Jetstar 330 grounded 3 days after returning from overseas maintenance in Manilla
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar 330 grounded 3 days after returning from overseas maintenance in Manilla
Jetsar A330 VH-EBC has been grounded today for at least 24 hours after a loud noise from door 2L forced passenger to be moved from the area when the aircraft reached altitude. The aircraft left Manilla 4 days ago after completion of another overseas heavy maintenance check. Qantas management were in flat spin mode again today attempting to find a spare Qantas aircraft to replace the scheduled service. The defect was first identified on the first flight out of Manilla. A temp repair carried out on an Engineering Authority failed to fix the problem on the following sector to Bkk and on return to Australia it was decided that the aircraft was no longer fit to fly. An incorrectly installed door sill appears to be the likely source but Qantas Engineering spokesperson CD says that Qantas's commitment to safety is higher than ever before.
Last edited by The masked goatrider; 3rd Aug 2007 at 06:39.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this for real or just some sort of sick joke? If it's serious the joke is on the passengers who fly on aircraft and the fact that DCx is still in charge of Qf engineering. What a sad state of affairs
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orstraylia
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correctamundo
The masked one is spot on the money.
Ill fitting door sill fitted during MNL heavy maint check due to poor workmanship is to blame.
No spares in AUS so A/C is AOG until part arrives ex MNL and re-fitted.
What is the excuse for this one DC????
QF ACS Line Maintenance picking up the pieces as usual.
Ill fitting door sill fitted during MNL heavy maint check due to poor workmanship is to blame.
No spares in AUS so A/C is AOG until part arrives ex MNL and re-fitted.
What is the excuse for this one DC????
QF ACS Line Maintenance picking up the pieces as usual.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Encore please David TT loves your style
When the Christ will they learn and how long will incompetent leaders be protected by the boy from Wagga? DC you are the one fool who destroyed the Qantas engineering reputation through your selfish actions for your own greedy purpose. Of particular note was the payrise. $600,000 pa to $1.3 M. The target? Heavy Maintenance in Australia and every engineer who finds defects on aircraft. Finding defects costs money because that requires repair work but at times the problems aren’t identified by engineers. It is the tech crew when things go wrong and the latest addition to your resume the poor Jetstar pax who couldn’t even sit within 6 rows of the door because the squeal was too loud. Don’t think you will be getting off lightly next week you turkey. While you terrorise every lame at Base Maint with threatening letters, interrogations and security guards watching every move it appears that you have let your own guard down. No such actions for the laid back Melbourne boys. Free to work, find the problems and yes report them to their union. I hear TT particularly found log seq’s 065 and 074 of concern and it should be an interesting week coming up. Call on your friends in Manilla this time to protect your a$$ buddy. The “loud whine noise” coming from 2L on the very first flt out of maint and yes I expect you to say it wasn’t them. We are investigating. It’s not a safety issue it is a quality problem. Casa are comfortable with our actions. We only use top tier suppliers. Come on down DC, your encore performance on television awaits and be prepared to be thrown some more photos at the last minute. We took them in the lift on the way up. 
So what are you talking about here, a door sill, or a door seal?
The symptoms described sound more applicable to a door seal not a sill as mentioned in the opening post and since both items exist on aircraft an error such as this cannot be excused.
So what is it, are you armchair maintenance workers or just QANTAS haters? You'd have a lot more credibility if you get it right.
Let the stone throwing commence.
The symptoms described sound more applicable to a door seal not a sill as mentioned in the opening post and since both items exist on aircraft an error such as this cannot be excused.
So what is it, are you armchair maintenance workers or just QANTAS haters? You'd have a lot more credibility if you get it right.
Let the stone throwing commence.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pete,
If someone issued an EA for an incorrectly fitted rubber door seal rather than replacing or fitting it properly they would need to be shot as well.
If someone mispells sill for seal I would also be shocked.
I would suggest it is the very hard to remove and install piece of titanium protection door sill with seal mating face that is the problem. Hell if they didn't do a mating check on this after installation what else have they not done?
So yes I believe they "would have it right"
Where's CASA? IS YUM CHA FINISHED YET!
WE LOVE QANTAS, THE CURRENT ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT DOES NOT! THEY ARE DESTROYING ITS HERITAGE, ITS PREMIUM IT ATTRACTS, AND EXPOSING OUR JOBS.
IF THATS GONE THERE NOTHING LEFT!
If someone issued an EA for an incorrectly fitted rubber door seal rather than replacing or fitting it properly they would need to be shot as well.
If someone mispells sill for seal I would also be shocked.
I would suggest it is the very hard to remove and install piece of titanium protection door sill with seal mating face that is the problem. Hell if they didn't do a mating check on this after installation what else have they not done?
So yes I believe they "would have it right"
Where's CASA? IS YUM CHA FINISHED YET!
WE LOVE QANTAS, THE CURRENT ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT DOES NOT! THEY ARE DESTROYING ITS HERITAGE, ITS PREMIUM IT ATTRACTS, AND EXPOSING OUR JOBS.
IF THATS GONE THERE NOTHING LEFT!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Snakepit Sydney
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar 330
Now will CASA serious say to Qantas management you better do your maintenance in house? JAL was told by JAA to suspend all overseas maintenance and take it back in house after repeated incidents of poor maintenance, carried out by what Mr Cox says are in the top 10 MRO's in the world for aviation maintenance....What was the name of that company...
SIAEC.....
JAA isnt a toothless tiger like CASA....
SIAEC.....
JAA isnt a toothless tiger like CASA....
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA get serious with Qantas, you are dreaming mate. The last time CASA had a serious discussion with Qantas was when Qantas was telling them what they might find if they looked closely at the Ansett 767's.
You would probably stand a better chance of getting John Laws to tell both sides of a story involving Qantas.
Ahab
You would probably stand a better chance of getting John Laws to tell both sides of a story involving Qantas.
Ahab
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: concert hall
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hardworker, could you provide a link to that determination by the JAA, or anyone else for that matter. Seems that the Singapore CAA post on here too and claim that they are squeaky clean over the wiring issue. Just one thing that crossed my mind, if that door sill/seal assembly on the 'bus got to the stage of depuressurising the cabin. I would hope the emergency oxygen is lockwired to the open position.
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just one thing that crossed my mind, if that door sill/seal assembly on the 'bus got to the stage of depuressurising the cabin. I would hope the emergency oxygen is lockwired to the open position.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: BNE
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This error occurred at SASCO, just a stones throw from SIAEC. (not the one your after UK Subs) but it did involve JAL. Unfortunately the original link is dead.
It happened in 2005.
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/051221/kyodo/d8ekgjt00.html
Wednesday December 21, 3:53 PM
JAL B747 jumbo in sky for 7 months with engines on wrong side
(Kyodo) _ Japan Airlines had been flying a Boeing jumbo jet for seven months without realizing the plane's left and right outer engines had been placed on the wrong sides during maintenance in Singapore in February, airline officials admitted Wednesday.
Some components of the engines are required to be inspected once every 650 flights, but as a result of the mistake, one of the engines completed about 850 flights without being examined.
The officials said there were no safety problems but the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Ministry instructed the airline to take measures to prevent any recurrence.
In February, JAL commissioned ST Aviation Services Co. Pte Ltd. in Singapore to conduct maintenance work on the four-engine Boeing 747. The plane resumed service after the overhaul was completed in April.
It was not until a regular maintenance checkup in November that the engines were discovered to have been attached wrongly.
Reversing the engine locations results in air flow toward the fuselage instead of away from it during reverse thrust. However, it does not create any difference during normal thrust and thus poses no safety problems during flights, the officials said.
They said JAL will revise in-house procedures to ensure that inspections on the planes are conducted after outsourced maintenance work. The current policy only calls for checking documents after the completion of maintenance work.
It happened in 2005.
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/051221/kyodo/d8ekgjt00.html
Wednesday December 21, 3:53 PM
JAL B747 jumbo in sky for 7 months with engines on wrong side
(Kyodo) _ Japan Airlines had been flying a Boeing jumbo jet for seven months without realizing the plane's left and right outer engines had been placed on the wrong sides during maintenance in Singapore in February, airline officials admitted Wednesday.
Some components of the engines are required to be inspected once every 650 flights, but as a result of the mistake, one of the engines completed about 850 flights without being examined.
The officials said there were no safety problems but the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Ministry instructed the airline to take measures to prevent any recurrence.
In February, JAL commissioned ST Aviation Services Co. Pte Ltd. in Singapore to conduct maintenance work on the four-engine Boeing 747. The plane resumed service after the overhaul was completed in April.
It was not until a regular maintenance checkup in November that the engines were discovered to have been attached wrongly.
Reversing the engine locations results in air flow toward the fuselage instead of away from it during reverse thrust. However, it does not create any difference during normal thrust and thus poses no safety problems during flights, the officials said.
They said JAL will revise in-house procedures to ensure that inspections on the planes are conducted after outsourced maintenance work. The current policy only calls for checking documents after the completion of maintenance work.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "U.K SUBS, I don't know what your occupation is but it certainly can't be aviation."
Mr Hotdog, it appears that you have let the point of U.K SUBS' last post whistle through to the keeper... It wasn't so long ago that a very similar aircraft departed a very similar maintenance facility with the crew oxygen bottle lockwired in the closed position.. Swiss cheese effect? maybe..
Mr Hotdog, it appears that you have let the point of U.K SUBS' last post whistle through to the keeper... It wasn't so long ago that a very similar aircraft departed a very similar maintenance facility with the crew oxygen bottle lockwired in the closed position.. Swiss cheese effect? maybe..
Last edited by Black Hands; 4th Aug 2007 at 09:11. Reason: grammar
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Black Hands, the subject was a leaking door seal that could not have caused a depressurization; I hope you agree with that statement? Ergo, whether the red herring of crew oxygen supply valve lock wired closed, is not the open goal that you are eluding to. Not at all defending the lock wiring, if it happened, a check of crew oxygen masks during pre flight checks is SOP with most operators.