Why do you indeed?

If that's ALL you want done and and nothing else, then in Europe you get what you ask for.
Normal procedure in Europe? If so, it does not make it RIGHT, but I suspect that there is MORE being asked of the wrong people.

A waste of highly paid resources? Defects picked up early can be repaired a lot cheaper than those picked up late. ("stitch in time")

The redundancy features in the design of the aircraft is the first line of defence in the event of a failure. It is NOT a something on which the business model for the operation of the aircraft can be based. It's unfortunate to see some operators do.

Cessna Pete, if you are an airline pilot, and in Europe, I suggest you pay very close attention to pre flights if you only have baggage handlers present.

Curious.

At least half of Qlink Dash-8's are pushed back by Aerocare. I've yet to notice any difference between an aerocare pushback and a pushback by a Qlink engineer.

DIVOSH!

Then ask yourself this DIVOSH;

Why don't aerocare do the push backs on the Q-link 717's in places such as Melbourne?

They are carried out by, you guessed it, Q-link ENGINEERS.


But back to topic and those who crave the decimation of the engineering ranks in order to push the minimisation of standards. No doubt, bag snatchers can carry out the average pushback. Just as an aircraft can be routinely flown by remote control (refer U.S. drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan). But when things go wrong on the pushback and, as in Singapore with a QF A330 some time back there is an uncontained tailpipe fire on engine start, it's nice to know a competent person is on the end of the headset to give the crew an accurate picture of what is happening.Or so I would've thought. Rather than, as in the above mentioned example, have somebody with no clue who simply takes the headset off and runs away!

As it is comforting to know a competent flight crew are on hand to cope when things don't go to plan during flight.

Your arses strapped inside these things day in day out. Just saying.

And remember, the term "sustainability", be it in regard to aviation safety standards above the absolute minimum, or other things in life, is just a measure of what we are prepared to pay for.

Funny how the PM and GG's RAAF BBJ aircraft still get a preflight carried out by engineers at every Maint port (complete with a terminating check at the end of every day's flying. Where as Qantas now follow Boeings absolute minimum requirements with regards to the frequency of these checks) and are dispatched by a qantas or NGS engineer. Why do the politicians deserve a higher standard of safety than the general public???

Why wouldn't you want the last pair of eyes to walk around the aircraft, just prior to departure, when everything is closed and pax on board to be someone who is qualified and experienced to do so?? The techies do their walk around very early on in the transit, any anomalies, leaks, ground handling damage, disturbed doors or access panels that occur after the Flt Crew inspection would be left to the discretion of the baggage handlers to report. Hardly comforting..

Chockchucker
 

I bet QF 380s don't get pushed back by engineers in Dxb and Lhr.
An engineer is on the headset and oversees the pushback, steering pins etc. and monitors the start and also has a final last check of the aircraft.
The fully trained pushback drivers do not have to be aircraft engineers, again what a waste of qualified resources in Oz if this is the norm.
Aso as an aside, how disrespectful some Aus posters are about baggage handlers, they are not all thieves, as all Jetstar pax are not Boguns!!

All the LAME experience in the world goes to waste if the wrong attitude is driving it and I've seen that (complete with cock ups) on more than one occasion.

Sounds like 'jobs for the boys" with no technical requirement!!

Who said that's the norm in Australia cessnapete? It's not AFAIK. Stick to commentating on european standards in the world of bug smashers mate.

Couple of years ago.
747-400 positioned from hangars for max wt dep.
During push, engineer requested return to blox as he suspected one tyre pressure low. No flight deck monitoring fitted.
After parking I could not visually confirm his diagnosis but he had the experience.
Tyre had damage sustained during positioning and was losing pressure.
Would have been flat by the time we taxied 4 k to runway.
Results of max wt take off with flat tyre?
May have felt something during take off but probably not enough to reject at low speed.
Probably shredded at high speed, possible eng failure,probable fuel dump and return.
None of the above happened because of the experience and vigilance of the engineer during the pushback.
Saved how much money???

Cessna Pete, Woody 42.

My post was not meant disrespectfully, rather to say that licence training and operational experience provides much more than that given to a baggage handler.
They do the best they can, but the airline believes that this all that is required based on economics, not safety or logic.
When things unravel and costs spiral past the savings made, the thinking on this WILL NOT CHANGE.

PW1830

Maybe so, but having lames day in day out, vs the once a blue moon occurrence you mentioned does not weigh up.

Meaning the company could wear the cost of the air return and fuel dump on the odd occasion and still be miles ahead.

You miss the point
 

The point being: which is safer?

Of course having a lame is safer.

Dick smith coined it as affordable safety. If you made aviation 100% safe we wouldn't fly.

Everything is a compromise, from an MEL, to an OEB, the aircraft design and capability to the very system we work in.

Such is life.

Exactly GG. Affordable safety unfortunately is the way it goes these days. If they want to do everything the same as the old days, that's fine, but that means charging what they did in the old days as well, and the travelling public these days finds the cheapest fare.

Time to get with the times. Weigh up the risks vs the benefits.

morno

QF baggies to do receipt/dispatch
 

All LHR QF A380 departures are carried out by an engineer. Couldn't say about DXB, but would think it highly likely.

What a load of rubbish

I have reported things on a walk around now that have lead to a flight being canx on more than one occasion, one occasion was immediately after the aircraft had an acheck, and another just after engineering did their daily.

Those baggage handlers report everything to the crew and the crew determine wether or not they call engineering


I should also say after several thousand pushbacks with engineering and ramp staff, I have encountered less problems with ramp staff knowledge of the dispatch duty, I still get engineers who don't know how to connect a towbar and then ask to conduct the cross bleed start during pushback.

The engineer pushback has gone the way of the inflight engineer and probably the pilots one day too.

As much as I love working with engineers and enjoy their company, particularly overseas at the floors, it's life.

I'm just bloody glad that despite the massive change through the industry, anytime I need one, they are there quickly and always display the utmost professionalism and courtesy.

I'd rather qantas' worst, than the best I've seen overseas.

I disagree with the above leejoyce, rampies are rampies. We never know what we'll get and generally its too hard to set them straight. So we just consider it a threat and manage it the best we can.

I will say on behalf of most, slow down! It takes about 3 minutes to start the engines. It doesn't matter if you rush the ship out at breakneck speed. You can't dispatch until the donks are lit and the checklists are done. Slow it down and it might save the above mentioned lames a lot of swearing in the hanger one day replacing a tailcone or a sharklet. If you time it so you're saying set brakes as the flaps are coming down it'll be a job well done.

Exactly the "free market" driven ideology that says we should also lower the qualifying criteria for pilots.

The results of which can now be seen spread all over the French alps.

Like to see anyone try and explain " risk vs benefits" to the relatives of the victims on the German Wings murder site.

Morno,
What is your alternative, UNaffordable safety. Dick is continually misconstrued about what affordable safety amounts to, it does NOT necessarily mean everything collapses to the lowest common denominator.
It does mean that the "safety dollar" should be spent where it will do the most good, and featherbedding in the guise of "safety", when it is no such thing, has to be eliminated, (including in CASA).
LeeJoyce,
Agree entirely, that has also been my experience, quite a few times over the years, including fan blade damage not blended out IAW MM, on all too many occasions.
It was great, in QF, with many quite exceptional engineers, but QF has to compete or go out of business.
Tootle pip!!