January 9, 2008 at 10:36 pm
A Qantas mid-air electrical failure near Bangkok on Monday is set to prompt a worldwide alert to Boeing 747 operators after the problem was traced to a cracked drip tray under the first-class galley.
Qantas yesterday began a fleet-wide check of its other jumbo jets after the aircraft was forced to land on Monday using battery back-up because water leaking from the tray shorted out a generator control unit.
The problem struck the aircraft, flying from London with 344 passengers, about 15 minutes from Bangkok, killing the passenger cabin lights but leaving essential functions running in the cockpit.
Qantas executive general manager, engineering, David Cox said: “It was just like tipping a glass of water into your stereo.
“It is not a good thing for that sort of equipment to have happen to it.”
The short-circuit deprived the aircraft of all or most of its main electrical power and left it on an emergency system designed to provide back-up for a minimum of 30 minutes.
The highly unusual loss of power from the aircraft’s four engine-mounted generators has sparked an investigation by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Boeing and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority as well as an internal probe by Qantas.
Aviation sources said the back-up battery was likely to last for up to an hour and the problem could have been disastrous had the aircraft been travelling too far away from a suitable landing site.
The aircraft has been repaired and put back into service, arriving back in Sydney yesterday.
Airline officials are examining information from the flight data recorder to understand how the water affected the electrical system, whether any power was still getting through and what options were available to the pilots.
“It happened at 15,000ft, so already descending on approach, and I think the first thought was ‘get the aeroplane down’, which was quite right,” Mr Cox said. “Had they been presented with the challenge with more time in the air, there are other things they could have tried.”
Mr Cox said he expected manufacturer Boeing to alert other operators to the cracking and that it could also produce regulatory action. He said at the very least operators would be asked to inspect the water protection around the equipment bay and there could be other findings to come.
“At the moment, we’re out inspecting the fleet and looking to see where that water may have come from, and what steps we need to take to stop that water getting in there again,” he said.
“Obviously correcting the drip tray is an immediate action but that’s a relatively simple thing to do. The bigger concerns are around how the water got there, and how we protect the avionics better.”
ATSB deputy director of aviation safety investigation Julian Walsh said he also expected Boeing to issue a worldwide alert about the problem.
Mr Walsh said lessons could be learned from the incident, and Boeing was in a position to warn other operators to do safety checks to make sure the problem did not happen again.
“We’re very fortunate that we’ve had a serious incident with a good outcome in terms of an aircraft landing safely and we’ve been able to learn from it to stop it happening again,” he said.
By: atr42 - 10th January 2008 at 10:17
Reminds me of very similar issues we had with the 737-200 back in the 90’s. We were warned about excess water in the fwd loo & galley seeping down into the electrics. Can’t recall if this was a problem with one of our fleet or a warning we received from elsewhere. Maybe an engineer out there will recall more.
By: steve rowell - 10th January 2008 at 09:50
QANTAS has reacted angrily to what it says are unfounded criticisms about the age of its fleet and suggestions it may have been a factor in Monday’s incident in Bangkok.
The airline, which is spending $2 billion a year on aircraft and has 215 planes worth $35 billion on order, said the average age of its fleet was just over nine years.
This compares well with other airlines and is lower than most US carriers.
Qantas executive manager John Borghetti said the 747 in Monday’s incident was 16 years old and well within its operational lifespan.
“These aircraft are built to operate much longer than that and any speculation that this was related to either the engineering discussions that are going on or cost-saving is just totally wrong,” he said.
Mr Borghetti rejected suggestions the airline was putting profit ahead of safety.
“There have been lots of discussions about waste and efficiency, of course, but never ever would there be a debate between profit and safety,” he said. “It’s just not on.”
By: PMN - 9th January 2008 at 22:56
So despite having a generator per engine, the entire main electrical system and the feeds from those four main generators can be crippled if one single control unit fails?
Does anyone here have a reasonably detailed knowledge of the 747’s electrical system? I’m quite intreagued by this incident. Logic (and experience with electrics) tells to me that any component from a trip to a bit of cable can fail, so if this one control unit somehow decides it doesn’t want to work anymore, is there no other way to distribute the power from any of the generators to feed the aircrafts non-essential systems? (By non-essential I mean those not powered by the emergency system, which I assume is simply batteries?) I realise the backup system keeps essential systems and instruments working for a limited time, but is everything really controlled by one unit?
What exactly is this main control unit and how does it work? Any ideas anyone?
Paul