Seems strange that the 737s operated by Virgin still have their heavy done at CHC and Tiger sends the ones in their colours to SIAEP. Tiger did sign a deal in 2016 with SIAEC for heavy on the A320 fleet, so obviously they were hoping to snare more work as the fleet transition gets underway. This episode looks like Air NZ may be the default provider for some time, but I guess ST Aero, GMF and many other Asian shops will also be eyeing the business.

Section etc.,
You clearly do not understand the system, provisions like S.28BE are only applicable to operators who do not have a well resourced legal department, or who outsource not only maintenance, but legal maintenance to suitably resourced and capable licensed (usually) multi-national law firms.
It is only "tiddlers" without resources to battle CASA that "feel the full weight of the law" ( I probably should have said "mass")
Tootle pip!!

All because Australian airplane mechanics ( "engineers" no idea why they are called engineers they don't design anything) cannot function in a practical and efficient manner, everything so dramatic.

4 Holer.
It's a bit more complex than that, don't blame the individuals, but the "system" which effectively prohibits productivity levels that would make MRO in Australia competitive.
Contrary to popular myth/ conventional wisdom, it is not "high wages" in Australia that are the problem, but what you get for the money, and the "system", substantially but not only the CASA "regulation/micro management" that is the problem.
If you have a search around, I have made several more comprehensive posts on exactly this point.
Tootle pip!!

PS: For goodness sake, don't tell Rod the Con he is only a mechanic and not an "Engineer", he gets quite bitter and twisted about it --- indeed the history of how mechanics became engineers in aviation is quite instructive. You have heard of "bracket creep", this is "title creep".

Lead

Well said & thanks.

Ref- "You clearly do not understand the system"...... reckon, 'we' may well understand.

Rgds and have a good weekend.
S28- BE

Gordon FR at al.
Or simply does not have the expertise, much less the will, to do anything about it, I really don't like "buzzword bullsh1t", but this is a multi-factorial problem ( eat your heart out, Sir Humphrey) with no simple or short term solution, and sadly, with little likelihood that anybody in Australia will even try to sort out the problem.

After all, "Safety Is Our First Priority" is a catch-all cover for bureaucratic and political paralysis, an unfortunate but probably accurate belief that a "do nothing" policy has the least political risk for the bureaucrats, and hence advice to the Minister that the current "regulatory and administrative frame work is optimum", as we have the "world's best air safety" ----- fiction, as we all know (or should know, the facts are very public) but convenient.

After all, what are a few thousand relatively high skilled jobs and million, maybe billions saved on the current account, compared to bureaucratic comfort. I believe I can say that, in my opinion, the current Minister and his aviation advisor don't have a clue about this, and the bureaucracy is not about to tell him.

Sadly, Barnaby Joyce did understand, be we have lost him.

In short, serious aviation MRO as an industry in Australia has been lost, to the degree that quite small aircraft (Kingairs, small jets) are now being ferried out of Australia for routine maintenance, and not just "deep" maintenance.

To see how to do it right, have a good look at NZ/Canada/US. There are good reasons for the new major Qantas MRO investment in Los Angeles, but everybody here seem oblivious, with Qantas hiding these major capital developments in plain sight.

As to maintenance errors, nobody in immune from mistakes, I could catalogue some rippers in Australia, over the years, bad enough to potentially cause the loss of an aircraft.

Tootle pip!!

Is it not CASA's role to oversee in some manner the maintenance of VH registered aircraft? They must have at some stage approved the overseas maintenance shop. If the work is being done by shoddy overseas shops should CASA not be saying enough is enough? Or don't political relationships allow that?

As long as the paperwork is fine - so is the aircraft.

Folks,
In a nutshell, that is the CASA "process based system", as opposed to an "outcome" based system, where the criteria is: "Does the aircraft conform to its type design and certification standard".
Tootle pip!!

PS: "Pencil whipping" ---- reminds me of a certain WA based LAME who was widely recognised as:" The Fastest Pen In The West".