G-DOCU - damaged at Genoa?

[akerosid]

According to a report on another site, one of BA's 737-400s, G-DOCU, was badly damaged in a collision with a ground service vehicle at Genoa, to the extent that the cabin was cut open. Apparently it has not left there since (last week). Does anyone know any more about this incident? Haven't seen it on Aviation Herald ...

JetPhotos.Net Photo » G-DOCU (CN: 25854) British Airways Boeing 737-436 by John Fitzpatrick (http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6916625)

[DaveReidUK]

There's a reference to the incident, albeit of no relevance to the subject, in the third post of this thread:

http://www.pprune.org/spectators-balcony-spotters-corner/484254-ba0840-canceled.html

[CessnaEng]

Looks pretty bad (http://imageshack.us/f/254/img20120504wa0001.jpg/)

[gas path]

Speedtape?

[750XL]

Ouch :eek:

[DaveReidUK]

And there wasn't a scratch on the iceberg ...

[Evanelpus]

Double ouch!:ouch::ouch:

That doesn't look good at all!

[Doug E Style]

Italian drivers.

[MKY661]

Plane is back in service :)

[BOAC]

..and the truck driver..............?

[SpringHeeledJack]

..and the truck driver..............?

I've always wondered about such incidents and if the wrongdoer gets fired directly, gets prosecuted and is liable financially OR is protected by a militant union that threatens strike action if one of the brothers, or fratellos in this case, is held to task. With such expensive machinery around the place of work the qualifications and responsibilities must be very stringent for the ground staff :hmm:


SHJ

[ballyctid]

Think it depends where you are.

I know one Gulf state where it is a no questions asked instant dismissal for any aircraft that is hit, no matter how minor.

Whereas a UK airport that I worked at the offender would be suspended and as long as complete negiligence isn't proven they would be retrained and have to sit the airside driving course again.

[TURIN]

Depends on your point of view.

Would you rather someone accidentally damages an a/c and walks away without reporting it because they know that to do so is instant dismissal or promote honest reporting, keep the job and stay safe?

I know which I would choose.

[ZFT]

... and with the advent of composite fuselages that may not retain or exhibit evidence of being hit, even more important to promote honest reporting.

[SpringHeeledJack]

I'm all for honest reporting, but really, if a job description involves maneuvering equipment around multi-million dollar aircraft then both training and oversight of the participants must be to the fore. However I take the point that as pilot you would want to know of any 'accidents' before getting the hull pressurised. Glad to see G-DOCU back in revenue service :ok:




SHJ

[Notso Fantastic]

I used to fly this very plane 15 years ago. I identified the location and was pleased to see I was bang on. Interestingly enough in a subsequent small airline, one of the 737-700s suffered similar damage (but less widespread) in a towing incident at LGW when the tow truck turned and the 737 didn't. Took several weeks to organise, but a 10 man Boeing team came over and blitzed it in about 10 days, with Christmas coming to encourage them to get on with it. First rate job. I would think in DOCU's case, BA's team would easily accomplish it.

As for the insurance angle, it seems it's common for ground handlers not to fully insure in aviation to reduce the insurance element of ground handling cost, the airlines themselves accepting liability beyond that level. All in all, very shrouded in obscurity!

[yotty]

Initial repair undertaken by a crack LGW team of BA engineers. Then positioned to LHR for Boeing working party to carry out final work.