After diverting a flight on Monday as a result of a smoke-filled cabin, Qantas budget airline Jetstar has been forced to deny there are maintenance problems with its aircraft.
A spokesman for the airline said everything was normal with the aircraft, which met with Qantas group safety standards.
The pilot of the B717 travelling from Brisbane to Hamilton Island with 56 people aboard made a precautionary landing at Mackay after fumes and smoke were noticed.
The spokesman said the pilot and flight attendants had followed standard safety procedures in diverting for a precautionary landing.
Investigations into the incident were still underway but the spokesman said it appeared the fumes came from moisture from water splashed in a toilet hand basin which created a reaction in wiring of a nearby intercom at the rear of the cabin.
The wiring heated up, setting off the fumes.
A spokesman for the Australian Transport Safety Bureau said it was investigating the incident, along with another earlier this month which passengers described as a near-miss between a Qantas jet and a Jetstar aircraft near Hamilton Island.
The Jetstar aircraft, with 124 people aboard, took dramatic evasive action shortly after taking off from the island’s airport.
Jetstar said its pilots changed course. Qantas said both aircraft were in visual contact and no danger was posed to any passengers.
By: DarrenBe - 12th August 2004 at 09:12
Its a bit unfair to Jetstar to suggest that as they ‘appear’ to be the only ones with issues on the 717 fleet, that there is an issue within Jetstar.
Series of problems DO occur, even in aircraft fresh out of the factory. You only have to a look at the ADs (airworthiness directives) published, you’ll soon realise that all aircraft are far from perfect.
I don’t know the full situation over in Austrailia, except that it appears that the media have an issue with Jetstar. Any problem, no matter how minor, seems to get the attention of the media. Unfortunately the media are very good at turning a very benign incident into a full scale drama. It then gives an image to the public that Jetstar is somehow ‘unsafe’.
If the press reported on every single technical issue to affect airlines, they’d be no room for other news.
By: Bmused55 - 12th August 2004 at 07:39
Well-DOne to the crew for returning.
I am unsure as to whether these are just freak coincindences or whether their are operational issues that need to be address within Jetstar. I’m not pointing a finger. However, it isn’t as if the 717’s are that old, nor are they high-time airframes, still will relatively low cycles. Modern aircraft, as such are incredibly reliable, and it just doesn’t happen that a series of problems occur, certainly not on one aircraft-type, and most certainly not within the same airline. Gauging by the world fleet of 717’s, I personally think something is amiss within Jetstar that only they are having problems and it’s only their fleet that are having them.
ANyone care to chip in…
Also, as far as Bmused56 – it isn’t me, even after my rather rash outburst at Bmused55 himself – I’m not that shallow…:)
yeah yeah,… we know who you are
*Thick german accent* Vee have vays of making you talk!
By: Bmused55 - 12th August 2004 at 07:38
Call me supersticious, but do bad things, and it’ll only come back to haunt ya.
Namely the decision to go for the A320, in itself not a bad decision, better aircraft, range, etc. But clearly a more expensive option.
By: steve rowell - 12th August 2004 at 04:29
Not good for the 717-Programm. Would all there 717s replace by A320?
Yes all fourteen 717’s will be replaced with twenty three A320’s Jetstar has on order
By: Bmused55 - 11th August 2004 at 22:17
It’s not big, it’s not clever and it certainly isn’t funny, whoever you are. 😡
I swear. its not me
By: Grey Area - 11th August 2004 at 22:07
It’s not big, it’s not clever and it certainly isn’t funny, whoever you are. 😡
By: bmused56 - 11th August 2004 at 21:54
If they last long enough, thats the general plan
agreed, sweet sherry anyone? 😉
By: Bmused55 - 11th August 2004 at 12:43
Not good for the 717-Programm. Would all there 717s replace by A320?
If they last long enough, thats the general plan
By: beistrich - 11th August 2004 at 12:38
Not good for the 717-Programm. Would all there 717s replace by A320?
By: Bmused55 - 11th August 2004 at 11:59
Talk about bad Karma.
They should’ve decided to stick with the 717, that way they’d have good Karma…. LMAO!
By: Pablo - 11th August 2004 at 11:56
I think the question is, will they still be around in 2006?
By: steve rowell - 11th August 2004 at 11:55
A JETSTAR aircraft forced to return to Melbourne shortly after take-off will today have one of its engines replaced.
Jetstar spokesman Simon Westaway today said the pilot noticed problems with the Boeing 717 as it reached the top of its climb after it took off for Hobart at 2pm (AEST) yesterday.
“Our crew weren’t happy with the way the engine was performing,” Mr Westaway said.
The aircraft was turned around and landed again at Melbourne at 3pm (AEST).
Mr Westaway said passengers were put onto the next Hobart flight at 4pm (AEST) and there was minor disruption to the flight schedule for about an hour.
Jetstar engineers would today investigate the source of the problem and would put a fresh engine on the plane before it was returned to service today or tomorrow, he said.
Jetstar has experienced several minor technical problems since its May launch, most recently on July 26 when a Jetstar flight made a precautionary landing after an attendant smelt burning plastic and wiring.
But Mr Westaway said Jetstar had excellent safety standards and it was unfair, “for people to somehow allude that we don’t have our eye on the ball”.
Jetstar safety and maintenance had just been reviewed as part of their move to introduce their new A320 Airbuses, he said.
Jetstar’s third A320 will take off this Sunday and by 2006 the Qantas-owned budget carrier plans to have a fleet of 26 of the aircraft in operation.
By: LBARULES - 4th August 2004 at 09:48
LMAO nice one 🙂
By: Bmused55 - 4th August 2004 at 09:40
Oxford have just announced the publication of the 2004 revised Dictionary.
Notable changes:
Definition note for “SH*T” is: JetStar
Definition for Bad Luck: JetStar
Definition of Bad Idea: Picture of a JetStar A320
😀
By: Bmused55 - 4th August 2004 at 09:38
By: LBARULES - 4th August 2004 at 09:36
God, the amount of bad publicity this airline has already got is unbelievable.
By: dartie - 4th August 2004 at 00:34
Yes thats a fair enough comment, but try telling that to the travelling public, because they dont really look at the facts they just go by what the media says, and not what the real facts are which is quite ridiculous.
By: mongu - 3rd August 2004 at 17:58
I seriously doubt there are any safety issues with Jetstar. There’s a fair amount of Qantas/Jetstar cross marketing and I would imagine a lot of the technical/engineering people are ex-Qantas.
By: dartie - 3rd August 2004 at 06:04
Jez Jet star having been having alot of these bad reports that is surely damaging theyre reputation, if Qantas want them to compete with Virgin Blue they better pick up their act i say. Im surely not flying Jetstar!
By: steve rowell - 3rd August 2004 at 03:44
Jetstar is investigating the slashing of two seatbelts on a flight from Hamilton Island to Sydney nine days ago.
Flight attendants discovered the damage after the plane arrived in Sydney.
Jetstar spokesman Simon Westaway says a search of the aircraft failed to find any sign of a sharp object which could have caused the damage.
“We acted appropriately, we’ve notified authorities, we’re looking into the matter further,” he said.
“We don’t operate the airport security at the airports where we fly. We clearly … seek to get to the bottom as to how it may have occurred.”
Sign In
July 29, 2004 at 1:23 am