Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SQ 317 Diverted to Baku

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SQ 317 Diverted to Baku

    Flight SQ317, an Airbus A380 operating from London to Singapore, diverted to Baku in Azerbaijan on 6 January 2014 as a result of a cabin depressurisation. Oxygen masks were deployed and the aircraft landed uneventfully at Baku airport at 01:03 (local time). There were no injuries to the 467 passengers and 27 crew on board.

    We are seeking clearance from local authorities to transfer affected customers to a hotel until a replacement aircraft arrives from Singapore.

    Customers may wish to contact our Reservation and Ticketing Office in Singapore at +65 6223 8888 for assistance.


    https://www.facebook.com/singaporeair

  • #2
    Flight SQ317 diverted to Baku - cabin depressurisation

    As reported on their Facebook post

    Flight SQ317, an Airbus A380 operating from London to Singapore, diverted to Baku in Azerbaijan on 6 January 2014 as a result of a cabin depressurisation. Oxygen masks were deployed and the aircraft landed uneventfully at Baku airport at 01:03 (local time). There were no injuries to the 467 passengers and 27 crew on board.

    We are seeking clearance from local authorities to transfer affected customers to a hotel until a replacement aircraft arrives from Singapore.

    Customers may wish to contact our Reservation and Ticketing Office in Singapore at +65 6223 8888 for assistance.

    Comment


    • #3
      There's an error somewhere here. SQ317 is the 10:55 departure out of LHR.

      It has just gone 03:18 on 6 Jan in London, so the SQ317 6 Jan departure craft hasn't even landed in LHR yet.

      It can't be the 5 Jan SQ317 departure because it would have flown over Baku by 14:00 thereabouts. I'm sure it didn't take 10 hours to land the plane.

      I'm guessing it is meant to read SQ321 (the only other A380 flight out of LHR at present) and it is the 5 Jan 22:05 departure which probably does reach Baku around 01:00.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
        There's an error somewhere here. SQ317 is the 10:55 departure out of LHR.

        It has just gone 03:18 on 6 Jan in London, so the SQ317 6 Jan departure craft hasn't even landed in LHR yet.

        It can't be the 5 Jan SQ317 departure because it would have flown over Baku by 14:00 thereabouts. I'm sure it didn't take 10 hours to land the plane.

        I'm guessing it is meant to read SQ321 (the only other A380 flight out of LHR at present) and it is the 5 Jan 22:05 departure which probably does reach Baku around 01:00.
        Let's work this out:

        SQ 317 ETD LHR 1055 on Jan 5
        SQ says it landed at 0103 Baku time which is 2103 London time.
        Depressurization would've happened earlier than that.

        That would mean that it flew for 10 hours before landing in Baku. Yes, seems a bit long even to dump fuel before landing. At 10 hours it would probably would have been around the south of Myanmar thereabouts.

        Comment


        • #5
          On further checking, SQ317 due to arrive in SIN on 6 Jan is showing as having an arrival status of "AS" on iCargo- not sure what that means but by now it should be showing "LD".

          I think the SQ Facebook report must mean 01:03 local time SIN, not local time at GYD. That would seem a lot more accurate, and if any detail was in error, it would be less likely to be the flight number.

          The aircraft involved according to iCargo and flightradar24 is 9V-SKE.

          Comment


          • #6
            I just arrived in on SQ305. It would have been quite an adventure if I had decided to take 317 just so that I could turn up for the Singapore workday on time...

            Glad that there are no injuries so far. although I suspect that, if it could, SQ would have chosen another airport to divert to.

            Comment


            • #7
              Finally a FB posting with a pic from a pax.

              https://www.facebook.com/matthewgjohnson?fref=ts

              Excerpts:

              Interesting story... shortly after take-off from Heathrow a loud air noise was heard from the door five rows in front. So loud it was impossible to hear and cold due to the airflow.
              I asked the cabin crew whether they knew the cause and whether the flight crew had been down to examine.
              Got silly answers so then asked to speak to the in-flight supervisor two hours later he finally turned up. Apparently the door had a leaking seal which had presented on the flight to London but apparently in very mild form. He assured me they had cleared the airplane as servicable. I was a little dubious and miffed by the high noise and cold temperatures. I wrote a compalint questioning their judgement and then settled to pass the time watching movies.
              A few hours later the leaking door over powered the compressors' ability to pressurise the cabin and we entered into an emergency decent over Afghanistan (of all placess!) with those cute facemasks to keep us amused.
              After a couple of hours we limped back to Azerbaijan at 10,000 feet trying to avoid the nearby mountains.
              Meanwhile I took a few minutes to reread the safety card and assess our chances of survival should the door fail completely...
              Answering a question as to how long they have been told that they will spend in Baku.
              Lisa - I reckon 1 - 2 days, although no one's too sure right now. Even if they fix the failed door seal, they still have to repair/recharge the emergency breathing gear. Hope i get to see something of Baku... might be a once in a lifetime opportunity
              As it's a full Airbus 380 with 600+ passengers finding alternate transport might be challenging.
              ... although I assesed our chances of survival as good there were a few anxious moments.

              In my view the decision to take-off was marginal but the decision to continue after the problem worsened was poor. Dumping the fuel and returning to Heathrow seemed the obvious choice, and I had highlighted this to them a couple of hours before the emergency. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but in this case it was a little too easy to predict.
              SQ317 - crew gone off to a hotel leaving 467 passengers stranded in the transit lounge.
              Last edited by CarbonMan; 6 January 2014, 02:58 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                "SQ317 - crew gone off to a hotel leaving 467 passengers stranded in the transit lounge."
                That is one of the worst things ever to happen and something which defines an airline. I still cant forget the image of MH Crew Trampling over old Japanese passengers at TBIT to collect luggage on the delayed flight due to the 1st November incident at LAX. Shitty crew make shitty airlines.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I wonder how this (and missing parts on wings reported elsewhere in the forum) was cleared. Took a US domestic ORD-LAX flight (AA) recently where a plastic panel from a seat leg was discovered lying about and mechanics and a pilot crawled up the aisle to find the seat it belonged to. I thought it was a rouse to stall for connecting passengers but we took off with my row block intact

                  Can anyone familiar with regulations chime in?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ashkale View Post
                    "SQ317 - crew gone off to a hotel leaving 467 passengers stranded in the transit lounge."
                    That is one of the worst things ever to happen and something which defines an airline. I still cant forget the image of MH Crew Trampling over old Japanese passengers at TBIT to collect luggage on the delayed flight due to the 1st November incident at LAX. Shitty crew make shitty airlines.
                    Not sure what happened in this situation but maybe it was easier to clear the crew through immigration, board them, etc. as they're basically one unit v. passengers who could be headed anywhere and of various nationalities. Too bad Baku wasn't an online station. I'm sure the station manager would've been scrambling to get emergency visas, transportation, lodgings, etc. Maybe Star Alliance had to help out SQ here

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by ashkale View Post
                      "SQ317 - crew gone off to a hotel leaving 467 passengers stranded in the transit lounge."
                      That is one of the worst things ever to happen and something which defines an airline. I still cant forget the image of MH Crew Trampling over old Japanese passengers at TBIT to collect luggage on the delayed flight due to the 1st November incident at LAX. Shitty crew make shitty airlines.
                      Ashkale, there's very little the air crew can assist in as they have neither expertise in processing visas nor sourcing for hotels for the pax. Best that they can some downtime so that in the event the plane can be fixed, they would be legally rested sufficiently to fly again. As Orsetto mentioned, SQ would have had to contacted a local agent to assist. Finding hotel rooms and transportation for so many people in the middle of the night is always a challenge. Priority is usually given to premium classes as they are smaller in number, then they will handle the 400+ Y pax as a group. Just getting pass immigration would have been a hassle - even if they could get sufficient officers to do the processing in a place like Baku.
                      Last edited by CarbonMan; 6 January 2014, 04:55 PM. Reason: grammar

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Picture of the affected door. Note the deformation of plastic window cover and the rim around the door.

                        Copyright (C) Matthew G. Johnson 2014.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          In my view the decision to take-off was marginal but the decision to continue after the problem worsened was poor. Dumping the fuel and returning to Heathrow seemed the obvious choice, and I had highlighted this to them a couple of hours before the emergency. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but in this case it was a little too easy to predict.

                          I think that's more of a key than whether the crew faded away to rest......

                          If the seal 'blew' shortly after take-off and had even had a problem on the sector beforehand, the comment to dump fuel and return to LHR, where at least A380s can be serviced and SQ have a base, is a valid point. Even heading to FRA where SQ also have a base or at least a good partnership with LH would have been a better choice than 'suck-it-and-see' as it were.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by orsetto View Post
                            Not sure what happened in this situation but maybe it was easier to clear the crew through immigration, board them, etc. as they're basically one unit v. passengers who could be headed anywhere and of various nationalities. Too bad Baku wasn't an online station. I'm sure the station manager would've been scrambling to get emergency visas, transportation, lodgings, etc. Maybe Star Alliance had to help out SQ here
                            In one of the newer pics, I see atleast one member of the crew so definitely

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by ashkale View Post
                              "SQ317 - crew gone off to a hotel leaving 467 passengers stranded in the transit lounge."
                              That is one of the worst things ever to happen and something which defines an airline. I still cant forget the image of MH Crew Trampling over old Japanese passengers at TBIT to collect luggage on the delayed flight due to the 1st November incident at LAX. Shitty crew make shitty airlines.
                              I think your comment about the crew is totally uncalled for. I'm not sure if you are referring to the technical crew or cabin crew, but there are legal requirements for them to have minimum rest before they are allowed to operate again, once the replacement aircraft arrives.
                              Have you checked your blind spot lately?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X