EK A330 diverts Muscat after fuel leak

[kotakota]

Bit of delay for us landing at Muscat yesterday evening , EK A330 diverted in after fuel leak and engine shutdown . Parked safely , but fuel clearly visible on apron after it did so .

[MATMAX]

fuel leak from where ? under the engine or under the wings ?

[lionoftheleft]

Who cares where the leak is from, the point is that they had a leak and landed without incerdent.
Well done to all crew members :ok:.

[kotakota]

Absolutely , nothing to see , just move along . Just thought I would share the 'non-event' .

[Rwy in Sight]

If the crew were Canadians they would have shut down the engines and landed in their home base.


I know hut coat door.

Rwy in Sight

[Payscale]

Come again?

[goatherd]

Without trying to sound like a prophet of doom I fear we are going to see more and more of this. Not enough engineers, not enough time on the ground and definately flying around with more snags than a few years ago. I have had a few engineers admit to me that they simply cannot do a complete daily check as they are short of bodies with more leaving and none coming this way.:ugh:

[WELCO]

That's very true, goatherd.. This is not new in this part of the world and engineers keep complaining most of the time from the workload.. But as far as I know, just give it a couple of years and the whole region will be flooded with engineers and technicians.. Probably of Bahraini workforce getting EASA qualifications.. The question is would such incidents, although being minor ones, ring any bells to avoid major ones from happening in the future? It's usually a cascade of little tiny things at the end!

Safe flying.

[Oblaaspop]

Welco, I hardly think a fuel leak large enough to require shutting an engine down could be described as a 'minor' incident! Luckily they were surrounded by decent diversion options on this occasion, however had it been 90 mins out of SEZ over the Ocean, then that would have caused a few more parts of the seat cushion to be chewed up through the crews bottoms!!

I agree in general though, that due to lack of 'down time' and not having the correct amount of engineers, we are probably carrying certain defects longer than we should!!

[WELCO]

Oblaaspop, call it a non-event, call it a silly thing while flying, it doesn't matter what you call it really. What matters is if these silly things start to build up from here and there, and you know what might be the results.. It's going to be bad! I assume we all won't be happy to see a thread telling how serious it was the other night for one airliner flying somewhere around!


Good luck.

[B737-700]

it is not the question about the availability of engineers but the question is how many engineers does the company want to employ. as you know every company is run by accountants and they want minimum number of engineers with maximum number of qualifications, hence each engineer has 3 or 4 aircraft coverage and he signs 3 or 4 aircraft types in a single shift on the line. there are no regulatory restrictions as to the number of aircraft approvals that can be exercised by a single engineer and in absence of such regulatory restrictions the companies are trying to run thier maintenence operations with minimum number of engineers

[MATMAX]

"they simply cannot do a complete daily check as they are short of bodies with more leaving and none coming this way.:ugh:".
and you are taking an A/C with a signed release with a check who has not been done ???
and more important , you are aware of it !!!
an ex-ek Engineer ...
brothers Engineers who are still suffering there , do not yeld to the pressure !
rgds.

[White Knight]

and you are taking an A/C with a signed release with a check who has not been done ???
and more important , you are aware of it !!!


No! I only SIGN for the AEROPLANE after the spanner has put his mark in the techlog! After all MAx - it's we who are ultimately responsible for the machine heh? No matter what you like to think:hmm::hmm:

Sorry to all the other folks - that was just a digression because of this french pillock:ok:

[wadefac]

agree .........whitenight......don't like the aircraft ...stand up for yourself and don't accept it.......its your problem not theirs.......problem is no one stands up for them selves.....anywhere in the middle east

[WELCO]

My fellow pilots,

Let's not be so hard on engineers.. I think they are doing their best utilizing all the resources available to them. They will surely be happy to know that more qualified engineers/technicians will give them hand, but it's not their decision anyway. I don't expect the flight crew to double check everything engineers have dealt with, assuming that they can at first place! It might look alright while we are setting in front of EICAM/EICAS and after the walk-around. However, deep inside the guts, there might be few hidden surprises. So we then go back to square one where the managerial level is pushing us all to the limit. I always keep wondering how lucky they are escaping lots of deep holes around them! The bitter sweet reality is that as long as they can escape these, we can too.. Somehow!

[Dessert Aviator]

At GF the pages of ADD's have grown to a cosmic level, in excess of 100+ on the A340's. Instead of getting down to fixing them a madcap scheme of stamping them either red or blue has been initiated, to denote wether they are worth bothering about or not.:mad:

[Le Pen]

Poor Arty,

Life must be so dull for you in your perfect world :}

Your management must be wonderful. :ok:

Good luck mate!

LP

[MATMAX]

to Dear Sir white nightmare (from KKK ?),
i have explained you already that your signature is meaning that you are accepting the A/C.
we , Engineers are signing that YOUR ( or is it the one from the company you are working for ) A/C is serviceable.
it is true , YOU are responsible but i would say of the ops when you are O/B the A/C , we , Engineers are responsible of the technical stuff of the A/C ...
so when a s..t happened during flight or at take-off (do you see what i am talking about) or at landing , who is then responsible ?
and you are so highly paid ... not to double-check and follow procedures !
it is not what i am thinking but only the truth , easy to demonstrate ...
now about " this french pillock " , don't you know that you can be banned from here and please speak with respect to others , mostly to Engineers , Field Reps , Working Parties , etc ... who are putting in your hands a so expensive machine that you fu..ed up so easily , and you are not even able to fix what you have broken !
in which country Toulouse is , prick ?
oh , i was nearly forgetting , the 340 i am just back from get a blank PFR , WC , you know what a PFR is ? with no MEL , no CDL and his registration is starting by F- .... it should be a dream for you ...
LP , Arty is a great joker , the truth of there is completely the opposite !
Arty , i am wishing you , really , all the best , i have been there , so i know how much you are suffering ! Mate , do like me , run-away as the situation there will never improve , do not dream !
Brgds.
MM.

[goatherd]

and you are taking an A/C with a signed release with a check who has not been done ???
and more important , you are aware of it !!!

Ah Matty boy, yet again we have a perfect example of a ppruner jumping to conclusions without taking the typing finger out of gear and getting the brain into gear first!!

Do you honestly think any pilot will take an aircraft he is not happy with? I am merely referring to having a chat to engineers in general and their comments about the state of the engineering and the kind of pressures they are dealing with. If an engineer tells me he did'nt have time to do a thorough daily I will fill in an ASR and get off the aircraft. However, until such a time I will have to accept that the signature in the logbook means it was done correctly.

Hope your team: fares better at the next worldcup, if they make it there....:E