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

Steve Purvinas, legend

Old 3rd Nov 2019, 16:46
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 160
Now Mick, you may choose to bathe in the glow of those who dislike the Skygods, and Qantas staff generally, but you have specifically avoided answering this question that I put to you earlier:

"Even with the boroscope method you mention, even if the check takes even two or three hours, wouldn't that be worth it?" That is the crux of this issue, isn't it? Give me some kind of reason NOT to do it?
Cactus Jack is online now  
Old 3rd Nov 2019, 17:28
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Inside the Industry
Posts: 767
If I was advising QF, and the check only takes one hour (if that) then I would advise them to conduct a one off check of all 737-800s, followed by a weekly check of all with > 22k cycles and a monthly check of all with < 22k cycles.

Its cheap to do requiring approximately 1.5x FTE to be allocated, it goes beyond OEM and regulatory requirements, it will give the travelling public reassurance that QF is a safety leader and furthermore, QF can claim world class visibility into the emerging PF cracking issue.

Unless Boeing has isolated the cause to something other than cycle or age related, it's clearly going to be an ongoing issue for some time.
industry insider is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2019, 19:30
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,624
Originally Posted by industry insider View Post
If I was advising QF, and the check only takes one hour (if that) then I would advise them to conduct a one off check of all 737-800s, followed by a weekly check of all with > 22k cycles and a monthly check of all with < 22k cycles.

Its cheap to do requiring approximately 1.5x FTE to be allocated, it goes beyond OEM and regulatory requirements, it will give the travelling public reassurance that QF is a safety leader and furthermore, QF can claim world class visibility into the emerging PF cracking issue.

Unless Boeing has isolated the cause to something other than cycle or age related, it's clearly going to be an ongoing issue for some time.
That was precisely the point Mr Purvinas made.

1. Prudent, above reproach and consistent with a safety message.
2. Very little cost
3. Great PR Optics.

That they choose the other legal but minimal approach, denigrate those who suggest otherwise and send an industry hack like Mr David on TV to sell it is disappointing.
Rated De is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2019, 21:40
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mt Druitt
Posts: 159
Inspections

Are there enough experienced Engineers left at QF, to do the inspections, after years of laying off Engineering staff?

Cost cutting and outsourcing of Engineering, looks to be biting QF (and many more Airlines) in the ass. If Engineering numbers were right, there'd be NO issue doing extra inspections to keep everyone Safe!
​​​
snoop doggy dog is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2019, 21:56
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,783
Just a quick check in. MickG could not be GT....the points he is posting seem to come from a person with some aviation knowledge.

As for the checks and yes you can get up there with a rag and torch but that would not be recommended for a Pilot, you'd need a new shirt if you tried. Boroscope is the standard method to undertake these inspections. The checks are a nominal 1 hour but our members report that once experienced, you can do them in around 15 minutes.

Like other departments, Engineer numbers have been cut to the bone. They're having all sorts of problems keeping up with their maintenance program, you may have noticed from the state of the cabins. It doesn't mean any of us should turn a blind eye to problems. The state of the fleet is a result of mismanagement, not poor workmanship.
ALAEA Fed Sec is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2019, 22:08
  #206 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 979
Love the comment re GT, rolled gold. Buy that man a beer.
dragon man is online now  
Old 3rd Nov 2019, 22:50
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,624
They're having all sorts of problems keeping up with their maintenance program, you may have noticed from the state of the cabins. It doesn't mean any of us should turn a blind eye to problems.
That the industry has descended into a state whereby employees who have as their core responsibility safety are, in the "industrial climate" chastised, sanctioned and threatened is a disgrace.
The industrial relations system is broken, "fair work" is just a name and it is increasingly obvious that everything Little Napoleon touches turns to scrap.
With the exception of his own remuneration.


'In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act'

Last edited by Rated De; 3rd Nov 2019 at 23:03.
Rated De is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2019, 23:46
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Cactus Jack View Post
Now Mick, you may choose to bathe in the glow of those who dislike the Skygods, and Qantas staff generally, but you have specifically avoided answering this question that I put to you earlier:

"Even with the boroscope method you mention, even if the check takes even two or three hours, wouldn't that be worth it?" That is the crux of this issue, isn't it? Give me some kind of reason NOT to do it?
I'm not bathing in anyone's glow. If there's any glow bathing going on it's the coterie of contributors who operate like a closed-cycle human-caterpillar, endlessly reprocessing the same nonsense.

And I don't have an issue with the 'Skygods' (or anyone else for that matter) so long as they're happy to argue on a factual and logically reasoned basis. As I said earlier facts are facts whether they're put forward by one of the 'Skygods' or someone else.

And I wasn't avoiding the question. I gave you a raft of additional information the other day and had heard nothing back from you. Now you've seen the inspection instructions can you see that the rag and torch thing is just a nonsense?

But anyhow, to your question;

Adding the check for cracks to the next A Check for aircraft with that have met the 22,6000 cycle threshold would be a reasonable course of action but that is now largely moot as all aircraft that meet that criteria have been inspected. Grounding the entire fleet, regardless of age/flight cycles, is a course of action that is simply not supported by the data to hand.

Let me ask you a question, do you support the ALAEA call for all B737s to be immediately grounded pending inspections?
MickG0105 is online now  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 00:12
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the Trees
Posts: 145
Once upon a time Qantas never mentioned itís safety record, it didnít need to, it had an industry wide well deserved reputation for its safety culture. This reputation naturally made its way to the traveling public, and it was highly respected.

How times have changed. If a company needs to constantly remind the public of its safety record, there is something culturally wrong within the company.
ANCDU is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 00:17
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by ALAEA Fed Sec View Post
Just a quick check in. MickG could not be GT....the points he is posting seem to come from a person with some aviation knowledge.
Thank you ... I think. That's a bit like a Steve Bradbury gold but any old how, just to revisit a question that I put to you on Saturday,

Are you still calling for the immediate grounding of all 42 QF B737s that have not yet been inspected? What about Virgin? should they be immediately grounding their currently uninspected B737s?

Last edited by MickG0105; 4th Nov 2019 at 00:25. Reason: Question revisited
MickG0105 is online now  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 02:26
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 67
Posts: 366
The demise of Qantas - the Geoff and Alan story

How true;

Originally Posted by ANCDU View Post
Once upon a time Qantas never mentioned itís safety record, it didnít need to, it had an industry wide well deserved reputation for its safety culture. This reputation naturally made its way to the traveling public, and it was highly respected.How times have changed. If a company needs to constantly remind the public of its safety record, there is something culturally wrong within the company
What ANCDU said, 10/10.
Qantas had an impeccable safety record and certainly didnít have to advertise itself as being safe. Actually canít fault Strong James on that score. However Dixon started the ball on eroding that reputation due to Ďprofit before safetyí and Joyce happily ran with that baton, to what we have today. Qantas never had to advertise safety, and similar applied to its quality of service. My how the place has snow dived since 2000. Well done Geoff and Alan.......
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 02:29
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 248
Mick,

Virgin have reported to the press that they have completed their B737 inspections..

If that report is correct, they have achieved it with little fanfare, without stress and without denigrating the Engineering world, or the leadership of its Engineering Union.

And while QF Management may be able to win perception when it comes to any Pilot Industrial action by trotting out the old chestnut of Pilot salaries, they may find it a little more difficult when the Engineers are simply arguing on a point of safety.

Anyway, no dog in this fight, so my post is just an observation and opinion..
Square Bear is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 04:16
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 887
In the old days we were told implicitly that Qantas would NEVER mention its safety record publicly as it was well understood that Ďboastingí about not killing anyone (for a very long time at least) was poor form, highly risky and completely disrespectful to others - Ďthere but for the grace of god ...í

Far better to have Tom Cruise do it for you. Who, interestingly enough is a very similar size to someone else.... hmmmmm
V-Jet is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 04:47
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 412
Virgin have reported to the press that they have completed their B737 inspections..

If that report is correct, they have achieved it with little fanfare, without stress and without denigrating the Engineering world, or the leadership of its Engineering Union.
As I understand Virgin have inspected 19 of their aircraft in a fleet of about 85. So they have done the same high cycle inspections that Qantas have done. Yet the call was not to ground THEIR fleet, so thatís probably why there was less stress and name calling.

I support the call to inspect all the aircraft in an expedited manner but the usual PPRuNe suspects singling out Qantas and ignoring the other carrier in the country reads like the usual one-eyed whinge fest.
Beer Baron is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 06:04
  #215 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 979
Virgin has inspected all there 737s that have cycles above 18,000 as they believe the AD will be lowered.
dragon man is online now  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 08:36
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 911
Angry

That's a bit like a Steve Bradbury gold
Now you back right off Bradbury mate
The name is Porter is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 09:17
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,624
Originally Posted by dragon man View Post
Virgin has inspected all there 737s that have cycles above 18,000 as they believe the AD will be lowered.
That is exactly what Mr Purvinas was referring to, the AD (inspection) is working off "known knowns": The data is limited presently, suggestive the scope be broadened.
So rather than whinge, they just quietly, expeditiously and prudently did the inspections. That is called airline management, risk minimisation and sound practice.

Fort Fumble couldn't do it without a catchy project name a "team" to administer it and some way to personally profit from doing so.
Given Little Napoleon has spent the last week ordering flowers and attending to high society nuptials with such eminent people like Piggy as guests, the best Fort Fumble could do was send out an industry hack to denigrate the engineers and deny.

Rated De is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 09:49
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 412
Originally Posted by Rated De View Post
That is exactly what Mr Purvinas was referring to.
No itís not. Mr Purvinas was not calling for a grounding of airframes with over 18,000 cycles, he wanted the ENTIRE Qantas 737 fleet grounded.
"As long as Qantas is unaware which aircraft do or don't have cracks, they should ground the entire fleet until they know which are safe to fly."
So Rated De, why would that not apply to the entire Virgin fleet?
So rather than whinge, they just quietly, expeditiously and prudently did the inspections.
Again, no. Virgin inspected 20% of their fleet, Qantas have inspected 44% of their fleet but Qantas are laggards??
Beer Baron is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 12:34
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Inside the Industry
Posts: 767
Virgin has inspected all there 737s that have cycles above 18,000 as they believe the AD will be lowered.
Quite right, but how low can it go?

18,000 is only 20% of design life. Boeing's pickle fork problem gets bigger by the day.

Last edited by industry insider; 4th Nov 2019 at 21:46.
industry insider is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 19:38
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,624
Originally Posted by industry insider View Post
Quite right, but how low can to go?

18,000 is only 20% of design life. Boeing's pickle fork problem gets bigger by the day.
Exactly.

The A380 fleet was grounded until it was ascertained which of the aircraft were and were not modified.
It is entirely logical and prudent to do so.
If the head of the engineering union with substantively more experience than any industry hack or duplicitous regulatory idiot, details the inspection takes an hour per aircraft, then what precisely is the downside?

Great value PR with far less BS than filling a delivery aircraft full of hack journalists and claiming "scientific" research was done for an aircraft not yet ordered.
Rated De is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

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