deicer hits plane
 

Saw a Flybe aircraft in SOU today, it had been hit by the de-icing van - left a pretty big dent in the side of the aircraft. it had pax on too.

This might be a world-shattering event in Southampton but such events are incredibly common in the rest of the world.

Have to say that despite it being a regular occurence, this one felt particularly hard. A reasonable amount of damage done, to the point that so far, it is not flyable to a hangar able to deal with it. Bombardier are still thinking on it!

Was the deicer checked for D ice C
 

Was it a runaway truck or a very big accident.????

I am led to believe it was a slipped foot at a very critical moment. Very embarrassing for the driver me thinks.

didnt see the reg of the van, but apparently the guy who did it was a long serving employee and will automatically lose his job

Why should the guy who did it automatically lose his job??
Accidents happen all the time and if aircrew got the sack everytime they cocked up, we would be really short on drivers!!!

Seriously, a policy like that only encourages anyone who accidently damages an aicraft in the course of their job to try and cover it up rather than come clean.

Each incident should be treated on its merits and staff should always be treated fairly. That way all accidents will be reported however small.

Coop & Bear

i agree - i think its a shame he will lose his job, but thats what the despatcher said.

Coopervane
Correct, but if it was a "mistake" then surely a no blame culture would stop a loader / deicer / Caterer trying to avoid detection with the possible fatal consequences of such a decision :\

I really do hope that mately boy with the loose foot doesn't loose his job. This is the arsesolic reaction from duckwits in HR when an expensive mistake has been made. It is vital that when employees make a mistake they own up to it. I for one want to hear that somebody has driven into my prop or whatever. Sacking people for being human makes it so that genuine errors are hidden and are only discovered later inside the smoking hole in the ground.

Excuse my ignorance here, but surely unless it can be proved that the individual concerned deliberately rammed into said plane, then i don't really see how he/she can be sacked on the spot. Part of being human is that mistakes and accidents will naturally occur from time to time. Surely the person concerned could appeal... unless his/her contract clearly states 'driving a de-icing rig into a q400 is considered gross misconduct and will result in employment termination'. Unlikely methinks. JW411 says 'such events are incredibly common in the rest of the world'... makes you wonder if this is particularly high demand for drivers if the actions of those in SOU is anything to go by!!

The driver has been suspended on full pay whilst the investigation takes place. The investigation is normally held in conjunction with the customer, covering all aspects including vehicle maintenance (although the rig in question is apparently only months old), ramp contamination, driver training etc etc. A multitude of factors could have caused this incident.

That's why god invented insurance to cover any losses.

Thats odd, spoken to ground crew today and at least two independant people have said he is still on shift but keeping a sheepish profile. Poor sod. I think we maybe getting confused with having his airside driving licence removed until enquiry. But I maybe wrong!

So far, not one negative post on this - very good to see. Let's hope the driver can draw some comfort from that.

Is this the Q400 that is sitting next to the hangar at the Northern end? I saw it from the train yesterday and wondered why it was parked there.

One for the rubberneckers, wonder no more.........;)
http://photobucket.com/albums/c96/ma...t=DSCN1277.jpg
http://photobucket.com/albums/c96/ma...t=DSCN1275.jpg

A/c struck between aft service door and rear pressure bulkhead. Damage; 2 skin punctures, 3 frames and 7 stringers apparently.

Ouch! :eek:

So it might, but some of us look to R&N for news such as this. Each to their own, JW... :hmm:

It may be a common thing - aircraft being damaged by ground equipement, but it shouldnt happen... Poor training and judgement play a very large part in this problem, mechanical making up the remainder. People really must be confident, aware and on the ball when working around aircraft no matter what their task is. Reporting any incident should be of the highest priority.

methinks the despatcher should stick to despatching as he obviously knows little about employment law.

Absolutely!!

So far - looking like 14ft length by 8ft height of re-skinning needed. Thats after four frames and many stringers. At least she is in the warm now being cared for!!!

Just to put all your minds at rest, the incident is under full investigation to determine the exact cause of the incident. The individual concerned is not going to be dismissed automatically. As someone rightly pointed out, this would promote a no reporting culture which must never happen. And lastly to the person who takes the word of dispatcher gossip. Come on.......you surly should know better!!!!

The old girl gets to fly to exeter tomorrow! I think I will take my camera. And as a get well jesture, she will be getting a new engine at the same time too, someone is looking after her.

Thanks for the back-up Biggles, Sarcasm lowest form of wit JW :p

Correction of speculation
 

People please note:

The Accident in question is under investigation that is still on going.

The Driver has not been dismissed he has had his license removed and is still on shift.

The aircraft had a temporary repair to fly back to Exeter.

Any accident is bad and normally avoidable but we in the aviation business should respect;

"THERE ARE THOSE WHO HAVE DONE IT, AND THOSE WHO ARE YET TO DO IT!
:{

Anyone know what the reg the a/c is, just so I know the history the next time I fly it?

Rusty,

I quite agree, in fact spoke to the lad in question last nite to make sure he is alright. I can proudly say that despite what happened, on the day, one of my concerns was that the driver of the truck was ok. I think my closing gambit was "Not to worry, accidents happen, thats why we and Aviance are insured, at least nobody is injured"

And the aircraft should fly circa 13.00 today.

Snigs, it's JEDO apparently

TO TRISTAR 500
 

As you may have never worked or been around a very busy airport with approx 25 overnighters and thru flights it will be easy for you to say training and not beening tired at 0330 after beening called in to do a extra shift as a flu bug has hit the line station is no excuse for not being on the ball every minute for 40 some years around A/C? give the guy a break huh!!!!!!

Perrin; A valid point but SOU on a busy night hardly ticks all those boxes. Accidents happen, lack of training, complacency and a could not care attitude are often at the root of these happenings.

HZ: I note that you are a ground operations trainer at LHR.
Please explain your pompous presumption that anyone who doesnt work at one of the UKs major airports is totally incompetent, not trained properly and doesn't give a toss.
I was involved in ground ops in an earlier life at several different airports - big & small - and what I have experienced is the pressure to get five different jobs done at the same time, but very rarely have I come across complacency or incompetence.

As you say, accidents happen despite any amount of training, and I would have thought that if you are the proffessional you would like to think that you and others think you are, you would take a more constructive approach.

"De-icer hits plane"... obviously front-page news! Reminds me of "Dog bites man"... :hmm:

I concede NikNak as you say 'a long time ago'. In many of the handling companies today, indeed five tasks are the norm hence many of them do not get done properly, under pressure and result in accidents. Thats what we have insuarance for. You are correct I can comment and I see daily the unsatisfactory handling companies and their staff that are out there. Human nature plays a large part as we all cut corners adding to the problems. SOU staff please do not take offence but perhaps if one of them sees this they can comment on the expertise and training of Aviance, or whatever name they go by this week?

How about you widen your perspective a bit, FougaMagister?

Lots of people with a genuine interest in aviation-related news read this forum and to some of us information like this is very useful.

Snigs - good to see you back amongst the Sky Gods! Glad you won that duel we had ;)

Do certain airports have a better record than others? Given HZ123 profile I would suggest he would know better than most. In general, everyone is under greater pressure with tighter t/rounds and schedules to meet.

Don't shoot the piano player
 

When do you need de-icing? When it is snowy.

When do feet slip on pedals? When it is snowy.

Hmm. Maybe it is time to have a look at footwear
issued and pedal surface - for starters.

FC.

Training
 

Aviance have a training procedure based on the AEA Regulations edition 20.
It is always easy to blame training, experience or lack of was a factor and people who do not listen is another.
Yes SOU is a small airport but we still have to work to Company procedure/s as LHR/ LGW / LBA / STN etc.
Bigger airports do think of us as a ploughed field!
Ignorance is bliss!!
The aircraft in question was a Q400 G-JEDO and the vehicle was not a van? It was a FMC TEMPEST.

Biggles - ramp damage is a near-daily occurence at most UK/European major airports. Whatever the reasons (usually down to poor training and/or rushed procedures due to short turnaround times) I insist it's hardly worth mentioning - a bit like a national newspaper mentioning a car "ding" where the only damage was to the bodywork... big deal!

:cool:

Thanks to HZ,
as you say, pressure upon staff plays a big part, no doubt that this is the case here.
Good of you to respond in a professional and personal context.

Rgds,
Niknak.