[Peetwo]

Addendum to last: How many minutes to bingo fuel??  

Found some media coverage on the QF28 diversion to Williamtown RAAF base, which suggests bizarrely that it is an acceptable practice for a Qantas international HCRPT airliner to conduct a missed approach into Sydney and then have to bolt to a 'emergency alternate' - WTD??   

"..During approach, the aircraft encountered moderate turbulence and high wind conditions and the approach became unstable. The crew conducted a missed approach and advised ATC of minimum fuel conditions. The crew diverted the aircraft to Williamtown where ground handling equipment was not sufficient for the aircraft size. The investigation is continuing..."

Via Simple Flying:

Qantas 787 From Santiago Forced To Divert Due To Sydney Storms

BY
MICHAEL DORAN
PUBLISHED FEB 20, 2023

Despite keeping passengers and crew safe, Qantas has been criticized for a diversion that saw a 787 sitting on the ground in Newcastle.



While Qantas has recently been in the news for all the wrong reasons, it seems the Flying Kangaroo is now being held responsible for the violent storms in Sydney on Saturday night that forced one of its aircraft to divert to Newcastle.

With the Boeing 787 unable to land in Sydney, the airline took the appropriate action and yet still copped a bucket full of criticism for keeping passengers and crew safe.

To start at the start, Qantas flight QF28 departed Chile from Santiago International Airport (SCL) at 14:22 on Friday. The flight was operated by a three-year-old Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner, registered VH-ZNJ with MSN 66074, and painted in the Qantas 100-year commemorative livery.

According to Flightradar24.com, it was due to touch down at Sydney International Airport (SYD) at 17:50 on Saturday, after a flight covering 11,363 kilometers (7,060 miles), which usually takes around fourteen hours.

Stormy Sydney prevents 787 landing

However, severe storms in the Sydney area forced several aircraft to be diverted, including this one from Santiago, the only international flight affected. The Dreamliner was diverted north to Newcastle, where it landed at Newcastle Airport (NTL), a regional center around 100 miles from Sydney.



While that kept the passengers, crew and aircraft safe, a report from news.com.au said that Newcastle Airport lacked the necessary facilities to accommodate and refuel the widebody, so it was, in effect, stranded for the night. The aircraft is configured to carry 236 passengers who, along with the crew, faced an uncomfortable night on top of enduring extreme turbulence during the flight.

There were no immigration services or accommodation immediately available, so passengers had to stay onboard for around seven hours while the aircraft sat on the apron. The news.com.au report said they were eventually allowed to leave the aircraft and spend the night in the terminal.

It's tough being an airline

As expected nowadays, social media lit up with criticism of Qantas, although it is difficult to see what else the airline could have done in the circumstances.

Ref link: https://twitter.com/OzziePatriot/status/...-storms%2F

JFR
@OzziePatriot

Hey @Qantas why did a plane from Chile last night make an emergency landing at Newcastle airport late yesterday and is still there this morning? Passengers forced to sleep in terminal??? @nbnnews

@newcastleherald what excuses will be spun???

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FpSBpa6akAMM...name=small

In response, the airline released the following statement, thanking customers for their patience throughout the long, uncomfortable night.

"This included our flight from Santiago to Sydney which diverted to Newcastle. Qantas customer support team members travelled from Sydney to Newcastle to assist customers in the terminal through the night. We understand that this would have been a frustrating experience for our customers and an uncomfortable night and we thank them for their patience and understanding of the impact the storms had on flights into Sydney."

According to the Sydney Morning Herald, passenger John Myers described the flight as incredibly bumpy and that a crew member had said the turbulence was "extreme." He said:

"A lot of us have been on flights that were bumpy, but that was on another level. Some people were holding hands, and a few people were gripping on tight, there were a few gasps, but no screams."

Inflight catering to a new level

For the uninitiated, Australia's Newcastle is no New York, so finding food and refreshments for more than 200 people in the middle of the night is not an easy task. The report said that, in the early hours of the morning, the flight crew appeared with hamburgers and drinks for passengers sourced from the local McDonalds. Meyers put that into perspective by saying:

"It was lukewarm, and I'm not usually a Maccas fan, but I was hungry and desperate times call for desperate measures. By and large, people kept their cool, and it was good to see that the people at the pointy end weren't treated any differently to people in cattle class."

The 787-9 returned to Sydney on Sunday, with the Flightradar24.com data showing it landed at 10:22. While Qantas has had an unusually high number of turnbacks this month, diverting an aircraft that can't land safely is nowhere near a failure by any airline.

Of course, in situations like these, there are always things that could have been done differently, but overall it is hard to see how Qantas can be criticized for this one.

Hmm...so just for shits and giggles, what if on arrival Williamtown QF28 experienced the same or similar conditions that they experienced in YSSY and were forced to conduct another missed approach? Would they have been placed in a situation where they might have had to consider a controlled (powered ) ditching into Tilligerry creek; or Anna bay?    

MTF...P2