Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

MERGED: Alan's still not happy......

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

MERGED: Alan's still not happy......

Old 16th Mar 2014, 05:35
  #3481 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,756
So this is what the Qantas/CASA representative says to the ABC -


"As it turned out, it was one washer on one bolt on one engine that had been incorrectly installed. And naturally that shouldn't happen, but that's the scope of what it was," he said.

Then wtf did I get this in a letter from the ATSB at the time as a response to them from CASA about the problems on 3 engines? It was then published in the Flight Safety magazine.


ALAEA Fed Sec is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 06:43
  #3482 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 823
Sorry if I sound obtuse Fed Sec, but you are saying:
- 3 of 4 engines were not correctly fitted on one aircraft (B744).
- Qantas deemed it 'NOT AN AIRWORTHINESS ISSUE' and HKG simply didn't report to CASA, so CASA simply didn't know.
- CASA did receive a report saying the Mount Bolts on a 'couple of engines' were only fitted with one instead of two washers but this is not a maintenance issue.
- CASA also received a report that on one engine 3 Mount Bolts were fitted with upside down washers, that were also deemed not to be an issue.

So the primary issue is that 3 of 4 Engines were installed in an unsafe manner, but it was not reported correctly, nor understood/recognised by Qantas to be a significant issue?
V-Jet is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 08:41
  #3483 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,756
You got it. 3 of 4 engines not bolted on correctly and casa say it is not an airworthiness issue. They then lied again on Sat by saying it was only one missing washer on one engine.
ALAEA Fed Sec is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 08:54
  #3484 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 823
Thanks Fed Sec. I've spent years reading MEL's and discussing things with Engineers and even I get a little lost.

I would hope people reading this who aren't of an aviation background would realise that vastly powerful engines that each burn 10,000kgs of fuel per hour on takeoff (40,000kgs total) need to be bolted on to the wing properly. This type of thing on a 400 seat airliner (even if that airliner might not need maintenance) is absolutely unacceptable on any level.

This is NOT about 'militant unionists' - this is about highly technical machines needing highly technically accurate maintenance.

Outsourcing can be fantastic, but if you outsource to the point you lose the ability to 'police' that outsourcing, then you have a major problem.

Big things that spin very fast go bang very quickly. I've put my life in Steve's hands about twice a week for the last 28 years. If Steve isn't happy with something I am expected to fly then I certainly am not happy.

I trust him with my life - so should anyone reading this. There is a big difference between 'militant unionism' and 'professionalism'. Make sure you understand the difference.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 10:34
  #3485 (permalink)  

Don Quixote Impersonator
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,408
V-jet,

In my personal experience, not with airline, but light to heavy corporate over the years I can think of dozens and dozens of instances where SDRs were a complete waste of time and when absolute physical and documentary evidence of clear MRO fraudulent certification of work simply not performed.

CASA simply squibbed.

I am not talking about the Australian airline engineers here.

Fortunately most have gone out of business but not as a result of any CASA action.

In one instance they had no option but to ground a fleet of light charter twins after a mistake by the MRO annual reporting less hours on the airframes one year than the previous years. 5 sets of engines with multiple overhauls by biro and so on. It's the old story when you tell a lie you have to have a really good memory to perpetuate it. Prosecuted, not as I recall. But they start the race to the bottom on rates.

We didn't use them nor would we have anything to do with aircraft that were.

Having said that LAME's are as a profession, very honest professionals also frustrated by losing work and suffering depressed incomes because the dodgy bros are allowed to flourish.

Definitely a case of crawling all over the good guys, because they are easy targets and ignoring or too frightened to take on the not so good ones.

Price is the driver and I'm sure you agree there ain't such a thing as cheap safety in maintenance terms.

I repeat the old maxim if you think safety is expensive try having an accident.

It goes right back to the days of horse travel, "for want of a nail the shoe was lost"...........you know the rest of it.
gaunty is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 10:41
  #3486 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 823
If my reading of your post is correct, then, I'm not sure CASA is the issue per se, but an airline who's word and practices were 'the best' are now not so. What I personally find highly objectionable is that the 'gold standard' hasn't been so much lowered as all understanding of what it was and what it entailed has totally been lost on the people who run the joint.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 11:21
  #3487 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Syd, NSW
Posts: 329
Thanks for the expanded detail and clarification FEDSEC.

This situation is a national disgrace and a disaster waiting to happen.

Thanks for putting yourself in the firing line for all of us at the sharp end.
CaptCloudbuster is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 11:34
  #3488 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Somewhere on the Australian Coast
Posts: 861
If the AMM allows for fitment of a single washer, why is the fact that the bolts were installed accordingly a problem? It appears that two of the three engines "wrongly" installed were actually installed in accordance with the maintenance manual. The third appears to be a f$&k up.

Just curious as to why this is an issue for those two engines that appear to have been installed in accordance with the maintenance manual so a serious question, not s$&tstirring. Thanks.
DirectAnywhere is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 11:48
  #3489 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: McHales Island
Age: 64
Posts: 138
Directanywhere,


The stuffup with the offending washers was that they were COUNTERSUNK washers installed UPSIDE DOWN. This then creates stress raisers under the HIGH TENSILE boltheads,which eventually leads to cracks and ultimately,bolt FAILURE.


Pretty sure you or the pax don't want to see a 5 plus ton engine bouncing down the runway just on rotate or even worse departing the aircraft from 35000ft.


McHale.
Capt Quentin McHale is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 12:23
  #3490 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,756
The issue isn't really about bolts, washers, overseas facilities or where maintenance is done. This is about CASA blatantly lying about an issue they knew everything about to make it look like I had misled the Senate.


The lying **** Peter Gibson appears to have told ABC that the only issue was with one bolt on one engine.


The ATSB had received a letter from CASA explaining the problems with mounting spread across a number of engines and varying problems.


They knew all about this. What would motivate them to lie to the press??? Are they so ****en stupid to think that we don't keep records? I am so angry that this mob that are meant to be our Regulator can be so untrustworthy.
ALAEA Fed Sec is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 12:37
  #3491 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 468
The question should be "What's driving the regulator to make such statements when evidence to the contrary is clearly there, and who's driving the regulator to do that?"
AEROMEDIC is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 12:48
  #3492 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 823
Fed Sec:
Im so f&&&&en angry that it NEEDS a regulator to even be involved. This is iconic Qantas, not a tin pot GA startup! Like ASIC with corporate fraud (another 'totally unrelated' subject) if you rely on them in real life to head off problems then you will get caught. They are only (in my experience) helpful in hindsight when something has already gone wrong and they are forced to act, or be seen to have acted.

I completely understand your anger. I dont know how you deal with it so calmly. I would be reaching across tables strangling people.

Ive dealt with ASIC and they are Council workers who want to get home each day with as little on their desks as possible for the next day.

There is nothing wrong with the rules, just they are not policed.

CASA seems like ASIC.

That does not surprise me. What now surprises me is how accepting I have become with the 'regulators' inaction. You are absolutely correct to point out how wrong that attitude is.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:53
  #3493 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 10
Posts: 1,057
They knew all about this. What would motivate them to lie to the press??? Are they so ****en stupid to think that we don't keep records? I am so angry that this mob that are meant to be our Regulator can be so untrustworthy
Good point Steve, a good reminder how Government, Government agencies and the Qantas management fit in so well with each other in my view..

V-Jet nails it
I've dealt with ASIC and they are Council workers who want to get home each day with as little on their desks as possible for the next day.

There is nothing wrong with the rules, just they are not policed.

CASA seems like ASIC.
As are most of those Senators at that inquiry last week, really was a waste of time and money, Two high quality submissions Submissions ? Parliament of Australia was largely ignored in my view, as if they were way above their heads for them to get a grasp of what is really going on in the industry. I too have tried and failed with ASIC, they are simply not interested..


Originally Posted by Shark Patrol
The two things they were talking about here were "P&L" - profit and loss - versus cash flow. What Evans was saying was that the routes still being flown by QF International are cash flow positive (meaning the flights are making money), but that QF International are doing badly on profit and loss. So, by extrapolation, the flights are making some profit, but not enough to counter the losses that are being made elsewhere - maintenance costs or labour costs, by inference. What the senators weren't cluey enough to ask was where QF International was losing money and whether Jetstar cost-shifting was taking place.
Again the wrong people asking accounting questions, (other than Nick X, but time restrictions got the better of him) they simply don't understand what Joyce & Co are getting away with, think about it, if Joyce had nothing to hide then why would he bring his head lawyer with him? It's simple, he's hiding something.. we know it, probably many in the so called regulator agencies know it but nothing ever happens.

What now surprises me is how accepting I have become with the 'regulators' inaction. You are absolutely correct to point out how wrong that attitude is
Is basically where we are all at again.... and again.. its become the Australian way.

There must be someone in this country who can order a forensic study into the accounts at Qantas for example.. or force CASA to come clean etc. other than going through countless Senate inquiries that never get much coverage and always end up going nowhere.

On the upside, what has changed, the mainstream media almost daily now are calling for AJ to quit.

And in the background, calls are growing louder for Alan Joyce to quit as the airline's long serving chief executive.
The Irish born Australian citizen - who controversially grounded the entire Qantas fleet in late 2011 in his fight with unions - is vowing to stay on.
Mr Joyce once joked in his first ABC interview as Qantas boss back in 2008 that he took a "hospital pass" from his tough talking predecessor Geoff Dixon.
The question now is whether any corporate warrior would have the nerve and stamina to take a hospital pass from Mr Joyce.
Qantas: What's the future for the flying kangaroo? - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
It's a mess, the question is, how loud do people have to shout before anything ever gets done in this country?

I don't know how you deal with it so calmly.
I think everyone in the industry do an outstanding job considering the events of the past few years, true professionals..


What's the future for the Flying Kangaroo? - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
TIMA9X is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 20:14
  #3494 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,756
A forensic audit of the Qantas books will not work. The accountants wouldn't know where to look and it is too easy for Qantas to hide shit. When they were getting close, they give them Chairman's lounge memberships and presto, they come out giving them a clean bill of health.


Qantas offered this via the ACTU last year and AIPA and ALAEA said no worries but we want one of our nominated Reps present the entire time to make sure the accountants understood the areas to look in. Qantas would not allow this forensic investigation to take place with anyone with any aviation knowledge there.
ALAEA Fed Sec is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 21:55
  #3495 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 715
Pretty sure you or the pax don't want to see a 5 plus ton engine bouncing down the runway just on rotate
Been done before - American Airlines 191 at Chicago in 1979. Didn't end well.
Oakape is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 22:12
  #3496 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 715
Ansett found a couple of problems with the 767's in 2000 & 2001, fixed them & self reported. The fleet was grounded by CASA - twice! QF seems to have a growing number of issues that are at least as serious as those, but has never had even one aircraft grounded by CASA.

What has changed? Is CASA a different beast these days? Does QF have some sort of control over them? Is there political interference? Or is the 'National Carrier' simply untouchable?
Oakape is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 22:36
  #3497 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 823
V-Jet is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 22:59
  #3498 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,289
CASA doesn't have the competency, let alone the balls, to ever find fault with Qantas.

Pilot mate talked about one of CASA'a surviellance efforts - when shown some systems and data, they couldn't even understand what they were looking at, let alone analyze and critique what was happening.

CASA is happier beating up GA children. (cue "The Bold Gendarmes")
Sunfish is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 00:15
  #3499 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Melbourne
Age: 49
Posts: 113
Seems some bond traders understand why Alan’s not happy.
Doubts over Qantas Airways Ltd. (QAN)’s plan to stem losses pushed bond risk for Australia’s biggest carrier above that of Air France-KLM Group, which is attempting a turnaround from near bankruptcy.

Credit-default swaps protecting against non-payment of Qantas’s debt have risen by 48 basis points since Feb. 28 to 300 on March 13, the highest level since November 2012. Risk for Air France-KLM fell to a three-year low on March 7 as the carrier’s Chief Executive Officer Alexandre de Juniac, who said it had been “heading to bankruptcy," refocused on premium fliers.
Source:Qantas Risk Tops Air France-KLM on Plan Doubts: Australia Credit - Bloomberg

WorthWhat is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 01:17
  #3500 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 10
Posts: 1,057
Seems some bond traders understand why Alan’s not happy
Oh dear, this is serious now! Bloomberg doesn't write this stuff for the fun of it...

“If revenue keeps falling the profit margin might remain very similar despite all the cost cuts,” Raymond Lee, who helps manage about A$6.5 billion at the Sydney-based fund, said by phone. “There hasn’t been any real positive news about the underlying business.”
Annual revenue at the 93-year-old carrier will fall this year for just the fourth time since 1993, according to the median of 12 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg.

Losing Control


Qantas will have to borrow money to pay for planes and other capital spending during the year through June due to negative free cash flow, chief executive Alan Joyce forecast Dec. 5. The measure, which shows how much cash is left over from sales once operating costs and capital spending have been paid, has only been positive in one year since Joyce took over in November 2008, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
All the negative talk from Alan the last 3 years is now hurting the company big time... hope he is very happy with his self trumped "transformation" progress...

What happened to the trading environment? - YouTube

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/busi...1226856359418#

Last edited by TIMA9X; 17th Mar 2014 at 02:24. Reason: add link
TIMA9X is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.