Qantas Maintenance Story On Ch.7
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF , the new Garuda
Mate, talk to the ex heavy guys or the base maint boys who
have to deal with the crap that comes back from overseas, but most
of all talk to the techies 'cause they are the ones who see
how the reliability of the aircraft they fly every day has dropped.
You can deal with an IFSD but structual failure is another thing all together.
But its all good isn't it , its now all about putting bonus money in
Geoff , Dave and Murray's pockets !
I just hope that Tulla heavy stays 'cause they do a fantastic job on those
737's.
have to deal with the crap that comes back from overseas, but most
of all talk to the techies 'cause they are the ones who see
how the reliability of the aircraft they fly every day has dropped.
You can deal with an IFSD but structual failure is another thing all together.
But its all good isn't it , its now all about putting bonus money in
Geoff , Dave and Murray's pockets !
I just hope that Tulla heavy stays 'cause they do a fantastic job on those
737's.
Last edited by acslame; 18th Jul 2007 at 13:40.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While doing crown inspections on one of the ugly sisters (OEB?)one of the engineers in syd heavy Tim peeled back an insulation blanket to discover he was seeing light shine thru from outside.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heavy Maintenance
It is a common statement made by the layperson that if these MROs' are so dodgy, then why aren't aeroplanes falling out of the sky?
Well the simple answer is that any short cut taken, or deviation from accepted industry practice, or task simply not carried out, or defect missed etc... is like a time bomb buried deep. When and how it goes off, anyones guess. These checks are years appart.
This is not a problem for Singapore Airlines, in particular, because they get rid of their aircraft after about 5 years (D checks 5-6 years apart). Couple this with a world wide shortage of capacity for wide body 3rd party work (yes David Cox and John Vincent closed down the premier heavy line and workshop support, in an environment where no 3rd party MRO had space) so "rushing them through" is paramount. Qantas were lucky they jagged a few slots in Singapore. MAS has 10 lines full, "come back in about 10 years" if you need a check done.
But at the end of the day, the law was broken. Someone is surely culpable. These were not maintenance errors, mistakes, these people deliberately acted in the way they did. They knew what they were doing was wrong. If Cox cannot see this, he must go.
Well the simple answer is that any short cut taken, or deviation from accepted industry practice, or task simply not carried out, or defect missed etc... is like a time bomb buried deep. When and how it goes off, anyones guess. These checks are years appart.
This is not a problem for Singapore Airlines, in particular, because they get rid of their aircraft after about 5 years (D checks 5-6 years apart). Couple this with a world wide shortage of capacity for wide body 3rd party work (yes David Cox and John Vincent closed down the premier heavy line and workshop support, in an environment where no 3rd party MRO had space) so "rushing them through" is paramount. Qantas were lucky they jagged a few slots in Singapore. MAS has 10 lines full, "come back in about 10 years" if you need a check done.
But at the end of the day, the law was broken. Someone is surely culpable. These were not maintenance errors, mistakes, these people deliberately acted in the way they did. They knew what they were doing was wrong. If Cox cannot see this, he must go.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not an engineer, but I have several questions in relation to organisational oversight:
1. How much sway does CASA have over foreign maintenance organisations and their standards?
2. Obviously if required, CASA can tell QF that their maintenance standards are not up to scratch and they need to improve, but at what hyperthetical point do CASA get the balls to do this and risk the political fallout? Is there such a thing as three strikes...you're out?
3. It used to be a case where the DCA relied heavily on "an ear to the ground" for regulation enforcement. These days, it seems all they want to see is that the correct procedures are written in an Ops Manual. What evidence do they require to indicate that procedures are not being followed?
4. Finally, which individual has the courage to be the "whistle-blower" in Qantas when the unions are torn to shreds?
Someone mentioned in an earlier post, "However, you can bet your life that if a serious accident does occur, it will be a pilot or an engineer left holding the can, not MJ,GD or DC." Sounds like my experiences in GA!
1. How much sway does CASA have over foreign maintenance organisations and their standards?
2. Obviously if required, CASA can tell QF that their maintenance standards are not up to scratch and they need to improve, but at what hyperthetical point do CASA get the balls to do this and risk the political fallout? Is there such a thing as three strikes...you're out?
3. It used to be a case where the DCA relied heavily on "an ear to the ground" for regulation enforcement. These days, it seems all they want to see is that the correct procedures are written in an Ops Manual. What evidence do they require to indicate that procedures are not being followed?
4. Finally, which individual has the courage to be the "whistle-blower" in Qantas when the unions are torn to shreds?
Someone mentioned in an earlier post, "However, you can bet your life that if a serious accident does occur, it will be a pilot or an engineer left holding the can, not MJ,GD or DC." Sounds like my experiences in GA!
I dont understand how any company, especially QF, can allow the deskilling of its workforce. Aircraft heavy maintenance is a particular learned skill through training and experience. In 10 years time there will be no one left in QF who possess these skills and all the tooling etc, will be gone. I bet my left you-know-what that the 'low prices' wont be around then and you have no option but to accept what the offshore MRO decides that you have to pay, and it wont be cheap. But current management dont care about that, they have boosted their bonuses through cost cutting and are living the good life. Its the next CEO or whoever that will have to justify it all. Perhaps CEO/Managers should be held accountable down the track for something that they did 10 years ago if something happens.
Slightly off track, but who does the maintenance on the RAAF VIP fleet?
Slightly off track, but who does the maintenance on the RAAF VIP fleet?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orstralya
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No Idea,
I suspect you may already know the answer to you question. The BBJ's are maintained by Qantas, with the heavy maintenance performed at the Tulla 737 base.
Apparently, substandard maintenance is O.K. for the general public but, only the highest standards will do for Johnny.
I suspect you may already know the answer to you question. The BBJ's are maintained by Qantas, with the heavy maintenance performed at the Tulla 737 base.
Apparently, substandard maintenance is O.K. for the general public but, only the highest standards will do for Johnny.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: concert hall
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To get back to the thread guys, just wondered who will take the rap when there is a crash. The most immediate thing that sprung to mind was the Lockhart River fatality and that facility was audited by CASA prior to that dreadful event. Seems the lunches were nice and long at Changai Airport. When is the body responsible for the safety of the travelling public wake up and start acting like one. If it was good enough for Ansett then it's good enough for the white rat.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The facts as such are that the Singapore maintenance facility used staples in a procedure that QF admitted was incorrect.
This leads to 2 questions.
1...Did the facility know that they were not supposed to use this technique?
or
2...Did the facility know that this method was incorrect but used it anyway?
Either way would anyone after seeing this have them service your car let alone a commercial aircraft.
You would have to assume that if there was one instance then there will be others.
If you found a car dealership had used a dodgy repair method would you go back to them?
This leads to 2 questions.
1...Did the facility know that they were not supposed to use this technique?
or
2...Did the facility know that this method was incorrect but used it anyway?
Either way would anyone after seeing this have them service your car let alone a commercial aircraft.
You would have to assume that if there was one instance then there will be others.
If you found a car dealership had used a dodgy repair method would you go back to them?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pure genius
If only I had known I could fix emergency track lighting with a stapler !! pure genius.
If that defect occurs it quite often means emptying the adjacent zone of pax.
That means off loading 50 plus people
Perhaps tech services can get this repair put in the manual as a temp wiring repair for future drama as it looks like the staples were fitted for almost 12 months.
SIAEC is ahead of its time and we should not be criticizing but embracing them or I should be writing PR for D Cox
If only I had known I could fix emergency track lighting with a stapler !! pure genius.
If that defect occurs it quite often means emptying the adjacent zone of pax.
That means off loading 50 plus people
Perhaps tech services can get this repair put in the manual as a temp wiring repair for future drama as it looks like the staples were fitted for almost 12 months.
SIAEC is ahead of its time and we should not be criticizing but embracing them or I should be writing PR for D Cox
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bolty, can you confirm that the emergency track lighting system on Qantas airplanes is photoluminiscent and does not require electrical power for it's function or charging; in which case the staples were not inserted as an electrical means of circuit continuity but rather to secure the luminiscent strips, which alters the equation somewhat.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Delhi
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Message to Staff
David Cox, Executive General Manager Qantas Engineering
Recently there have been some media reports concerning Qantas Engineering’s heavy maintenance activities.
These stories focus on a small number of audit reports, and a small number of issues, relating to work carried out for Qantas by Singapore Airlines Engineering Company (SIAEC) in Singapore and Lufthansa Technik in the Philippines. The key issues were identified some time ago and were thoroughly investigated at that time.
However, to anyone not experienced in the field of aircraft maintenance, the story may have caused needless concern regarding safety at Qantas
First and foremost, I can assure you that Qantas remains 100 per cent committed to the highest safety standards.For Qantas Engineering, safety always has been, and always will be, at the core of everything we do.
These are the facts
the vast majority – about 90 per cent - of our aircraft heavy maintenance is undertaken in Australia
the remainder which is generally overflow work, work on aircraft types where the volume is low, including new aircraft types such as the A330, is done overseas. This is nothing new and has been the case for decades;
our overseas providers are in the top tier of the industry and are certified by Qantas and CASA;
their employees are specially trained to meet Qantas’ own requirements;
Qantas Engineering always has a team of its own people on site to oversee and ensure work undertaken offshore is of an acceptable quality; and
Qantas Engineering undertakes nearly 200 audits each year. Any issue identified – be it with a Qantas Australian facility or an offshore provider – is dealt with immediately and rigorously.
The providers used by Qantas maintain aircraft for some of the most respected airlines in the world, including Singapore Airlines, Lufthansa, Cathay Pacific and Japan Airlines. No rational person who understands the aircraft industry could seriously suggest that they too are not committed to safety.Qantas Engineering applies identical stringent standards to all of its suppliers in Australia and overseas. If we identify a quality issue at any supplier, we address it immediately. For this process to work, every staff member should report issues as soon as they arise. To withhold information and then release it to the media is a totally unacceptable breach of our safety system.
Our people here in Australia undertake the vast majority of our maintenance work and they do a fantastic job day in and day out, particularly in the context of the necessary changes we are making to the Qantas Engineering business to make it sustainable. It is deeply regrettable that such good work is undermined by industrially motivated media activity.
We are trying to build an efficient and competitive business in Australia that will ensure work stays in this country. To do this, we need the flexibility to be able to occasionally send work overseas to reputable providers. To run stories of this nature quite simply works against this goal and prejudices our commitment to safety.
David Cox
Executive General Manager
Qantas Engineering
Thank you for saving the airline David. No wonder we pay you 1.3 M per year.
David Cox, Executive General Manager Qantas Engineering
Recently there have been some media reports concerning Qantas Engineering’s heavy maintenance activities.
These stories focus on a small number of audit reports, and a small number of issues, relating to work carried out for Qantas by Singapore Airlines Engineering Company (SIAEC) in Singapore and Lufthansa Technik in the Philippines. The key issues were identified some time ago and were thoroughly investigated at that time.
However, to anyone not experienced in the field of aircraft maintenance, the story may have caused needless concern regarding safety at Qantas
First and foremost, I can assure you that Qantas remains 100 per cent committed to the highest safety standards.For Qantas Engineering, safety always has been, and always will be, at the core of everything we do.
These are the facts
the vast majority – about 90 per cent - of our aircraft heavy maintenance is undertaken in Australia
the remainder which is generally overflow work, work on aircraft types where the volume is low, including new aircraft types such as the A330, is done overseas. This is nothing new and has been the case for decades;
our overseas providers are in the top tier of the industry and are certified by Qantas and CASA;
their employees are specially trained to meet Qantas’ own requirements;
Qantas Engineering always has a team of its own people on site to oversee and ensure work undertaken offshore is of an acceptable quality; and
Qantas Engineering undertakes nearly 200 audits each year. Any issue identified – be it with a Qantas Australian facility or an offshore provider – is dealt with immediately and rigorously.
The providers used by Qantas maintain aircraft for some of the most respected airlines in the world, including Singapore Airlines, Lufthansa, Cathay Pacific and Japan Airlines. No rational person who understands the aircraft industry could seriously suggest that they too are not committed to safety.Qantas Engineering applies identical stringent standards to all of its suppliers in Australia and overseas. If we identify a quality issue at any supplier, we address it immediately. For this process to work, every staff member should report issues as soon as they arise. To withhold information and then release it to the media is a totally unacceptable breach of our safety system.
Our people here in Australia undertake the vast majority of our maintenance work and they do a fantastic job day in and day out, particularly in the context of the necessary changes we are making to the Qantas Engineering business to make it sustainable. It is deeply regrettable that such good work is undermined by industrially motivated media activity.
We are trying to build an efficient and competitive business in Australia that will ensure work stays in this country. To do this, we need the flexibility to be able to occasionally send work overseas to reputable providers. To run stories of this nature quite simply works against this goal and prejudices our commitment to safety.
David Cox
Executive General Manager
Qantas Engineering
Thank you for saving the airline David. No wonder we pay you 1.3 M per year.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hot Dog
The Emergency Lighting system under scrutiny is NOT photoluminescent. The Emergency Egress Lighting (EEL) system is Electro luminscent and powered by 115VAC from inverters which are themselves powered by the Emeregency battery packs.
The Emergency Lighting system under scrutiny is NOT photoluminescent. The Emergency Egress Lighting (EEL) system is Electro luminscent and powered by 115VAC from inverters which are themselves powered by the Emeregency battery packs.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: around the corner
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hotdog. Those staples were going straight through the conductors of the 115V feeder cables for the floor path lighting. They run from the sidewall to the E.E.L track and sometimes accross the isles and get severed by catering trollies and those sort of things. Normally the only way to repair it is to rip the carpet up and replace the whole feeder (anywhere from 3ft to 9ft).
Sorry if you were being sarcastic, but the answer to your question is that no, those staples are there for electrical continuity, not fastening it to the track.
Sorry if you were being sarcastic, but the answer to your question is that no, those staples are there for electrical continuity, not fastening it to the track.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HOTDOG
From memory. The "eel" emergency light (electro luminescence) on a 744 is powered by trickle charged DC battery pack which is inverted up to 115V 400 htz AC. This power is supplied to the track which is made of some special fart gas mixed with plastic in ribbon form that when hit with AC it glows. In each strip 4 or 5 very thin copper conductors run to power the strip which when cut prevents the "eel" light from working. Cutting quite often happens when carpet guys hit the thin wires with their carpet knives. These wire are so thin I would never have thought a staple would work unless it was touching a copper wire to make the circuit. But as we have found out the luminescence material is conductive enough to make the system work when a split/cut is jumpered with a staple. Genius misguided but genius
The photo photoluminiscent system you mention similar to the tritium painted green dots on your watch face is not fitted to any QF long haul aircraft.
To alcohol, the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems
From memory. The "eel" emergency light (electro luminescence) on a 744 is powered by trickle charged DC battery pack which is inverted up to 115V 400 htz AC. This power is supplied to the track which is made of some special fart gas mixed with plastic in ribbon form that when hit with AC it glows. In each strip 4 or 5 very thin copper conductors run to power the strip which when cut prevents the "eel" light from working. Cutting quite often happens when carpet guys hit the thin wires with their carpet knives. These wire are so thin I would never have thought a staple would work unless it was touching a copper wire to make the circuit. But as we have found out the luminescence material is conductive enough to make the system work when a split/cut is jumpered with a staple. Genius misguided but genius
The photo photoluminiscent system you mention similar to the tritium painted green dots on your watch face is not fitted to any QF long haul aircraft.
To alcohol, the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems
Last edited by Bolty McBolt; 20th Jul 2007 at 03:43.