Passengers have described how they feared their plane would disintegrate after a “massive” hole appeared mid-flight.
The plane made an emergency landing in Manila about 1:20pm after the cabin depressurised due to the hole in the fuselage
Sources report the hole, near the cargo door, was ”several meters wide” and caused what passengers describe as an “explosive” depressurisation.
Melbourne woman Dr June Kane said passengers were stunned by an ”incredible boom”.
”There was wood and newspapers flying past me and a woman who I was talking to in first class and then oxygen masks fell down,” Dr Kane said. ”The moment it happened I thought we were going to plunge to our deaths.
”There was an incredible boom. Everyone thought the plane would disintegrate. (The hole)
goes right under the plane. It’s about 2 metres by 4 metres.
”Baggage was flying out.”
The International Herald Tribune quotes Manila International Airport Authority deputy manager for operations Octavio Lina as saying that several passengers vomited after they disembarked.
“There is a big hole on the right side near the wing,” he told the newspaper’s website, saying it appeared to be 2.5 to 3 meters in diameter.
He said parts of the floor had collapsed to reveal cargo underneath. The ceiling around the area also collapsed.
“Upon disembarkation, there were some passengers who vomited. You can see in their faces that they were really scared,” he said.
The flight was travelling between London and Melbourne.
The pilot has just addressed passengers in Manila confirming there was a large hole in the aircraft and that the cause of the incident was unknown.
He was greeted with rousing applause from passengers.
Qantas this afternoon confirmed there was an incident, saying flight QF 30, carrying about 350 passengers, was forced to make an emergency landing in Manila after de-pressurising at cruising altitude.
An emergency room was set up at the airline’s head office at Mascot after the incident was reported.
Senior airline executives there were being briefed continuously through the afternoon by aircraft engineers.
Qantas this afternoon was still trying to establish how a large hole came to appear in the fuselage outside the baggage compartment.
The 747-400 jet had flown from London via a stopover in Hong Kong.
Passengers who have called Herald Sun Online say oxygen masks dropped from the ceiling during the incident.
The plane then made a rapid descent 30,000 feet to 10,000 feet as the pilot brought the craft lower to deal with the effects of the depressurised cabin.
Passenger Brendan McClements said there was a sudden “gust of wind” through the plane.
”There was a degree of surprise – people questioning what it was,” he said.
”There was a rush of wind as the air pressure came down. It got people’s attention. It was then a matter of getting the masks on.”
Another passenger described how children burst into tears after a “quick bang” reverberated throught the cabin. She said the plane plunged, but then stabilised after about five minutes.
Mr McClements, the chief executive of Victorian Major Events, praised the pilot and crew.
”The crew were terrific they did a great job. Everyone gave them a round of applause as we landed.”
Mr McClements said the faulty door was on the “driver’s side” of the plane, just before the wing. He said there was ”a big gap where the door used to be”.
He said other passengers seemed in ”resonably good spirits”.
Another passenger reported the masks fell from the ceiling, the plane “dropped suddenly” and there was a “fairly explosive” depressurisation.
One passenger reported the pilot did “an amazing job” of controlling the craft.
Flight QF 30 was due to arrive in Melbourne about 10pm tonight.
It was one hour from Hong Kong when the incident occured.
The plane is on the tarmac at Manila airport with all passengers – the majority of them Australians – on board.
“Qantas can confirm Qantas flight 30 from Hong Kong to Melbourne has been diverted to Manila,” a Qantas spokeswoman said.
“The aircraft is on the ground and being inspected as we speak.”
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has been notified of the incident and its director of air safety is being briefed by Qantas officials.
A spokesman said depending on the extent of any mechanical failure, Australian investigators may be required to fly to Manila to conduct an investigation.
ATSB director of aviation safety investigation Julian Walsh said the 747-400 had suffered a large hole in the underside, front forward section of the aircraft below the passeenger floor.
Mr Walsh said the hole – below what is known as the R2 (right front) passenger door, had been opened up in the cargo area of the plane, but it was unknown whether it had been caused by loose cargo, an internal component breaking away, or an exterior projectile such as an engine impellor.
“The informatino we have is there was damage to the fuselage … it is a serious incident,” Mr Walsh said, adding a team of ATSB investigators were preparing to fly to Singapore.
He said the hole has caused a rapid depressurisation event in the aircraft which caused oxygen masks to be deployed in the cabin.
The pilot then initiated a “controlled descent” from 29,000 feet to 10,000 feet.
An official at Manila airport’s accident investigation section said the Qantas aircraft had experienced a problem with one of its doors, possibly as a result of the fuselage damage.
Source :The Herald Sun
By: KKM57P - 30th July 2008 at 14:44
Oxygen cylinder at fault in Qantas emergency: ATSB
Air safety investigators have confirmed an oxygen cylinder was to blame for an explosion on a Qantas 747 last week.
By: ATFS_Crash - 28th July 2008 at 16:50
Reports of a door loss or door malfunction. Not sure whether the plane landed at Adelaide or Melbourne.:confused:
I heard this more recent incident, was just a gear door malfunction.
I would consider a gear door malfunction a very minor event, as long as the plane land safely, which it did.
I consider the hull breach to be a very noteworthy mishap. So I consider the earlier (hull breach/pressurization) event to be very significant and the newer (gear door) event to be minor.
By: Newforest - 28th July 2008 at 16:44
Reports of a door loss or door malfunction. Not sure whether the plane landed at Adelaide or Melbourne.:confused:
By: Ren Frew - 28th July 2008 at 16:35
Another Qantas jet has just declared an emergency and landed at Melbourne… details to follow…
By: ATFS_Crash - 28th July 2008 at 16:35
US warned of faulty 747 oxygen tanks months before Qantas blast
Source and whole story.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article4414114.ece
By: JetSet - 27th July 2008 at 10:44
Wrong it had landed in hong kong, had the turn around and had taken off from HKG. It must of been like an hour and a half into the flight this incident happend.
If this had happend an hour away from landing in hong kong they would of landed in china.
The philippines is south of hong kong so this means that if they were an hour away from landing then they went the long way round, the very long way round. Unless your thinking of the other way round where it was heading to london and stopping in hong kong. Is that what you meant
Yep ya right there…..I think I must of had a blonde moment:eek:
By: steve rowell - 27th July 2008 at 07:23
Preliminary investigations point toward an exploding oxygen cylinder ..as one of two situated in that area is missing
By: Super Nimrod - 27th July 2008 at 07:16
Overnight the Aussie papers are saying the same thing
By: KKM57P - 26th July 2008 at 19:51
Do you really think that even if it was hit by a meteorite (!!!!), or some other more plausible external force, that the metal would remain pushed inwards ?
The volume of air forcing it’s way through such a relatively small hole would blow the metal back out at best, at worst you’ll have a big hole like this as the cabin air rips away the skin.
More possible an exloded emergency oxygen bottle.
“Ein solcher Fehler darf nicht passieren”
http://www.spiegel.de/reise/aktuell/0,1518,568216,00.html
By: Newforest - 26th July 2008 at 17:23
This is not the plane that the Pope flew on. The incident plane is VH-OJK, msn 25067.
There are of course continuing trade criticism of Qantas outsourcing the maintenance of its planes and it will be interesting to seem whether this will be the focus of the investigation.
By: Ren Frew - 26th July 2008 at 16:42
It’s not corrosion !
By: Bmused55 - 26th July 2008 at 16:08
I bet Sherlock Holmes is a worried man!
Well, it could have been a matter of the fairing failing and somehow taking a chunk of fuselage skin with it. I’ve already seen that idea parried around on other forums
By: bloodnok - 26th July 2008 at 14:57
Looking at the pics, the metal is petal shaped outward, indicating a force from inside blew it outward.
Perhaps some internal component gave up or maybe a small bomb… who knows, but my mind is pretty made up, whatever caused this was on the inside.
I bet Sherlock Holmes is a worried man!
By: bloodnok - 26th July 2008 at 14:55
Yip, when I first heared I thought maybe a meteorite. But these pictures point to an internal cause.
Do you really think that even if it was hit by a meteorite (!!!!), or some other more plausible external force, that the metal would remain pushed inwards ?
The volume of air forcing it’s way through such a relatively small hole would blow the metal back out at best, at worst you’ll have a big hole like this as the cabin air rips away the skin.
By: bloodnok - 26th July 2008 at 14:46
Hardly a 3 x 4 m hole as quoted above!
By: Distiller - 26th July 2008 at 11:29
Looking at the pics, the metal is petal shaped outward, indicating a force from inside blew it outward.
Perhaps some internal component gave up or maybe a small bomb… who knows, but my mind is pretty made up, whatever caused this was on the inside.
Yip, when I first heared I thought maybe a meteorite. But these pictures point to an internal cause.
By: sekant - 26th July 2008 at 11:10
Boeing’s engineering is second to none, as I think their history and their sales and safety records will more than amply demonstrate. Do things go wrong on Boeing airplanes? Of course they do. They’re designed and made by humans. But things go wrong on Airbus, McDD, Tupolev, Ilyushin, ATR, and every other kind of airplane. Are they deficient and faulty too? The perfect machine has yet to be made, nor will it ever be.
Boeing has a decent safety record, and things went wrong with products from other manufacturers indeed. But to turn Boeing into some type of saint company and place it above all other manufacturers in this domain is both far fetched and groundless. I mean, we had issues not only with the 747 but also 737.
You make it sound like UA811 and this QF bird went down in a fireball!
Now who’s slanting the truth?ElAl 1862 was a very bad set of circumstances I don’t recall ANY investigation results blaming that soley on Boeing. One engine left the wing due to fatigued pylon bolts and unfortunately took its neighbouring engine with it alone with some forward slats and wing surface (as No4 engine was ripped off). In the right conditions this could have happened to any 4 engines aircraft, be it Boeing, Airbus, McD, Illyushin or Tupolev.
TWA800, well again, like any air disaster, it was a bad set of circumstances. But that bird was old, with 1960s wiring. Should have been overhauled.
No one said that the QF flight went down in a fireball but that some 747 had issues because of design.
Elal 1862 due to bad circumstances only? The Netherland safety board disagree with you: “The design and certification of the B-747 pylon was found to be inadequate to provide the required level of safety.”
TWA800? Same thing, not only bad circusmtances, but also due to design as found by the inquiry. The fact that air conditioning system was placed underneath the central tank and heats up fuel was one of them. And there were other such findings.
By: Ren Frew - 26th July 2008 at 10:24
It was reported here that it was the Papal aircraft!!
Lot’s of requests for “There Is Only One River” were bandied about the cabin in the general direction of the singing nun, I’m told…:rolleyes:
By: Bmused55 - 26th July 2008 at 10:09
No. As said what you are saying is slanted at best. The cargo door on UA811went off and people died because of faulty Boeing engineering. The final inquiry showed that the accident was due to both faulty locking and electrical system. Certainly not because the door had not been properly locked by ground staff.
And the point is that other 747 went down because of deficient Boeing engineering. That applies to ElAl 1862 and TWA800. So to congratulate at this stage Boeing for building resilient aircraft when the causes are not yet known seems at best premature, if not foolish.
Went down?
By gum.. if I had wrote that post and subsituted Boeing for Airbus… I’d now be looking at a forum ban!
You make it sound like UA811 and this QF bird went down in a fireball!
Now who’s slanting the truth?
ElAl 1862 was a very bad set of circumstances I don’t recall ANY investigation results blaming that soley on Boeing. One engine left the wing due to fatigued pylon bolts and unfortunately took its neighbouring engine with it alone with some forward slats and wing surface (as No4 engine was ripped off). In the right conditions this could have happened to any 4 engines aircraft, be it Boeing, Airbus, McD, Illyushin or Tupolev.
TWA800, well again, like any air disaster, it was a bad set of circumstances. But that bird was old, with 1960s wiring. Should have been overhauled.
By: Jet 22 - 26th July 2008 at 08:47
from London and was an hour away from landing at Hong Kong.
Wrong it had landed in hong kong, had the turn around and had taken off from HKG. It must of been like an hour and a half into the flight this incident happend.
If this had happend an hour away from landing in hong kong they would of landed in china.
The philippines is south of hong kong so this means that if they were an hour away from landing then they went the long way round, the very long way round. Unless your thinking of the other way round where it was heading to london and stopping in hong kong. Is that what you meant
Sign In
July 25, 2008 at 8:09 am