Here's a story from yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald about a cover-up by senior QF management and editing reports by engineers.
This is just a snippet:
SENIOR management at Qantas have been accused of covering up a serious maintenance flaw on a Boeing 747-400 by pressuring an engineer to change his finding that a crack in the jet's frame had been painted over.
The original safety report, completed after a check on the aircraft at Qantas's heavy maintenance base at Melbourne's Avalon Airport in May, and obtained by the Herald, shows that an engineer found a crack that "appears to have been previously covered over with sealant and paint".
The airline investigated the matter and found the report had been altered but that this was "acceptable practice" because it found "no evidence" the crack had been painted over.
"The fact that the management requested the information to be changed in a Qantas Engineering report is an acceptable practice and the prerogative of management," the report says.
The airline's head of engineering and maintenance, David Cox, said in a statement yesterday there was "no issue". "We are more than confident in our processes and run an open and transparent operation. It is a shame that some people are not able to abide by the umpire's decision."
However, engineers from the Avalon base are adamant that the crack had been painted over.
"The part should have been quarantined until a proper investigation into the painting over took place, but that didn't happen. It basically sat in the manager's office," a Qantas engineer, who asked not to be named, told the Herald.
A spokesman for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority said it was not clear "whether the crack had developed underneath the paint or whether it was painted over".
I would not expect an internal investigation to be unfavourable toward QANTAS management, and I wouldn't expect CASA to be any better.
One would have thought that if a crack "developed" underneath the paint, the paint/sealant above it would be cracked. If the paint is not cracked/damaged, then this would most likely indicate that it has been painted over or "covered up" as the article suggests. Typical of CASA to be not clear about this issue, as it may jeapordise QF's business. I guess passenger and the general public safety is nothing to worry about, and the pesky engineers should not be bothering management with problems ageing aircraft. This may cloud the arrival of the A380 and and dampen the toss session that will take place with all of the office staff oohhing and aahhing at the big aeroplane arriving at SYD later this morning.
Anyway, to anyone who's interested in the article, here's the link:
Qantas accused of safety cover-up - Travel - smh.com.au