Qantas Delays/Cancellations

[Flyerqf]

SYD also under single runway ops. Runway 07.

 

[Flyerqf]

Looks like back to 32L/32R are back in operation now after about 3 hours of single runway ops.

 

[Flyerqf]

Yes they were, I have a few relatives on it. Still delayed until 8.30PM at the moment.

9.30PM now

 

[tomlee1986]

9.30PM now

Hope they can beat curfew!!

 

[tomlee1986]

9.30PM now

Final departure is 2228 and scheduled to arrive at 1621 - 4 hr delay

 

[larrymull]

Hope they can beat curfew!!

that's what i thought too, gotta love SYD

 

[sleepytime68]

From a passenger’s report, it seems QF63 lost one of the engines close to Antartica

Someone pls explain why they would not unconditionally aim for MEL. SYD makes sense logistically, but the potential legal exposure dwarfs this by several orders of magnitude. Perhaps just my litigious American mindset at work.

My knowledge of Quantas is primarily derived from "Rain Man". And this:

.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Someone pls explain why they would not unconditionally aim for MEL. SYD makes sense logistically, but the potential legal exposure dwarfs this by several orders of magnitude. Perhaps just my litigious American mindset at work.

My knowledge of Quantas is primarily derived from "Rain Man". And this:

.

Hi and welcome to AFF!

The pilots are well trained for these scenarios and would have first-hand knowledge of the reason for the engine outage. They will have assessed the situation and continued to an appropriate airport for landing.

The a380 can fly safely on three engines, provided there’s no ongoing or broader safety issue.

The pilots would only have returned to Sydney had it been 100% safe to do so. Safety would trump all commercial considerations.

 

[elanshin]

Someone pls explain why they would not unconditionally aim for MEL. SYD makes sense logistically, but the potential legal exposure dwarfs this by several orders of magnitude. Perhaps just my litigious American mindset at work.

My knowledge of Quantas is primarily derived from "Rain Man". And this:

.

So to put some things into perspective, on 3 engines the plane could legitimately continued flying. It's not necessarily in danger of falling out of the skies unless it loses all 3 other engines. Even on 1 it could limp back somewhere.

So if the immediate danger isn't present of the plane falling out the sky, then it becomes a choice of where does it go for the best option for all parties involved. Keeping im mind at cruise it would realistically only be an extra 30-40mins to go to SYD instead of MEL.

In this instance, I'd suspect it's because the main a380 hub right now is SYD (not MEL), replacement aircrafts would be much more easily facilitated there and easier to offload and reload the pax at SYD than MEL. They'd need to ferry an a380 down to MEL to meet the PAX. I'd suspect the potentials for repairs and parts are also more concentrated at SYD right now.

If it was an imminent threat to the plane or medical, they would've gone for MEL in that instance.

 

[markis10]

There is also the possibility the aircraft was above maximum landing weight of circa 395T should it had gone to Melbourne.