QF44 last night - not a great flight to be on

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was initially directed to divert to MEL as SYD air traffic control were swamped. The storms were about 40 nautical kms from SYD airport, but apparently they couldn't handle anymore flights in a holding pattern. The diversion to MEL was to be a touch and go refuel stop with pax remaining on board.

It landed in MEL at about 21:15. It had to be back in the air by 21:40 to make the curfew and once the required fuel was loaded it took of for SYD.

It missed the curfew by about 20 seconds, the flight got down to a very low level and had to power up and return to MEL
touching down just after midnight. More noise was created by powering up to flight level than continuing to land. CRAZY.

If the aircraft had have been within the airport perimeter fence it would have been accepted, just a few more seconds.
it was 23:00:20 not 22:59:59 seconds. Considering SYD forced the flight to MEL, for goodness sake let it land.

QF tried to get permission from CBR but this was denied apparently.
 
Is it just not possible that the reason just might be a commercial one based on customer preferences. They just might deploy their assets to where the best commercial return is.

I suppose that was one reason Qatar chose MEL but also possibly exacerbated by the SYD curfew
 
It was initially directed to divert to MEL as SYD air traffic control were swamped. The storms were about 40 nautical kms from SYD airport, but apparently they couldn't handle anymore flights in a holding pattern. The diversion to MEL was to be a touch and go refuel stop with pax remaining on board.

It landed in MEL at about 21:15. It had to be back in the air by 21:40 to make the curfew and once the required fuel was loaded it took of for SYD.

It missed the curfew by about 20 seconds, the flight got down to a very low level and had to power up and return to MEL
touching down just after midnight. More noise was created by powering up to flight level than continuing to land. CRAZY.

If the aircraft had have been within the airport perimeter fence it would have been accepted, just a few more seconds.
it was 23:00:20 not 22:59:59 seconds. Considering SYD forced the flight to MEL, for goodness sake let it land.

QF tried to get permission from CBR but this was denied apparently.

Thanks for the detailed info and yes a fuel stop in MEL makes sense!
 
It was initially directed to divert to MEL as SYD air traffic control were swamped. The storms were about 40 nautical kms from SYD airport, but apparently they couldn't handle anymore flights in a holding pattern. The diversion to MEL was to be a touch and go refuel stop with pax remaining on board.

It landed in MEL at about 21:15. It had to be back in the air by 21:40 to make the curfew and once the required fuel was loaded it took of for SYD.

It missed the curfew by about 20 seconds, the flight got down to a very low level and had to power up and return to MEL
touching down just after midnight. More noise was created by powering up to flight level than continuing to land. CRAZY.

If the aircraft had have been within the airport perimeter fence it would have been accepted, just a few more seconds.
it was 23:00:20 not 22:59:59 seconds. Considering SYD forced the flight to MEL, for goodness sake let it land.

I would love to hear the recordings of:
a) the tranmission from ATC telling the aircraft it had been denied permission to land
b) the CVR of the crew's comments immediately after that direction!
 
I would love to hear the recordings of:
a) the tranmission from ATC telling the aircraft it had been denied permission to land
b) the CVR of the crew's comments immediately after that direction!


Live ATC is your friend!

The diversion to MEL was to be a touch and go refuel stop with pax remaining on board..

Those touch and go fuel stops are tricky, you need to get the tanker up to the correct speed :cool:
 
Last edited:
It missed the curfew by about 20 seconds, the flight got down to a very low level and had to power up and return to MEL
touching down just after midnight. More noise was created by powering up to flight level than continuing to land. CRAZY..

It commenced a missed approach at 10.58 over Hurstville above 1000 ft, not that low, with noise measured at 85db over Bexley, about the same noise measured at the 34 threshold when QF21 took off a minute later.
 
It commenced a missed approach at 10.58 over Hurstville above 1000 ft, not that low, with noise measured at 85db over Bexley, about the same noise measured at the 34 threshold when QF21 took off a minute later.

I wonder what would have been louder - the aircraft noise generated, or the noise on board when all the pax were absolutely livid at Qantas after telling them that they would be forced to return to MEL. :-|
 
Typical examples of circumstances covered by this section of the Act and therefore not requiring issue of a dispensation would include

  • the landing of a passenger aircraft where urgent medical treatment is required for a passenger who has suffered a heart attack;
  • the landing of an aircraft where there is an on-board security incident (eg a violent passenger is endangering the safety of a flight).

I have a feeling I may have chest pains if I'm ever on a plane that misses curfew by seconds.
 
I wonder if fatigue will ever get into the reasons list, unlike the rest of the aviation legal arena this piece of legislation is increasing safety risk rather than trying to reduce it IMHO.
 
So Qantas would have had to pay $$$$ for hotels and food etc because of the pathetic curfew!

and all the fuel for a MEL-SYD-MEL and now still has to fly all the pax to SYD in the morning. Interesting choice to leave MEL cutting it so close to SYD curfew to get here.
 
and all the fuel for a MEL-SYD-MEL and now still has to fly all the pax to SYD in the morning. Interesting choice to leave MEL cutting it so close to SYD curfew to get here.
Worth taking the risk I think. Crew out of position, A/C out of position for the morning flight back to AKL
 
another ridiculous curfew story. what a backwards system . Sydney's curfew must cost the country badly , our major international hub closed at 11pm.
 
Read our AFF credit card guides and start earning more points now.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

and all the fuel for a MEL-SYD-MEL and now still has to fly all the pax to SYD in the morning. Interesting choice to leave MEL cutting it so close to SYD curfew to get here.

Yes PLUS all of that as well, far from a cheap exercise!
 
So Qantas would have had to pay $$$$ for hotels and food etc because of the pathetic curfew!

and all the fuel for a MEL-SYD-MEL and now still has to fly all the pax to SYD in the morning. Interesting choice to leave MEL cutting it so close to SYD curfew to get here.

I would imagine they would have to pay for these.

Not sure if there is some sort of insurance that QF can call upon for such events (unlike or not dissimilar to an insurance for covering expenses during "Acts of God"), otherwise it's "all part of operating an airline" (e.g. if you were an EU carrier and had to keep in mind EU 261/2004).

QF was probably in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" kind of situation. If there was a chance that they could make it, they had better have tried it otherwise the general pax uproar would've not understood that there wasn't enough time, not to mention that there are other costs anyway. As it turns out, it wasn't an awful gamble, having only missed out by under a minute (so it seems), compared to if, for example, they had missed out by 10-30 minutes. Of course, the pax won't understand that they just missed out by a few seconds - in the end it's still Qantas' fault, especially since they were kept up in the air an extra hour or so.

That said, it really could've gone the other ways, i.e. the original decision could've been to not risk it, save the effort and not go to SYD to start with; or the aircraft might have just made it into SYD in time (by a whisker, viz. 20 seconds before curfew limit).

Of course, had QF just made it 20 seconds before curfew limit, there would be no article and there would be no discussion here, though suffice to say QF44's successful arrival in SYD may had then come at the expense of another cancelled flight (perhaps not as big a deal, e.g. another mainline domestic flight).

And, of course, had the original course of action been to "give up and not head for SYD due to cutting it fine to the curfew", there would be a different article in the paper than this one, basically saying that QF are cowards for not trying, or there would've been plenty of time to make it to SYD, and certainly there would be a lot of people here who would be arguing of QF's cowardice for not trying to make it to SYD when cases clearly exist where it has been done previously. Certainly, articles like these have made the press before (i.e. QF not flying to SYD because curfew could not be made, then everyone complaining that they would've easily had enough time).
 
I wonder if fatigue will ever get into the reasons list, unlike the rest of the aviation legal arena this piece of legislation is increasing safety risk rather than trying to reduce it IMHO.

What would happen if having to fly back to MEL would take the crew over their maximum duty hours?
 
And the original hold pattern rejection around SYD, apparently due to ATC staff shortages.

So its blame the Government on all fronts.
I hope QF sends them the bill.
 
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.

Staff online

Back
Top