Virgin Blue Maintenance - an Oxymoron????

[Beer Can Dreaming]

Heard from a few engineer mates about Virgin Blue's maintenance prowress.
These guys make the former Ansett engineering look like Gods!!

Yes, Virgin does have more aircraft due for delivery and yes, CASA won't put them on the register until they get their maintenance up to scratch!

Better still......... they were taking VBQ (-700 with winglets) to/from the hangar in Melb the other day and managed to almost entirely remove one of the winglets with the hangar door!!! OOPs!!
Now that VBQ is undergoing some major reconstruction, they have deemed suitable to take all the servicable perts off it and fix(?) the other aircraft.

Now I am told by a reliable source, that when you purchase a brand new 737 from Mr Boeing, he recommends you take a number of spare parts with your new aircraft, apparently around $5 mill per airframe. However, currently Virgin has only $5 mill in total of spare parts for a fleet of 40 aircraft. Work that out?
It all ads fuel to the fire.

On top of that, these same engineers tell me that it takes approx 10-14 days for your discrepency that you write-up in the maintenance log to actually be entered into the maintenance computer at head office.
No wonder they don't have enough spare parts!
Never mind the basic fact that they are currently unable to accurately track aircraft hours as there is only 1 person who enters the aircraft log details, discrepency log history, parts tracking and maintenance!

If the above is indeed only half true then CASA seems justified in either doing a lengthy and thorough audit or curtailing their maintenance organisation with the associated consequences.

As the man says, you get what you pay for!!

[What Red Line?]

Yeah, I got turned down too.

[Keg]

You registered either with a new profile or the first time for that beneficial contribution? :yuk:

Welcome aboard! You'll fit right in with half the others here who shoot the man rather than actually develop some thoughts and/or ideas of your own and just prove them wrong! :bored: :E

[swh]

Beer Can Dreaming,

I hear QF is quite happy with the VB spares logistics management, I understand that the amount of spares that VB orders from QF is sufficent to pay for all of QF's NG spares.

For VB its not such a silly thing either, if you don't have a lot of day to day cash, it makes sense to pay a premimum for parts but not having a lot of tied up capital sitting one the ground. To use your figures, 40 ac x 5 mil, thats either a lot of parts, or a could be more aircraft you could have online to generate revenue or run into hanger doors.

:ok:

[nomorecatering]

While I dont want to go into a slanging match, there are numerous things that make the virgin operation look sloppy.

Aircraft frequently taxiing into the bay with landing flaps still set, or speed brakes not stowed, landing lights/strobes still on. One memorable crew got on blox with all of this happening.

Latest rumour going around is involving an engine mount(someting about it having to be removed) and lost paperwork, CASA threatening to ground the fleet as the lost paperwork tells them which a/c its on.

Ground crew (rampies) have started to develop an attitude that make the Qantas guys look modest in comparison. They think they own the whole damn airport.

[Dehavillanddriver]

nomorecatering, you are full of it.

i have seen plenty of QF aircraft with strobes etc still on while on blox.

I have also seen stairs driven up to QF aircraft with the beacon still on....'

people make mistakes on the odd occasion, but certainly noy as often as you seem to believe

[Z Force]

These aircraft one day will have to go undergo heavy manintenance which is big dollars. And has the big V allowed for this???

[swh]

Z force,

Depends on how they do their fleet planning, they might do what the goverment and corporations do with cars, get rid of them before they need the real heavy stuff done with them and just run a young fleet, costs more in terms of aircraft replacement, but you dont have the overheads associated with real heavy maintenance and the number of spare uned on young aircraft is less, need less day to day TLC

I have nothing to base this on, just some thoughts

[Capt Claret]

can't comment on most of your post because I don't have any information.

I would suggest however, that had VB not dammaged an aircraft moving it in or out of a hangar, they'd almost be the only aircraft operator in the world not to have done so.

[Dehavillanddriver]

is a winglet easier to replace than half a fin?

I suppose the QF engineers in Canberra should know!

[Keg]

Easier to replace than a husband/father/brother who has been zapped when plugged into or unloading an aircraft in a thunderstorm.

I mean seriously, do we really WANT to do this? :rolleyes:

All organisations have problems. Criticisms can be opportunities for learning. You have to admit that even by PPRUNE standards, DJ cops a bit of stick over their engineering processes- almost as much as QF do for having pilots who think they're God's gift to aviation! ;) Whether it is true or not is another matter entirely. Even if 1/10th of it is true though.... :eek: ;)

One of the DJ guys may be able to answer the questions specifically raised initially. When were the next aircraft scheduled for delivery? Are they arriving on time? Does there appear to be a delay in entering the tech log entries in the mainenance system? (I know that QF can be up to a day behind for the notices to crew that get sent to dipatch!) I'm not having a dig, just trying to give the DJ crews a chance to respond specifically to issues that BCD raised rather than get into yet another DJ vs QF slanging match!

[Dehavillanddriver]

keg,

not sure what you are driving at with regards getting zapped in a storm - the DJ blokes go out at the same time as the QF blokes when a storm warning is received from BoM - I spent a good 45 minutes the other night waiting for BoM to cancel the warning -
seeing as you can get zapped from 30 odd miles it seems a little strange at times!

with regards delays in getting things entered into the maintenance system - I am not sure... the defects/deferrals are entered in the log onboard immediately and appear within a few hours on a web based status system operated by maintenance watch, it is dependent upon the engineer faxing a copy of the paperwork to maintenance watch - if he is busy with a couple of aircraft it may take a few hours to fax the sheets off...

as for the maintenance system not sure how long it takes - none of the pilots see that bit so whilst you may get some answers the truth is that we wouldn't know.

i thought virgin were in a spares pool operated by boeing that shifts the majority of the spares holding to a third party - but am not sure about that.

i wouldn't be too surprised if a lot of the critics are driven by the fact that the engineering workforce is basically contracted to third parties

[HotDog]

The reason Virgin doesn't get involved in a slanging match like this one on PPrune is exactly the same why Qantas ignores all the barbs thrown in their direction. Third hand stories gleaned from a mate in a pub are rarely a good basis for an informed opinion for an outsider.

[What Red Line?]

Keg

Good to see you think my post was beneficial. BCD was carrying on a bit all over something he heard in the pub for Christ's sake. By your figures, at least half the rooners think he's a bit off.



HotDog

Good one mate.

[Z Force]

Unfortunately it is true about CASA not allowing them to operate more aircraft until their system is sorted out.

[ER2nd.]

Beer Can Dreaming wrote... Better still......... they were taking VBQ (-700 with winglets) to/from the hangar in Melb the other day and managed to almost entirely remove one of the winglets with the hangar door!!! OOPs!!Now that VBQ is undergoing some major reconstruction, they have deemed suitable to take all the servicable perts off it and fix(?) the other aircraft.


I heard it this way...
1. Wasn't it the staging it colided with - not the hangar door?
2. Collision not realy blameable on the Engineers concerned. Either the hangar moved or it was managements fault - I think I know what the answer will be to that one.
3. It didn't do all that much damage (visually that is) to the winglet. Grazed one side of the vertical face and thereby exposed the subsurface. Probably will cost a bit for the patch (by HdH) though.
4. Sign going up on hangar door shortly will be "Pick-a-Part" as borrowing from dead a/c is tending to become a much loved (by DJ that is) piece of entertainment. QF are pretty expert at this practice too, though their a/c are usually in their hangar for longer so it doesn't cause too much interuption to their a/c (parts removed from) in maintenance schedule. Also QF do it as a last resort...!
5. Virgin people are sworn to secrecy (or be shot at dawn) and forbibben from saying anything - that is the domain of those nice people in PR

[737opsguy]

Keg,

Dehavillanddriver is on the money. Once a defect gets written up it gets phoned then faxed through to maintenance watch. From here it is entered into a status report which all of the engineers and pilots can access in real time.

At the same time it gets electronically scanned or faxed directly to the engineering records guys. They have a team doing shift work who enter all of the aircraft logs, discrepancies and part changes. Each day they do the previous days information so the input time usually about 24 hours. I know they send out a "hit-list" every night to all the ports detailing what reports someone has forgotten to send through. The engineers in the applicable port have to get the aircraft copy, copy it and fax it through. It seems that they have a pretty good system setup for ensuring all of the information gets put into the computer system.

I beleive that the next aircraft (VH-VOU) has been in Christchurch and is being flown to Melbourne either today or tomorrow. The next one out of the factory is actually going to Pacific Blue and is ZK-PBC I think.

[Keg]

DHD, was wandering through terminal picking up relatives one night and was surprised to observe the lightening bizzo. Phoned a mate at the QF ramp and they'd been closed for about 20 minutes and were closed for 20 after. Unlike NG, I'm prepared to back my statements up! ;) But enough of that crap! :D

Thanks for the other info lads. It certainly takes a bit of the steam out of the critics when decent info is posted rather than just playing the man.

[Dehavillanddriver]

Hi Keg,

Which city?

I know in Brisbane they all go out at the same time - and go back as soon as they get an all clear from BoM

[Keg]

SYD. This was about middish December I think?!?!

[Beer Can Dreaming]

What Red Line.

This so called thread was confirmed by three engineers that were less than pleased with the current systems in place and not pub talk.
As for maintenance paperwork system one engineer (concerned not to be identified for obvious reprisals) suggested talking to maintenance control to confirm their procedures and inefficiencies in paperwork.

All in all this has resulted in two of the three engineers lodgeing CAIR reports as they are fed up with the system and feel safety is being compromised.

[Groaner]

Boeing may well say $5m in spares is recommended. No operator in their right mind would have that amount of spares per aircraft.

Try around $1m in spares for a single 73 - there aren't many places on the planet you can't arrange a loan at short notice for a 73 part (and at worst, just cop the AOG and fly the part in). And if you have a reasonable-size fleet, no need to have even $1m per A/C.

Don't forget, Boeing sell parts and make money from them. So their recommendations in this area should be taken with a pinch of salt. Economics dictates taking a bit of downtime or copping loan charges rather than having lots of little-used, expensive spares sitting around not doing much.

[mainwheel]

Valid point.

What is required as minimum though?. And at which ports of call. What are the comparative factors for the price of a rotable component, general spares, tooling etc when it's needed against the delay cost.

An aircraft swap isn't a big delay but the punters may not come back. And then theres the 10 to 3 factor of the number of people tell others of a bad to a good flight experience.
Worst scenario is putting up all pax for a night. Whats that cost?.

Experience, not accounting, would say having the right gear and people inplace works far more efficiently.

If you pulled up to a servo and were told the pumps knackered and waiting for it to be fixed, wouldn't you find somewhere else and never go back?. Both garages charging same price.

[gaunty]

Groaner

Don't forget, Boeing sell parts and make money from them. So their recommendations in this area should be taken with a pinch of salt. Economics dictates taking a bit of downtime or copping loan charges rather than having lots of little-used, expensive spares sitting around not doing much.

?? Boeing actually sell aircraft and wont continue to sell a shedload of them if they don't work when they are supposed to or they get trashed by the operator.

An operator in his right mind will have or have access to something like they, Boeing, suggest at the peril of their continued existence.

Sure the aircraft will survive on its reputation for a very good while, but sooner than later you are going to have to replace something somewhere and usually out the back of Bourke.

If I was the regulator I would be scruting mightily with an very intense scrute. (apologies to Messrs Milligan and Bentine)

The scary bit is, that when you are bumping along the bottom of an "economic" spares inventory, the risk that 'someone' out there will sign off on or turn a blind eye to "'till it gets back to base so they can rat the part up from somewhere" on a dodgy part out of loyalty 'for the company" goes assymptotic and you will get set up for a expense that makes Boeing's $5,000,000 look like lunch money.

Chances are, if you cant afford a sensible spares package and need to run the aircraft on its reputation to make money, then you probably didn't have a business in the first place.

Consuming capital or parts amounts to the same thing at the end of the day.

[ER2nd.]

...the real point is they (DJ) don't carry enough of the 'right' spares and furthermore they don't have the spares they do have in the right places. I'm told the guys in the other ports get a bit peeved at nearly always seeing the bit they want as "n/r" on the system or the entire stock is in Brisbane - and then a geat pile of 'xyz' at that. Instead of responding to a problem when it exists, why not try a bit of anticipation. The probability of failure/breakdown/life expired/etc is after all why Boeing (etc) suggest, to buyers of their products, a spares float consisting of xyz. Their (Boeing etc) figures are based on worldwide fleet experiences and data from ventors of the OEM - be that an actuator, hose or screw etc. I am lead to believe that the way DJ look at spares requirements is more on 'how much does it cost' than any other data considerations or the ramifications of not having it. Sadly, Initial Provisioning is an art form which DJ have yet to appreciate.... and try to catch up on.

[Groaner]

Gaunty, ER and mainwheel, agree with you all (as far as it goes - I am in no position to know whether DJ has the right spares inventory)

Certainly an aircraft operation should have a minimum of spares - but 5 bars worth is too much. At commercial spares lease rates that would cost you around $75k each and every month - plus the usage of them of course. Whether the $75k is worth paying is dependent on what not having such spares would cost - a very complex calculation dependent on many things, including failure probabilities, reputation costs, recovery costs, how tight the fleet plan is (spare A/C), maintenance turn times and capacity, direct delay costs etc etc.

In my experience, having lots of spares is a false panacea - Murphy's law always strikes, and the one vital part you actually need is not even in the $5m parcel, or else is not in the place it's needed.

Far more important (imho) is to have access arrangements to spares pools (rather than holding them yourself) at major ports on your network. The access costs are usually pretty cheap (even if the actual loan charges are not). And no reason why this shouldn't get by an intense scrute.

It's all part of the art of inventory management - not a simple thing at all. To use mainwheel's example in a different way, how many servos do you think carry a spare pump? I'd guess maybe close to zero. I'd also guess that most carry almost no pump spare parts at all - effectively on-condition repair.

I'll still stick with my assertion that a good clean (reputable, reasonable dispatch reliability up above say 98%) 737 operation can be had with a little over $1m spares holding. DJ with its fleet should have a multiple of that, but certainly nowhere near $5m per tail.

[TIMMEEEE]

Gaunty, have to agree with you about a serious lack of spares possibly pressuring engineers to sign off or turn a blind eye.No company is immune from that.

I also agree that $5m per frame is on the rich side but lets face it, the parts that are used the most frequently should be kept in good supply.
(ie: Tyres/Starter Motors/Generators/GCU's/Hydraulic
components/Lamps and globes (landing and other lights etc) rather than those things which have a long shelf life such as IRS's etc.

Also it gets sad when the bean counters get involved and actually sell parts from store inventories to improve the bottom line and make the books look better.
I remember Air New Zealand doing this with Ansett with obvious consequences and little forethought as to the expense when an aircraft is grounded in Perth for a few days waiting for a spare from god-knows where.

One day a B737 was grounded in Darwin because of a sheared starter motor and the nearest part was in Auckland.
Great sheep-shagger mentality there guys!!

Bean counters - take note.

[ER2nd.]

TIMMEEEE
TN/QF had been doing that for years too. Many examples where parts were 'sold' to their disposal agent in the States, only for QF to buy some back - even before they'd got there!
Ah.... Bean Counters. Don't you just love 'em....next to ATO monsters, Bank Managers and murderers.....