Talk:Qantas Flight 72

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Qantas Flight 72 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Aviation: Accidents

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Qantas Flight 72 is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 12, 2008	Articles for deletion	Deleted
October 16, 2008	Deletion review	Overturned

777 incident

You might compare this earlier incident. LeadSongDog (talk) 17:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added info at Malaysia_Airlines#Accidents_and_incidents (see the 1 August 2005 entry).LeadSongDog (talk) 21:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some revisions at Air Data Inertial Reference Unit that could use some other eyeballs They might be of interest here too.LeadSongDog (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see this article eventually reinstated to mainspace. In the delete discussion, most of the naysayers judged the incident by the number of injuries, considering the article irrelevant because there were no deaths. However, the most significant aspect is the failure of Airbus' computer systems, for whatever reason, and the ramifications it will have on future aircraft design. When more information of this nature is available, and referenced into the article, I think it would then be time for the article to be reinstated.--Lester 04:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another incident

Have a look at NWAA flight 1712, an A320-210 that had an uncommanded excursion at FL370 on 1996-03-16. That flight had no pax aboard, so had a low profile, but airworthiness was questioned. LeadSongDog (talk) 14:24, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also this one April 27, 1995, an Airbus A320-211, N331NW, operated as Northwest Airlines Flight 1142.LeadSongDog (talk) 14:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the 16 March 1996 incident, it would appear at this stage to be unrelated. Refer NTSB docket CHI96IA109 - synopsis | factual (PDF) | probable cause (PDF)

Regarding the 27 April 1995 incident, also looks unrelated. NTSB docket CHI95IA138 - synopsis | factual (PDF) | probable cause (PDF) -- Rob.au (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for looking into it. LeadSongDog (talk) 15:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other ADIRU incidents

This section is getting out of scope of this article and should be moved to Air Data Inertial Reference Unit#Failures and directives Socrates2008 (Talk) 14:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added reference to the Final atsb report

Added some text referencing the final ATSB as a placeholder - can someone fix it up Donated (talk) 03:52, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Data describing the fall

At 12:42:27 the aircraft made a sudden uncommanded pitch down manoeuvre, recording −0.8 g,[note 1] reaching 8.4 degrees pitch down and rapidly descending 650 feet (200 m) in about 20 seconds before the pilots were able to return the aircraft to the assigned cruise flight level.

The descend of 200 m in 20 s can't be true (10 m/s) as -0.8 g is more than free falling. When the plane would free fall with 0.0 g for the passengers in the cabin, that means it is accelerated with 10 m/s² downwards. s = 1/2*a*t² meaning a 20 s free fall will result in a loss of height of 0.5 * 10 m/s² * (20s)² = 2000 m. With -0.8 g the downward acceleration is even more and in theory with I would expect rather a descend of 3600 m. --Gunnar (talk) 17:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the final report by the ATSB, Figure A2: Vertical accelerations (p. 225) it is shown, that the time span with negative g-forces is rather 2 seconds instead of 20 seconds. Table 7: Sequence of events (p. 34) gives the following timeline:

0442:27 0000:00 First pitch-down event commenced
0442:29 0000:02 Minimum vertical acceleration -0.80 g, pitch angle -8.4°
0442:31 0000:04 Maximum vertical acceleration +1.56 g recorded

".. after about 2 seconds the aircraft responded normally and the captain commenced recovery to the assigned altitude. During this 2-second period the aircraft descended about 150 ft. Overall, the aircraft descended 690 ft over 23 seconds before returning to FL370." (p. 3) --Gunnar (talk) 17:57, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Documentary Video

I came here after watching this documentary Video with first hand accounts which seems to be a good source to enhance the information in this article. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Sunday_Night_(Australian_TV_program)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cS1SMptlnQ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.188.53 (talk) 12:55, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely to be a reliable source. MilborneOne (talk) 17:02, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extra information in the "Air Crash" video.

The "analysis" section here says that altitude data was erroneously re-labelled as AOA data. However, in the video, they say that the two items were swapped: that the AOA became altitude and altitude became AOA. Now that in fact makes it a completely different problem; in the sense that a scenario that can explain a single swap is not going to be enough to explain a double swap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:E448:D401:1448:F499:2976:50A0 (talk) 03:35, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the ages of the pilots

what were the ages of the captain, the first officer, and the second officer - be as accurate as you guys can - find reliable sources, plz! Beluga732 (talk) 14:20, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are the flight crew ages relevant? Do you think mature-age pilots perform better/worse than younguns? I can't see the point. WWGB (talk) 14:42, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]