Virgin and Pacific Blue ETOPS
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
unfortunately "professional" doesn't equate to "capable".
...and once again we stumble down the weary path of "management are to blame". Look it up in history fella's - it's known as the Nuremberg defence. Absolutely management are to blame, but there are many in VB who aren't management and who are equally culpable....
Oh and give me a break - "the people working for it are" [professional]. Don't over-use the word. It doesn't fit with your airline and its culture....and you will note that in Branson's entire empire "professional" is a dirty word. That's the whole point of the brand.
..as the old saying goes, if you ain't part of the cure, you're part of the problem.
...and once again we stumble down the weary path of "management are to blame". Look it up in history fella's - it's known as the Nuremberg defence. Absolutely management are to blame, but there are many in VB who aren't management and who are equally culpable....
Oh and give me a break - "the people working for it are" [professional]. Don't over-use the word. It doesn't fit with your airline and its culture....and you will note that in Branson's entire empire "professional" is a dirty word. That's the whole point of the brand.
..as the old saying goes, if you ain't part of the cure, you're part of the problem.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Patriot one, that's all well and good, spouting off fat, dumb and happy at the other end of a keyboard. Many are Professionals doing the job in the most professional manner they can. Deal with it. Not everybody plays politics.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dhdriver and P/daddy are pretty much on the money
DJ has 90 minutes ETOPS approval and Pacific Blue will run under it's own AOC and will be an NZ AOC having no bearings on what DJ decides to do with her own ETOPS approval.
DJ has 90 minutes ETOPS approval and Pacific Blue will run under it's own AOC and will be an NZ AOC having no bearings on what DJ decides to do with her own ETOPS approval.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: down on the farm
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Z, Why would they voluntarily hand their ETOPS approval in? Unless they were told it was about to be taken off them, in which case you are hard pushed to say it is voluntary.
In either case however it displays a lacking in the engineering section and must cost them on the MEL - PER - MEL sectors.
Why the press has not picked up this one I don't know, maybe they are waiting for Easter.
In either case however it displays a lacking in the engineering section and must cost them on the MEL - PER - MEL sectors.
Why the press has not picked up this one I don't know, maybe they are waiting for Easter.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: OZ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Red_z3,
What you failed to remember is that Pacific Blue`s three aircraft are currently maintained and operated under VB`s current system of maintaince,as such these aircraft have and are affected due to the numerous component changes whilst operating for VB.
Until such time as all records have been rectified these aircraft will not be issued with an export certificate,therefore PB has nothing to fly until VB is FIXED !
What you failed to remember is that Pacific Blue`s three aircraft are currently maintained and operated under VB`s current system of maintaince,as such these aircraft have and are affected due to the numerous component changes whilst operating for VB.
Until such time as all records have been rectified these aircraft will not be issued with an export certificate,therefore PB has nothing to fly until VB is FIXED !
Last edited by DDG; 31st Dec 2003 at 07:31.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Brisbane,
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DDG - I thought that there were only 2 aircraft earmarked for PB and that they were the last 2 delivered(800's)and that additional a/c will be delivered during '04.
Justapplyhere,that's a big call,but looking at some of the stories being bandied about,who would know?
Justapplyhere,that's a big call,but looking at some of the stories being bandied about,who would know?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: OZ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
30/30 Green Light,
Pacific Blue livery aircraft currently operating with VB are VH-VOO,VH-VOP,VH-VOQ.All were -800`s delivered in last months of 2003. The fourth aircraft is/was due for delivery in Jan/Feb 2004 so i stand corrected on the current fleet numbers.
You can check out some pic`s at http://airliners.net/search/photo.search
Pacific Blue livery aircraft currently operating with VB are VH-VOO,VH-VOP,VH-VOQ.All were -800`s delivered in last months of 2003. The fourth aircraft is/was due for delivery in Jan/Feb 2004 so i stand corrected on the current fleet numbers.
You can check out some pic`s at http://airliners.net/search/photo.search
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hill Top
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FACT:-
DJ still have their 90min ETOPS Approval from CASA.
DJ voluntarily suspended ETOPS operations because while component hour records were being kept for major parts, smaller legally required logs were not being recorded. CASA was immediately informed and commended DJ on doing this under their own accord.
How will it affect PB?????
Instead of DJ doing PBs maintenance this will now occur by Air NZ until DJ is back up-to-speed. Launch and NZ CAA ETOPS approvals are still on schedule, albeit it a slightly hurried one.
Professionals certainly exists in most areas - it's a shame a select few give an airline as successful as Virgin such a bad name.
DJ still have their 90min ETOPS Approval from CASA.
DJ voluntarily suspended ETOPS operations because while component hour records were being kept for major parts, smaller legally required logs were not being recorded. CASA was immediately informed and commended DJ on doing this under their own accord.
How will it affect PB?????
Instead of DJ doing PBs maintenance this will now occur by Air NZ until DJ is back up-to-speed. Launch and NZ CAA ETOPS approvals are still on schedule, albeit it a slightly hurried one.
Professionals certainly exists in most areas - it's a shame a select few give an airline as successful as Virgin such a bad name.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that we're dealing with the facts, lets get them right.
FACT - VB no longer is approved for 90 minute ETOPS. In other words, they could not file an aircraft on a 90mins ETOPS flight tomorrow. Their original submission (using a plagerised Ansett ETOPS program) and the fact that the aircraft were new, and ETOPS equipped, earned them the 90 min approval.
However, like so many examples in this industry, and this airline, saying what you're going to do, and actually doing what you said you would do are two entirely different things. VB realised that in attempting to comply with their own approved processes for ETOPS that they were in fact non-compliant with the whole operation - not for ETOPS, but for standard operating. Therefore, in withdrawing from the ETOPS intent they therefore lost their 90mins approval.
The only way they picked up on their non-compliance was thanks to the arrival of their new engineering manager ex-QF, who is horrified at the mess. The new guy did the prudent, and required thing to do under self-audit, which was to immediately disclose it to CASA - therein stopping CASA's delving into the pandora's box.
Now I just gotta ask because its a common theme in this thread. How do any of you believe VB can hold onto 90mins approval when they have shown that they're non-compliant? CASA doesn't say "okay,,we can see you're not tracking parts..so we'll just approve you for 90mins". Makes a lotta sense eh?
FACT - non compliance with "little things" is just as damning as non-compliance with "big things". They are, quite simply, in breach of the regulations, and not in any small time way - in the most serious way, that is - with the tracking of aircraft parts.
FACT - VB and all other airlines in Australia are required to self-audit and thereby self-disclose problems to the regulator. CASA wasn't patting them on the back for being "good, honest boys" CASA was trying to keep the lid on a nightmare during the VB float.
So nice of them - CASA must be changing. Ansett self-disclosed an SB - not an AD, not even a CASA approved AD - but an SB that CASA itself had overlooked. That's right - read the regs - CASA is required to issue all AD's under their own name, as well as some SB's - but CASA hadn't seen this one either. So Ansett self-discloses an issue that isn't a safety issue, that the regulator himself has overlooked, and that only effected 4 of the 10 767's - but CASA's response is "Ansett must show cause" and they ground all 10 767's.
FACT - VB isn't moving PB's maintenance to Air NZ because of the ETOPS problem. It simply cheaper to do their maintenance in a 3rd world country. If, as AUSEP claims, they are giving Air NZ the maintenance because they are in non-compliance in Australia, then they would have to have all aircraft being done in NZ.
After all - you can't be a little bit pregnant....or a little bit over the limit.
..and finally, I keep thinking, I keep going through the structure, but damned if I can find who these professionals are in the management structure, other than this new guy from QF....pray tell who else is capable?
FACT - VB no longer is approved for 90 minute ETOPS. In other words, they could not file an aircraft on a 90mins ETOPS flight tomorrow. Their original submission (using a plagerised Ansett ETOPS program) and the fact that the aircraft were new, and ETOPS equipped, earned them the 90 min approval.
However, like so many examples in this industry, and this airline, saying what you're going to do, and actually doing what you said you would do are two entirely different things. VB realised that in attempting to comply with their own approved processes for ETOPS that they were in fact non-compliant with the whole operation - not for ETOPS, but for standard operating. Therefore, in withdrawing from the ETOPS intent they therefore lost their 90mins approval.
The only way they picked up on their non-compliance was thanks to the arrival of their new engineering manager ex-QF, who is horrified at the mess. The new guy did the prudent, and required thing to do under self-audit, which was to immediately disclose it to CASA - therein stopping CASA's delving into the pandora's box.
Now I just gotta ask because its a common theme in this thread. How do any of you believe VB can hold onto 90mins approval when they have shown that they're non-compliant? CASA doesn't say "okay,,we can see you're not tracking parts..so we'll just approve you for 90mins". Makes a lotta sense eh?
FACT - non compliance with "little things" is just as damning as non-compliance with "big things". They are, quite simply, in breach of the regulations, and not in any small time way - in the most serious way, that is - with the tracking of aircraft parts.
FACT - VB and all other airlines in Australia are required to self-audit and thereby self-disclose problems to the regulator. CASA wasn't patting them on the back for being "good, honest boys" CASA was trying to keep the lid on a nightmare during the VB float.
So nice of them - CASA must be changing. Ansett self-disclosed an SB - not an AD, not even a CASA approved AD - but an SB that CASA itself had overlooked. That's right - read the regs - CASA is required to issue all AD's under their own name, as well as some SB's - but CASA hadn't seen this one either. So Ansett self-discloses an issue that isn't a safety issue, that the regulator himself has overlooked, and that only effected 4 of the 10 767's - but CASA's response is "Ansett must show cause" and they ground all 10 767's.
FACT - VB isn't moving PB's maintenance to Air NZ because of the ETOPS problem. It simply cheaper to do their maintenance in a 3rd world country. If, as AUSEP claims, they are giving Air NZ the maintenance because they are in non-compliance in Australia, then they would have to have all aircraft being done in NZ.
After all - you can't be a little bit pregnant....or a little bit over the limit.
..and finally, I keep thinking, I keep going through the structure, but damned if I can find who these professionals are in the management structure, other than this new guy from QF....pray tell who else is capable?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tosser
"...FACT - VB isn't moving PB's maintenance to Air NZ because of the ETOPS problem. It simply cheaper to do their maintenance in a 3rd world country..."
Patriot One - Then what does that make a country that can't do it's own maintenance?
Patriot One - Then what does that make a country that can't do it's own maintenance?