What: Qantas Boeing 747-400 en route from Bangkok to London Where: Bangkok When: Apr 6th 2010 Who: 335 passengers Why: After takeoff, engine four had an engine surge. The crew decided to return to Bangkok where they circled, dumped fuel and made a safe landing. Passengers were provided accommodations, and an alternative flight. There were no injuries.
What: Egypt Air Airbus A330-200 en route from Cairo to Hurghada Where: Cairo When: Apr 2nd 2010 Who: 195 passengers Why: Prior to take-off, there was crew error on the ground, and the plane impacted two runway light poles. The wings were damaged; the streetlights collapsed. Passengers were transferred to another plane.
What: American Eagle Embraer ERJ-145 en route from Tulsa to Chicago O’Hare Where: Dane County Regional Airport When: 9:46 p.m. Sunday April 4 2010 Who: 27 passengers on board Why: While en route, the pilot detected smoke/electrical fumes in the cockpit and decided to divert to Madison.
Passengers were provided overnight accomodations by the airline and continued to Chicago on Monday.
What: Qantas Boeing 747 en route from Los Angeles to Melbourne Where: Melbourne When: Apr 5 2010 Why: While en route over Canberra, a crack developed in the outer pane of the first officer’s windshield. The flight landed safely, and was temporarily taken out of circulation/rotation for repairs.
What: Jetblue Airbus A320-200 en route from Newark to Fort Lauderdale Where: Newark Liberty International Airport When: Apr 5th 2010 Who: 134 passengers Why: During takeoff, the airbus lost the left engine cowling.
Distressed panicked passengers smelled smoke and said they could see inside the engine.
Less than a quarter of an hour later, it had landed back at the airport, where the fallen parts had to be gathered.
The NY Daily news reported that passengers were offered refunds and a free round trip.
What: Miami Air International Boeing 737-400 en route from Minneapolis to Miami Where: Chicago When: Apr 4th 2010 Who: the “Miami Heat” Why: While en route, the flight’s mechanic became sick. The flight diverted to Chicago for an hour where the mechanic was hospitalized in a diabetic coma.
What: Norwegian Air Shuttle Boeing 737-800 en route from Alicante to Stockholm Where: Alicante When: Apr 2nd 2010 Who: 106 passengers Why: After takeoff, passengers smelled smoke, and one of the indicators detected fire in a wheel well. The plane returned to Alicante, and made a safe landing. During emergency evacuation, four passengers were injured. Passengers were provided hotel accommodations and Boeing brought in another plane to transport them.
JetBlue has corrected an earlier report that the plane sustained hail damage. The airline is now saying that a tail strike on take-off caused the damage and subsequently the emergency landing.
What: Jetblue Airbus A320-200 en route from New York to Long Beach Where: New York When: Mar 28th 2010 Who: 144 on board Why: Leaving the runway, the plane’s tail impacted either hail or a bird or had a tail strike (reports conflict); the flight returned to JFK and made a safe landing so that the damage could be checked out. Passengers debarked, and boarded an alternative plane some time later.
What: THY Turkish Airlines Airbus A340-300 en route from Bangkok to Istanbul Where: Mumbai When: Apr 1st 2010 Who: 289 passengers Why: While en route, one of the engines developed problems, and the crew had to shut it down and decided to divert to Mumbai. The flight made a safe landing, and was towed to the gate.
140 passengers were directed to alternative airlines, and the rest were provided hotel accommodations and given a seat on a Turkish Airlines Friday flight.
What: Delta Airlines Boeing 757-200 en route from New York to San Francisco Where: Lambert-St. Louis International Airport When: Mar 30 Who: 171 aboard (165 passengers and 6 crew) Why: When smoke fill the cabin, the crew diverted the flight to St Louis. They made a safe landing with no reported injuries.
Passengers disembarked on the runway and were bussed to the gate.
What: Qantas Airbus A380-800 en route from Singapore to Sydney Where: Sydney When: Mar 31st 2010 Who: 244 passengers Why: On landing, the plane blew its left tires; and there were sparks and and a brief fire from the brakes. The plane left a rubber trail. Damage assessment was made on the tarmac by engineers, with the plane sitting on its rims.
Qantas denies classifying this as an “emergency” landing.
George’s Point of View
I’m thinking how smart Boeing is to have held up release of their big jumbo, especially when I see A 380 incidents.
I am reminded of all the flaws that popped in the Airbus A310 (reputedly a rush copy of the Boeing 737); and I also remember reading about Airbus struggling to get the A-380 shipshape before Airbus rushed it to market. In development, Airbus wrestled with a plane that was severely overweight, withstructural, and production problems. Remember the trouble the A-380 had getting launched:
On Dec 4 2009, QANTAS Airbus A380-842 (VH-OQA) Singapore to London- On the runway, the plane’s nose gear became unsteereable. The plane was towed to the gate and spare parts had to be flown in to deal with the problem.
On July 4 2009, Qantas Airbus A380-842 (VH-OQA) Singapore to London- the approach was aborted due to nosegear problems. On landing, steering failed.
In March of 2008, Qantas removed all 3 of its A-380s due to fuel system problems (two unserviceable with a ‘”fuel tank indication system problem”.)
The A380 is a part of the Air France, Emirates, Qantas and Singapore airlines fleets , and in which fuel gauge problems, nosegear problems and braking problems are becoming known issues. Problems also arise because the prohibitive size of the plane limits where it can land.
Some Worrisome Airbus History
In 2004, Joseph Mangan, an Airbus whistleblower told European aviation authorities of flaws on a computer chip on the Airbus A380. (These were microprocessor flaws that could cause the valves that maintain cabin pressure on the A380 to accidentally open during flight, allowing air to leak out so rapidly that everyone aboard could lose consciousness within seconds.)
Mangan was chief engineer for the Viennese company TTTech Computertechnik, which supplied the chips and software controlling the A380 cabin-pressurization system assembled at the French Airbus plant. TTTech fired Mangan, filed civil and criminal charges against him for revealing proprietary company documents. Austrian law has no whistleblower protection, and there is currently a gag order imposed on Mangan. They claim his allegations have been disproved.
What did he know? Have the problems behind his concerns been addressed? What elsedo we not know? Without transparency, how can we ever know?
What: United Airlines Boeing 777-200 en route from San Francisco to Beijing Where: San Francisco When: Mar 27 2010 Who: 251 passengers and 17 crew Why: After takeoff, the Boeing’s Traffic and Collision Avoidance System issued a traffic advisory, recognizing an Aeronca too close. From a lower altitude, the Boeing crew only saw a portion of Aeronca that was passing between 200-300 feet away. TCAS warned them to drop their altitude to increase separation. The Aeronca was directed to take a “hard left”
What: Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-300 en route from Fort Lauderdale,FL to Chicago Where: Tampa International Airport When: Mar 30th 2010 Who: 136 passengers Why: After takeoff, the landing gear remained stuck in the down position. After circling the airport for half an hour, the flight landed safely at the Tampa airport, with emergency vehicles on standby.
What: Qantas Boeing 747-400 en route Sydney to Singapore Where: Sydney When: Mar 30th 2010 Who: 414 aboard Why: While en route, a right engine experienced an engine surge. That engine had to be shut down. The crew had to dump fuel and return to Sydney where they made a safe landing about an hour after departure. Passengers were provided a replacement plane.
What: Mexicana Boeing 767-300 en route from Sao Paulo to Mexico City Where: Brasilia When: Mar 28 2010 Why: While en route, the flight developed an oil leak, which prompted the crew to shut down the left engine. The crew diverted the flight to Brasilia and made a safe landing. Passengers were rebooked.
What: Delta Airlines McDonnell Douglas MD-88 en route from Albuquerque to Atlanta Where: Albuquerque International Sunport When: March 28, 2010 Who: 140 passengers Why: While the flight was en route, on board systems indicated that the landing gear was malfunctioning. The plane circled Albuquerque for an hour burning off fuel before making a safe landing.
What: Jetblue Airbus A320-200 en route from West Palm Beach to Boston Where: en route When: Mar 27 2010 Why: On the return flight coming home from her son’s funeral, 76 year old Renee Rappaport was returning to her seat after visiting the bathroom, and found the aisle was blocked by a beverage cart, and a flight attendant who told her to wait. She tried to squeeze by to get to her seat, and wouldn’t fit. The woman was arrested on arrival in Boston for shoving the flight attendant, and charged with assault.
Is rudeness an arrestable offense?
George’s Point of View
There is something wrong with this picture.
A 76 year old woman arrested for trying to get back to her seat.
It sounds like something out of Golden Girls, with Beatrice Arthur getting arrested for being her usual pushy self (although unlike our 76 year old airline passenger, Beatrice Arthur was in her 60’s when it was filmed, only 70 at the end of the series.)
Even though I don’t know all the facts, the bare bones of the situation are enough for me to feel that if I were the kind of person who started writing campaigns, I would start one now. I would inundate Jet Blue’s mail boxes with letters demanding more respectful treatment of the elderly.
Is this bizarre escalation some Jet Blue policy or a flight attendant’s strategy not to get written up?
There is something wrong with a 76 year old woman being arrested for assault while on a plane trying to get back to her seat. One wonders if the flight attendant could not have backed the cart up, or done something in a courteous fashion during or after the event. Even if the elderly woman were a female version of the governor of California, is she not entitled to some courtesy?
I have come across both belligerent flight attendants and hospitable flight attendants. I think I can safely speculate that a little graciousness on the part of the flight attendant would have prevented the situation from happening, certainly from escalating to arrest. At the very least, such an arrest is frivolous, and a waste of the police force’s valuable time.
Maybe it marks me as old fashioned, but I believe a flight attendant’s job is not an entitlement; but an elderly passenger is entitled to some degree of courtesy and understanding.
If Jet Blue’s policy is to arrest in this situation, they deserve all the bad press they get.
On the other hand, if Renee Rappaport is capable of a serious assault, I can get her some gloves and schedule a grudge match against the flight attendant in Las Vegas.
What: Cargojet Boeing 757-200 en route from Ottawa to Hamilton Where: Hamilton When: Mar 25th 2010 Why: While on approach to Hamilton, a small privately owned Cessna turned into the Boeing’s path (reducing the distance between the two to 1.5nm horizontally and 200 feet vertically). The Cessna—on approach to the wrong runway—was corrected by ATC; and the Boeing landed safely.
The Cessna pilot acknowledged error on his runway approach.
This situation brings to mind two recent collisions- the March 20 Florida collision between a Piper and an experimental plane, and the February 6 Cirrus-Piper collision in Colorado. The circumstances of the collisions are entirely different but I should poitn out that neither of those collisions occurred under the direct eye of ATC. Perhaps there are extra kudos due to Air Traffic Control (or perhaps the Boeing pilot? whoever’s quick eye caught and cured the impending crisis) for the accident that did not happen.
It would be interesting to find out if the error is fatigue related, or if there were some other hidden cause. Anytime a collision is averted is a good thing.
What: Thai Airways Airbus A330-300 TG-318 en route from Mumbai to Bangkok Where: NSC Bose International Airport Kolkata When: Mar 25 2010 Who: 238 passengers and 11 crew Why: When the pilot detected a problem in the fuel dispenser affecting the rate of flow of fuel to the engine, he requested to make an emergency landing in Kolkata.
Ten technicians were flown in to provide maintenance on the plane.
Passengers were provided accommodations (hotel or international lounge), and later booked on a Kolkata-Bangkok flight.
What: Flybe de Havilland Dash 8-400, en route from Belfast City to Glasgow Where: Belfast When: Mar 25 2010, 7: 35 am Who: 61 passengers, 4 crew Why: After takeoff, witnesses detected “smoke billowing from the engine”. The flight returned to make a safe landing in Belfast where the return was attributed to a “technical problem.” Emergency crews were on standby. There were no injuries.
What: American Airlines Boeing 767-300 en route from Frankfurt/Main to Chicago Where: Amsterdam When: Mar 24th 2010 Why: While over Amsterdam, the left engine developed a problem with its anti-ice system. The flight returned to Frankfurt and made a safe landing. After maintenance and repairs, the plane took off again and made a safe landing in Chicago.
What: Malaysia Airlines Boeing 737-400, en route from Singapore to Penang Where: Penang Malaysia When: Mar 25 2010 Who: 88 passengers and 7 crew Why: On approach to Penang, the right engine developed vibration. Passengers heard loud noises and saw fire flashing from the engine. The crew shut down the right engine and continued on approach to Penang where they made a safe landing.
What: Westjet Boeing 737-800 en route from Cancun to Edmonton Where: Cancun When: Mar 23rd 2010 Why: On takeoff, the plane had a minor tail strike, and flew on to Canada. Minor damage from the tail strike was detected after landing in Canada, after the flight.
What: Continental Airlines Boeing 757-200 en route from Dublin to Newark Where: Dublin When: Mar 18 2010 Who: 162 passengers Why: After takeoff, the transatlantic flight developed a pressurization problem; and after burning off fuel, on return to Dublin, the flight ran into wind shear (strong crosswinds) resulting in a couple of go-arounds. They were back on the ground about 2 hours after takeoff. The flight was not cancelled until the 19th, and by that time, most passengers had already rebooked. Some passengers aboard that flight have expressed dissatisfaction in their situation, although hotel accommodations were provided.
The Irish equivalent of the NTSB (AAIU) said the problems were due to a failed Pressure Regulating and Shut Off valve in the right engine’s bleed air system.
What: Air Canada Airbus A320-200 en route from Montreal to Toronto Where: Toronto When: Mar 23rd 2010 Who: 99 (98?) passengers and 6 crew Why: En route, the flight had an indication of a problem with the hydraulics, followed by a problem with cabin smoke on landing. The flight crew complained of an odor in the cabin. Passengers were removed directly to the runway by emergency responders at about 9:00 am. Illness was attributed to an odor that reportedly made them sick, as well as smoke. The source of the odor, at some point, was determined to be the hydraulic fluid leak.
Passengers aboard the flight say that even before the flight there was a peculiar odor; they were told the odor was blamed on a malfunctioning heating system
The pilot also had complained to a steering problem, no doubt related to the leak. The plane was towed off the runway.
