Please guys, I'm genuinely intrigued. How can anyone incorrectly fit a stainless steel, pre shaped door sill panel.? Hardworker, you are the first one to mention this fault, please enlighten me.

Please guys, I'm genuinely intrigued. How can anyone incorrectly fit a stainless steel, pre shaped door sill panel.? Hardworker, you are the first one to mention this fault, please enlighten me.

I assume the 330 sill is similar to the 320 sill. The 320 maintenance manual requires the door silll to be vaccum baged whilst the sealant that bonds the sill to the door cutout is drying. If this procedure is not carried out, the sill is likely to leak.

Even the simpliest of maintenance tasks have potential avenues for error when not carried out, or closely supervised by trained personnel iaw the approved maintenance publication. Unfortunately, its seems maintenance accomplished in this manner is currently referred to as "gold plating" and is simply not cost effective or financially competitive enough in today's environment. DC might have to buy the wife a BMW instead of a Benz with his bonus...

MELKBQF you are probably getting close.

Come on guys, someone must know someone that was involved with the rectification.

Or at least know who to ask.

I know we all have philosophies to project here, but until we hear what the actual defect was it seems to be a bit premature to be sprooking about safety again.

So far it sounds no more than a pressurisation whistle to me.

MP.

Managers Perspective....Just like politicians and current management you are trying to not answer the question and distort the facts to divert attention away from the real issue.

FACT:The aircraft was serviced offshore.

FACT:Something was not done correctly.

FACT:The aircraft was grounded

Quote from PM.. "So far it sounds no more than a pressurisation whistle to me"

FACT: The aircraft was grounded because of a problem that happened after it was serviced.This cost the airline and it's reputation a huge amount.Not only because the aircraft was not earning money and because people in AUSTRALIA had to fix the problem but because of the public found out about YET ANOTHER OVERSEAS SCREWUP.

If the problem was "just a pressurisation whistle" as you put it MP and was of no significance then WHY WAS THE AIRCRAFT GROUNDED?

Thank you MP
 

MP i like the way you keep the threads alive and kicking.

The door sill was not sealed correctly that is a step in the maintenance manual which was not carried out (the vaccum process) that led to the aircraft being grounded. I'm sure that you won't accept that the aircraft was replaced whilst it sat on the deck for 2 days with tech log coupons backing what happened as evidence. I will post the coupons if you like when I get the chance. What would you like? a written signed confession from the Lufthansa Technik ame stating that he bothched up the job?

The concern here is that many other jobs have been done on the cheap with steps left out from the same facility. Good example was the crapper pipe that wasn't connected and dumped turds in the cargo area. Have they stuffed up other processes in more critical systems and more impotantly do you think DC would still be protected if this leads to a burning hole in the ground?

This is the question that should be exercising the best minds at Qantas and CASA. What is being done to ensure that what is certified to be done is done correctly as per the books so that the reported incidents do not recur? The travelling public and crew who operate these aircraft and, to a lesser extent, shareholders, deserve better.

WHEN WILL THE GUARDIANS REALLY WAKE UP TO WHAT IS HAPPENING?

Err, not quite
 

Hardworker your "facts" earlier in this thread are a little off the mark.

The A/C ferried MNL-MEL with the air leak defect reported on this sector.

Cause of defect isolated to an ill fitting door SILL which was sitting proud.

A temporary repair via an Engineering Authority was carried out and leak checked up to the max allowable cabin diff on the ground with no leak evident.

The A/C operated MEL-BKK and with the higher in flt cabin diff leaked again.

The intent of the EA was carried out prior to departure and also leaked again on the BKK-MEL sector.

A/C taken to the hangar for further investigation along with other scheduled maintenance.

Door sill removed and found to have been drilled off incorrectly, hence the poor fit.

Nil stock door sill in AUS, part ordered from MNL.

After that not sure of the outcome, happily away from the place for a few days. :D

BTW. Mangers Perspective you are a TOOL!:mad:

I think there are none. The temporary caretakers in charge of the company are busy lining their pockets.

A bit like TCAS, QF is operating on a last line of defence bases.

Doesnt QF operate these days on a one hull loss philosophy?

Like all business, it's a balancing act ...

Weigh up the savings on out-sourcing against the risk

Obviously they believe the cost benefits outweigh the likelihood/consequences of a bad thing happening.

It sure sounds like a repeat of the Alaskan Air stuff up, only difference SO FAR is there has not been any loss of life. FAA were also in the hip pocket of the airline there ( sound Familiar)

Only 88 passengers and crew were killed on flight 261 and the FAA has issued an emergency AD calling for ALL A/C with stabilizers to be inspected concerning the jack screw assembly that operates the stabilizer. How about VALUJET 592 who lost a total of 110 passengers and crew with "aircraft wire" (PVC TYPE wire) that can not pass the minimum standards for FAR 25.

I believe Alaskan Air had a whistle blower, but no one would listen, short cuts taken with maintenance to save a quid, dejavu.

I'm not sure what's in your coffee Orville, but it seems you're flying............

MP.

I think MP will not be truly satisfied that there is really any problem unless the aircraft leaves a large crater after its impact.

MP, you stated:The aircraft would under most circumstances fly "fine" on one engine too.
That you somehow think that flying "fine" is reason to believe that a problem and/or cause are not significant is of great concern. I sincerely hope that you are not a manager who is involved with maintenance or operational flying decisions at QF, because as one of the bunnies who has to deal with the "fine" aircraft from takeoff to landing, that would seriously scare me.

There are significant problems with some areas of overseas maintenance which QF uses. Get over that fact. There are also significant problems with the pressures, both real and perceived, that our LAMEs are operating under here in Oz. I, for one, am getting a little weary of both flying your "fine" aircraft with repeatedly identical MELs which substantially increase our workload but can't be fixed for lack of spares or time (lack of hangar space last week!), and of having to ultimately say "no, we will not accept this 'fine' aircraft again unless that problem is fixed, and we don't give a flying f**k whether it has an MEL and you have to wait a week for the bit or not."

http://tn3-1.deviantart.com/300W/ima..._the_Troll.jpg


:ok: