SQ 238 Oct 9 tailstrike incident

[zilchster]

Aircraft involved was 9V-SYG as per FlightRadar24. Looks like this aircraft will be out of action for a while

http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewt...?f=3&t=1344833

I find the pilot's reactions really wrong. I feel there are some safety issues with SQ or at least with crew training with the recent string of incidents...

[crazycrab955]

Aircraft involved was 9V-SYG as per FlightRadar24. Looks like this aircraft will be out of action for a while

If they are replacing the tail skid (which is on the aircraft precisely for this purpose), it would likely be a 24- or 48-hour repair. Max.

Maybe that's "a while" by your definition?

I find the pilot's reactions really wrong. I feel there are some safety issues with SQ or at least with crew training with the recent string of incidents...

Please elaborate. What about his reactions were wrong? And what are the safety issues and "string of incidents" to which you refer?

[zilchster]

If they are replacing the tail skid (which is on the aircraft precisely for this purpose), it would likely be a 24- or 48-hour repair. Max.

Maybe that's "a while" by your definition?




Please elaborate. What about his reactions were wrong? And what are the safety issues and "string of incidents" to which you refer?

The 9V-SWB incident...not evacuating...I remember the Shanghai 330 incident...

[SQ228]

Local media devoted about one line to the incident, buried within endless stories of wild wind that Melbourne hasn't seen for years. It was reported to be an SQ freight plane, no mention of passengers, but that's just another example of how many versions of the "facts" fly around, even from reputable sources.

The airport was in chaos all day, more than half our train lines cut, major road blocks from fallen trees, parks and attractions closed, fatal injuries and widespread power outages across the state. That's probably why a minor contact between a tail and the runway which left no visible evidence and couldn't be detected by the plane's own equipment was not considered something to get alarmed about.

The EK plane a few years back that removed ground equipment as it scraped its way off the end of the runway during perfect flying conditions, completely due to pilot error, got a lot more media attention.

[crazycrab955]

The 9V-SWB incident...not evacuating...I remember the Shanghai 330 incident...

Really? Those are your two examples of supposedly "bad training" or incidents that are the fault of the airline?

In the first one, "not evacuating," it is in fact SOP at many airlines (and, I would guess, SQ) to not evacuate when there are visible flames and fire crews on scene with fire-retardant foam. But perhaps we should trust the opinions of keyboard warriors over those who make aviation their profession?

In the second one, the "Shanghai 330 incident," the aircraft had a loss of power due to a technical issue with the engines. This is SQ's fault, how exactly? Again, as in the first instance, the crew landed the aircraft safely despite an emergency situation not of their making.

But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of an argument!

[zilchster]

Accidents and incidents do happen. All I am stating is that I find the crew's reactions and situational awareness questionable in response to such incidents.

[FN-GM]

The 9V-SWB incident...not evacuating

That did turn out to be the right decision though didn't it? An evacuation caused injuries to passengers more times than not. With the events that happened with SWB nobody was injured.

I find the crew's reactions and situational awareness questionable in response to such incidents.

Are you in the aviation safety profession?


EDIT: Just to add what would turning back achieve. These aircraft have a tail skid. All that should be needed is to change the skid. Shouldn't matter if this is done in SIN for MEL.

[flyguy]

Did SIA confirm or deny any tailstrike in Melbourne?

[ADL_SQ]

Local Australian Aviation expert Ben Sandilands wrote about this on his blog today and concludes: "This looks like a case of everyone doing the right thing".

https://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetal...-melbourne-ok/

[9V-SPL]

Did SIA confirm or deny any tailstrike in Melbourne?

Someone called Rowan asked about it on SIA's Facebook page and this was their response:

"Hi Rowan, we understand that the inspections confirmed there had been contact with the tail skid system, but there was no contact with the fuselage. The affected component is being repaired and the aircraft is expected to return to service by tomorrow. Thank you."

[SQ228]

Local Australian Aviation expert Ben Sandilands wrote about this on his blog today and concludes: "This looks like a case of everyone doing the right thing".

https://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetal...-melbourne-ok/

I would agree with the article 100%, and given the state of winds at the time, flying about dumping fuel and then landing again for no real reason other than public relations, would have caused even more chaos and involved flying back into the same tricky conditions. Surely the "Twittersphere" had enough work at the time dealing with The Donald anyway, or perhaps it was searching for a scapegoat or diversionary tactic. Now there's a conspiracy for the internet to blow out of proportion!

[FN-GM]

9V-SYG Is now back in service after having its skid changed.

Its not the massive drama people are making out.

[crazycrab955]

Local Australian Aviation expert Ben Sandilands wrote about this on his blog today and concludes: "This looks like a case of everyone doing the right thing".

1. Keyboard warrior claims SIA training is a problem and strongly implies, without any factual basis, that the airline is unsafe.

2. Aviation expert reiterates that procedures were followed correctly.

Whom do you trust?