QF engineers in SIAEC are there to vet the cards as they are returned and try and suss out if anything is amiss.
Qantas do not want their LAMES supervising work because that is what they are paying SIAEC to do.
As for SIAEC's bloody crocodile tears in the Australian today, I have never seen such a load of ****e in my life. They contradict themselves.
They have basically accused the Qantas Quality and Risk Auditors of making up the whole story.
These allegations are not new. We've gone through them before, except for the staples, and every single allegation has been proven false not by us but by (the Civil Aviation Safety Authority)If CASA doesn't come out now and make a correction it means they concur with SIAEC and support the facility.
Perhaps CASA are covering their asses because they carried out an inspection of the facility in august 2006 at the same time VH OJQ was getting a dodgy D check and saw nothing but at the same time Qantas QA guys saw all that you are hearing about in the media.
To top it off they then call D.Cox a liar by saying that the staple inciddent didn't happen there and that CASA agrees with them, this is despite Coxs statements in the media that they identified the practice in October and asked SIAEC to stop doing it.
If Cox is correct where was the Quality alert bulletin and the inspections of other aircraft that had been through that facility. Or did he make it up in the face of media pressure. Someone is not telling the truth. It seems that the union is only putting forward the facts and the guilty parties are falling over themselves to refute them.
The bottom line is the DOLLAR. On the part of all three parties, CASA , SIAEC and QANTAS. They all want to make some or save some.
Another quote from SIAEC
"It was audited by 27 aviation authorities, including Europe's EASA and the US Federal Aviation Administration, and underwent 107 audits a year."
Maybe if they sent some higher calibre Quality Auditors such as the guys that did the job for QF then the quality of the place would be better. Obviously the 107 audits that were carried out were similar to the CASA audit in august sept. Does SIAEC really have 2 audits carried out every week, why? QF have had to audit them everytime they send an a/c there because of all the quality issues.
Another quote "But SIAEC said yesterday a thorough review of its maintenance records showed it had carried out no such repairs in the aircraft locations identified by Qantas"
Thats because they were oo busy skimming over the inspections to actually snag anything that needed fixing. i can't believe that they are saying that the EEL never came up during the structural inspections of the sub floor area.
No wonder they could carry out 50 odd hrs of inspections per shift and find no defects.
Ever seen a floor track with no defects? 5 thou is a defect. I bet you'll find them every 32" where a seat has been sitting for years. And where the corrosive galley fluids have been eating away at the forward r/h C zone area.
SIAEC Engineers found no defects on any floor track.
I guess it depends on how close you look, doesn't it?