QF and QLink big announcement?????
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This, today from "The Guardian" in the UK. Looks like QF might be able to pick up some second hand Scandinavian Q400's to preempt the jungle-jets arrival. VB must be loosing sleep - NOT!
SAS Pulls Turboprop Planes From Fleet
Sunday October 28, 2007 7:01 PM
By MALIN RISING
Associated Press Writer
STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) - Scandinavian Airlines said Sunday it will pull Bombardier Q400 turboprops from its fleet after a series of crash landings caused by landing gear malfunctions.
The decision came a day after an SAS turboprop with 44 people on board crash-landed in Denmark when part of its landing gear collapsed, with one wing scraping the ground in a shower of sparks. All passengers and crew were evacuated safely.
The same type of plane, also known as Dash 8, crash-landed twice last month and SAS temporarily grounded its fleet of turboprops. No one was seriously injured.
``Confidence in the Q400 has diminished considerably and our customers are becoming increasingly doubtful about flying in this type of aircraft,'' SAS chief executive Mats Jansson said in a statement.
In a statement released Sunday on the company Web site, Canada's Bombardier Inc. said it was ``disappointed'' with the SAS decision to pull the planes because Danish authorities had not yet closed an investigation into Saturday's crash landing. The company stuck by an earlier assessment that found no systemic problem with the landing gear.
``Bombardier stands behind the Q400 aircraft,'' the company said.
The statement also said Bombardier had completed a full review of the Q400 landing gear system along with the landing gear manufacturer, Goodrich, which further ``confirmed its safe design and operational integrity.''
SAS said it would replace its 27 Bombardier turboprops with other types of aircraft in its fleet, as well as with leased aircraft. SAS warned that it would have to cancel flights ``in the period immediately ahead,'' but did not say how many. The turboprops represented some 5 percent of SAS's total fleet.
The airline had already canceled about 50 flights Sunday and Monday with turboprops after Saturday's emergency landing at Copenhagen's airport.
Bombardier recommended airlines to continue flying the aircraft, saying there appeared to be no link between the Saturday's crash-landing and previous incidents involving SAS turboprops.
SAS has said it would demand $78.25 million in compensation from Bombardier for costs and lost income for accidents involving the turboprops. It wasn't immediately clear if SAS would make additional claims after Sunday's decision.
Twenty-one other airlines worldwide currently operate the Q400 or have pending orders for the aircraft, including American companies Horizon Air, Frontier Airlines and Continental Airlines, according to Bombardier.
Company spokesman Bert Cruickshank said 164 Q400 planes had been delivered worldwide as of July 31, including 31 currently operated by Horizon Air.
Cruickshank said Frontier Airlines has 10 Q400 planes on order, one of which had been delivered as of July, and Continental Airlines and Memphis, Tenn.-based Pinnacle Airlines Corp. ordered 15 planes in March under a joint contract.
SAS Pulls Turboprop Planes From Fleet
Sunday October 28, 2007 7:01 PM
By MALIN RISING
Associated Press Writer
STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) - Scandinavian Airlines said Sunday it will pull Bombardier Q400 turboprops from its fleet after a series of crash landings caused by landing gear malfunctions.
The decision came a day after an SAS turboprop with 44 people on board crash-landed in Denmark when part of its landing gear collapsed, with one wing scraping the ground in a shower of sparks. All passengers and crew were evacuated safely.
The same type of plane, also known as Dash 8, crash-landed twice last month and SAS temporarily grounded its fleet of turboprops. No one was seriously injured.
``Confidence in the Q400 has diminished considerably and our customers are becoming increasingly doubtful about flying in this type of aircraft,'' SAS chief executive Mats Jansson said in a statement.
In a statement released Sunday on the company Web site, Canada's Bombardier Inc. said it was ``disappointed'' with the SAS decision to pull the planes because Danish authorities had not yet closed an investigation into Saturday's crash landing. The company stuck by an earlier assessment that found no systemic problem with the landing gear.
``Bombardier stands behind the Q400 aircraft,'' the company said.
The statement also said Bombardier had completed a full review of the Q400 landing gear system along with the landing gear manufacturer, Goodrich, which further ``confirmed its safe design and operational integrity.''
SAS said it would replace its 27 Bombardier turboprops with other types of aircraft in its fleet, as well as with leased aircraft. SAS warned that it would have to cancel flights ``in the period immediately ahead,'' but did not say how many. The turboprops represented some 5 percent of SAS's total fleet.
The airline had already canceled about 50 flights Sunday and Monday with turboprops after Saturday's emergency landing at Copenhagen's airport.
Bombardier recommended airlines to continue flying the aircraft, saying there appeared to be no link between the Saturday's crash-landing and previous incidents involving SAS turboprops.
SAS has said it would demand $78.25 million in compensation from Bombardier for costs and lost income for accidents involving the turboprops. It wasn't immediately clear if SAS would make additional claims after Sunday's decision.
Twenty-one other airlines worldwide currently operate the Q400 or have pending orders for the aircraft, including American companies Horizon Air, Frontier Airlines and Continental Airlines, according to Bombardier.
Company spokesman Bert Cruickshank said 164 Q400 planes had been delivered worldwide as of July 31, including 31 currently operated by Horizon Air.
Cruickshank said Frontier Airlines has 10 Q400 planes on order, one of which had been delivered as of July, and Continental Airlines and Memphis, Tenn.-based Pinnacle Airlines Corp. ordered 15 planes in March under a joint contract.
Would you buy a new Q400 rite now? If so theres a fleet of them going very cheap in Scandinavia.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Straylia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not so sure if they are all that CHEAP. SAS management claims buyers are already lined up to buy their grounded aircraft, and supply and demand etc. etc....
Scandinavian newspapers further claims that SAS are in discussions with Bombardier to get an entire new fleet of yet to be named aircraft. Maybe they have the guts to be launch customer yet again for the - still to be made official - Q400X, a stretched derivative of the Q400 and the worst kept secret at Downsview. Meanwhile it is claimed that the cause of the last debacle was an incorrectly installed O-ring on the RH MLG actuator, which - if proved correct - seems to indicate that the kneejerk withdrawal of the fleet after tha last bellyflop was just that, a kneejerk reaction (which will not help SAS in their upcoming lawsuit towards Bombardier for damages caused by the 3 landing mishaps).
Scandinavian newspapers further claims that SAS are in discussions with Bombardier to get an entire new fleet of yet to be named aircraft. Maybe they have the guts to be launch customer yet again for the - still to be made official - Q400X, a stretched derivative of the Q400 and the worst kept secret at Downsview. Meanwhile it is claimed that the cause of the last debacle was an incorrectly installed O-ring on the RH MLG actuator, which - if proved correct - seems to indicate that the kneejerk withdrawal of the fleet after tha last bellyflop was just that, a kneejerk reaction (which will not help SAS in their upcoming lawsuit towards Bombardier for damages caused by the 3 landing mishaps).
Europeans ponder Bombardier's fate
Steve Creedy | November 02, 2007
EUROPEAN safety officials have called a crisis meeting to discuss the fate of Bombardier Q400 airliners, despite findings that the problem behind a crash-landing in Copenhagen on Saturday is not linked to a flaw responsible for two previous crashes.
The European Aviation Safety Agency warned it will "take all measures to ensure the safety of European passengers and citizens" after the Copenhagen incident and would decide whether to issue a further airworthiness directive after the meeting with Canadian authorities and manufacturer Bombardier.
Bombardier has defended the plane and has advised its other customers, including Qantas, to continue flying.
Saturday's landing gear failure proved the last straw for Scandinavian Airline Systems, which announced it was abandoning its fleet of 27 Q400s due to "repeated quality-related problems" and because customers no longer trusted the aircraft.
The airline group said its flight operations had always enjoyed an excellent reputation and there was a risk that use of the Q400 could eventually damage the SAS brand.
SAS operates the aircraft on domestic routes in Scandinavia, as well as on European routes, and it accounts for about 5 per cent of the group's seat capacity.
Denmark's Civil Aviation Accident Investigation Board said this week that the latest Q400 crash occurred after the right landing gear failed to extend.
The two previous Q400 crashes, in Denmark and Lithuania in September, were found to have been caused by the corrosion of a bolt that prevented the right landing gear from locking.
But the latest incident appears to be linked to what investigators have termed "a blocked orifice" in the landing gear hydraulics.
Canadian manufacturer Bombardier, which expressed disappointment at SAS's decision, said the preliminary findings backed up its belief there were no connections between the incidents.
SAS said this week it would do everything possible to mitigate the negative consequences of its decisions for passengers, including leasing aircraft to replace the Q400s in the short term.
SAS expects the decision to cost it 300-400 million Swedish kroner ($51-68 million).
"In parallel, work has already been initiated (on) how to replace the aircraft type long term," the airline's board said. "SAS expects to start to implement a long-term solution by the second half of 2008."
Unlike SAS, Qantas has said it will stick with its fleet of seven Q400s and forge ahead with a recently announced $400 million order for 12 more, with options and purchase rights on an additional 24.
The September accidents prompted Bombardier and regulatory authorities to issue a global alert calling for immediate inspections of all Q400s.
QantasLink inspections of its seven aircraft led to the discovery of loose nuts on the undercarriage of some planes.
The airline said earlier this week that it was closely monitoring the situation and its aircraft had been cleared to fly after the September inspections. It also noted that its aircraft were younger than those at SAS and had all been operated for less than 5000 cycles, compared with more than 14,000 cycles on the overseas planes.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is also watching developments and is receiving regular updates from Danish and Canadian authorities.
CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said the authority saw no reason to take action on the aircraft at this stage. Mr Gibson said CASA had also been told the latest incident was not related to the previous two. "We're keeping in close contact with Transport Canada and the Danish authorities and we're getting quite detailed engineering advice from them as they're progressing their examination," he said.
"But really the only thing we know at this point is that it's not related to the previous two and that it is another issue. But whether it's a local issue or something that could apply to all models, we still haven't worked out the answer to that yet."
EUROPEAN safety officials have called a crisis meeting to discuss the fate of Bombardier Q400 airliners, despite findings that the problem behind a crash-landing in Copenhagen on Saturday is not linked to a flaw responsible for two previous crashes.
The European Aviation Safety Agency warned it will "take all measures to ensure the safety of European passengers and citizens" after the Copenhagen incident and would decide whether to issue a further airworthiness directive after the meeting with Canadian authorities and manufacturer Bombardier.
Bombardier has defended the plane and has advised its other customers, including Qantas, to continue flying.
Saturday's landing gear failure proved the last straw for Scandinavian Airline Systems, which announced it was abandoning its fleet of 27 Q400s due to "repeated quality-related problems" and because customers no longer trusted the aircraft.
The airline group said its flight operations had always enjoyed an excellent reputation and there was a risk that use of the Q400 could eventually damage the SAS brand.
SAS operates the aircraft on domestic routes in Scandinavia, as well as on European routes, and it accounts for about 5 per cent of the group's seat capacity.
Denmark's Civil Aviation Accident Investigation Board said this week that the latest Q400 crash occurred after the right landing gear failed to extend.
The two previous Q400 crashes, in Denmark and Lithuania in September, were found to have been caused by the corrosion of a bolt that prevented the right landing gear from locking.
But the latest incident appears to be linked to what investigators have termed "a blocked orifice" in the landing gear hydraulics.
Canadian manufacturer Bombardier, which expressed disappointment at SAS's decision, said the preliminary findings backed up its belief there were no connections between the incidents.
SAS said this week it would do everything possible to mitigate the negative consequences of its decisions for passengers, including leasing aircraft to replace the Q400s in the short term.
SAS expects the decision to cost it 300-400 million Swedish kroner ($51-68 million).
"In parallel, work has already been initiated (on) how to replace the aircraft type long term," the airline's board said. "SAS expects to start to implement a long-term solution by the second half of 2008."
Unlike SAS, Qantas has said it will stick with its fleet of seven Q400s and forge ahead with a recently announced $400 million order for 12 more, with options and purchase rights on an additional 24.
The September accidents prompted Bombardier and regulatory authorities to issue a global alert calling for immediate inspections of all Q400s.
QantasLink inspections of its seven aircraft led to the discovery of loose nuts on the undercarriage of some planes.
The airline said earlier this week that it was closely monitoring the situation and its aircraft had been cleared to fly after the September inspections. It also noted that its aircraft were younger than those at SAS and had all been operated for less than 5000 cycles, compared with more than 14,000 cycles on the overseas planes.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is also watching developments and is receiving regular updates from Danish and Canadian authorities.
CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said the authority saw no reason to take action on the aircraft at this stage. Mr Gibson said CASA had also been told the latest incident was not related to the previous two. "We're keeping in close contact with Transport Canada and the Danish authorities and we're getting quite detailed engineering advice from them as they're progressing their examination," he said.
"But really the only thing we know at this point is that it's not related to the previous two and that it is another issue. But whether it's a local issue or something that could apply to all models, we still haven't worked out the answer to that yet."
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why on earth this mob is ordering more aircraft when they, like Rex, are about to find they are pilot-less? Is that the master plan?
Fairly simple really,
YOU CAN'T FLY PLANES WITHOUT PILOTS.
Fairly simple really,
YOU CAN'T FLY PLANES WITHOUT PILOTS.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queenland, Australia
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF with its' safety record would be crazy to purchase these grounded Q400's....can't imagine the headlines! '... but they are painted in the QF scheme..of course they're safe'!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Oz
Age: 63
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all this is my first post.. have been around a long time and never seen the industry like this, the talk in the crew room(QLINK) is full of interviews, sim rides and start dates. Dont think the flood gates have fully opened yet but I see a huge problem looming. All these NEW aircraft, the additional crews required, not to mention the demise of the experience database that is about to occur with senior captains leaving creates an uneasy feeling for those left to paddle the canoe.
One would imagine that management have a grip on this, but I cant see that they have any idea of the magnitude of the exodus.
Me sees parked aircraft..
One would imagine that management have a grip on this, but I cant see that they have any idea of the magnitude of the exodus.
Me sees parked aircraft..
tea & bikkies,
QF Link mangement are in fact, belatedly, all over the problem! Well, sort of. A professional retention bonus has been introduced to...
(a) (hope you are taking note aircraft) to recognise the value of it's pilots
(b) to retain an appropriate mix of experienced pilots.
Of course, it is all way too little too late..., some may even say the amounts being put forward are insulting. I suspect the Evil Empire will have to do a lot better than what's on offer.
Some may say it's better than nothing, but will it achieve anything? I think the pathetic offer would be beter spent on throwing a decent Xmas party for the staff!
QF Link mangement are in fact, belatedly, all over the problem! Well, sort of. A professional retention bonus has been introduced to...
(a) (hope you are taking note aircraft) to recognise the value of it's pilots
(b) to retain an appropriate mix of experienced pilots.
Of course, it is all way too little too late..., some may even say the amounts being put forward are insulting. I suspect the Evil Empire will have to do a lot better than what's on offer.
Some may say it's better than nothing, but will it achieve anything? I think the pathetic offer would be beter spent on throwing a decent Xmas party for the staff!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As it should be.
The situation at the moment is about as it should be, although it seems that there are still some pilots who do not even get a reply from airline recruiting offices. This is probably a temporary situation that will sort itself out in due course.
Our airlines have had an enormouus surplus of CPL's to pick from for decades, and have also had people with ATPL's and some with jet endorsements knocking on their doors. Mostly they knocked on the doors when the airlines did not need any more pilots, and they were ignored. One bloke I spoke to had "purchased" 300 hours of 737 time with an asian airline and still could not get a job in Australia after that. Another had gone to the US and flown a Lear jet for a few years. He could not get an airline job in Australia either. These blokes could not even get a job flying piston engined aircraft in Australia.
That was about 18 months ago. Things have changed a bit since then. But not a lot. Not as much as many people think. I'm not sure there is a shortage. If there was a real shortage pilots would get a reply from the airline recruiting office. A country GA outfit was looking for an instructor. They did not get the usual flood of applications they were used to. But they did find a local bloke who is qualified and happy to work part time, which suited fine. (he makes much better money doing something else). Is this a shortage? I think there are others who have qualifications and some experience who may come back if things get sensible again. At one time Alice Springs had about fifty CPL holders in town without flying jobs. Is it a shortage if you don't have a big surplus like that??
What the airlines are talking about is a shortage of people who have spent lots and lots of dollars to get the qualifications needed and then are prepared to wait for years until the airlines call for them.
I have yet to see a cadet scheme that the airlines are paying for. Nor have I heard of a cadet scheme which involves guaranteed employment with the nominated airline on completion.
When I see that, and some good salaries, I will believe there is a shortage.
Our airlines have had an enormouus surplus of CPL's to pick from for decades, and have also had people with ATPL's and some with jet endorsements knocking on their doors. Mostly they knocked on the doors when the airlines did not need any more pilots, and they were ignored. One bloke I spoke to had "purchased" 300 hours of 737 time with an asian airline and still could not get a job in Australia after that. Another had gone to the US and flown a Lear jet for a few years. He could not get an airline job in Australia either. These blokes could not even get a job flying piston engined aircraft in Australia.
That was about 18 months ago. Things have changed a bit since then. But not a lot. Not as much as many people think. I'm not sure there is a shortage. If there was a real shortage pilots would get a reply from the airline recruiting office. A country GA outfit was looking for an instructor. They did not get the usual flood of applications they were used to. But they did find a local bloke who is qualified and happy to work part time, which suited fine. (he makes much better money doing something else). Is this a shortage? I think there are others who have qualifications and some experience who may come back if things get sensible again. At one time Alice Springs had about fifty CPL holders in town without flying jobs. Is it a shortage if you don't have a big surplus like that??
What the airlines are talking about is a shortage of people who have spent lots and lots of dollars to get the qualifications needed and then are prepared to wait for years until the airlines call for them.
I have yet to see a cadet scheme that the airlines are paying for. Nor have I heard of a cadet scheme which involves guaranteed employment with the nominated airline on completion.
When I see that, and some good salaries, I will believe there is a shortage.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Steerage
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good post Bushy. I have no problem with airlines bleating about a 'shortage'. I DO have a problem when they expect the government subsidies for training and/or allow 457 visa's for pilots. Now that we are well into the electoral spin cycle, I wonder about the timing of certain statements by operators & for what outcome they are looking for.
Gidday bushy,
Your post makes sense, but with respect, it only applies to the here and now. Airline managements have proven themselves to be notoriously reactive to situations such as this.
The beginning of this year was the time for action to mitigate the effects of this crisis. alas, nothing. The major airlines, being at the top of the food chain (in Australia at least) could sit on their hands to a certain extent. The second level operators, REX, QF Link, etc... should have been thinking seriously about where they would be towards the end of the year! Fast forward 10 months, and the loses of experienced crews are exceeding 50%, cancellations of flights are a daily event, cancellations of services, and the share price going into freefall.
The obvious question is not where are we now?, we all know the answer to that one, but where will we be in another 6 months, 12 months etc... And more importantly, what can be done about it......NOW!!!!
Your post makes sense, but with respect, it only applies to the here and now. Airline managements have proven themselves to be notoriously reactive to situations such as this.
The beginning of this year was the time for action to mitigate the effects of this crisis. alas, nothing. The major airlines, being at the top of the food chain (in Australia at least) could sit on their hands to a certain extent. The second level operators, REX, QF Link, etc... should have been thinking seriously about where they would be towards the end of the year! Fast forward 10 months, and the loses of experienced crews are exceeding 50%, cancellations of flights are a daily event, cancellations of services, and the share price going into freefall.
The obvious question is not where are we now?, we all know the answer to that one, but where will we be in another 6 months, 12 months etc... And more importantly, what can be done about it......NOW!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wherever the hotel drink ticket is valid
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny Thing About Retention Bonuses
Although the retention bonus is certainly better than a kick in the nuts (and I will be spending mine with a warm satisfied glow knowing how much the company loves me), I'm not sure it's going to have any real effect on retention. A large proportion of that money is going to be spent on people who were going to stay with the company anyway (and so did not need the incentive). For example, an older CAPT with kids out of home, owns his house, has a decent super portfolio and is thinking about going part time in the next two years, didn't need extra investment to keep him on board (but I'm more than happy to watch him cash the cheque).
Meanwhile, the FOs coming up for command are still going to have their interviews, sim rides and start dates looming - the best you can hope for is that some will take some of their leave before resigning in order to stretch the days out until the next bonus payment comes through. Junior FOs who have applications in elsewhere will be quite happy to leave in the 6 - 18 month band in order to progress to an international jet job.
My guess is that this just might give some pause to mid-seniority CAPTs who are coming up for C & T positions etc, who may otherwise have considered taking an SO job with an international. Not a terrible result, but like I say, you spend a lot of cash where it won't matter.
Too bad for the guys and girls who left recently - hopefully some of them had their leave in until next year!
Meanwhile, the FOs coming up for command are still going to have their interviews, sim rides and start dates looming - the best you can hope for is that some will take some of their leave before resigning in order to stretch the days out until the next bonus payment comes through. Junior FOs who have applications in elsewhere will be quite happy to leave in the 6 - 18 month band in order to progress to an international jet job.
My guess is that this just might give some pause to mid-seniority CAPTs who are coming up for C & T positions etc, who may otherwise have considered taking an SO job with an international. Not a terrible result, but like I say, you spend a lot of cash where it won't matter.
Too bad for the guys and girls who left recently - hopefully some of them had their leave in until next year!
I once worked for a GA company where the boss told me "I'm giving you a pay rise because I think you'e worth it".
It really makes you feel wanted and you are prepared to do that little bit extra to help them out.
And after that I worked for QLink where the attitude was "we're going to screw you because we can". And that was true a couple of years ago, but I have a long memory, and I suspect many others do to.
So MD if you looked after us when you didn't have to maybe not so many people would be looking to leave now. But you didn't, so you only have yourself to blame now.
It really makes you feel wanted and you are prepared to do that little bit extra to help them out.
And after that I worked for QLink where the attitude was "we're going to screw you because we can". And that was true a couple of years ago, but I have a long memory, and I suspect many others do to.
So MD if you looked after us when you didn't have to maybe not so many people would be looking to leave now. But you didn't, so you only have yourself to blame now.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS Q400 accident probe points to maintenance error
By David Kaminski-Morrow
Danish investigators are indicating that a maintenance error led to the landing-gear actuator blockage which led a Scandinavian Airlines Bombardier Q400 to conduct a gear-up landing at Copenhagen last month.
It follows their discovery that an O-ring from a newly-replaced door valve caused the blockage of a restrictor valve in the actuator assembly. The blockage prevented the right-hand landing-gear deploying.
The subsequent gear-up landing was the third suffered by a Scandinavian Airlines Q400 since early September and the carrier opted to remove the entire fleet permanently from service.
But while the underlying reasons for the first two accidents, which resulted from actuator corrosion, have yet to be determined, Danish investigation agency HCL is suggesting that a maintenance error contributed to the third.
The finding lends support to claims from manufacturer Bombardier that there is no inherent problem with the aircraft.
HCL says that in-depth analysis of the Q400’s hydraulic system shows that the O-ring “could not have travelled” from the solenoid valve to the actuator because certain components, such as the mechanical sequence valve, would prevent passage.
But it points out that the right main landing-gear’s solenoid valve was replaced on 16 October and the mechanical sequence valve was replaced on 22 October – just five days before the Copenhagen accident.
Scandinavian Airlines replaced a number of landing-gear components on its entire fleet after the first two gear-up events, at Aalborg and Vilnius, on 9 and 12 September.
HCL says that, during replacement of the mechanical sequence valve, the rogue O-ring could have “unknowingly been transferred…by maintenance personnel” from one side of the valve to the other.
If this was the case, it says, the O-ring would have been able to travel through the hydraulic lines towards the landing-gear actuator. HCL states that the investigation is continuing and the organisation has yet to reach final conclusions.
But Bombardier says that the Danish evidence “clearly support” its view that the Q400 is “safe and reliable”. The manufacturer has been forced to defend the Q400 in the wake of the three closely-spaced Scandinavian Airlines accidents and the carrier’s decision to axe the type.
“We have unwavering confidence in the Q400 aircraft and we stand by our product,” says Bombardier Regional Aircraft president Steven Ridolfi.
“We are concerned about the impact negative comments might have had on Bombardier and the Q400 turboprop’s reputation and we will do all that is necessary to protect our brand and, by association, the reputation of our Q400 aircraft customers.”
By David Kaminski-Morrow
Danish investigators are indicating that a maintenance error led to the landing-gear actuator blockage which led a Scandinavian Airlines Bombardier Q400 to conduct a gear-up landing at Copenhagen last month.
It follows their discovery that an O-ring from a newly-replaced door valve caused the blockage of a restrictor valve in the actuator assembly. The blockage prevented the right-hand landing-gear deploying.
The subsequent gear-up landing was the third suffered by a Scandinavian Airlines Q400 since early September and the carrier opted to remove the entire fleet permanently from service.
But while the underlying reasons for the first two accidents, which resulted from actuator corrosion, have yet to be determined, Danish investigation agency HCL is suggesting that a maintenance error contributed to the third.
The finding lends support to claims from manufacturer Bombardier that there is no inherent problem with the aircraft.
HCL says that in-depth analysis of the Q400’s hydraulic system shows that the O-ring “could not have travelled” from the solenoid valve to the actuator because certain components, such as the mechanical sequence valve, would prevent passage.
But it points out that the right main landing-gear’s solenoid valve was replaced on 16 October and the mechanical sequence valve was replaced on 22 October – just five days before the Copenhagen accident.
Scandinavian Airlines replaced a number of landing-gear components on its entire fleet after the first two gear-up events, at Aalborg and Vilnius, on 9 and 12 September.
HCL says that, during replacement of the mechanical sequence valve, the rogue O-ring could have “unknowingly been transferred…by maintenance personnel” from one side of the valve to the other.
If this was the case, it says, the O-ring would have been able to travel through the hydraulic lines towards the landing-gear actuator. HCL states that the investigation is continuing and the organisation has yet to reach final conclusions.
But Bombardier says that the Danish evidence “clearly support” its view that the Q400 is “safe and reliable”. The manufacturer has been forced to defend the Q400 in the wake of the three closely-spaced Scandinavian Airlines accidents and the carrier’s decision to axe the type.
“We have unwavering confidence in the Q400 aircraft and we stand by our product,” says Bombardier Regional Aircraft president Steven Ridolfi.
“We are concerned about the impact negative comments might have had on Bombardier and the Q400 turboprop’s reputation and we will do all that is necessary to protect our brand and, by association, the reputation of our Q400 aircraft customers.”
Icarus53,
you must run in different social circles to most of the regional captains I know. After years of substandard wages in GA, years of substandard wages in Regional airlines, a mortgage in Sydney, and still more than one mouth to feed, many of the regional captains I know, self included, will hardly make the Forbes top 100 list! Many of these guys and girls will be flat out funding their retirement.
I'm not sure about QF Link at the moment, but the charge out the door of my company is being being led by the people that you have said will probably not leave anyway! This is a fact. It is no longer speculation, or the hoping against hope that it will not happen by a stubborn and narrow minded management.
A Retention bonus will (would) have worked. The problem I fear now is that it is more than likely too late, and what is on offer at QF Link is most definitely too little!
The cheif pilot at REX stated earlier in the year that he couldn't see the point in offering a pay-rise to senior people that would probably stay anyway! Sound familiar? Those same irreplacable people are now either gone, or are in the advance stages of going.
I suspect that the same type of people at QF Link will not be too far behind.
you must run in different social circles to most of the regional captains I know. After years of substandard wages in GA, years of substandard wages in Regional airlines, a mortgage in Sydney, and still more than one mouth to feed, many of the regional captains I know, self included, will hardly make the Forbes top 100 list! Many of these guys and girls will be flat out funding their retirement.
I'm not sure about QF Link at the moment, but the charge out the door of my company is being being led by the people that you have said will probably not leave anyway! This is a fact. It is no longer speculation, or the hoping against hope that it will not happen by a stubborn and narrow minded management.
A Retention bonus will (would) have worked. The problem I fear now is that it is more than likely too late, and what is on offer at QF Link is most definitely too little!
The cheif pilot at REX stated earlier in the year that he couldn't see the point in offering a pay-rise to senior people that would probably stay anyway! Sound familiar? Those same irreplacable people are now either gone, or are in the advance stages of going.
I suspect that the same type of people at QF Link will not be too far behind.
Last edited by KRUSTY 34; 9th Nov 2007 at 04:31. Reason: clarity
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Repeat
This happened in GA and now it's happening to the regionals. Soon the majors. It's all caused by the obscene lottery that resulted in a huge pool of desperate unemployed pilots all fighting for the non existent jobs for all those years. It appeared to be a huge confidence trick. Many lost confidence and quit. Most of those pilots who are left, are now ruthless and feel they do not owe loyalty to anyone.
They almost destroyed GA, and now it's the regionals turn to have one year captains and lots of continual training. That's why pilots now have to pay for training.
When the airlines start planning ahead and give commitments to pilots before they spend their money the industry may stabilise, and they may even see a bit of commitment from the pilots. Until then it's survival of the fittest and chaos. And safety problems.
What happens in GA also happens in the airlines. Later.
They almost destroyed GA, and now it's the regionals turn to have one year captains and lots of continual training. That's why pilots now have to pay for training.
When the airlines start planning ahead and give commitments to pilots before they spend their money the industry may stabilise, and they may even see a bit of commitment from the pilots. Until then it's survival of the fittest and chaos. And safety problems.
What happens in GA also happens in the airlines. Later.
