‘Home Handyman Maintenance’

[wheels_down]

Moving the work from Philippines to Singapore is hardly going to solve the problem.

Virgin Australia has ended its heavy maintenance contract with a Philippines-based company because its budget arm Tigerair Australia had to ground one of its B737 jets for three weeks after it was returned from maintenance work with serious undetected faults.
The facility is owned by Singapore Airlines.

When the jet returned to Melbourne, Tigerair engineers discovered work that was "home handyman" standard, according to Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association federal secretary Steve Purvinas, with unsecured components and wires connected to the wrong terminals.

Another fault was a flight attendant's seatbelt not properly bolted to the seat.

Overseas maintenance providers need to be certified by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), which is working with the airline and SIA Engineering Philippines (SIAEP) to "ensure that the high standards of Australian aviation safety are maintained".

A spokeswoman for SIAEP said the company was "working closely with Tigerair Australia to understand the issues reported on one of their Boeing 737 aircraft".
http://impactpub.com.au/micebtn/85-news/btn-news/22834-virgin-australia-cancels-maintenance-contract-after-flaws-found-in-serviced-jet

[TBM-Legend]

Reminds m of the time when a member of the ALEAA crossed the wiring on one of our company Metros after a major inspection and the test flight nearly wound up in a smoking hole off the end of the runway at Bankstown.

Many duplicate inspections and they still got it wrong

[doug606]

TBM-Legebd you probably shouldn't have Al Bundy working on your Metros as i don't think a shoe salesman is qualified to do the work. I bet he had a badass pair of ballet shoes on why he did the work but

[The Bullwinkle]

But $afety is the number one priority! :rolleyes:

[mattyj]

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/384x384/c1235399_e9fd_4a56_8437_0c9575ff83e6_aaa464a5ea3a012dc8844fd 9f62ce0323f609586.jpeg
That’s all that’s in the budget after a 600+ million dollar loss

[The Bullwinkle]

This should definitely position MM as the front runner for future CEO of Virgin.
With her superior Aviation knowledge based decisions such as this, her appointment should be a mere formality!

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Don't blame Virgin, CASA sits idly by while Aussie airlines cut corners with cheap and dodgy maintenance. A regulator with a spine would ground anything that has been maintained in the Philippines.

[4 Holer]

Here you go again. Australia best at this best at that. Remember your only a remote socialist Island in the SouthWest Pacific. Tens of thousands of Jet Transports flying around the world with their foreign dodgy maintenance ? If the Maintenance was so bad from the Philippine EASA/FAA Maintenance facility one should be asking who were the " AUSTRALIAN MAINTENANCE REPS ". Australia will always be a backwater with little man syndrome. There should only be one Airline Qantas you cannot manage anything else look what happened when there were 4 banks hahaha... 3rd World Muppet land.

[JPJP]

Here you go again. Australia best at this best at that. Remember your only a remote socialist Island in the SouthWest Pacific. Tens of thousands of Jet Transports flying around the world with their foreign dodgy maintenance ? If the Maintenance was so bad from the Philippine EASA/FAA Maintenance facility one should be asking who were the " AUSTRALIAN MAINTENANCE REPS ". Australia will always be a backwater with little man syndrome. There should only be one Airline Qantas you cannot manage anything else look what happened when there were 4 banks hahaha... 3rd World Muppet land.

Categorical proof that drinking at lunchtime, and poor adult literacy aren’t a pretty sight.

[SIUYA]

JPJP...

Categorical proof that drinking at lunchtime, and poor adult literacy aren’t a pretty sight.

Seems to be a logical summation. :ok:

[Tom Sawyer]

Don't blame Virgin, CASA sits idly by while Aussie airlines cut corners with cheap and dodgy maintenance. A regulator with a spine would ground anything that has been maintained in the Philippines.

To be fair - The report is implicates SIA Engineering Philippines, which is obviously different from Lufthansa Technic Philippines (LTP) and not involved in this.

One of my previous employers Airbuses went to LTP for C checks and above, and after the initial difficulties of a new contract, they did start producing some good work with very few issues. But, it depends on what level of oversight you put in place. We had a team of guys based there for all checks to keep an eye on things, but we did that for all outsourced checks no matter where they were carried out in the world.

Not had any dealings with SIAEP, but I have had dealings with SIA/SIAEC...........wasn't overly impressed and can't say I'm too surprised by the report!

[Capt Quentin McHale]

My first question would be, were there ANY Tigerair/Virgin engineers (be they LAMES or unlicenced engineers) present to oversee this check? And if not, then who, and what was their qualifications?

McHale.

[cessnapete]

BA A380 major checks done there with no problems it seems. After maintenance, positioned to Sin and flown back on a scheduled service to LHR. One of the most reliable and utilised aircraft in the fleet.

[Watchdog]

Ahhhhh.....excuse me, but MY "home handyman" work is always done very professionally, whether I'm fixing a tap or mowing my lawns 😂

[Australopithecus]

A building inspector once rightly suggested that my under-floor plumbing was DIY. “No plumber would put a copper saddle on every joist, let alone use copper nails” So yeah, this story gives some home handymen a bad name.

More to the point: Serious airlines have resident company engineers at the actual factory where their aircraft are actually made. Why the hell would you not do likewise at an offshore MRO? Since all maintenance contracts are awarded on a cost basis why would you seriously expect the lowest bidder to always do the most correct (and hence costly) thing when no one was watching, given what we all know about human nature?

Perhaps “Trust, but verify” is too far in the past to inform managers who have only a degree in business administration and no ability in actual business leadership?

[The Bullwinkle]

Serious airlines
I don’t think you can really use the words “Serious airline” and “Tigerair” in the same sentence!

[Mk 1]

Australia will always be a backwater with little man syndrome. There should only be one Airline Qantas you cannot manage anything else look what happened when there were 4 banks hahaha... 3rd World Muppet land.
I have a banking background. During the depths of the GFC (caused by dodgy banking practices in the US largely) - there were only 10 banks worldwide that maintained the maximum 3 star rating - our big 4 banks were 4 of that 10. But - don't let facts get in the way of your rant.

[Australopithecus]

I have a banking background. During the depths of the GFC (caused by dodgy banking practices in the US largely) - there were only 10 banks worldwide that maintained the maximum 3 star rating - our big 4 banks were 4 of that 10. But - don't let facts get in the way of your rant.

Don't pay any attention to 4-holer: He ran afoul of some oztranaut checker years ago and ended up flying some piece of sh*t DC-8 outta Miami. Miami of all places! Hardly the paragon of virtue in the civilization hall-of-fame. But stand your ground*, 4-
Holer.

*look up “stand your ground” Florida gun laws. Its like Mogadishu without the local flair.

[Station Zero]

Would imagine there would have been a Tech Rep or equivalent overseeing the maintenance input. But how many and what was their responsibilities?

Some airlines send reasonably large teams, technical, materials and commercial people to these inputs, others just send the bare minimum (even just one) so potentially they have to be a jack of all trades.

From personal experience doing checks on your own is a mammoth undertaking and whilst I set boundaries with the MRO to witness close up inspections, be out when functional tests are being performed and witness final engine runs etc, you cannot be everywhere 24/7 during however long the input is. Not trying to justify anything but if there was only one Tech Rep onsite then there is absolutely no chance they can keep a full eye out on the maintenance being performed when having to deal with everything else.

[Section28- BE]

Evening all.....

Oh- dear......

Shall just leave the 'User Name' here..........., cannot rebut any of the above- are 'these' airframes VH registered.....?????

Rgds all
Section28- BE (ref: the Act)

[The Bullwinkle]

Not trying to justify anything but if there was only one Tech Rep onsite then there is absolutely no chance they can keep a full eye out on the maintenance being performed when having to deal with everything else.
I’d be surprised if Tiger sent anybody at all.

[morno]

Aren’t these Virgin frames? Why are they not being maintained by VA?

[AerialPerspective]

To be fair - The report is implicates SIA Engineering Philippines, which is obviously different from Lufthansa Technic Philippines (LTP) and not involved in this.

One of my previous employers Airbuses went to LTP for C checks and above, and after the initial difficulties of a new contract, they did start producing some good work with very few issues. But, it depends on what level of oversight you put in place. We had a team of guys based there for all checks to keep an eye on things, but we did that for all outsourced checks no matter where they were carried out in the world.

Not had any dealings with SIAEP, but I have had dealings with SIA/SIAEC...........wasn't overly impressed and can't say I'm too surprised by the report!

SQ is the most overrated company in the industry on every level.

[The Golden Rivet]

Aren’t these Virgin frames? Why are they not being maintained by VA?

Yep, Line and base maintenance on both b737 and a320 , heavy is outsourced like the rest of the fleet

[ebt]

Yep, Line and base maintenance on both b737 and a320 , heavy is outsourced like the rest of the fleet

Seems strange that the 737s operated by Virgin still have their heavy done at CHC and Tiger sends the ones in their colours to SIAEP. Tiger did sign a deal in 2016 with SIAEC for heavy on the A320 fleet, so obviously they were hoping to snare more work as the fleet transition gets underway. This episode looks like Air NZ may be the default provider for some time, but I guess ST Aero, GMF and many other Asian shops will also be eyeing the business.

[LeadSled]

Evening all.....
Oh- dear......
Shall just leave the 'User Name' here..........., cannot rebut any of the above- are 'these' airframes VH registered.....?????
Section28- BE (ref: the Act)

Section etc.,
You clearly do not understand the system, provisions like S.28BE are only applicable to operators who do not have a well resourced legal department, or who outsource not only maintenance, but legal maintenance to suitably resourced and capable licensed (usually) multi-national law firms.
It is only "tiddlers" without resources to battle CASA that "feel the full weight of the law" ( I probably should have said "mass")
Tootle pip!!

[wheels_down]

I thought the CHC contract ended and there were just using them for minimal work? 777s and VA registered aircraft are most defiantly being checked in Asia. VA have been sending 737s to Singapore for years and years.

[4 Holer]

All because Australian airplane mechanics ( "engineers" no idea why they are called engineers they don't design anything) cannot function in a practical and efficient manner, everything so dramatic.

[LeadSled]

All because Australian airplane mechanics ( "engineers" no idea why they are called engineers they don't design anything) cannot function in a practical and efficient manner, everything so dramatic.

4 Holer.
It's a bit more complex than that, don't blame the individuals, but the "system" which effectively prohibits productivity levels that would make MRO in Australia competitive.
Contrary to popular myth/ conventional wisdom, it is not "high wages" in Australia that are the problem, but what you get for the money, and the "system", substantially but not only the CASA "regulation/micro management" that is the problem.
If you have a search around, I have made several more comprehensive posts on exactly this point.
Tootle pip!!

PS: For goodness sake, don't tell Rod the Con he is only a mechanic and not an "Engineer", he gets quite bitter and twisted about it --- indeed the history of how mechanics became engineers in aviation is quite instructive. You have heard of "bracket creep", this is "title creep".

[Section28- BE]

Lead

Well said & thanks.

Ref- "You clearly do not understand the system"...... reckon, 'we' may well understand.

Rgds and have a good weekend.
S28- BE

[megan]

"engineers" no idea why they are called engineers they don't design anything en·gi·neer[en-j uh- neer]NOUN1. a person trained and skilled in the design, construction, and use of engines or machines, or in any of various branches of engineering: a mechanical engineer; a civil engineer.2. a person who operates or is in charge of an engine.3. Railroads. a person who operates or is in charge of a locomotive.4. a member of an army, navy, or air force specially trained in engineering work.5. Digital Technology. a person skilled in the design and programming of computer systems: a software engineer; a web engineer.

Hooray, No. 2 means I can add engineer to my list of qualifications, used to be in charge of, and operate two engines. :ok:

[AerialPerspective]

Don't blame Virgin, CASA sits idly by while Aussie airlines cut corners with cheap and dodgy maintenance. A regulator with a spine would ground anything that has been maintained in the Philippines.

“... while Aussie airlines cut corners with cheap and dodgy maintenance...”

Don’t blame Virgin??? Seriously??? CASA is not responsible for this, the airlines are, it is the boardroom where these decisions are made - the airline has made a conscious decision to use shonky near-do-wells to perform critical maintenance. It’s not like there wasn’t evidence available with the stapling of wires on Qantas aircraft years ago from this thoroughly overrrated MRO (and it’s equally overrated parent company). You just need to look at the pre VA administration of TT to see evidence of how average SQ are in reality.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Don’t blame Virgin??? Seriously???

Seriously....Why blame Virgin when they are not doing anything wrong by outsourcing maintenance? Outsourcing is many things, but illegal isn't one of them, CASA has the mandate to curtail this behaviour and choses not to.

[LeadSled]

Seriously....Why blame Virgin when they are not doing anything wrong by outsourcing maintenance? Outsourcing is many things, but illegal isn't one of them, CASA has the mandate to curtail this behaviour and choses not to.



Gordon FR at al.
Or simply does not have the expertise, much less the will, to do anything about it, I really don't like "buzzword bullsh1t", but this is a multi-factorial problem ( eat your heart out, Sir Humphrey) with no simple or short term solution, and sadly, with little likelihood that anybody in Australia will even try to sort out the problem.

After all, "Safety Is Our First Priority" is a catch-all cover for bureaucratic and political paralysis, an unfortunate but probably accurate belief that a "do nothing" policy has the least political risk for the bureaucrats, and hence advice to the Minister that the current "regulatory and administrative frame work is optimum", as we have the "world's best air safety" ----- fiction, as we all know (or should know, the facts are very public) but convenient.

After all, what are a few thousand relatively high skilled jobs and million, maybe billions saved on the current account, compared to bureaucratic comfort. I believe I can say that, in my opinion, the current Minister and his aviation advisor don't have a clue about this, and the bureaucracy is not about to tell him.

Sadly, Barnaby Joyce did understand, be we have lost him.

In short, serious aviation MRO as an industry in Australia has been lost, to the degree that quite small aircraft (Kingairs, small jets) are now being ferried out of Australia for routine maintenance, and not just "deep" maintenance.

To see how to do it right, have a good look at NZ/Canada/US. There are good reasons for the new major Qantas MRO investment in Los Angeles, but everybody here seem oblivious, with Qantas hiding these major capital developments in plain sight.

As to maintenance errors, nobody in immune from mistakes, I could catalogue some rippers in Australia, over the years, bad enough to potentially cause the loss of an aircraft.

Tootle pip!!

[AerialPerspective]

Seriously....Why blame Virgin when they are not doing anything wrong by outsourcing maintenance? Outsourcing is many things, but illegal isn't one of them, CASA has the mandate to curtail this behaviour and choses not to.



Right, I see, so Virgin are choosing the cheapest option and obviously have not had appropriate oversight or QA so it’s all CASA’s fault, Virgin isn’t responsible in any way whatsoever because it’s up to someone else to have a moral compass for them.
Tell me, if a law abiding citizen with no criminal record or evidence of mental illness is granted a firearms license and then shoots someone, your attitude is to blame the Police for granting the license is it???

[megan]

so it’s all CASA’s fault Is it not CASA's role to oversee in some manner the maintenance of VH registered aircraft? They must have at some stage approved the overseas maintenance shop. If the work is being done by shoddy overseas shops should CASA not be saying enough is enough? Or don't political relationships allow that?

[PPRuNeUser0198]

Doesn't CASA audit the MRO?

[Bend alot]

As long as the paperwork is fine - so is the aircraft.

[bazza stub]

As long as the paperwork is fine - so is the aircraft.

Isn’t that the approach that brought us “pencil whipping” in the USA?

[LeadSled]

As long as the paperwork is fine - so is the aircraft.
Folks,
In a nutshell, that is the CASA "process based system", as opposed to an "outcome" based system, where the criteria is: "Does the aircraft conform to its type design and certification standard".
Tootle pip!!

PS: "Pencil whipping" ---- reminds me of a certain WA based LAME who was widely recognised as:" The Fastest Pen In The West".

[GA Driver]

As an engineer once said to me.... “they can’t prove I didn’t do the inspection, but they can prove I didn’t do the paperwork!”

[bazza stub]

Safety, like security, is merely a facade in the airline game.

[mustafagander]

The pen is mightier than the spanner!!

Look at the history of these MROs. Staples to rejoin an emergency exit light ribbon on the floor, a check requiring around 2 shifts signed off over 1 night when it is physically impossible to have more men on the job to speed it up - it just goes on. CASA has all the paperwork in order though.

[AerialPerspective]

Is it not CASA's role to oversee in some manner the maintenance of VH registered aircraft? They must have at some stage approved the overseas maintenance shop. If the work is being done by shoddy overseas shops should CASA not be saying enough is enough? Or don't political relationships allow that?

I have no argument with that Megan, my argument is people straight out saying "it's CASA's fault" as though VA/TT have zero responsibility whatsoever. CASA may not do enough inspections but saying it's not VA/TT's fault is completely abrogating any responsibility they have as operators to ensure that the work is being carried out in a compliant manner. When I have my car serviced and if they make a mistake, I take it back. If it's unsafe I don't drive it. I don't just say "Ah well, it's the government's responsibility to do inspections via the Police so I'll just drive it and if someone gets killed, it's the government/Police's fault for not picking me up.

No problem with criticising CASA, no problem with suggesting they should do more inspections but that doesn't obviate the responsibility of an operator who has declared via their exposition that they will maintain compliance or exclude them from any blame. My only objection is how people are saying "blame CASA".

Remember the DC-10 accident at Chicago when the engine sheared off an AA DC-10 and it crashed??? It was because AA were using a non-approved/non-recommended shonky engine change procedure which weakened the structure that held the engine in place. Going by the logic of some of these comments, that's not AA's fault (who were purely doing it to save money and increase profit) but rather the FAA is totally to blame because it's their job to regulate... as if they are supposed to have an Inspector watching over every process. No, part of the approval process is that organisations like AA agree to abide by manufacturer procedures for things like Engine Changes. You can't blame the regulator because some shoddy shop decided they'd do it a different way - that's AA's fault just like sending aircraft to places known to have problems is TT/VA's fault. Credit to VA for doing what QF did though and ceasing to use that facility. As for their approval by CASA, I'm guessing the facility is Part 145 approved so who issued that certificate originally and didn't check it met ICAO requirements???

[anxiao]

A wise post Aerial.

That is why when I look for an AMO for my GA aeroplane I do not look for cheapest, as the airlines do, I look for someone who is capable of doing the job to 1) My standards 2) The authorities standards and 3) His standards. I always expect the last to be the highest of the three.

I have found these guys over the years, and they are stars. They are rare, and when the word gets around who they are they have a hangar full of work, whereas the guys at a field 100k away can go out of business. I wonder why.

It is up to the owner of the aircraft to ensure that his aircraft is serviceable for flight. Not CASA, they are on the boundary picking up shots that cover point missed. You the owner are the infield.

I mentioned this before a couple of years ago but if you think you have a bad deal with CASA, try the the others. I have worked with several CAAs around the world and for all their faults CASA are better than most. Frustrating, but capable.

[wheels_down]

CASAs job is to review the carriers operation, not the procedures of Manila. Regardless of where the maintenance is done they are only digging here in Australia. It’s up to the operator to ensure it’s up to standard. They want to take risks on cheap engineering well that’s up to them, end result is accidents/fatalities/bad pr/casa oversight.

Blame the regulator when no action is taken to known serious events. Tiger was grounded for many reasons, not all were publicly known, but they pushed the envelope and showed zero interest in spending money on safety. A continued disregard to acceptable engineering standards without any sort of rectification ends in penalties. Tiger was grounded.

Tiger grounded this jet for 3 weeks to resolve the issue. The Tiger back in the pommy era would not have done this, would keep pushing on, the issues would keep growing, and the regulator dealt with that swiftly.

[4 Holer]

HAHAHA Tiger was grounded because Australia will only allow two airlines.. Ansett was also grounded for political reasons. HMMM why was QF not grounded, oxy bottle through side of 747, crashed in Thailand, 767 air returns hydraulic and engine failures, multiple 747 engine explosions out of LAX, A380 with a river of water running down the pax isle ? The list at the time goes on and on ?
1) Ansett was grounded so QF and government could stop SQ and get market share.
2) Tiger was grounded for eating into QF revenue and being owned by SQ and thus merged into Virgin as their low cost carrier. See back to two airlines weak Virgin and QF, If Virgin became bigger they would also be grounded by CASA.......

See as I say Remote socialist Island in Southwest Pacific.

As long as Alliance and others fly for the only two airlines in Australia they will be allowed to stay. So behave and be quiet or "they will get you ".

Bye Bye for now.

[PoppaJo]

Tiger was grounded because it didn’t have a safety department. It didn’t maintain its aircraft. It didn’t fix the engineering problems. It flew aircraft that should never have been allowed to. Serious components were failing mid flight. If never conducted investigations. Incidents were not being reported. Serious Failures (even Airbus were scratching their heads) were not being reported. There was no paperwork. There was no Training Department at one stage. People were making their own executive decisions around safety. Rules were made of one self. There was no rules.

You can’t compare it to anything. The aircraft were at risk of serious failures during flight. The whole operation was just non existent.

It was shut down.

Where is Tony these days?

[megan]

No argument from me AP as to what you say. And yes, remember the DC-10 accident very well, a work colleague who I used to fly to and from his work site was a pax on the flight.