Qantas Engineering redundances - Advice required!!!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CN's job is starting to look a bit shaky
Now that this clown and his merry men have helped close down engine overhaul facilities in this country can he proclaim such a thought.
I had a good laugh when I saw the domestic lift update, about how they're 'refreshing' the CFM56's.
The amazing logic that new engines use less fuel than old engines. Am I living in the twilight zone ? Now its cheaper to get new ones after they closed down their own overhaul facility that churned out good engines year after year in all of the forms that the facility had over the many dozen years it was in existence ?
I wouldn't be suprised if that funny thing that happens once you remove all of the competition from a market happened in the case of engine overhauls.
As in the price went up!
Shut it down guys and sign it all over to us - we'll give you a great deal if you do!
The amazing logic that new engines use less fuel than old engines. Am I living in the twilight zone ? Now its cheaper to get new ones after they closed down their own overhaul facility that churned out good engines year after year in all of the forms that the facility had over the many dozen years it was in existence ?
I wouldn't be suprised if that funny thing that happens once you remove all of the competition from a market happened in the case of engine overhauls.
As in the price went up!
Shut it down guys and sign it all over to us - we'll give you a great deal if you do!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Present Position
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been following this thread for some weeks now, and am aghast at the inhumane behaviour of engineering 'management'. What possible happy outcome can they expect from such a strategy? How can they convince themselves that sheer bastardry will overcome the mechanical realities of operating compex contrivances like aeroplanes without an engaged engineering workforce?
I am but a simple (as opposed to humble) pilot, yet even I can see from my pit of ignorance that complex devices might need, from time to time, expert care. Today I had the bittersweet pleasure of informing a ' manager' that his delay was purely the result of a profoundly pissed-off workforce, and that presently most of us seem hell-bent on ******* up this airline rather than advancing it. Not (with Seinfeld raised hands) that there's anything wrong with that. Since the executive branch seem to be wallowing in willfully ignorant self-congratulatory hyperbole it falls to us to provide concrete evidence that their scorched-earth policies may just result in....scorched earth.
For the first time in this particular walking-dead-man of an airline, it seems to me that most staff will, instead of doing everything in their power to advance the company, will do anything to blame management. Even if that means destroying the airline.
Today I was staff travelling on a delayed flight. The gate staff, the duty managers, me and my cohorts were all telling the pax war stories regarding what **** heads the executives are, and that all of their woes are the result of corporate policies. The funny thing is that none of the commercial pax seemed to be surprised at this news.
Every time I fly I buy a beer for every defect the other pilots can log. Is that wrong?
I am but a simple (as opposed to humble) pilot, yet even I can see from my pit of ignorance that complex devices might need, from time to time, expert care. Today I had the bittersweet pleasure of informing a ' manager' that his delay was purely the result of a profoundly pissed-off workforce, and that presently most of us seem hell-bent on ******* up this airline rather than advancing it. Not (with Seinfeld raised hands) that there's anything wrong with that. Since the executive branch seem to be wallowing in willfully ignorant self-congratulatory hyperbole it falls to us to provide concrete evidence that their scorched-earth policies may just result in....scorched earth.
For the first time in this particular walking-dead-man of an airline, it seems to me that most staff will, instead of doing everything in their power to advance the company, will do anything to blame management. Even if that means destroying the airline.
Today I was staff travelling on a delayed flight. The gate staff, the duty managers, me and my cohorts were all telling the pax war stories regarding what **** heads the executives are, and that all of their woes are the result of corporate policies. The funny thing is that none of the commercial pax seemed to be surprised at this news.
Every time I fly I buy a beer for every defect the other pilots can log. Is that wrong?
Last edited by Twin Beech; 3rd Mar 2013 at 13:58.
Ngineer:
A useful senior management strategy (if you are an arsehole) is to employ a head kicker to roughen up a division and fire a lot of people, creating a lot of stress and anger among the remaining employees in the process.
Once the dirty deeds have been done, you fire the headkicker, blame everything bad on him, and hire Miss Pollyanna as the new manager. She is all sweetness and kindness and smoothes over all those furrowed brows among the employees. She gets everyone working productively and trusting her and the company again....... until the next time.
CN's job is starting to look a bit shaky
Once the dirty deeds have been done, you fire the headkicker, blame everything bad on him, and hire Miss Pollyanna as the new manager. She is all sweetness and kindness and smoothes over all those furrowed brows among the employees. She gets everyone working productively and trusting her and the company again....... until the next time.
Last edited by Sunfish; 3rd Mar 2013 at 18:11.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
Twin Beech. Sad but true. Rather than working around the problems any airline can have it seems to me nearly everyone is rubbing every single stuff up ,systemic or logistical inadequacy in their faces with absolutely no regret.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pity City
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite a few of the Ops managers are now stating that CN's strategy is a train wreck waiting to happen. The end game doesn't look good for anyone in QE. And that's from people who have previously supported him!
Maybe said ops mgr's now know they're in the firing line and are willing to dissent.
But Qantas is not a democracy, the line managers either tow the line or they get the boot. Have you noticed that:
-They send out pre-scripted 'managers information packs' telling them what to say
-They send out HR staff to monitor/police what they say, no doubt just in case they interject with some truth
Now that they have Maintenix, they also now how the ability to run quick analytics on the workforce. Everyone needs to make damn sure they treat their day to day as an astute business would, as in logging every fault into maintenix.
But Qantas is not a democracy, the line managers either tow the line or they get the boot. Have you noticed that:
-They send out pre-scripted 'managers information packs' telling them what to say
-They send out HR staff to monitor/police what they say, no doubt just in case they interject with some truth
Now that they have Maintenix, they also now how the ability to run quick analytics on the workforce. Everyone needs to make damn sure they treat their day to day as an astute business would, as in logging every fault into maintenix.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is from a genius of a man who has recently stated - that thinking innovatively, it is better to buy new CFM56 engines than repair them
They're either completely brain dead or got rid of engine overhaul, can't get their engines maintained and now have to sell it as a great idea to replace em with new ones.....
Last edited by Nudlaug; 4th Mar 2013 at 00:00.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
Nudlaug , it sounds like someone making a virtue out of a mistake.
Last edited by ampclamp; 4th Mar 2013 at 00:07.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by clipped
This is from a genius of a man who has recently stated - that thinking innovatively, it is better to buy new CFM56 engines than repair them.
Do you have any figures to the contrary? Or just supposition?
From Wiki, so not an authoritative source but something worth considering
CFM56-7B "Evolution"
In 2009, CFMI announced the latest upgrade to the CFM56 engine, the "CFM56-7B Evolution" or CFM56-7BE. This upgrade, announced alongside Boeing's newest 737 variant, further enhances the high- and low-pressure turbines with better aerodynamics, as well as improving engine cooling, and aims to reduce overall part count.
CFMI expected the changes to result in a 4% reduction in maintenance costs and a 1% improvement in fuel consumption (2% improvement including the airframe changes for the new 737); however, flight and ground tests completed in May 2010 revealed that the fuel burn improvement was better than expected at 1.6%.
Following 450 hours of testing, the CFM56-7BE engine was certified by FAA and EASA on 30 July 2010.
1.6% fuel saving and 4% maintenance.
Pretty significant methinks.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by booglaboy
And airbus told Qf the 380 a-chks take 50 man hrs. Manufacturers can claim whatever they like. Reality is a different beast
I'd be guessing but a 1.6% fuel saving counts as "substantial" methinks.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flt and grd tests performed by cfm? It's a similar principle the car manufacturers use when quoting fuel consumption. No one ever achieves those results in the real world. Just my opinion
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gods Country
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try explaining that to the Shareholders.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
750 million? The number gets bigger all the time. I hear the line guys are over the moon about how good it works
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The place is gradually grinding to a halt. Maintenance On Demand, MXI, redundancys and a deferral rate through the roof. If no one is asking serious questions now then they should be.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty significant methinks
How can decades of engine overhaul philosophy be caned with this one upgrade. Buy new, throw out the old.
'Who'll buy into our little scam'? 'I know someone high up in QE'.
Last edited by Clipped; 4th Mar 2013 at 07:04.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by clipped
Ah, believing the glossy brochure - again. Promises. The 787, 'game changer', comes to mind.
Equally rather than just straight negativity do you have any info on the matter?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a grey area of cost / benefit.
The costs of upgrading engines or buying new ones are going to be very expensive for a couple of reasons.
The first is buy/ lease back financing. These costs will be about 0.80-0.82% per month of the list price of about $10 mill which has to eat into margins, even with the fuel and maintenance savings.
The second is, that an operator will have to do a lot of "wheeling and dealing" to ensure that the list price will stay affordable as these high thrust engines are also in high demand.
Upgrading the modules may be the answer assuming there's still good life left, but depending on the version, an upgrade can still cost up to $4 mill.
Buy or upgrade? Lots of homework for the bean counters I'd say, and CN may not have the credentials for this task.
The costs of upgrading engines or buying new ones are going to be very expensive for a couple of reasons.
The first is buy/ lease back financing. These costs will be about 0.80-0.82% per month of the list price of about $10 mill which has to eat into margins, even with the fuel and maintenance savings.
The second is, that an operator will have to do a lot of "wheeling and dealing" to ensure that the list price will stay affordable as these high thrust engines are also in high demand.
Upgrading the modules may be the answer assuming there's still good life left, but depending on the version, an upgrade can still cost up to $4 mill.
Buy or upgrade? Lots of homework for the bean counters I'd say, and CN may not have the credentials for this task.