Originally Posted by
Wycombe
The numbers (as also contained in the doc shared by ETOPS last week) are indeed truly shameful and (sadly) indicate why the Govt was not willing to intervene.
Slightly worrying (for what I would say was considered to be safe/professional operation) that the "return of the aircraft has been “hampered” by the fleet’s not being
in the condition required, the administrators state, with a need for a “significant amount” of asset swaps to restore them", or is that just because nearly all of the a/c
concerned have been sat on the ground for nearly 2 months with the minimum required attention? (with perhaps a few exceptions)
I don't believe it has any reflection on any unsafe practices; it's not worded brilliantly. It's more that engines get swapped around the fleet during their lifespan with an airline and when the aircraft are returned to lessors in an orderly fashion, the correct engines are back on the correct aircraft for the handover. However, with the airline suddenly being grounded overnight - engines are not on the correct aircraft, so need to be swapped before they can be returned to the lessors. A good operation wouldn't ground an aircraft because its engine needed to be sent off for servicing - they'd pop a different engine on and the aircraft returns to service, which is why they're all on different airframes. It's a good way of balancing out hours on airframes and engines in a normal operation and all airlines will do it. Just means there's some work to do to get everything back the way it should be.
If an aircraft is owned by lessor A, they're not going to want their aircraft back with lessor B's engines.