Qantas Maintenance Story On Ch.7
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: concert hall
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DrPepz....I am reasonably confident that VH-OJQ and VH-OJG have never had a heavy check offshore ........then Mr Tan wants to infer that he has no problems with his organisations quality and the problems are all at your end guys....it was Australian engineers that carried out the staples not us in other words. Pepz, are you aware of the damage that was inflicted on that aircraft while it was having its d check in Aug last year?.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If SIAEC is indulging in such dodgy maintenance practices, I believe it amounts to criminal negligence. If such criminal negligence is indeed taking place, this is no longer a commercial issue between Qantas and SIAEC, and neither is it just simple industrial relations dispute. It should involve the arm of the law. The following should be done then:
1) Qantas and CASA should notify the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore and ICAO
2) The Commercial Affairs Division of the Singapore Police and other relevant police agencies in Singapore and Australia should also be notified
3) Both civil and criminal charges (professional negligence) should be pressed against SIAEC by Qantas in both Singapore and Australia.
4) All the 107 (or whatever the number was) organisations who audited SIAEC should strike them off as an acceptable MRO organisation
5) SIA aircraft, together with the QF aircraft damaged by SIAEC should all be grounded and banned from flying(as the EU banned Indonesian aircraft) until it can be shown that reasonable standards of maintenance have been met
6) If what SIAEC did was indeed true, QF should not send yet another 744 to SIAEC in 2 weeks. They should ground the aircraft till there is a slot internally or in another MRO company that has an acceptable level of maintenance standards. Qantas, by sending yet another aircraft to SIAEC, is breaching the duty of care it has to its passengers and crew in the law of tort and can be found guilty in a court of law if anything goes wrong, bearing in mind that SIAEC has (apparently) been proven on multiple counts to have indulged in unsafe maintenance practices
So my question is, why is none of the above being done? The least I would expect is for the police to be notified.
1) Qantas and CASA should notify the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore and ICAO
2) The Commercial Affairs Division of the Singapore Police and other relevant police agencies in Singapore and Australia should also be notified
3) Both civil and criminal charges (professional negligence) should be pressed against SIAEC by Qantas in both Singapore and Australia.
4) All the 107 (or whatever the number was) organisations who audited SIAEC should strike them off as an acceptable MRO organisation
5) SIA aircraft, together with the QF aircraft damaged by SIAEC should all be grounded and banned from flying(as the EU banned Indonesian aircraft) until it can be shown that reasonable standards of maintenance have been met
6) If what SIAEC did was indeed true, QF should not send yet another 744 to SIAEC in 2 weeks. They should ground the aircraft till there is a slot internally or in another MRO company that has an acceptable level of maintenance standards. Qantas, by sending yet another aircraft to SIAEC, is breaching the duty of care it has to its passengers and crew in the law of tort and can be found guilty in a court of law if anything goes wrong, bearing in mind that SIAEC has (apparently) been proven on multiple counts to have indulged in unsafe maintenance practices
So my question is, why is none of the above being done? The least I would expect is for the police to be notified.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: concert hall
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am thinking of cock's response in that he was aware of the staples issue and told siaec to stop it........just like the prisoners issue as well ....oh sorry.......there are no prisoners working on aircraft there.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I work at SIN (one of the organisations stated above, but not SIAEC) and I can assure you with 99.9% certainty that prisoners are not given work at Changi Airport. It's a bitch for people like myself who don't (yet) have a criminal record to get the airport pass approved. The Internal Security Department (our equivalent of the Gestapo or the CIA, however you want to look at it) goes through every application and does background checks on all applicants for the airport pass. When I was in desperate need of more staff and offered one candidate a position after the interview, he could only take up the job one month after the offer since all the police checks had to be done. And he isn't even getting anywhere close to aircraft.
Just to get back on track, if Cox thought that SIAEC was indulging in unsafe maintenance practices, he should not just have told them to stop it. He should have informed the police and the relevant regulatory authorities.
And Cox said he picked up on it, William Tan says it never happened, so who is telling the truth? Surely we should find out in a court of law?
Just to get back on track, if Cox thought that SIAEC was indulging in unsafe maintenance practices, he should not just have told them to stop it. He should have informed the police and the relevant regulatory authorities.
And Cox said he picked up on it, William Tan says it never happened, so who is telling the truth? Surely we should find out in a court of law?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh please..........
Police agencies in Singapore and Australia should be notified......
And what would the charge be?
Under whose law would that be prosecuted under, and which provision?
If it wasn't so funny it would be sad.
- M.P.
Police agencies in Singapore and Australia should be notified......
And what would the charge be?
Under whose law would that be prosecuted under, and which provision?
If it wasn't so funny it would be sad.
- M.P.
Another reason QF won't take this to the police is that another B744 is about to arrive at SIAEC for a "D" check. There are no vacancies anywhere else so QF management won't upset the apple cart.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Word on the Tarmac is that Mr Borgetti is none to happy with cox-up and has told him if another aircraft fk-up is found out by the ALAEA his ass is grass 
Oh my I feel so ............. here's my phone click click hasta la vista davo
Oh my I feel so ............. here's my phone click click hasta la vista davo
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah , Today tonight tells it again!
I wonder if Dave will reply this time?
But sadly the question in my mind is
WHERE THE HELL IS CASA?
Seems all they care about is collecting my
license renewal money and stuff all else.
Funny how they come down on Ansett like
a ton of bricks but QF can do no wrong.
Lucky I am not a conspiricy theorist because
I would be starting to smell a rat.
I loved John Laws last comment saying that
its a pity these incidents were brought to the
unions attention instead of the companys.
More to the point , its a bloody disgrace
that the company and casa have done nothing
for years and years and now the only
forum available is the media.
I wonder if Dave will reply this time?
But sadly the question in my mind is
WHERE THE HELL IS CASA?
Seems all they care about is collecting my
license renewal money and stuff all else.
Funny how they come down on Ansett like
a ton of bricks but QF can do no wrong.
Lucky I am not a conspiricy theorist because
I would be starting to smell a rat.
I loved John Laws last comment saying that
its a pity these incidents were brought to the
unions attention instead of the companys.
More to the point , its a bloody disgrace
that the company and casa have done nothing
for years and years and now the only
forum available is the media.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Snakepit Sydney
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VH-OJE off to Singapore
Well Vh-OJE is off to SIA Siaec for a D check, as with the past 3 or 4 aircraft that have returned after having their checks in Singapore, spent 3 to 4 days on the ground while QF engineers fix problems that have happened as a result of the D Check - maybe we should all just say, its had its check it must be 100% serviceable. After all the Siaec management say their maintenance records are excellent. Then the aircraft should go straight back into service on its return on its immediate return!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF was dutifully informed by it's engineers and it's surveillance staff, BOTH WERE IGNORED, because we can't put SIAEC offside after all they have the only spare slots for B747 maint. in the southern hemisphere.
You pay peanuts you get monkeys
Ignorance is no excuse but it is still a step well behind Negligence deliberately doing something wrong is disgraceful.
You pay peanuts you get monkeys
Ignorance is no excuse but it is still a step well behind Negligence deliberately doing something wrong is disgraceful.
"The only spare D check slots in the southern hemisphere." QF will do what they're told by SIAEC because they have NO OPTIONS. The current management have single handedly de-skilled their engineering section. We will soon see SIAEC placing demands on QF and I just cant wait until they up the costs. I hope QF have "hedged" their contractual arrangements with SIAEC for the next 100 years..
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Here
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every other facility wanted a 60 aircraft contract. SIAEC is happy to squeeze a QF machine into their white space along side a repaint or an A check.
Qantas dont want to get them offside or they'll say "find another hole to stick your aircraft in" and QF know they are fked because there aint no more available holes.
Qantas dont want to get them offside or they'll say "find another hole to stick your aircraft in" and QF know they are fked because there aint no more available holes.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest installment
Here is the footage from the 1st of August on Today Tonight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZNSH8JQ4yQ
Enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZNSH8JQ4yQ
Enjoy.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there comes a time in a heavy check where management decide weather to send the parts offshore / avv or the aircraft to the parts. Dmm's / check coordinators call.
In a perfect world it would make perfect sense because its all about getting QF's 250mil aircraft back into service. Gd"s new world with segmentation and the like makes MRO look cheap and ACS / qantas heavy (I can not bring myself to put qantas in upper case any more) look expensive.
QF heavy mnt gave the network a 100% serviceable aircraft . Jokes from
line guys aside ,go look at the first 10 sector defects an do a comparo. with
an aircraft done offshore .
Its a bloody disgrace. Come first A check all that deferred stuff comes back and we are made to look even worse.
I say any aircraft that goes OS for a check goes black and we will see where the real costs lie.
The latest copy of leading edge had this lean sigma speel about going to the work place ,well lets see if they have the guts.
Remember QF management are no more than a pack of fast talking liars.
Below the line M ?
Well Fu*k off . you cant hide behind your new world talk forever.
A real accountant will expose you for the liars you are.
In a perfect world it would make perfect sense because its all about getting QF's 250mil aircraft back into service. Gd"s new world with segmentation and the like makes MRO look cheap and ACS / qantas heavy (I can not bring myself to put qantas in upper case any more) look expensive.
QF heavy mnt gave the network a 100% serviceable aircraft . Jokes from
line guys aside ,go look at the first 10 sector defects an do a comparo. with
an aircraft done offshore .
Its a bloody disgrace. Come first A check all that deferred stuff comes back and we are made to look even worse.
I say any aircraft that goes OS for a check goes black and we will see where the real costs lie.
The latest copy of leading edge had this lean sigma speel about going to the work place ,well lets see if they have the guts.
Remember QF management are no more than a pack of fast talking liars.
Below the line M ?
Well Fu*k off . you cant hide behind your new world talk forever.
A real accountant will expose you for the liars you are.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Snakepit Sydney
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally agree there....the additional workload of deferred and OSIP work that was placed on QF heavy maintenance was to the point of ridicules...Now they
send the aircraft overseas and then do all the OSIP when it returns...
It must be almost about time a vote of no confidence be placed on Mr Cox and his management team...There seems to be no accountability by any of them at all...
send the aircraft overseas and then do all the OSIP when it returns...
It must be almost about time a vote of no confidence be placed on Mr Cox and his management team...There seems to be no accountability by any of them at all...
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: airside
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it just me, or does Dixon look more and more like becoming another Christopher Skase every day?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Skase
God help Qantas if he is!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Skase
God help Qantas if he is!