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.
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: 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: Delta MD-88 en route from Guadalajara to Atlanta, Georgia Where: Guadalajara When: Mar 27 2010 Who: 116 passengers Why: While en route, the flight developed issues with the undercarriage and engine. It was decided not to divert to Puerto Vallarta, where repair facilities were inadequate, so the decision was made to return to Guadalajara. After burning off fuel, with emergency crews on standby, the plane landed safely with no injuries in Guadalajara.
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: Cargojet Boeing 727-200 en route from Hamilton to Moncton Where: Moncton, Canada When: Mar 24th 2010 Who: 3 crew Why: While landing in heavy rain in Moncton, the flight hydroplaned on landing, and overran the runway and, while still undamaged, got mired in the mud. Emergency crews are working to get the plane on solid ground.
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: Air Canada Boeing 767-300 en route from Toronto to London Where: Toronto When: Mar 24 2010 Why: After takeoff, the crew detected smoke in the rear galley. The flight returned to Toronto and made a safe landing.
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.
What: Aer Lingus Airbus A321-200 en route from London to Cork Where: Shannon Ireland When: Mar 21, 2010 Who: 181 passengers Why: While on approach to Cork, an indicator light revealed a hydraulic issue. After two aborted approaches, the flight diverted to Shannon, and made a safe landing. It was towed off the runway. An alternative flight was provided for the passengers several hours later.
Hopefully Aer Lingus planned (230) job cutback will not also result in a cutback in safety.
What: Aviastar-TU Tupolev TU-204-100 ferry flight en route from Hurghada Egypt to Moscow Where: Moscow When: Mar 22nd 2010 Who: 9 crew Why: While nearing its destination in poor weather conditions with limited visibility, .6 miles from the runway, the flight went off radar, landing 3300 feet shy of the runway– ostensibly a belly landing–crashing in a forested area. Five aboard had minor injuries and two were injured seriously. One wing separated, and the rest of the plane incurred serious damage.
Sunday, another Tu-204 plane bound for Hurghada, left Domodedovo but had to return to Moscow.
What: Norwegian Air Shuttle Boeing 737-300 en route from Oslo to Bergen Where: Stavanger Norway When: Mar 20th 2010 Who: 140 passengers and 5 crew Why: While en route, the plane developed vibration and control problems, and the destination, Bergen was experiencing high wind conditions. After issuing the emergency alert, they diverted the flight to Sola Airport where weather conditions were stable, and , where they circled, then were able to safely.
What: Qantas Boeing 737-400 en route from Melbourne to Canberra Where: Canberra on Mar 14th 2010 When: Mar 14th 2010 Who: 147 passengers Why: While en route, one engine experienced “thrust loss.” The crew shut down the affected engine, but was able to continue to their destination.
What: SAS Scandinavian Airlines Boeing 737-800 en route from Las Palmas to Stavanger Where: Las Palmas Spain When: Mar 13th 2010 Who: 114 passengers Why: While en route, the plane developed a technical problem. The flight diverted to Madrid, where the plane landed safely. Passengers disembarked without any problem, and were booked on an alternative flight the next day.
What: Kuwait Airways Boeing 747-400 en route from Cairo to Kuwait Where: Kuwait When: Mar 12th 2010 Who: 259 passengers Why: On approach to Kuwait City, the plane indicated a fire and emergency services were deployed. However on landing, there was no fire.
The report was due to a faulty fire indicator on the wheel well.
What: Air New Zealand Airbus A320-200 en route from Sydney to Wellington Where: over the Tasman Sea When: Mar 13th 2010 Who: 99 passengers and 8 crew Why: While en route, the crew received an indicator message that the hydraulics were down (a hydraulics warning light.) The flight was diverted to Auckland where they made a safe landing, even though nosewheel steering (undercarriage problem) is said to have been affected.
5 Fire Service/rescue trucks and ambulance staff were on stand by during the landing.
Passengers were provided overnight accommodations and booked on alternative flights.
What: Mil Mi-8 Helicopter en route from Makanchi Kazakhstan Where: near Urdzhar, Kazakhstan When: Mar 11 2010 Who: 8 aboard Why: Around 2 local time, the Mi-8 was engaged in a rescue mission in conditions of bad weather and low visibility (28 have been killed in local floods); the tower lost contact with helicopter, though its partner helicopter continued on safely. Bad weather and low visibility severely hampered the search, but a day later, the wreckage was been located near Urdzhar to the northwest, with no survivors.
Two local officials and two doctors were among the deceased.
What: Virgin Atlantic Airbus A340-300 en route from London to Miami Where: London When: Mar 12th 2010 Who: 231 passengers, 14 crew Why: After takeoff, the plane was struck by lightning. Experiencing a technical problem after the lightning strike, they dumped fuel (over the coast of N. Wales) and returned to London where they made a safe landing.
What: Sheltam Aviation Beechcraft 58 Baron Where: Virginia Airport, Durban South Africa When: Mar 10, 2010 Who: 5 aboard Why: Newspapers reported this accident as the tires falling off after takeoff.
Apparently the pilots were getting conflicting messages, and did a flyby the tower where there was visual confirmation that the landing gear were down but improperly locked.
On touchdown, the pilot attempted to spare the right gear which eventually collapsed as the plane skid right, impacting bushes. There were no injuries reported.
What: chopper Where: Queensland rural area at Tally Ho, about 60km south of Emerald When: 11 am March 10, 2010 Who: 2 unidentified pilots Why: Information on this so far is very sparse–: The helicopter they were piloting crashed, and they walked away. One of them with minor injuries was taken to Springsure Hospital.
