VB explains Nationwide demise

[Selfloader]

The Businees Day has a wide-ranging interview
today on the failure of NW. Makes for interesting reading. Go to
http://www.businessday.co.za/article...?ID=BD4A781519

[very old flyer]

Nationwide: Where the fault lies!

For all VB's faults, I must agree with him in pinpointing the blame on the CAA. He puts it quite mildly, I think. They were totally out of line in what they did, and basically destroyed Nationwide.

They are (the CAA) in fact South African aviation's equivalent of ESKOM and the Department of Home Affairs rolled into one!

[777Contrail]

Bull!

The airline failed because VB is a failure.

He is one of the poorest examples of a human I've EVER had the displeasure of doing business with.

He's a chancer and tried to take some more shortcuts, the grounding was as result of NON COMPLIANCE with a previous audit, after which a serious technical incident followed. The CAA did what it was suposed to do.

[boertjie]

Go and look at avcom.

Certain guy at caa warn VB that he will close it in year!
Can believe it,it is Africa!

Just remember some CAA guys we pay there salaries on all our payments!

SA just lost more good pilots what can fly!

[Shrike200]

Originally Posted by 777Contrail

He's a chancer and tried to take some more shortcuts, the grounding was as result of NON COMPLIANCE with a previous audit, after which a serious technical incident followed. The CAA did what it was suposed to do.

That's the point actually, they didn't, at least not competently. As I understand it, the airline did not feel that any kind of licence would be revoked due to what seemed to be less serious (specifics needed, I still want to know precisely what happened during that audit) non-compliances resulting from that initial audit. Indeed, no threat of grounding or removal of any kind of licence was mentioned, up until the actual removal of the AMO licence. The grounding itself was also handled in a malicious fashion, coming out of the blue on a Friday afternoon, at the beginning of a school holiday if memory serves, making any follow up action very difficult, and was also communicated to ACSA before Nationwide.

Logically, any airline that knows it faces something so serious should have a) ample warning that such stern action is to be taken (due process), and b) would almost certainly bend over backwards to prevent it happening by rectifying any faults. Your (and almost everyone else's, mine included) personal animosity to VB shouldn't let you lose sight of the fact that this whole event was handled badly by the CAA, IMHO. Imagine - you're flying for your particular airline (SAA, Comair, etc). You hear that the AMO is being audited by the CAA. Two weeks later, chatting to an engineer, you ask how it went. 'Ah, ok, a couple of typo's in some logbooks, some guys don't have the correct paperwork for their qualifications, that sort of stuff, but fine'. A week later, you come to work, and lo and behold, your airline is shut down. It's unpleasant. 'Due process' is the term I'm looking for, ie a documented chain of events should precede something like this, as opposed to just sudden harsh actions 'because we (the CAA) say so'.

And by saying that 'a serious technical incident followed' (it was an accident actually) you imply that the grounding due to non-compliance was related. It wasn't. No grounding (unless all B732's were never allowed to fly again), or further paperwork exercises (since that was what the CAA was concerned with) would have stopped that engine from separating.

[Flyer14]

I personally believe the CAA boys were trying impress the FAA as well. As it was around the time the FAA's report on the CAA was due out.

[WhinerLiner]

By taking such drastic action the CAA effectively admitted that there had been no adequate oversight previously. If the CAA had been doing its job then shortcomings would have been noticed and addressed much earlier. Simply put, if Nationwide was as bad as the CAA say they were then why did they not notice before the engine seperation.

This is not the first time the CAA has tried to help its ailing reputation by fighting its misguided battle in the media. I think its particularly disgusting how the spokeswoman expressed personal opinions about the airline on prime time news.

The problem is the CAA has a core of vendictive losers that will take any/every opportunity to cause harm. Like Jeff, the ex speedcop, who thinks he's well balanced because he's got a chip on both shoulders. The list goes on.....

I don't know VB and by all accounts he's not a nice man. But nice isn't required and considering how he took on the likes of SAA, dirty tricks and all, for all those years I would say it was a very respectable effort.

I support his cause to expose the CAA as the collection of incompetent, vendictive people they really are. Hope he drags SAA into it next.

[Jamex]

Boertjie wrote; Certain guy at caa warn VB that he will close it in year!
Can believe it,it is Africa!

Have to agree there is something to this statement as I have met an individual from the SACAA who has stated on more than one occasion that he intends closing down all the smaller AMO's in SA. He only wants the "big boys" in business(he's words, not mine) The South African Campaign Against Aviation closed down VB's AMO forcing him to make use of Safairs expensive services and this allied to record high fuel prices must surely have played a major part in Nationwides demise.

[Morphieus]

I do stand to be corrected but I have also heard from Nationwide's engineers that after SAFAIR released the aircraft back into service nothing significant was found on any of NTW's aircraft that warranted grounding them outright in the first place.
If that is in fact true then that would in my opinion prove that the whole grounding was a bit of a knee jerk reaction on CAA's part. Fact is that none of the aircraft where in perfect condition when they left SAFAIR's hangar, still plenty of snags and defered items. Most NTW pilots will tell you that generally the condition of the aircraft was not any better, if not poorer after the grounding than before it. Whats the point of forcing NTW to outsource its maintenance then?

I do think there was some political motive to shut NTW down. Whatever was wrong could've been fixed. Guess we'll never know.

[lvdriver]

There is no doubt the CAA shutting down Nationwide harmed the long term welfare of the business, however if one looks at the fleet with its relaince on the 737 200 (and coupled to their low fare positioning in the domestic market) then its seems pretty clear the fuel price would have got them in the end anyway- it may have just taken a while longer.

VB was a shark and in the end the chickens came home to roost, unfortunitely too many good people had to suffer in the process

[Coleman Myers]

Sa Caa

There is no doubt the SA CAA had to act after the serious incident but I cannot help thinking that SAA et al were not somewhere in teh background turning the knife. At a time when all airlines are grappling with spiraling costs the last thing we need is a retrun to the 3500 rand tickets to Durban. Competition is good, but not at the expense of safety ..

[Shrike200]

Lets not let this descend into another 'SAA conspiracy theory'. It's simply not likely, and of course there's no actual evidence.

[WhinerLiner]

Other than the inalienable and inconvenient truth that they spend taxpayers money (and lots of it) competing against private enterprise.

[Ibhayi]

I know this may be libel and will most probably be deleted.

All do your self a favour and ask a Nationwide pilot. Many of them were told to not report snags. A dude would come up and say, it was so much paperwork etc etc why don't u just tell a mechanic and he will sort it out.

VB was the kinda guy that you gave a wide berth to, you would shake his hand then count your fingers.

[Lifes-a-Beech]

I am so sick and tired of everyone always pointing a finger in this industry. Really Ibhayi - pilots are big boys too and they are forever telling everyone one that - they know the difference between right and wrong and ultimately its their choice whether they fly or not (or report a fault or not). To say that the operater MADE them do it, is completely ridiculous - no one can make anyone do something - pilots always have a choice. Granted, it may not be a choice that they like, but they still have a choice. What they choose to do depends on their own morals, principles and ethics.

I do not know VB and being relatively new to the industry, I obviously just hear the stories, however what I do know is that to run any aircraft company takes balls, sweat, guts and major stress - and yes, they do it by choice, but thank heavens they do, otherwise the rest of us would all be out of a job. I however have no ambition to be an operator - I'll stick to flying thanks.

[Shrike200]

Originally Posted by Ibhayi

All do your self a favour and ask a Nationwide pilot. Many of them were told to not report snags. A dude would come up and say, it was so much paperwork etc etc why don't u just tell a mechanic and he will sort it out.

I have asked them actually. They say you're completely and utterly wrong. They actually loved snagging the c*** out of the planes - they wanted new ones.

[LittleMo]

Shrike is correct: we snagged everything as we were the guys who had to fly the things at the end of the day. BUT, what happened after that VB controlled. Engineers often just moved snags around the fleet or the age old "ground tested and found servicable" tag would appear next to a snag in the tech log.

Bottom line was money wasn't spent on maintenance and the poor old engineers did what they could to keep the planes flying and "legal" under tremedous pressure from Vermin and his henchmen. I' sure if the budget was there, the maintanence would have been up to scratch, but as te engineers would say "we don't have a spare/there isn't money for that."

If the planes were as up to date as VB claimed, why did it take so long for all the a/c to be released from SAFAIR? ZS-OVG still hadn't been declared fit by the time the NW ship sunk. Apparently something to do with the undercart.

Also what VB failed to say in the his interview with the papers is that yes the cone bolts all had serial numbers etc BUT they had never, yes never, been NDT'd in their service history with NW. That is fact. Also the cradle that held flight 723's engine on had a fatigue crack in it. Whether or not it was mandatory to NDT/X-ray the cradles of those engines I don't know but I believe a crack should have been picked up somehwere in the continuous maintanence proccess.

I agree that the CAA may have handled the whole thing badly and perhaps there were knives out for Nationwide and VB but as the old saying goes, where there is smoke there is fire.

[evanb]

Metal fatigue is not an accident ... it is a failure that results from human error since it is something that takes years to develop. The failure is/was preventable and VB must take responsibility for it. I am sure if the same problems with maintenance came up with any other carrier the CAA would react in the same way.

[Shrike200]

The CAA have, I believe, claimed that the grounding was not the result of the engine separation. It certainly helped justify it in the minds of people though.

Ultimately, I believe the CAA failed (quite badly IMHO) in their oversight role, which allowed VB to operate as he saw fit. It was a case of 'Too much, too late'. The crews and engineers did the best they could with what they had.

[evanb]

The grounding had nothing to do with the engine separation but both the grounding and the engine separation were a result of the same cause ... poor maintenance which ultimately VB is responsible! Had the CAA been working as they should the grounding should have come before the incident, thus preventing it all together!