I would normally not grace this rubbish with a reply, but ok, this time you got me.
I will not give any info other than to urge readers to look back at High NR's previous posts reference this company and use that as guidance in deciding whether his posts are truth or just libellous muck raking. This sort of thing does nothing for any of us as professionals (heaps for those with a barrow to push though).
Now, the fact is that this was nothing to do with fuel or anything to do with hydraulics, flight controls or anything nearly as news worthy or dramatic. It was an indication of a potential minor mechanical malfunction that lead the pilot to do as the checklist says, land and have the problem checked. After achieving this and the licensed engineer finding no actual problem, the mission was continued. If there was a problem, the aircraft would have been grounded. If this situation had taken longer than 24 hours, a similar aircraft would have hove into sight to carry on tasking for the client.
So, lets analyse. A piece of safety equipment on the aircraft did its job. The crew took note of it and made a precautionary landing - thus doing their job. The company arranged for a qualified engineer to do his job and check the aircraft. A spare was - as always - ready to take over if required thus allowing this service provider to do its job as per the contract in place. The aircraft was cerified serviceable and returned to its job within four hours.
Can anyone see anything glaringly wrong with this chain of events? Was the client or crew placed in danger, or was the client let down due to non-complience with the contract? Or is this all being written here because the aircraft had an emblem on the tail that some posters feel threatened by and think is a license for slander?
By the way, why exactly was the Canberra based aircraft tasked to work in Sydney's area in the first place? Or is it only ok for the northern blokes to have totaly normal "technical problems"?
I will not reply to any further posts as I know full well that this is now going to further degenerate into slander and untruth. Gymble. Nice try, but anyone who reads your other posts knows you dont represent the organisation in question in any way.