, and all of these have to happen in the right order. If, because a sensor has failed, the system detects a fault, then part of the gear retraction sequence may fail, or the whole sequence may stop. For instance, partial retraction would be the most likely outcome if a wing landing gear tilt sensor were to fail (if I remember correctly, there are two per truck, and they must AGREE). That's much better than the alternative, where attempting to retract gear that were (for example) at the incorrect tilt, would most likely cause damage to doors and the gear cavity, and perhaps even jam it in place.

As for a PA...well you get to it when you can. This is most likely a two pilot operation. They have a lot of things to do, and, quite simply, a PA is not high on that list. With an extra pilot, you'll most likely use him to make PAs, but it's a distraction with a small crew.

Would it not depend on how heavy the aircraft came in, as I'm guessing that dumping fuel for an hour only, puts it overweight for a landing? There may have been all sorts of checks that needed to be done if so.
An hour would be plenty to dump to well below MLW in a 747.
 
They don't have any Singapore or Hong Kong based newspapers, so I would expect not.

I was thinking along the lines where they blame Qantas because they replaced a faulty loo seat six months ago while the aircraft was in Sydney.
 
If the plane did have the nosewheel pin in place after landing at SIN surely all the engineers would need to do is just remove the pin so the aircraft could be on its way again?

Wouldn't there have to be checks to determine whether or not the landing gear bent or was forced too hard before it ceased trying to retract?

I have absolutely no knowledge if what I am asking about is easy to rectify or needs to have a full check before taking off again.
 
Wouldn't there have to be checks to determine whether or not the landing gear bent or was forced too hard before it ceased trying to retract?

I have absolutely no knowledge if what I am asking about is easy to rectify or needs to have a full check before taking off again.

If one of the switches shuts things down, then there would be no damage. That's the entire point of the switches.
 
If one of the switches shuts things down, then there would be no damage. That's the entire point of the switches.
And the fact is, you would much rather having your landing gear stuck in the "down" position than in the "up" position...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top