Capt Refuses To Fly 'unsafe' Onur Air A321!!!

[JanetFlight]

Passengers on an airliner bound for Bristol were plunged into panic when their captain refused to fly them home, telling them the aircraft was unsafe. Evening Post readers on board the flight from Antalya in Turkey say a "mini-riot" broke out after the pilot walked into the cabin and made his dramatic announcement, then walked off the plane.:confused:
The aircraft, operated by Turkish budget airline Onur Air, was waiting for clearance to take-off.
About 180 passengers are understood to have been aboard the Airbus A321 for 30 minutes in stifling heat, as the air-conditioning was not working.:rolleyes:
Full article here»»»
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=145365&command=displayContent&sourceNode=145191&contentPK=15434133&folderPk=83726&pNodeId=144922
Cheers:p

[Ultralights]

a mini riot? amongst the PAX? if i was on that flight, i would have praised the captain for refusing to put our lives at risk!

[MrBernoulli]

Ultralights,

Unfortunately the pax, in general, who frequent holidays that involve somewhat low,low, low cost travel are more interested in getting home (I don't suppose the heat was too pleasant, either) than being safe. Only those involved in aviation, particularly commercial, will understand just how brave a decision like this can be.

[FCS Explorer]

thumbs up for the brave CP.:ok:
takes a lot of balls to lean up against a company, especially in a place like turkey.

[Lon More]

Well done that man.
In May 2005 they were banned from landing in several European countries for a month after a number of airworthiness related problems were discovered.
The ban was lifted 12 days later after the problems had been addressed

[MD11Engineer]

Just the opinion of a ground engineer.
I would really like to know what was at fault on this plane. I have occasionally had pilots who refused to accept an aircraft even though I raised a HIL in accordance with the MEL and all applicable procedures, so that from a maintenance point and operational point of view the plane was servicable and legal to fly, because the pilot's opinion did not agree with the approved proceedures. In this case I usually let the chief pilot deal with the ensuing delay, means I will not accept it as maintence delay.
I also had occasional pilots who wanted to tell me how to troubleshoot and repair a problem and in one case refused to accept an airplane because the fault turned out to be caused by some other reason than the pilot imagined (on a B727 a low pressure light illuminated on a center tank boost pump, but only at high altitude. We traced it back to some water in the line connecting the pump output to the pressure switch, installed on the L/H front spar, which would freeze at high altitude and cut off the switch from pump pressure, thus erronously giving a false low pressure indication. The captain insisted that something must block the pump inlet, which to inspect would mean to enter the center tank, which is a major task and not easily doable on the ramp. He refused to accept the plane until we had entered the tank, giving a huge delay).

On the other hand I know from reliable sources in Turkey that there exist black lists for engineers and an engineer who grounds aircraft, no matter how justified, might find himself fired, with no chance ever finding a job again. I have seen Turkish engineers performing improvised, illegal, maintenance, just to meet the departure time, because the boss wouldn't let them get a spare part from another carrier abroad, due to cost reasons.

Jan

Jan

[Boeing Pilot]

Well done. He's my hero now. Couldn't have resigned in a better way myself.

[Piltdown Man]

I wonder what the real story is? Frankly, I'm a bit brassed off when I read quotations from well informed, highly educated (in technical and aviation matters amongst others) and sober "Sun Readers" telling the World about how unsafe an aircraft is, who said what and how they all saved the day! Reporting of matters aviation also leaves a lot to be desired, especially in Britain. I also wonder if there was something lost in translation. Onur Air doesn't have a good reputation in Europe but getting off before your pax, if this is true, is not really acceptable no matter what the reason and somewhat undoes the good of not flying a broken aircraft.

PM

[B2N2]

Piltdown man this may have something to do with it;
The captain, who is thought to be German

But kidding aside, he must have been completely fed up with this company already.
If memory serves me right Onur Air has been banned and readmitted several times in the last couple of years.

[Strepsils]

MD11Engineer - Just because the MEL says the fault is legally acceptable doesn't mean it's always sensible or practical to depart with it.

The MEL is exactly that, the exact MINIMUM you can LEGALLY depart with. I don't see the word SAFE in there anywhere.

That's why we're paid to make decisions. Work with us, we're not trying to ruin your day by refusing defects, we're making sure ours doesn't go horribly wrong:ok:

[Flying Mech]

Passengers on an airliner bound for Bristol were plunged into panic when their captain refused to fly them home, telling them the aircraft was unsafe. Evening Post readers on board the flight from Antalya in Turkey say a "mini-riot" broke out after the pilot walked into the cabin and made his dramatic announcement, then walked off the plane
The Skipper may have been right, we don't know, but the reality of the situation is the only job this guy will ever get in turkey again is in a kebab shop. Somebody said he was german,. he must be pretty hard up for work to be flying for Onur Air. I can't imagine them paying their crews top dollar!

[Artificial Horizon]

Also the limitations that I find with the MEL is that sometimes although allowable in the book it doesn't take into account other failures or ADD's on the aircraft. I had an aircraft the other day where the APU was u/s and in line with the MEL was allowed to fly, on looking through the tech log though it became apparent that the generator on number one engine was not reliable, several reports of it dropping offline although the mighty engineers had checked it to be satisfactory on the ground. No matter how much the engineer thinks that I should accept an aircraft which could leave me with only one reliable generator doesn't mean that I will. When an engine fails and then the unreliable gen goes offline aswell he won't be the one sitting in the dark wishing that I had the APU as a backup.

[Piltdown Man]

And for the record, something lost in translation meant that the Captain may have translated in verbatim what he was thinking and expressed this to the passengers. But when the Sun readers heard, they started to blub and panic, not realising that this was only one possible way of expalining the problem. Try asking a lawyer what the time is!

PM.

[PAXboy]

... Passengers on an airliner bound for Bristol were plunged into panic when their captain refused ...Let us hope that they quickly realised that he had avoided them plunging into the ground and so they then plunged into delight and acclimation. :p

The children in the press do like to use the word 'plunge' don't they? Here is a situation that might engender some irritation but the overwhelming feeling must have been of relief that the Cpt was concerned enough to make a stand - almost certainly knowing the risk he was running of it back-firing on him.

Of course, if he had accepted the machine then he might have been in the situation of 'bravely avoiding plunging into a school'. :}

[777fly]

JanetFlight,

Just what was the point of your post about this A321 problem? Surely this was simply a case of a Captain taking the trouble to personally inform the passengers of a problem. This is usually very well received, reassuring and very effective.

Your post is full of typical media hype:

Passengers 'plunged into panic'? Surely they were just very concerned that there would be a delay!

The Captain ' refused to fly'? He had to wait until the defect was rectified

Captain 'walked off' the airplane? Perhaps he went to help sort the problem?

'Mini-riot'? Probably just vociferous concerns about potential delay, alternative arrangements,etc,etc?

Aircraft 'awaiting clearance to takeoff'?? How did the Captain 'walk off' then? Clearance to takeoff is only given at the runway. This must have been a technical problem while still on the ramp.

'Evening Post readers' ?? I suspect that this is a backwater local paper seeking a sensationalist headline. Maybe there was a cub reporter aboard this particular flight?

Go away and learn something about professional aviation and keep your sensationalist and trivial posts off this professional forum.

[JanetFlight]

Hi 777Fly:)
I only repost here a mail i just received yesterday...i wasn't affirming anything!
It was post in a Rumours room...it wasn't to offend or said anything bad about anyone in particular:bored:
Cheers;)
PS: And its not very polite at all saying such words as "Go away and learn something about professional aviation..."!!!
You dont know me at all to say such thing, me thinks...You could be a 777 F/O at HVN and i could be a mere Cpt at new DTA 777!!!???

[lexxity]

I think Janet was right to post the story, yes it has had the media "hype" done to it, but it is a very interesting case all the same.

Reading between the lines, I think this "incident" was the straw that broke the pilots back. Good luck to him in the future, he looks like he's going to need it.

[777fly]

OK, but rebroadcasting sensationalist stories is not a good idea.

[JanetFlight]

Ok 777Fly...No worries...friends again;)

[Tigs2]

777Fly

I really dont see your problem. There are hundreds of threads on these forums that start by somebody posting a piece of press, to try and find out from those that may be better informed. Maybe people post them to find out if they are just rumours!

[woodpecker]

MD11Engineer suggests..." In this case I usually let the chief pilot deal with the ensuing delay, means I will not accept it as maintenance delay"

Perhaps you are the plonker who suggested that I should take a 757 to a snowy Moscow a few winters ago with no APU. I refused, even though it was acceptable in the MEL.

The reason? Deicing at Moscow is carried out after pushback and before engine start. The Ground Power and Air Start were only available on the stand. The idea that we should pushback with a full load of passengers with just the battery bus powered, de-ice and then pull back onto the stand for engine start was totally unacceptable. That would have taken about 25 minutes, would the battery have lasted that long?

It may be in the MEL but in the end of the day it's up to the Captain.

[LatviaCalling]

Sometimes we bash the press deservedly, and sometimes undeservedly. However, thanks to the rag that published this episode of the captain refusing to fly the aircraft in it its condition, we have at least gained information on which to comment on.
There are good aviation writers and then there are "cubs" or those who know nothing about an airplane. Still, we have to throw out the "I thought we were going to die!" explatives and look to see if the story has at least some meat in it instead of pure puff.
In this case, apparently there was some meat and that is why the original posting was legitimate and received some informed responses.

[LH2]

From the article:
the captain, clad in a navy-blue blazer and cap, suddenly came out of the cockpit and stood in the gangway, announcing that he was going to resign.

Now that's what I call resigning in style :} :p

[Nerik]

He resigned with hONoUR!

[cwatters]

OK, but rebroadcasting sensationalist stories is not a good idea.

Got any links to a version that's not been given "the treatment"?

[Filler Dent]

It is an MEL and therefore it is legal to go. However the Captain has final say in it, not the Chief Pilot, the engineer or the FO.


And what if the Engineer isn't happy with the aircraft? Surely your not saying a Captain would over rule an engineer if he thought the fault should be rectified?

[Skywards747]

A story I have heard long time ago.
Pax: Why are we delayed?
Gate Agent : The Captain decided that the aircraft is unsafe and refusing to fly.
Pax: So we are waiting for an another plane ?
Gate Agent : No, No , we are waiting for an another Captain.

[puddle-jumper2]

Filler Dent,

I have only had one event in 20 odd years of commercial flying where I said I was happy to fly it and the engineer said he wasn't happy for me to fly it.:D

I was more than happy to step aside and except his advise, as it happens he was one of the best engineers I have ever come across.

Just a shame it doesn't happen very often !

[Filler Dent]

Personally I think also it’s an unusual occurrence as well. I’ve only found myself in that situation a few times also.

It’s worth pointing out however that some items in the MEL are ambiguous at best and need careful consideration.

The Technical consideration of the aircraft is up to the engineer though, in liaison with the operating crew we should collectively decide upon the correct course of action between us.

Your destination, duty hours, on route WX etc. are all factors to be to take into account.
Mostly I think this happens, certainly in Sussex anyway.

Management expect us to work to the maximum allowable limits of the MEL, fortunately it's very rare that in BA excessive pressure is applied to take a less than serviceable aircraft is it not?

[theresalwaysone]

None of you have commented on the lack of professionalism of commander who just walks off the aircraft.

Presumably after an aircraft crashes it is unservicable, so does the captain just walk off the aircraft?

By all means refuse to fly an unservicable aircraft but do continue in the role you are being paid for until the passengers have left or you are at the end of your duty hours.

It is shame that a lot of commanders do not really understand their complete responsibilty to the people who actually pay their wages!

[Tigs2]

theresalwaysone
The thing is we don't know all the details. There is absolutley nothing wrong with the Captain saying to the first officer 'ok you have control, look after the pax, i am going to find a land line and sort this mess out', then leaving the aircraft. This does not mean he is derilict in his duties. That situation has certainly happened before.

[tuyanir]

I don?t know which one is better,
- leave a/c and just go home and let the poor pax to fly with an other captain in same plane
- let the pax know what is going on and than leave the a/c, give people a chance to make decision about their life,
Even you pay it with your job?
I think he did the great job before he leave the plane and it`s also shows how professional he is.
Regards? :ok:

[puddle-jumper2]

Theresalwaysone,

You can be sure that ANY CAPTIAN who does what it sounds like this guy has had to do is thinking of his passengers and only of his passengers.

Staying on the A/C to point the passengers in the right direction is a nice touch but don't loose sight of the fact that he could have been much more unprofessional and just flew the A/C as apposed to putting his job on the line.

It's a shame that some passengers do not really understand the responsibilities the Captain has.:ugh:

[MaxBlow]

:D

This Capt. sure got his priorities in order. Pax will never understand.

So how did they finally got home? Same airplane - local Captain...:yuk:

[sun737pilot]

I Flew A Couple Of Years In Turkey. I Know The Mentality Of Most Companies And Their Pilots.

Safety Standarts Are Very Low And Most Ex Military Pilots Are Kamikaze Pilots So They Dont Refuse To Fly Even With Serious Tech Problems.

Lots Of Flights With Mel Items.

So Nobody Wants To Loose His Job.

The Authorities Must Act As Soon As Possible.

[vascani]

md11 wrote"Just the opinion of a ground engineer.
I would really like to know what was at fault on this plane. I have occasionally had pilots who refused to accept an aircraft even though I raised a HIL in accordance with the MEL and all applicable procedures, so that from a maintenance point and operational point of view the plane was servicable and legal to fly, because the pilot's opinion did not agree with the approved proceedures. In this case I usually let the chief pilot deal with the ensuing delay, means I will not accept it as maintence delay."

reminds me too of a cold and icy morning in cdg. the a/c hard been parked overnight and was being prepared for an early morning departure. it was a B757 if i remember rightly. the mechanic came into my office and said the pack had overheated. so we wandered up to the flight deck to see what was going on. the mel was produced and with a smile the skipper let me know it was not allowable etops? i think. Anyway we opened the pack bay door thumped the ACM and the pack was screaming like a good' un.

up we went to sign the log and let him on his way, two good packs and no other problems. thats when it all fell apart, the skipper seemed to think we should have changed the pack valve or changed this or that. There was a young first officer that seemed to be egging him on as well, dont know why maybe because she was female? anyway I let the skipper know we would not being doing anymore work and I was happy the a/c was serviceable. that seemed like a red rag to a bull, he refused to fly the a/c, ok then i said and went back to my office.

I then get a phone call to say the service had been cancelled and can you shut the a/c up as it wont be going anywhere. no problem, funny thing was the next day I powered the thing up and the self same skipper flew it back. I would have loved to have known what the story was back at his main base.

[captjns]

The captain may have done the right thing by resigning his position with the company, but leaving his passengers, and fellow crewmembers on board at the everone's mercy... not a good move by any means of a professional.

Nobody should be coerced into flying an unsafe aircraft, no matter the cost. But as captain, one of his prime objectives is the safety of his crew, passengers, cargo, and aircraft. A captain does not abandon either until his crew and passengers are safely off the jet.

The fundamental question... When did the captain deem the aircraft to be unsafe... before boarding, during boarding, or after boarding. Was it necessary to board passengers knowing that he was going to walk off the job. His dislike for the ariline must have been brewing before the flight in question.

At the end of the day, if he felt that strongly that the aircraft were unsafe to fly, the captain should have taken all means required to off load his crew and passengers... then make his farewell speech to the crowd in the lounge.

By all means, yes, he did the right thing by not taking an aircraft which he though was unsafe. But alsow remember when the captain walked off the jet, he abandoned his crew and passengers and left them behind with their thumbs up their arses.

[GearDown&Locked]

The captain may have done the right thing by resigning his position with the company, but leaving his passengers, and fellow crewmembers on board at the everone's mercy... not a good move by any means of a professional.


captjns, although I agree with you I think it's much better to refuse to fly a plane in such awkward way, than to get your tail between your legs and hope for the best, just because you can't loose the job for whatever reason.

[captjns]

captjns, although I agree with you I think it's much better to refuse to fly a plane in such awkward way, than to get your tail between your legs and hope for the best, just because you can't loose the job for whatever reason.

My post clearly stated that a captain should not fly an aircraft he deems to be unsafe regardless of the consequences. However, he should not walk off an aircraft and leave his fellow crewmembers and passengers on the aircraft. That's not captain material. IMO, I don't think his priorities were in the right order.

[MaxBlow]

Captjns,

I got your point and under normal circumstances I would probably agree with you - however one has to understand that this was the only way for the captain to make sure that no other Turkish captain would take this airplane with the defect only fixed on paper (their usual way of doing things).

I know ´cause I´ve been there too for a summer and experienced similar situations where they just put you on another flight and a local captain will happily take the sick airplane without being fixed. (see another recent Onur thread):ugh:

This company is constantly putting economical interest over safety and it´s about time somebody draws a line. The ban in 05 didn´t help at all, after only a few weeks they fall back into old habbits.

So again: Well done captain:D :ok: :D

[SLFguy]

So very very typical of R&Ns....immediate assumption is that the mini-riot was due to the LoCo type of SLF wanting the flight to carry on! Not how I read it at all - methinks they wanted off!!!!

[captjns]

Captjns,

So again: Well done captain:D :ok: :D

Well done for not taking the flight, but wrong move in using your fellow crewmemers and passengers as pawn in one's game plan.:= The best thing the captain could have done was not board the aircraft, or have the passengesr get off the aircraft, and turn it over to the engineers. If no engineers are about, then unpower the jet.

This man is not even F/O material to abandon his crew to rath of the passsengers. Bottom line the bum is a coward.:*

[sikalia]

Was tha captain shot or thrown into a jail waiting for the " midnight express" for taking that decision?
Does anyone now?

[captjns]

.........and leave the pax sitting in the dark?:=

Re-read my post... I said, and I quote The best thing the captain could have done was not board the aircraft, or have the passengesr get off the aircraft, and turn it over to the engineers. If no engineers are about, then unpower the jet.

Perhaps I should clarify... unpower the jet after the passengers and fellow crewmembers have been deplaned.

[spannerless]

I have to concur with MD11 over one ot two points particularly short cutting??
I cite the Air Alaska Trim Jack Failure!
Eventually after several investigsations an engineer came foward assisted the FAA and never worked again! Branded a whisltle Blower! (well not in that field)
No, it wasn't because he was caught with his fingers in the proverbial fan blade either! and had to confess.
The FAA had found several dodgy practices and reports telling the management they had a problem before this particular accident occured.
:confused:

Well done to the Pilot for having the B*lls!

[GeeJay]

Just had a look at Brussels BIAC site. All Onur Air flights cancelled fot today and tomorrow!!
Has someone more infos.

Happy (and safe) landings

GJ

[weasil]

. I have occasionally had pilots who refused to accept an aircraft even though I raised a HIL in accordance with the MEL and all applicable procedures, so that from a maintenance point and operational point of view the plane was servicable and legal to fly, because the pilot's opinion did not agree with the approved proceedures.
Jan

There's a reason why this happens. The MEL does not tell you whether or not the aircraft is safe to fly. For an airplane to be "legal" it must be airworthy and it must be safe. You say that from an "MX point and an operational point of view the plane was serviceable".. but how do you know? You are not the one operating it. The APU example given by another poster was a good one. The number of times I've been handed an airplane with the APU deferred is not the same number of times as I've accepted the airplane as safe. 40 degree temperatures in the cabin at stations with no ground air is not safe and it says so right in my company manual. But that is not in the MEL. Yet if we call and say to maintenance we want a different airplane they give the same response you did.

What about a piece of de-icing equipment deferred, the plane is legal to fly, but are you aware of whether or not the crew will encounter icing conditions?
I even had a mechanic defer the autopilot once because the ALT knob came off. This particular flight was a long one and required use of the upper flight levels (RVSM airspace) but without the autopilot was not possible. Consequently the MEL now states "No RVSM" under the autopilot deferral.

I would be very interested to hear what happens to this Captain, that was a very brave thing he did. I would guess that he was under a lot of pressure to take the airplane on previous occasions also. :ugh:

[sf25]

would like to know how onur finally handled the whole thing. were the pax brought home with the same plane, but different cockpitcrew? anybody knows?

[the_hawk]

the news article states
Eventually the stewards got all the passengers off the plane and after waiting two hours they were told another Onur Air flight would take them back to the UK.
Between 10 and 20 passengers refused to get on the plane and were left behind in Turkey.
Those who chose to fly back had to pick their luggage out from a pile of bags dumped out of the first aircraft's hold. The four-hour flight, which was due at Bristol International Airport at 7pm on Wednesday, eventually arrived three hours late.

[mary_hinge]

The worry is that the savings / subsidies have to come from somewhere:

http://english.sabah.com.tr/E243096A8F5044A4B9986C86A5C158F0.html

Competition in the air continues. Onur Air sells plane tickets for less than a cab fare.


After Pegasus announced its winter schedule rates, Onur Air joined the competition and sold 2,500 tickets for only 1 YTL.

Rivalry between airlines has caused plane ticket prices to drop down to unbelievable amounts. Yesterday, Onur Air announced it is selling 2,500 plane tickets for flights between September 25 and October 18 (Ramadan) for only 1 YTL. In about an hour, most of the tickets were sold. Even people who don't have any plans for the Ramadan month bought tickets. Meanwhile, bus companies have reacted against the prices by saying: "This is economical suicide. Airlines will go into bankruptcy if they keep lowering their prices."

[scarebus03]

After reading several quotes regarding the MEL not involving safety, I must protest. The MEL takes into account the aircraft systems only and not the various operational requirements of different airports. If it states that flight in icing conditions is not permitted in relation to a particular failure then further flight involves checking the route, this directly involves safety, no?

It is the responsibility of maintenance to provide all the relevant information in relation to a fault and then up to the commander to say yes or no. However the engineer can also say no and does not have to wait for a flightcrew decision but this normally is a clearcut no go.

The engineer can say it's dispatchable because the MEL says so, but common sense may say something else. Both parties must make all relevant info available because engineers may not be aware of other airports procedures or flight restrictions on any given day.

In nearly 20yrs in maint. I have never had a problem with a flight crew in relation to any MEL item being go/no go depending on outside factors. If it's safe to go the airplane goes. However sadly there are thick f%#ks on both sides of the fence who are more interested boosting their self importance than actually working together.

Read the MEL introduction when you have some time it covers a lot of the points raised in this thread

As for Onur air obviously that skipper was at the end of his tether although I would like to know the exact fault or faults involved

BRGDS
SB03

[sf25]

[QUOTE=Boeing Pilot;2852219]Well done. He's my hero now.


is it really that outstanding brave??? apart from mere self-preservation that´s what a passenger expects from the guys up front: to check the plane and NOT to fly if they regard it as unsafe (normally of course without retirement ...)
and if the pax are then brought home in another a/c .... to me it seems a correct procedure ....

[Bbus]

This cpt is more or less always complaining and frustrated that he is not working at a major airline. What do all know about the maintenance of this company you all work there? Last year may when they where banned to fly to Holland there where two separate investigations of independent English company's and both they said that the Dutch CAA was wrong by banning them from Holland so the Dutch CAA is being sued by Onur. Also in this case it means there is only one save Pilot working there and the rest of the 249 pilots are stupid and unsafe? Also very professional to do it this way and walk away from it and leave the whole crew behind take the responsibility that where he gets paid for.

I don't think he like's Ryan air......:=

an 321 driver

[MaxBlow]

I managed to get some more details from friends and a website (airporthaber.com):

The acft had an u/s APU for weeks. After eng.#2 has been started with grnd air, #1 should be started with x-bleed. During push and after opening the x-bleed valve the supplying eng.#2 shut itself down for unknown reasons.
(Airbus!)

The acft was pulled back to the parking stand and appearently this has happend before several times during earlier flights. Mx released the acft after
doing their tests every single time .

The capt. called his C/P and he told him, 'If you don´t fly it, you´re fired!'

His answer, 'why don´t you come and fly it yourself' :D
That was why he went and talked to the pax and told him he can´t fly because he was just fired for refusing to fly.

Pax where upset because of extreme temperatures in the plane.

Second hand info only...:confused:

[Bbus]

Well he was not fired the he resigned for you're information just wondering you work there?
Just for you're info the cpt is frustrated that he is not working for a mayor airline and he is always complaining! Also in this case there is only one pilot working there who is safe so that means the rest of the (249) pilots are unsafe and stupid to fly unsafe aircraft. Also for you're info there are working a lot of ( unsafe? ) foreigners and I’m one off them!!!!

greetz..

[quickturnaround]

Bbus, at Groningen EHGG we all learned how safe ONUR really was. There you guys were very, very lucky that no one was killed.
I am not surprised that the dutch CAA stepped up their SAFA inspections after one hull-loss and many more incidents.

Onur may take the dutch CAA to court, but how big is the chance that they will win anything out of it.

I wonder?

Fly safely, QTA

[The AvgasDinosaur]

Bbus, at Groningen EHGG we all learned how safe ONUR really was. , QTA Do we have any links to this report??
I've tried searching ONUR and Groningen on here without sucess.
Be lucky
David

[LLuke]

http://www.google.com/search?q=onur+groningen+report
3d hit.

[Bbus]

For sure they won't winn at court.. But as we are speaking about onur and crashes there is one over run correct. So what does this mean? Look around what about crashes Air france 340, klm-panam 747-200 klm, ect. Even qantass has an over run with an 747 so does this mean they are un safe???

greetz

[cwatters]

Interesting report. It contains references to a few other over run events in other aircraft. I note that on one or two of these the pilots tried to work the problem during the take off run. This sound like a bad idea. Woudn't it be better to have a policy to reject, stop and vacate before making any attempt to fix the problem giving more time and less pressure?

[Jando]

Or use this direct link to the .pdf:
http://www.safetyboard.nl/publications/dsb/report_runway_overrun_after_rejected_take-off.pdf
(Order of Google results can be different the next day, for different countries, languages, etc.)

[Earl]

Well done Captain.
Seems this company quickly returned to its old bad habits.
Guess they will never learn.

[Blacksheep]

We don't have the precise nature of the problem with this aircraft, the captain's views on the matter nor the AOC holder's. There's been lots of mention of the "Minimum Equipment List." Are we getting confused about the DDG here? Another document to consider is the Company Operations Manual. Was this a technical problem or an operations problem?

While the DDG is covered by commander's discretion, the flight operations management can, and frequently does, disagree with an individual Captain. In the event that such disagreement cannot be resolved, management can at its discretion, assign another captain to operate a flight. While an aircraft captain does have discretion, the AOC holder's discretion can override it. All we can tell from the story given here, is that is exactly what happened. Any discussion of the rights and wrongs of the matter must, as in the case of the Groningen incident, await the facts.

[sun737pilot]

Yes I Can Definitely Say That Many Ex T@rkish Milit@ry Pilots Are Incompetent, Overconfident And Unsafe.

The Captain On That Flight Is German/turkish And Has A Bad Reputation. His Decision Was Right But The Way Of Doing It Not.

[pax2908]

The capt. called his C/P and he told him, 'If you don´t fly it, you´re fired!'

If this is true, then even without any problem with the acft, I (as a PAX) would consider unsafe to fly. And in general I would consider unsafe any airline for which the above quote may be true...

[xetroV]

For sure they won't winn at court.. But as we are speaking about onur and crashes there is one over run correct. So what does this mean? Look around what about crashes Air france 340, klm-panam 747-200 klm, ect. Even qantass has an over run with an 747 so does this mean they are un safe???
The Groningen report identified many serious shortcomings in the Onur Air safety standards: unreliable loading figures, faulty performance calculations, very dubious decisions by the flight crew during the take-off roll (continuing a with a take-off warning sound blaring all the way is really not a good idea), poor CRM... Too bad the dutch incident investigation focussed mainly on governmental issues (supervision of foreign carriers) and on the actual flight deck actions, because I think the flight deck shortcomings may very well have been a sign of higher-level problems elsewhere in the Onur Air organisation.

Since any responsible airline would try learn from these mistakes, I find it highly worrying to see an apparant Onur Air pilot now trying to downplay this nearly fatal incident by diverting the attention to other mishaps by other airlines. Safety begins by acknowledging your own fallibility, and hiding behind others is definitely not a good sign in that respect!

Bbus, I really hope the other 248 pilots at your airline will have a more professional attitude regarding this issue. Or else maybe the problems at Onur Air are more deeply rooted than I suspected.

[pulse1]

There's a report on this incident in today's Daily Telegraph, as if it has just happened. Talk about current news! I wonder if they got it off pprune as there are no extra details.

"British holiday makers waiting to return home from Turkey were told by their pilot "Do not fly with this plane. It is not safe"

The 180 tourists were about to take off for Bristol from aAntalya with Onur Air when they heard a strange noise from the engines.

They said the captain of the Airbus A321 came on to the intercom and said "I am resigning. Do not fly with this plane. It is not safe. Do not fly with Onur Air." He then walked off the plane. An alternative flight was arranged.

The aircraft had been chartered by the travel company Goldtrail, which has apologised to the passengers. It said: "The employee in question was serving his notice. It was not a major fault because the aircraft is still flying".

Why on earth would the Torygraph publish this story so long after it happened?

[quickturnaround]

And what is the Turkish CAA doing about it?

[flash8]

are you having a laugh?

[JanetFlight]

That Groningen report reminds some years ago at AMS when the Dutch CAA also banned Egyptian Luxor Air after the crew of a MadDog failed to perform a correct weight&balance report:rolleyes:

[captjns]

Yes I Can Definitely Say That Many Ex T@rkish Milit@ry Pilots Are Incompetent, Overconfident And Unsafe.

The Captain On That Flight Is German/turkish And Has A Bad Reputation. His Decision Was Right But The Way Of Doing It Not.

He should have made sure his passengers and crew were safely off the aircraft and then he could have made his dramatic farewell speech to his charges. No Tony award for the captains performance.

[MaxBlow]

The Captain gave an interview to a turkish newspaper (Millet). Maybe someone has the link and can translate it for us. I believe this would clear a few points.

As I understand it he already left the airplane and than turned around and talked to the pax to make sure no other crew will accept the airplane and fly it.

The nature of the defect is also explained. I hope someone can translate for us.

http://www.milliyet.com.tr/2006/09/27/son/sontur18.asp

[Bbus]

Strange that he starts flying the next day with Inter airlines! So he was not fired he was just sitting out his time with onur air and fedup that he had to work so much and frustrated that he not working for an major airline. Well it won't be different at inter airlines. They sort off pilots so also there he will be the only safe pilot and the rest will be unsafe. You really think they make us fly if the aircraft is not according the MEL? Nobody ever had a problem after starting engine's and taxi out you have a problem and taxi back in, does this mean the aircraft is unsafe? yes/no that's why you come back to get it fixed by maintance.

Greetz

[swing over]

We all remember one company names Onur Air which was banded of flying into europe for technical resons.
I like to point out and clear a few facts.Fact is that Mr. Bbus is not an Airbus driver, his name is Mr. Rauf Gertz, he is the press speechman of Onur Air.He and his boss Mr. Sabettin Bolukcu opened a campain against this captain.Mr. bolukcu gave a dinner 2 days ago to the press peolpe.Both are spreading lies on a web page names www. airporthaber.com,if you look carefully you easly will find out that Mr. Bolukcu is a writter for this page.I ask now what a neutral plattform,or.Thats the way how business is made in Turkey.They are tying to do the same things as they were banded to fly,the like to show this case like a europe against turkey thing.They manipulate the turkish civil authorities and the turkish pilot association is assisting them in this propaganda game.Because this captain is not a military pilot and was not a member of TALPA.( shame on them)
Mr. Gerz leave the real pilots form stay away of real pilots we don`t need your manipulation in this matter.We are not a part of your game and never will be. We can judge by ourselfs.

[Voeni]

do they really want to join the EU? i'm having a laugh...

[FSD glideslope!]

As requested by MaxBlow. Translation only basic, wife (Turkish) is an engineer but knows nothing about A/C or flight. Many moons ago I was PPL+ME+IFR. We are not translators! Don’t forget source was a newspaper.


From Captain
180 SLF on board. No1 engine stopped with a loud noise, a/c on ground. Tech log indicated same problem had happened before. Engineers didn’t take problem seriously. APU was u/s, No2 eng was running while repairs carried out to APU. While APU being repaired, No2 eng shut down without command from anyone. APU repaired by engineers but not proven in flight. Engineers wouldn’t take seriously problems with either No1 or No2 engines.

No1 from cabin told Capt No1 engine also failed on inbound leg. Tech team said all was OK. He again requested Tech team look at No1 engine, but they said all was OK. Capt asked if they could guarantee No2 engine would not shut down in flight – they could not. TIP (can’t translate, could be chief pilot or chief engineer) was called and Capt told to “fly it!” Capt told TIP – bye, I’m leaving Onur Airs. Capt left plane and walked 5m up jetway. Capt returned to a/c to make announcement to SLF, he considered a/c unfit to fly, but another pilot might be assigned to take the flight. Capt also said he considered dangerous decisions were being made in this company. Capt made announcement because he was concerned for SLF + cabin crew safety.

It was not a pre-planned event, he had not considered resigning from Onur Airs until this incident. Capt has 15 years experience, 9 years as Capt. 11,400hoursTT. Holds licensees from Germany, China & USA. Member of German pilots association. The company the Capt changed employment to has since agreed to his departure, as the unwelcome publicity was damaging the new companies name. Capt stated he would be looking for other employment as Capt, worldwide.


From Onur Airs
Capt found job with another company before he resigned. Onur Airs searched databases (unclear what databases) for psychological state of Capt. This event did not happen as reported by Capt. During and after the event no failures were found with a/c. This a/c continues to fly without problems since this event. Capt could have requested another a/c which makes Onur Airs think other circumstances caused Capt to act in this way. Capt states he had not intended to leave Onur Airs, but now works for another company. His resignation was to the SLF, not to Onur Airs. Capt comments are unbalanced and wrong, this is collaborated by all cabin crew, engineers and all other personnel directly involved. Despite holding dual Nationality, Turkish/German, he is taking the matter to the German authorities and not the Turkish authorities, which Onur Airs perceive as a threat.

[swing over]

Dear Sirs,

The captain ,who made this decision has 11300 hours ttl.The skipper flew B737 all series B747-400 and A321 ( including 2500 hrs on Airbus ).The a7c was given to the crew with APU in the hold item.The hold items inthis company are always full ,they use full extensions and after the extension time they swapp the the parts between aircrafts.They are not interseted to order parts.The pilots are forced to enter mailfunctions only on the return flight to the base,so that they can right ,SYSTEM TESTED CHECKED FOUND NORMAL,this words you can find every where on their TLB`s.
Fact is this aircaft was started with external power and air sources.ENG 2 was started first after the connections where taken away during crossbleed start ENG 2 stalled and came to stop.Since the aircraft does not have an APU back up everything became dark.NO ECAM INDICATIONS AVAILABLE.
GPU was connected again and technical staff started to run an FADEC test.
Then they started ENG 2 again and released the aircraft for flight.Mean while

[swing over]

The Crew Asked About If This Happened Before Again And They Find Out On The Old Tlb That 10 Days Ago Eng 1 Stopped During Taxi.there Some Mailfunction You Can Not Detect On The Fadec Test.i Think This Case Stinks.
It Is A General Procedure In This Company To Swapp Mailfunctions.
Why The Annocement?because It Is A Fact Also That If One Skipper Refuses To Accept An No Go Aircraft Mailfunction Or Out Of Limit Take Off Weights ;within 1 Hours There Will Be An Company Minded Kamikaze Pilot Available.the Captain Could Just Resighn And Leave But To Leave The Passers Behind With An Engine That Could Stop During Rotation To Is Not Some Body Who React As Safety Minded Pilot.many Turkish Pilots Have Problems To Find Jobs Due To Wellknown Resons.with The Salary In Turkey Living Standards They Prefer To Keep Silend.

[Bbus]

Well Swing over,

The name is wrong and I'm just a pilot like you. This week I flew the aircraft in question and have to say there was nothing on the HIL and I saw in the book and the entry of that CPT and it did not fly that same day but the next day to IKA so we are no kamikaze pilots. So the pilot has a problem with the aircraft during the taxi out and he returns to the gate like this never happens any where else, still does this means the aircraft is completely unsafe? So you get it fixed or get an other aircraft. The way this CPT did his job is I have no problems with but the annocement I don't think this was very unprofessional and also it was more or less his last day working in onur air because he would start soon with Inter airlines, so resign? He already did

Also it seems you know that CPT well knowing he total hours ect. Maybe you are the CPT.

What ever you say, you really think I would still be working here as what you say is true. There many jobs for 320 rated pilots, I even got a call from Etihad this week well I prefer to stay here!

See yeah…

[swing over]

So the pilot has a problem with the aircraft during the taxi out and he returns to the gate like this never happens any where else:D := the problem mr was that eng1 stopped suddenly as like it was with same aírcraft and this time eng2.you guys tink realy you could manipulate everybody.I AM PROUDE TO KNOW THIS CAPTAIN.can you look to the mirrow,and what you see ?????
You are not a pilot Bbus because you don`t react like one.God luck with your banded company.We in europe think different,welcome to the EU.

[MaxBlow]

FSD Glideslope,

thank you for the translation.:ok:

bbus,

getting a call from an airline doesn´t mean you get the job.
If you accept an airplane that shuts down its engines for unknown reasons
I wouldn´t hire you anyways.

The Turkish Pilot Union (TALPA) is defending Onurair, saying that the captain
in question has phsycological problems...:D and requested the Turkish CAA to invite him for a testing.:ugh:

You can´t cover up for ever! Onurair´s management is dangerous (profit over safety), their mx managers are dangerous and every pilot who works for them and accepts a sick airplane is dangerous too.
I´ve been there and know how they work and wouldn´t want to do it again.

TALPA,:=

get your priorities right or how much is Onur paying you? Are you really a
Pilots association?

[Bbus]

well first off all I didn't say a call from a company means I the have the job, second I prefer to stay here, third of all he has phsycological problems did you ever fly with him?

I'm won't say any thing more about it!

Take care and happy landings!

max blow have fun at sun express

[TheSailor]

Hello,

Sorry to jump in...but.....
Bbus:
still does this means the aircraft is completely unsafe?

Maybe it's a language understanding matter....or it must be understand "a aircraft partially unsafe"...is a safe aircraft.. ? :ugh:
Just a remark from a noob.

Regards. http://photobucket.com/albums/v509/Bebermaur/th_bye.gif

[MaxBlow]

....or it must be understand "a aircraft partially unsafe"...is a safe aircraft.. ?

Well, that´s the way Onurairs management sees it.


The Turkish Pilots union took a u-turn and revised their statement. Even Onurs management had to admit that they don´t really know whats wrong with the airplane and I understand that it´s been taken out of service for further investigation by the Turkish CAA.

bbus,

I´m not at xq - rgds from ORD

[FLCH-SPD]

I'm sorry, but I'm completely at a loss with this thread, it just doesn't make sense???

The aircraft, operated by Turkish budget airline Onur Air, was waiting for clearance to take-off

Ok, so was it sat at the holding point, or parked at the gate with the door open?

After the captain left, panic broke out, as one woman had an asthma attack and had to be given oxygen by the stewards, while others were in tears.

Why? The aircraft isn't going anywhere without a Captain? Unless he jumped out of the aircraft at the holding point and there was a very brave FO up front.

Passengers say one couple were banging on the windows, demanding to be let off the plane.

It's not difficult, surely they can get off the aircraft, the same way that the captain did :}

[dervis]

As I read the Turkish newspaper Millet I thought something was strange in the comments that Onur Air gave. They said the pilot was under investigation because they thougt he was not mental stable after this incident.

So did they allready new that the pilot had a mental problem before this incident happened or are they saying this know to bring the guy in discredit. If they knew I find it strange that they let him fly an aircraft.

[JamesA]

I read of this story in an American trade mag. It quoted its source as the Daily Mail. Again details were of the sensationalism type and left a lot untold. I agree that there could be a lot missing in the translation of the captain's words. This article did mention strange noises from an engine which caused the captain to announce his resignation. Good on the man.

I would like to point out to some earlier posters, who have picked on others points.
Strepsils and Weasil - the FAA preamble in my company's DDPG of which the MEL is part includes:-
'However, the rules also permit the publication of a Minimum Equipment List (MEL) where compliance with certain equipment requirements is not necessary in the interests of safety under all operating conditions.'
and
'The FAA approved MMEL includes those items of equipment related to airworthiness and operating regulations and other items of equipment which the Administrator finds may be inoperative and yet maintain an acceptable level of safety by appropriate conditions and limitations; it does not contain obviously required items such as wings,flaps and rudders.'
I think the safety aspect is adequately covered in the above.
Another point raised was where one defect has an effect in combination with others, again the preamble gives the guidance 'When operating with multiple inoperative items, the interrelationships between those items and the effect on aircraft operation and crew workload will be considered.'
In other words, whilst it is safe to fly with one of the items defective, in a combination, a fresh look at the overall situation is required.

[SILLY GOOSE]

I dont blame the pilot well done as ths airline was on the black list of airlines banned from flying into europe.

It appears to me that there is a significant latent safety threats engulfing the oun air and what they did to be removed from the black list is not enough.

That showes how corupt the system is and the lack of oversight by the countries civil aviation.

The irony is that Saudi Airlines is still utilising thier sevices inspite of serious several safety blunders commited during the previous HAJ seasons.

Lack of CRM , poor english language , Poor Maitenance. Weak Crew flying skills
Cheers for the Capt who walked off the aeroplane.