Sunfish - your pitch is quite valid although a few people would be no more if the debris got that far
(let's not mention where the avionics are located)
The extent of the damage to OQA, including the loss of so many essential systems is undeniable testimony to the fact that you just can't isolate 'the engine' as the risk and mitigate it by proclaiming a 'band aid' software patch.
The incident has also identified a number of other risk potentials/flaws in the redundancy fetures of the aircraft's design.
Aside from the sidebar questions about what prior knowledge of the risk that RR/QF & ors., had - the significant questions now relate to the integrity of the "fix".
These questions include:
(journos pls write them down for use at the next AJ stand up)
1. Given the 380's history of software problems - everything from main gear, cabin pressure, to emergency lights, what aceptance (flight) testing and assurance will crew have that the 'patch' will actually work?
2. Will the 'patch' override pilot command? (remember the 330 !!)
3. Will the software be tested in flight inc., in non routine events? - In such circumstances whose cmds are subordinate - pilot or software?
4. Even with a change of the type of seals used, the physical design of the engine remains unchanged, therefore the
actual risk still remains. Will QF abandon it's risk matrix & SMS protocols in order to put the 380's back up?
5. Assuming the current A.D. remains, QF will be self managed in the prescribed checks. Will it be done every 10 cycles, or will it be taken out to the max 20 cycles?...or in the absence of Regulatory oversight, will it slip (as is the QF way) due to operational needs?
(eg., OQF and the tea towel in the door fix last April)
6. Who will carry out the inspections - can RR & QF be trusted to self audit? The pressure to sign out an aircraft is already immense.
7. What is QF's position if further adverse findings are made during an inspection after reinstatement of operations? - will the fleet be immediately grounded or will they roll the dice and hope it is still a 'one off'?
8. The 'rolling reinstatement of ops' that QF internally is running with 72 hour status reviews, suggests that pending RR, QF will seek to return the 380 to ops prior to the ATSB interim report. This raises questions in connection with the effectiveness of the CASA/ATSB joint Regulatory environment.
9. Was told that last week QF advised CC that the soon to be delivered a/c 7, 8 & 9 all have "already received the RR mods and the a/c have been 'tested' and approved?" - When was the mod carrid out?, When was it tested and what was the test methodology? Given the conditions of the current A.D., who has approved it?
It certainly seems that the underscore will be more about trust and integrity - two things that are a little light on at Q these days.
AT
