A380 near disaster, wing ruptured, and could have been more catastrophic.

I'm not a fan of either Qantas or Airbus, but I do think "wing ruptured" in the subject of this thread is a bit of hysterical overstatement.

Not sure why it was reported as a "wing rupture" when it was an uncontained engine failure.  What is interesting is that it appears from looking at the damage to the nacelle outboard that it might have been a turbine failure, not a compressor or fan failure which is more usual.  Either way, the nacelle was supposed to contain the damage and protect the rest of the aircraft.

"I am not a fan of Quantas"..........why? Given that they are the only airline that has not experienced a fatal crash, that statement puzzles me.

Mr. Burke, sir:

Actually it's Qantas, no U.  It's an acronym.

I've flown them quite a bit.  They come across as professional.  And they are unpleasantly snooty.

Mike E

yeah looks like the narcelles contained most of the force.  wing was ruptured see this pic

http://media.straitstimes.com/stlytebox/gallery/20101104-qantas_a380/15.html

could have been worse. or any of the parts that fell to the ground could have sliced open wing/hydraulic lines/tanks.

My wife and I flew from the LA to Sydney enroute to Surabya.  When we were scheduled to land in Sydney, it was totally fogged in.  We were diverted to Bisbayne and were on the ground for a couple of hours.  I'm sure we took on fuel.  As we flew back to Sydney, and I was looking out the window for any sign the airport.  All at once I saw some hangars and we immediately were on the ground.  A round of applause erupted at that instant and, needless to say, all of the passengers were impressed with the landing. 

 As I exited the 747, I asked one of the Flight Attendants if the pilot was available, because I would like to congratulate him on the landing.  Her reply was (in a very Australian accent), "No.  He's still on the potty."

My experience with QANTAS and their crews has always been positive.

Rick.  AVID owner and pilot.  

Wing ruptures that people live through are the best kind. 

QANTAS : Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Services, Started as a small company in a tin shed in Central Queensland. Amazing history and a marvel the company has survived this long considering the history of commercial airlines.

If you read their blurp carefully is that they state they have never a  jet aircraft fatality. They have if my memory serves well there have been three fatal crashes an Avro two seater pilot pax killed. And two De Haviland Rapides. There are some excellent books available and recommend the read on the companys early history.

The 'wing rupture' was some of the  uncontained material going up thru the wing near the leading edge. some damage must have occurred as some spoilers did not work and the number one engine refused to shut down. They had to drown it with fire hoses to stop it.  Worth noting that RR maintain these engines for QANTAS.They also blew a tyre on landing just to keeep everyone on their toes. 

Now it seems there have been two other dramas since the A380. A 7474/400 with the 380 pax on board popped a cork on one engine and went back to Singapore. Then another 74 had hydralic problem out of Heathrow.

The current managment leave a bit to be desired and they have almost dropped the ball twice recently almost losing the company for good. Like what happend to another icon Aussie airline, Ansett. Qantas is still a great airline that has weathered the GFC and other recent dramas well. Unfortunatley bean counters have moved most maintenance offshore and i think that mistake is starting to show.

When i am overseas for a while and i see the big red tail with the 'Flying Kangaroo' it makes me feel good.

Just to add that QANTAS is this week celebrating it's 90th birthday.

Bit of a rocky one for them. But things will return to normal.

i guess these things happen when you move into a new age with high tech engines and airframes.

Be interesting to see if Boeing have the same problems with the dreamliner when (if) it comes on line.

Here is the scoop I got from a friend of mine who is a pilot for Quantis.

 Here are just SOME of the problems Richard had in Singapore last week
aboard
QF32.... I won't bother mentioning the engine explosion!.... oops...
mentioned the engine explosion, sorry.....

* massive fuel leak in the left mid fuel tank (the beast has 11 tanks,
including in the horizontal stabiliser on the tail)
* massive fuel leak in the left inner fuel tank
* a hole on the flap canoe/fairing that you could fit your upper body
through
* the aft gallery in the fuel system failed, preventing many fuel transfer
functions
* fuel jettison had problems due to the previous problem above
* bloody great hole in the upper wing surface
* partial failure of leading edge slats
* partial failure of speed brakes/ground spoilers
* shrapnel damage to the flaps
* TOTAL loss of all hydraulic fluid in the Green System (beast has 2 x
5,000 PSI systems, Green and Yellow)
* manual extension of landing gear
* loss of 1 generator and associated systems
* loss of brake anti-skid system (blown tyres)
* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using normal method after landing
due to major damage to systems
* unable to shutdown adjacent #1 engine using using the fire switch!!!!!!!!
Therefore, no fire protection was available for that engine after the
explosion in #2
* ECAM warnings about major fuel imbalance because of fuel leaks on left
side, that were UNABLE to be fixed with cross-feeding
* fuel trapped in Trim Tank (in the tail). Therefore, possible major CofG
out-of-balance condition for landing. Yikes!
* and much more to come..........

Yes along list of snags there. There were 5 high time pilots on the flight deck all were working on the problems. Reported that Airbus will replace this aircraft with new one as the repairs ar to costly and difficult to do. They will use the damaged airframe as a testbed. If i had a choice i'd go with the double out bird strike and ditching rather than an uncontained cork pop. Qantas A380 fleet will sit on ground indefinatley until they are sure RR are on top of it. maybe swap to PW type 

I don't know why airbus is such a competitor with boeing because their airplanes are horrible.

ridiculous scarebuses

Joe - I was sent that email too.  With other facts added.  The total read like spam, not a coherent, informative report based on fact.

Nic - on what facts are you basing that information?  Facts, facts, facts - those are what make aviation safer.  Not spurious gossip and scaremongering.