Virgin puts brakes on VARA
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: In a glass house
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quick google search reveals bird strike:
Virgin plane suffers two mid-air incidents, one resulting in woman breaking leg - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Jeez some of you blokes are cryptic!
Virgin plane suffers two mid-air incidents, one resulting in woman breaking leg - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Jeez some of you blokes are cryptic!
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Singapore
Age: 56
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Must have hit a pterodactyl, huh?
ATSB padlocking an aircraft after a birdstrike is pretty extreme. Never heard of that before. There is nothing for ATSB to gain unless of course the aircraft hit the bird as it was still sitting in its nest. Something more to this story I think...
ATSB padlocking an aircraft after a birdstrike is pretty extreme. Never heard of that before. There is nothing for ATSB to gain unless of course the aircraft hit the bird as it was still sitting in its nest. Something more to this story I think...
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting. I note the article states: "Five days later, during a flight to Albury in New South Wales, the pilot reported a possible bird strike."
So was it a bird at all, or the sound of something failing post the severe turbulence event?
So was it a bird at all, or the sound of something failing post the severe turbulence event?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Florence
Age: 74
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is it still there?
After DutyofCare's alerting us to the falling of the sky at Albury, PPRuNe is remarkably short of information.
So is the aircraft still there or being rebuilt or being parted out?
So is the aircraft still there or being rebuilt or being parted out?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Still there........
An engine failure is nothing compared to how close a certain airframe came to failing. It will be interesting to see if an economically feasible repair program is possible.
Apparently at least one.
Scary thing is, if true, the aircraft flew on for a day or two afterwards before being inspected for another separate reason.
All second/third hand so take it with a grain of salt...
Scary thing is, if true, the aircraft flew on for a day or two afterwards before being inspected for another separate reason.
All second/third hand so take it with a grain of salt...
Oh dear.
What is happening in our dear industry. Is it a standards issue? It's not just VR. It's across the board.
A lot of these issues come down to not using correct flying technique, and not knowing the contents of the books.
Be safe out there. We play for keeps.
What is happening in our dear industry. Is it a standards issue? It's not just VR. It's across the board.
A lot of these issues come down to not using correct flying technique, and not knowing the contents of the books.
Be safe out there. We play for keeps.
M12,
Sounds very similar to the story I was told.
You'd think overspeed recovery would involve a reduction in power...
Never thought the ATR would get anywhere near Vmo in the cruise!
Sounds very similar to the story I was told.
You'd think overspeed recovery would involve a reduction in power...
Never thought the ATR would get anywhere near Vmo in the cruise!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Florence
Age: 74
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
even more juicy (with or without salt)
If such an injury occurred, it would seem to be an immediately reportable event in accordance with paragraph 2.3(1)(a) of the TSIRs.
One might expect that an IRM would set off a number of processes under the SMS, including the involvement of the HoFO. Stretching a little further, an event that generates a serious injury might pique one's interest in the possibility of the event also being a CAR 47 event:
Putting aside the salt shaker for a moment, wouldn't that leave a lot of folks (including CASA) looking very nervously at each other? 
One might expect that an IRM would set off a number of processes under the SMS, including the involvement of the HoFO. Stretching a little further, an event that generates a serious injury might pique one's interest in the possibility of the event also being a CAR 47 event:
47 Maintenance release to cease to be in force
(1) If:
(aa) the holder of the certificate of registration for; or
(ab) the operator of; or
(ac) a flight crew member of; or
(ad) an authorised person engaged (whether as an employee or on his or her own behalf) in the maintenance of;
an aircraft in respect of which a maintenance release is in force becomes aware:
(a) that:
(i) ...
(ii) ...
(iii) abnormal flight or ground loads have been imposed on the aircraft;
(1) If:
(aa) the holder of the certificate of registration for; or
(ab) the operator of; or
(ac) a flight crew member of; or
(ad) an authorised person engaged (whether as an employee or on his or her own behalf) in the maintenance of;
an aircraft in respect of which a maintenance release is in force becomes aware:
(a) that:
(i) ...
(ii) ...
(iii) abnormal flight or ground loads have been imposed on the aircraft;
Thread update/merge....
Post # 1874 - Shades of PelAir perhaps??
Then from PT on Good Friday...
There may be more Prince but that should be reasonably updated for Easter long weekend cogitation...
scrubba: Given the emerging story of the VARA ATR at Albury, what are the chances that the ATSB and CASA have found a deep enough part of Lake Hume to hide the CVR and FDR, given that everyone survived...
Classic scrubba...
If part of the somewhat disjointed thread rumours are indeed true it certainly paints for some disturbing parallels with PelAir:
Virgin plane suffers two mid-air incidents, one resulting in woman breaking leg
Updated Fri 7 Mar 2014, 8:12am AEDT
Map: Australia
An investigation is underway into a flight that left a Virgin Australia crew member with a broken leg, and another incident involving the same plane a few days later.
The female crew member was injured when the ATR-72 turbo prop encountered severe turbulence on a flight from Canberra to Sydney last month.
Virgin says the plane was inspected by an engineer and cleared to fly.
Five days later, during a flight to Albury in New South Wales, the pilot reported a possible bird strike.
He later found the aircraft had been damaged.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau says the plane remains on the ground at Albury.
The bureau is interviewing crew and maintenance personnel and examining the flight recorder.
Passing strange that the first incident (actually listed as an accident) is duly recorded (see here & page 15 of weekly summary here) and yet the ABC article listing a possible bird strike incident 5 days later is not recorded as such, rather it is listed pg 16 here as:
25/02/2014 * 201400985 *Accident-Yes - AO-2014-032* near Albury Aerodrome NSW*
ATR - GIE Avions de Transport Regional* ATR72-212A*Air Transport High Capacity*Passenger* D CTR
During a post flight inspection, substantial damage
to the aircraft's tail assembly was detected. The
investigation is continuing.
So the ATsB has tied the two incidents (accidents) together, yet there is no big media statements from the bureau/Fort Fumble, no pending show cause notices and no voluntary grounding murmurs from VARA...
Oh that's right SOP 101 i.e. "nothing to see here...move along!"
One thing is for sure JB cannot be happy...
Classic scrubba...
If part of the somewhat disjointed thread rumours are indeed true it certainly paints for some disturbing parallels with PelAir: Virgin plane suffers two mid-air incidents, one resulting in woman breaking leg
Updated Fri 7 Mar 2014, 8:12am AEDT
Map: Australia
An investigation is underway into a flight that left a Virgin Australia crew member with a broken leg, and another incident involving the same plane a few days later.
The female crew member was injured when the ATR-72 turbo prop encountered severe turbulence on a flight from Canberra to Sydney last month.
Virgin says the plane was inspected by an engineer and cleared to fly.
Five days later, during a flight to Albury in New South Wales, the pilot reported a possible bird strike.
He later found the aircraft had been damaged.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau says the plane remains on the ground at Albury.
The bureau is interviewing crew and maintenance personnel and examining the flight recorder.
Passing strange that the first incident (actually listed as an accident) is duly recorded (see here & page 15 of weekly summary here) and yet the ABC article listing a possible bird strike incident 5 days later is not recorded as such, rather it is listed pg 16 here as:
25/02/2014 * 201400985 *Accident-Yes - AO-2014-032* near Albury Aerodrome NSW*
ATR - GIE Avions de Transport Regional* ATR72-212A*Air Transport High Capacity*Passenger* D CTR
During a post flight inspection, substantial damage
to the aircraft's tail assembly was detected. The
investigation is continuing.
So the ATsB has tied the two incidents (accidents) together, yet there is no big media statements from the bureau/Fort Fumble, no pending show cause notices and no voluntary grounding murmurs from VARA...
Oh that's right SOP 101 i.e. "nothing to see here...move along!"One thing is for sure JB cannot be happy...
Virgin Australia’s leg breaker ATR now ATSB tail breaker
There are some peculiar matters to note about the misfortunes of a 68 passenger Virgin Australia region ATR72 turbo-prop in February.
On 20 February the aircraft was involved in a turbulence incident on a flight from Canberra to Sydney which was sufficiently severe to leave a flight attendant with a broken leg.
The ATSB has launched an investigation.
The aircraft was given a post turbulence inspection by an aero-engineering service on behalf of Virgin Australia which found no damage and cleared the aircraft to continue in service.
(Without prejudice to anyone, Virgin Australia may, like any airline, outsource maintenance and repair, but it cannot outsource its obligations nor responsibility for any outcomes for the work it sends to others.)
On 25 February the same aircraft was alleged by the pilots flying it to Albury to have experienced a bird strike.
A post landing inspection discovered damage to the tail of the aircraft, and it has remained on the ground since then, inside a hangar.
Virgin Australia says the aircraft has not been released by the ATSB for repairs. Yet the ATSB doesn’t list an investigation of the claimed bird strike. Instead this is what the ATSB says in relation to the Albury grounding.
During a post flight inspection substantial damage to the aircraft’s tail assembly was detected. The investigation is continuing.
What investigation? The number quoted is the same as that for the Canberra leg breaker on 20 February. But you will only find that reference if you go to the second last entry on page 16 of 18 at the above link.
Could it be that the ATSB knows how to bury potentially embarrassing references to incidents involving high profile airlines, or is at the very least, delinquent in its duties to transparently communicate with the public interest it is supposed to act for?
Or put another way, does it have a clue as to the public interest at all, in a supposedly modern western democracy?
Note that the ATSB makes no reference to a bird strike. Unless this was a mature pelican from the Hume Weir or Lake Eildon, frozen into the form of a feather covered boulder after being sucked up to a high altitude in a chance encounter with a tornado, it is surpassingly difficult to imagine it doing so much damage to a modern airliner’s tail, rather than its front, that it is going to be held for ATSB inspection for perhaps as long as it takes the agency to write its final report, which was originally claimed to be finished by May.
The fact that the ATSB expects to complete this report by May, this 2014 May, is in itself almost unbelievable considering the time it usually takes to finalise reports.
And it’s a double report, an undisclosed double report into the Canberra-Sydney leg breaker and the Albury tail breaker.
Yet despite the speed with which the hidden double header is being thoroughly investigated the ATSB can’t even release the aircraft for repairs, seven weeks after the incident and only a matter of weeks before it is supposed to have been read in final draft form by the parties and then published.
So if it is conducting tests or whatever on the ATR72, how can the report be almost completed?
It beggars belief that Virgin Australia, or any Australian airline, would allow a plane of size to be kept out of the skies for such an extraordinary period of time. If this was a Virgin Australia 737 the airline would have a senior executive camped on the ATSB’s doorstep every day, demanding that it give it back its plane.
Virgin Australia says the aircraft is awaiting release, and then repairs. But its been in a hangar with nothing happening so far as anyone can tell for weeks.
There is no evidence of teams of ATSB inspectors poring over every rivet and no doubt searching for embedded pelican feathers every day in their desire to solve this mystery and give the plane back to Virgin Australia before they actually release the report. Is there?
Just what-the-hell is really going on?
Plus comments
Just a driver
Posted April 18, 2014 at 1:54 pm | Permalink
So I was in AY the day the ATR arrived. Our ground handler told us they inspected the tail after a bird strike, and when on the scissor lift, noticed a substantial crack. Aircraft grounded and alternate arrangements made for PAX.
About a week later, I am told that upon further inspection other damage to airframe discovered including several cracked wing bolts. Manufacturer has no repair process for damaged parts of airframe and cannot leave AY under special permit. CASA and ATSB doing back flips as the airframe flew 10 sectors before damage noticed.
Scary stuff.
Dan Dair
Posted April 18, 2014 at 5:32 pm | Permalink
As you rightly say Ben;
“Virgin Australia may, like any airline, outsource maintenance and repair, but it cannot outsource its obligations nor responsibility”
However,
If it’s really that bad (& the extended grounding would give you a clue that it is), who the hell inspected it & what were they actually looking at.?
If ever there was an advert for keeping inspection & maintenance in-house…….
Just a driver,
“(the) Manufacturer has no repair process for damaged parts of airframe”
All-in-all, if true, that’s a bit of a bugger, to say the least.?
There are some peculiar matters to note about the misfortunes of a 68 passenger Virgin Australia region ATR72 turbo-prop in February.
On 20 February the aircraft was involved in a turbulence incident on a flight from Canberra to Sydney which was sufficiently severe to leave a flight attendant with a broken leg.
The ATSB has launched an investigation.
The aircraft was given a post turbulence inspection by an aero-engineering service on behalf of Virgin Australia which found no damage and cleared the aircraft to continue in service.
(Without prejudice to anyone, Virgin Australia may, like any airline, outsource maintenance and repair, but it cannot outsource its obligations nor responsibility for any outcomes for the work it sends to others.)
On 25 February the same aircraft was alleged by the pilots flying it to Albury to have experienced a bird strike.
A post landing inspection discovered damage to the tail of the aircraft, and it has remained on the ground since then, inside a hangar.
Virgin Australia says the aircraft has not been released by the ATSB for repairs. Yet the ATSB doesn’t list an investigation of the claimed bird strike. Instead this is what the ATSB says in relation to the Albury grounding.
During a post flight inspection substantial damage to the aircraft’s tail assembly was detected. The investigation is continuing.
What investigation? The number quoted is the same as that for the Canberra leg breaker on 20 February. But you will only find that reference if you go to the second last entry on page 16 of 18 at the above link.
Could it be that the ATSB knows how to bury potentially embarrassing references to incidents involving high profile airlines, or is at the very least, delinquent in its duties to transparently communicate with the public interest it is supposed to act for?
Or put another way, does it have a clue as to the public interest at all, in a supposedly modern western democracy?
Note that the ATSB makes no reference to a bird strike. Unless this was a mature pelican from the Hume Weir or Lake Eildon, frozen into the form of a feather covered boulder after being sucked up to a high altitude in a chance encounter with a tornado, it is surpassingly difficult to imagine it doing so much damage to a modern airliner’s tail, rather than its front, that it is going to be held for ATSB inspection for perhaps as long as it takes the agency to write its final report, which was originally claimed to be finished by May.
The fact that the ATSB expects to complete this report by May, this 2014 May, is in itself almost unbelievable considering the time it usually takes to finalise reports.
And it’s a double report, an undisclosed double report into the Canberra-Sydney leg breaker and the Albury tail breaker.
Yet despite the speed with which the hidden double header is being thoroughly investigated the ATSB can’t even release the aircraft for repairs, seven weeks after the incident and only a matter of weeks before it is supposed to have been read in final draft form by the parties and then published.
So if it is conducting tests or whatever on the ATR72, how can the report be almost completed?
It beggars belief that Virgin Australia, or any Australian airline, would allow a plane of size to be kept out of the skies for such an extraordinary period of time. If this was a Virgin Australia 737 the airline would have a senior executive camped on the ATSB’s doorstep every day, demanding that it give it back its plane.
Virgin Australia says the aircraft is awaiting release, and then repairs. But its been in a hangar with nothing happening so far as anyone can tell for weeks.
There is no evidence of teams of ATSB inspectors poring over every rivet and no doubt searching for embedded pelican feathers every day in their desire to solve this mystery and give the plane back to Virgin Australia before they actually release the report. Is there?
Just what-the-hell is really going on?
Plus comments
Just a driver
Posted April 18, 2014 at 1:54 pm | Permalink
So I was in AY the day the ATR arrived. Our ground handler told us they inspected the tail after a bird strike, and when on the scissor lift, noticed a substantial crack. Aircraft grounded and alternate arrangements made for PAX.
About a week later, I am told that upon further inspection other damage to airframe discovered including several cracked wing bolts. Manufacturer has no repair process for damaged parts of airframe and cannot leave AY under special permit. CASA and ATSB doing back flips as the airframe flew 10 sectors before damage noticed.
Scary stuff.
Dan Dair
Posted April 18, 2014 at 5:32 pm | Permalink
As you rightly say Ben;
“Virgin Australia may, like any airline, outsource maintenance and repair, but it cannot outsource its obligations nor responsibility”
However,
If it’s really that bad (& the extended grounding would give you a clue that it is), who the hell inspected it & what were they actually looking at.?
If ever there was an advert for keeping inspection & maintenance in-house…….
Just a driver,
“(the) Manufacturer has no repair process for damaged parts of airframe”
All-in-all, if true, that’s a bit of a bugger, to say the least.?
Last edited by Sarcs; 18th Apr 2014 at 22:05.