Terror On AirBus at Gatwick

[IntheShade]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1172247/Terror-jet-abort-times.html

Terror as jet has to abort its take-off three times
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:44 AM on 21st April 2009
[headerlink]
Hundreds of holidaymakers were left terrified yesterday when their plane failed to take-off - three times.
The 355 passengers grew increasingly worried as the plane repeatedly taxied on the runway and picked up speed before the pilot braked at the last minute.
The passengers were evacuated from the Monarch Airlines Airbus A300 twice before mechanics at Gatwick airport managed to fix faults to its electrical and fuel systems.



A Monarch Airlines A300 AIRBUS (File photo)
They eventually set off on their flight to Taba in Egypt on the fourth attempt at 5.30pm - eight-and-a-half hours late.
Charter flight MON5704 took to the runway for its 9am take-off but could not get airborne, so it taxied around and a second attempt was made to lift-off.

But the same thing happened again, and the plane returned to the south terminal where passengers were escorted off.
Engineers found a fault with an electrical system on the plane. The broken component was replaced, and once again the passengers boarded.
At 11.44am, the plane attempted its third take-off. But the brakes came on again and passengers returned to the terminal. Mechanics then found a defect in the fuel indicating system.
Passenger Graham Owen, 48, a retired customs officer described the panic among passengers: 'People were saying that they simply didn't believe the plane was safe. They were demanding a new plane.'
A Monarch spokesman said the two problems which prevented take-off were unrelated and unlikely to have been dangerous.

Next time go BOEING

[3WE]

Quit giving Airbus such a hard time. I am sure the aircraft is safer than a Cirrus.

[ZeroAltitude]

Quit giving Airbus such a hard time. I am sure the aircraft is safer than a Cirrus.

Which brings up the question of ballistic parachutes on transport aircraft

[3WE]

Underlines are mine

Which brings up the question of ballistic parachutes on transport aircraft made of cheap composites.

It would be interesting to know what ITS thinks about that.

[G-DALE]

Terror as jet has to abort its take-off three times

For fnck sake You'd know the article was from a British tabloid....

[Big777jet]

Why the earth Monarch doing? Why can't Monarch get another different plane to get passengers out of town as soon as possible? Don't wait until the plane is fix the same plane! It's not right mechanics should fix first then the pilots to fly around for test plane without pax if its ok before to start next service! That's what USA airlines does that all the time if major problem get another plane and send plane back to hanger to be fix completed take thier time to fix properly. Jeez, what's wrong with England people doing up there? LOL


Stuart

[Jet-fighters.Net]

That's what USA airlines does that all the time if major problem get another plane and send plane back to hanger to be fix completed take thier time to fix properly.


Stuart

Not always if the problem can be fixed on the ramp and the mechanics sign it off they will send the plane on its way. A lot of times there is not a second plane available to substitute broken one. I was on a America West flight from IAD - PHX that had a engine issue was sat for 4 hours until the problem was repaired as there was no replacement A/C. Another time at CLT I had to wait for Mesa to fix one of there CRJ-700's. Both times we flew on the original A/C.

[phoneman]

I would rather be delayed than for the airline to attempt to fly with a defective part in order to maintain their schedule!!

[VAA1001]

Why the earth Monarch doing? Why can't Monarch get another different plane to get passengers out of town as soon as possible? Don't wait until the plane is fix the same plane! It's not right mechanics should fix first then the pilots to fly around for test plane without pax if its ok before to start next service! That's what USA airlines does that all the time if major problem get another plane and send plane back to hanger to be fix completed take thier time to fix properly. Jeez, what's wrong with England people doing up there? LOL


Stuart

I agree. Not all airlines just happen to be in the position to pluck an aircraft out of no where to fly off into the sunset. I have also been in the USA and had to return to stand after a problem was detected and then boarded the same plane after it was fixed on stand. In case you didnt bother to read the article, the two issues were not related and just unfortunate that they came to light as the aircraft started its take off run. I can assure you that Monarch are a very safe airline with very highly trained staff. Being airline crew myself, i am happy that when the engineers give the go ahead, its fine. However other things can then go wrong. But on that note, you will notice that the problem did get fixed and as far as i am aware........the plane got to Taba ok. As for flying around with no pax to test it? If there is a problem, there is a problem. Why would an airline do that? so would it be ok to send out the plane and risk the lives of the flight crew? Basically, what im saying is, if its ok for pilots to take it up to test it. Then it is safe for passengers to be on it and if another problem occurs, then thats how it goes and then that will be fixed. Oh and by the way............. its English people, Not England people.

[Evan]

Jeez, what's wrong with England people doing up there?

Monarchy.

Much appreciation should be directed at the pilots for two rejected takeoffs in the name of safety.

[sjwk]

While I'm sure if I was on the plane, I'd be a bit nervous too, at least the pilots spotted a fault and aborted rather than take off regardless and have something break in flight.

Steve.

[Dmmoore]

Almost all of the items that are written up by flight crews are repaired without the requirement or need of a test flight. Some items require a test flights. Examples are replacing more than 1 engine or any primary flight control require test flights. Some airlines accomplish test flights for aircraft leaving a heavy maintenance check letter "C" or higher. A test flight is required after a "D" check. Airlines do not accomplish test flights unless they are required or a problem can not be found without one.

When pilots write up a system, the mechanic troubleshoots the system. On through flights, sometimes the system is found to be operating normally. A system that ground checks normally but was faulted in flight requires some additional troubleshooting. If the aircraft is to RON (Remain Over Night) at a maintenance base maintenance will look deeper into the fault. On a through or turn around flight and if the system is not required for dispatch (an MEL item, Minimum Equipment List) the mechanic will usually confer with the outbound captain and discuss options. Because the system ground checked okay, the system can be dispatched as operational, does the captain want to use the system, see if it faults again? Or would he prefer the system be deactivated? I have seen a faulted system ground check okay and not fault again for several flight legs but they will always re-fault sometime after one of the first report. The easy fix is to replace a component of the system, 90% of the time, the problem is with a component. The other 10% are caused by wiring faults located outside the components. This type of fault is the most difficult to find and fix.

An intermittent or loose connection that only gives a problem when the wings are flexed just so or the fuselage is pressurized or the temperature is at a specific point, can drive you nuts. In a full blown check it's not a big deal, but on a through flight, finding this problem can take several attempts. Most captains will accept a system that ground checked with no faults provided it's that systems first fault, maintenance did physically look at the component and they accomplished some type of corrective action. Otherwise the item should be deferred per the MEL.

[sammie738]

thats damn great....going on monarch tomorrow