Engineers slam Virgin on safety
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engineers slam Virgin on safety
Wed "The Australian" 26/2/03
Engineers slam Virgin on safety
By Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
February 26, 2003
VIRGIN Blue has been accused of cutting corners and compromising safety by allowing pilots to do inspections on its newest planes.
The issue will be discussed as a matter of urgency today by the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association executive, which has also complained to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
The engineers want CASA immediately to instruct airlines to use licensed engineers for pre-flight and transit safety checks and have called on Virgin to end a practice they say "downgrades Australian safety standards".
The association has warned of work stoppages by engineers if the issue is not addressed.
But Virgin denied the pilot checks, which are also done by Qantas, were a safety issue and said it was using procedures recommended by the manufacturer and widely used abroad.
"We believe we have some of the most experienced captains, we're very confident in the quality of their work and we believe we're operating above global standards," Virgin head of commercial David Huttner said.
The association's claims come after an incident in which a Virgin captain following the new procedure removed landing-gear pins from an aircraft and left them on the tarmac.
The pins lock the landing gear in place and are a safety device to stop the gear from collapsing during towing and maintenance.
"This oversight could have had fatal consequences and highlights the dangers of taking short-cuts with safety," association president Michael O'Rance said. "The . . . incident showed there is no substitute for engineers with typically 10 years experience in certifying a plane is fit for flight."
The association raised fears last year that potentially serious faults could go undetected if CASA proceeded with a proposal to allow pilots to do routine checks now undertaken by licensed engineers.
Under the proposal for all domestic passenger jets, engineers would check and sign off on aircraft at the start of each day but pilots would be allowed to conduct checks done at present by engineers during refuelling stops.
Pilot checks are allowed in other parts of the world and by manufacturer Boeing for next-generation 737s flown by Virgin and Qantas.
But the association says the move is a cost-cutting measure and pilots don't have the experience to spot the potential faults an engineer would find.
Mr Huttner said Virgin was operating in accordance with CASA procedures as well as Boeing's recommendations and "global best practice".
A CASA spokesman confirmed Virgin was allowed to use pilots to perform the checks on newer planes.
===========================================
===========================================
Engineers slam Virgin on safety
By Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
February 26, 2003
VIRGIN Blue has been accused of cutting corners and compromising safety by allowing pilots to do inspections on its newest planes.
The issue will be discussed as a matter of urgency today by the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association executive, which has also complained to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
The engineers want CASA immediately to instruct airlines to use licensed engineers for pre-flight and transit safety checks and have called on Virgin to end a practice they say "downgrades Australian safety standards".
The association has warned of work stoppages by engineers if the issue is not addressed.
But Virgin denied the pilot checks, which are also done by Qantas, were a safety issue and said it was using procedures recommended by the manufacturer and widely used abroad.
"We believe we have some of the most experienced captains, we're very confident in the quality of their work and we believe we're operating above global standards," Virgin head of commercial David Huttner said.
The association's claims come after an incident in which a Virgin captain following the new procedure removed landing-gear pins from an aircraft and left them on the tarmac.
The pins lock the landing gear in place and are a safety device to stop the gear from collapsing during towing and maintenance.
"This oversight could have had fatal consequences and highlights the dangers of taking short-cuts with safety," association president Michael O'Rance said. "The . . . incident showed there is no substitute for engineers with typically 10 years experience in certifying a plane is fit for flight."
The association raised fears last year that potentially serious faults could go undetected if CASA proceeded with a proposal to allow pilots to do routine checks now undertaken by licensed engineers.
Under the proposal for all domestic passenger jets, engineers would check and sign off on aircraft at the start of each day but pilots would be allowed to conduct checks done at present by engineers during refuelling stops.
Pilot checks are allowed in other parts of the world and by manufacturer Boeing for next-generation 737s flown by Virgin and Qantas.
But the association says the move is a cost-cutting measure and pilots don't have the experience to spot the potential faults an engineer would find.
Mr Huttner said Virgin was operating in accordance with CASA procedures as well as Boeing's recommendations and "global best practice".
A CASA spokesman confirmed Virgin was allowed to use pilots to perform the checks on newer planes.
===========================================
===========================================
Last edited by Wirraway; 28th Feb 2003 at 06:24.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The next thing they will be advocating is the return of flight engineers, navigators and radio operators, all in the interest of safety of course.
They are flogging a dead horse and should get on with their jobs and allow aircrew to do theirs.
It has NOTHING to do with safety !!!!!
They are flogging a dead horse and should get on with their jobs and allow aircrew to do theirs.
It has NOTHING to do with safety !!!!!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And since when has it aircrew's job to do an engineers job. How can a pilot with no formal enginering training, and perhaps newly qualified on type, make engineering decisions that on occasion a highly experienced engineer has to go to great depth on. Some times the most innocuous sign can lead to much greater faults that require greater levels of experience than almost any pilot has. I have seen planes at the end of a day that have been subjected to pilot turnrounds and sometimes it isn't pretty, cuts in tyres seem to be a favourite area of ignorance. Engineers are not just glorified car mechanics, our training takes longer than pilots ( 3-4 years just for basic trade and then maybe another 2 yr for licences and on top of that extensive type training and on going recurrent) , just remember we make decisions on a daily basis that keeps you guys safely in the air, and that is us "getting on with our jobs"!!!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: The Land of OZ
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snowballs,
Have you completely lost the plot!!!!!
We are talking about compromising the safest airline system in the world. I have experienced numerous instances in the past where the early pick up of potential problems has prevented anything more catastrophic happening.
LAME's are trained on type for the reason of ensuring that the aircraft is maintained to an acceptable standard and therefore fit to fly. A large part of the LAME training/licensing involves hands on work over many years in dealing with fault analysis and inspection/maintenance work on the particular aircraft type, this in turn gives the engineer a good back ground experience in what to look for on turnarounds.
I shudder at the thought of us going down the path of what is being proposed here by virgin and qantas because it won't just stop at new gen 737's.
Have you completely lost the plot!!!!!
We are talking about compromising the safest airline system in the world. I have experienced numerous instances in the past where the early pick up of potential problems has prevented anything more catastrophic happening.
LAME's are trained on type for the reason of ensuring that the aircraft is maintained to an acceptable standard and therefore fit to fly. A large part of the LAME training/licensing involves hands on work over many years in dealing with fault analysis and inspection/maintenance work on the particular aircraft type, this in turn gives the engineer a good back ground experience in what to look for on turnarounds.
I shudder at the thought of us going down the path of what is being proposed here by virgin and qantas because it won't just stop at new gen 737's.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you are really saying is that all turnarounds must / should be certified by Engineers, so unless you are amoral that includes smaller commuter aircraft etc or perhaps aircraft seating less than about 40 passengers don’t count.
You people are thinking like Luddites. Safety is not compromised ! and as far as finding things on turnarounds it cuts both ways. From a lifetime in the industry I can quote many incidences of engineers missing defects.
Nobody has suggested that pilots sign of defects. If an aircraft goes U/S at an out station because there is no licensed engineer to sign off a defect, so be it. That is a cost benefit / loss that airlines would have considered.
737 guru - what a load of rubbish, you are talking about job protection, nothing else.
You people are thinking like Luddites. Safety is not compromised ! and as far as finding things on turnarounds it cuts both ways. From a lifetime in the industry I can quote many incidences of engineers missing defects.
Nobody has suggested that pilots sign of defects. If an aircraft goes U/S at an out station because there is no licensed engineer to sign off a defect, so be it. That is a cost benefit / loss that airlines would have considered.
737 guru - what a load of rubbish, you are talking about job protection, nothing else.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snowballs,
...the evolution of technology made these tasks simple enough for a pilot to handle whilst still preforming his/her primary role - flying the aircraft.
These tasks were once very complex and time consuming that required highly trained people dedicated to the specific task. Please don't embarrass yourself any further trying to distort historical events to back up your twisted viewpoint.
If your allowed on the ramp, have a look at the B737 Classic and NG...then you can tell everyone else how Boeing manufactured the NG to be inspected any differently to the Classic.
If you can do that maybe I'll regain some respect for your opinions...I look forward to your report.
As for Mr Huttner :
I'm sure you do have some...its the rest I'm not sure about.
I'm sure I'll be entertained with more wisdom from Snow et al...look forward to your responses.
the return of flight engineers, navigators and radio operators
These tasks were once very complex and time consuming that required highly trained people dedicated to the specific task. Please don't embarrass yourself any further trying to distort historical events to back up your twisted viewpoint.
If your allowed on the ramp, have a look at the B737 Classic and NG...then you can tell everyone else how Boeing manufactured the NG to be inspected any differently to the Classic.
If you can do that maybe I'll regain some respect for your opinions...I look forward to your report.
As for Mr Huttner :
We believe we have some of the most experienced captains
I'm sure you do have some...its the rest I'm not sure about.
I'm sure I'll be entertained with more wisdom from Snow et al...look forward to your responses.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Next door
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Huttner
Your beliefs and the reality are leviathan in measurement.
Capt. Snowball
Does all your 'experience' preclude you from seeing that "pins left on the tarmac" is not a safety issue?
Or was it you Captain, my Captain?
Your beliefs and the reality are leviathan in measurement.
Capt. Snowball
Does all your 'experience' preclude you from seeing that "pins left on the tarmac" is not a safety issue?
Or was it you Captain, my Captain?
Last edited by E.P.; 25th Feb 2003 at 22:59.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what was not mentioned from the same source !
CASA backs Virgin checks
By Lisa Davies
26feb03
VIRGIN Blue is not compromising passenger safety by removing some safety inspections on domestic flights, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has said.
The Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA) has accused the airline of cutting back on safety checks by licensed engineers and using pilots to check aircraft instead.
But CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said Virgin Blue had its full support because the newer aircraft involved required less attention.
"From our perspective we do not believe (passengers) should be concerned about the fact that pilots are doing turnaround inspections on these brand new Virgin Blue aircraft," he said.
"There are no safety issues, but ... there are industrial issues which are nothing to do with us.
"Virgin Blue have done this with our approval, they are perfectly within the requirements of the safety rules of Australia."
Mr Gibson said Virgin Blue was still using more engineers than required by the aircraft's manufacturer.
"(The manufacturers are) just building them better ... it's a bit like, you buy a new car these days and once upon a time you used to have to get it serviced every 10,000kms, now it's every 20,000kms," he added.
"Boeing has said that ... they don't require an engineer to do the turnaround inspections, therefore you can use a pilot."
He said this only referred to visual inspections, which included walking around the aircraft checking for damage.
However, ALAEA alleged a recent aircraft pre-flight safety check had been done by a pilot who removed some critical maintenance safety devices and left them on the ground.
Mr Gibson said that was still strictly prohibited and if during a visual inspection a pilot found damage, a licensed engineer must be called.
CASA backs Virgin checks
By Lisa Davies
26feb03
VIRGIN Blue is not compromising passenger safety by removing some safety inspections on domestic flights, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has said.
The Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA) has accused the airline of cutting back on safety checks by licensed engineers and using pilots to check aircraft instead.
But CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said Virgin Blue had its full support because the newer aircraft involved required less attention.
"From our perspective we do not believe (passengers) should be concerned about the fact that pilots are doing turnaround inspections on these brand new Virgin Blue aircraft," he said.
"There are no safety issues, but ... there are industrial issues which are nothing to do with us.
"Virgin Blue have done this with our approval, they are perfectly within the requirements of the safety rules of Australia."
Mr Gibson said Virgin Blue was still using more engineers than required by the aircraft's manufacturer.
"(The manufacturers are) just building them better ... it's a bit like, you buy a new car these days and once upon a time you used to have to get it serviced every 10,000kms, now it's every 20,000kms," he added.
"Boeing has said that ... they don't require an engineer to do the turnaround inspections, therefore you can use a pilot."
He said this only referred to visual inspections, which included walking around the aircraft checking for damage.
However, ALAEA alleged a recent aircraft pre-flight safety check had been done by a pilot who removed some critical maintenance safety devices and left them on the ground.
Mr Gibson said that was still strictly prohibited and if during a visual inspection a pilot found damage, a licensed engineer must be called.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: The Land of OZ
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ohhh Sorry,
I really am quite silly because I'm sure that the Captain & F/O would ground the aircraft on the last flight out of goodness knows where, put everyone up in the local pub on the company endorsed M/Card and then would probaly even buy all the pax the first shout
Seriously though, all I'm saying is that I would hate to see pressure being applied to the crew for flight/turn time and something go a miss. At the moment there is someone independant of the Flight Crew who can keep an eye on all things happening during the turnaround ie: Fuel, Dunny servicing, Catering trucks, Gorillas throwing bags etc.... As we all know it gets bloody busy out there.
I really am quite silly because I'm sure that the Captain & F/O would ground the aircraft on the last flight out of goodness knows where, put everyone up in the local pub on the company endorsed M/Card and then would probaly even buy all the pax the first shout
Seriously though, all I'm saying is that I would hate to see pressure being applied to the crew for flight/turn time and something go a miss. At the moment there is someone independant of the Flight Crew who can keep an eye on all things happening during the turnaround ie: Fuel, Dunny servicing, Catering trucks, Gorillas throwing bags etc.... As we all know it gets bloody busy out there.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snowball,
And your point is???
Are you now relying on a CASA spin doctor to back you up???
I'd be very interested to see this in black and white...last time I looked it wasn't in the M.M.
And this gem...
Fantastic!! Your on a winner now Snowballs. Keep up the good work.
And your point is???
Are you now relying on a CASA spin doctor to back you up???
"Boeing has said that ... they don't require an engineer to do the turnaround inspections, therefore you can use a pilot."
And this gem...
it's a bit like, you buy a new car these days and once upon a time you used to have to get it serviced every 10,000kms, now it's every 20,000kms,"
Evertonian
So therefore, Snowballs, you'd be quite happy to check in the PAX & serve them a cuppa during cruise as well? Never mind job protection, what price safety in the safest aviation environment?
If this is how DJ is going to change the industry, then I think I'll walk thanks!
If this is how DJ is going to change the industry, then I think I'll walk thanks!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Here. Over here.
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a great spin.
This reads like the pilot made a terrible mistake and (in best journo tradition) "we all escaped death by inches".
In fact it is nothing of the sort. I managed to sneak a peek at the appropriate bit of the Virgin manual.
It seems to me that this is a procedure to prevent the slight possibility of the gear pins bein left IN. The only danger I can see is if the engineers now tow the aircraft without checking the gear pins are in. You can hardly blame the pilots if this happened.
Compromising safety. Can't have pilots removing gear pins. Needs years of training and a licence to be able to do that. What CR@P!
The association's claims come after an incident in which a Virgin captain following the new procedure removed landing-gear pins from an aircraft and left them on the tarmac.
<snip>
"This oversight could have had fatal consequences and highlights the dangers of taking short-cuts with safety," association president Michael O'Rance said.
<snip>
"This oversight could have had fatal consequences and highlights the dangers of taking short-cuts with safety," association president Michael O'Rance said.
In fact it is nothing of the sort. I managed to sneak a peek at the appropriate bit of the Virgin manual.
Note: If during the Exterior Inspection, gear pins are in and the aircraft has been released for flight, they should be removed and left on the ground for subsequent stowing by the engineer.
Compromising safety. Can't have pilots removing gear pins. Needs years of training and a licence to be able to do that. What CR@P!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Desert Drongo,
Apart from the fact that the
appears poorly written with respect to safety: what about FOD precautions or the bloke working on the gear system, or tool accountability etc.... yet another reason for experienced people to be doing the job they have been trained to do. Thanks for that.
How could it be that
if the captain was still doing an external inspection???
Why is it that this task from the
is not being carried out by all pilots??? Or did some poor bloke get caught out by reading the book??
What happens at stations without engineering?? Who picks up the pins then??
Even better...don't blame me, I'm only a pilot. If the gear pins have been inserted as part of a maintenace function and a pilot removes them it is the pilot that will be held accountable and answer to CASA.
I think Drongo that your example and attitude is CR@P.
Apart from the fact that the
appropriate bit of the Virgin manual
How could it be that
the aircraft has been released for flight
Why is it that this task from the
appropriate bit of the Virgin manual
What happens at stations without engineering?? Who picks up the pins then??
The only danger I can see is if the engineers now tow the aircraft without checking the gear pins are in. You can hardly blame the pilots if this happened.
I think Drongo that your example and attitude is CR@P.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Boeing don't require an engineer...." Why should they? They have to demonstrate that their product is cheaper to run than brand X in order to sell them.
What is more to the point is what the FAA and Euro JAA require.
They operate just a few more aeroplanes than we do in their national fleets, so presumably have some statistics etc to back up whatever they require. I don't know what they do require these days, but not many years ago a pilot could not even do an oil dip on a part 121 (airline) or part 135 (commuter) operation in the USA.
Personally, I have no problem with doing my own preflights, because after all it's my bum in the seat of the thing too. BUT, I do insist on a proper turnaround time to do it. First flight of day - 1 hour 15 minutes sign-on, turnarounds - not less than an hour if taking over the ship, or 45 minutes if I have already flown it. If some management type puts any pressure on me to do it in less time, I just take more time until they get the message that these things can not be rushed. Therein lies the problem for Virgin, from what I have seen of the general hurry they always seem to be in to get everything done on schedule. Once they ingest those gear pins into an engine they'll get the message that I think all of you on both sides above are trying to send.
What is more to the point is what the FAA and Euro JAA require.
They operate just a few more aeroplanes than we do in their national fleets, so presumably have some statistics etc to back up whatever they require. I don't know what they do require these days, but not many years ago a pilot could not even do an oil dip on a part 121 (airline) or part 135 (commuter) operation in the USA.
Personally, I have no problem with doing my own preflights, because after all it's my bum in the seat of the thing too. BUT, I do insist on a proper turnaround time to do it. First flight of day - 1 hour 15 minutes sign-on, turnarounds - not less than an hour if taking over the ship, or 45 minutes if I have already flown it. If some management type puts any pressure on me to do it in less time, I just take more time until they get the message that these things can not be rushed. Therein lies the problem for Virgin, from what I have seen of the general hurry they always seem to be in to get everything done on schedule. Once they ingest those gear pins into an engine they'll get the message that I think all of you on both sides above are trying to send.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huh...
A manual that recommends leaving tooling on the ground?
Anybody ever heard of Foreign Object Damage? Really, if the pilot is going to withdraw the undercarriage pins, he should stow them appropriately and log his actions...
This though is a typical example of how easy it is to lose communications between pilots/ground crew when regulations are vague...
A manual that recommends leaving tooling on the ground?
Anybody ever heard of Foreign Object Damage? Really, if the pilot is going to withdraw the undercarriage pins, he should stow them appropriately and log his actions...
This though is a typical example of how easy it is to lose communications between pilots/ground crew when regulations are vague...
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has been discussed here previously, and you are NEVER going to get Engineers and Pilots to agree about it. 
The ONLY reason for doing it is to save money, it certainly CANNOT improve safety.
Over the years I have known quite a few Engineers who think they are Pilots, however I wouldn't want to fly with them.
The same applies in reverse...........
The ONLY reason for doing it is to save money, it certainly CANNOT improve safety.
Over the years I have known quite a few Engineers who think they are Pilots, however I wouldn't want to fly with them.
The same applies in reverse...........
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was once told by a very old engineer, no matter what happens to aviation in the future, engineers will still be around to fix things pilots break.
May be, the way aviation is going there will not be a requirement for pilots along with flight engineers,navigators and radio operaters.
You fly them we fix them
May be, the way aviation is going there will not be a requirement for pilots along with flight engineers,navigators and radio operaters.
You fly them we fix them
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: ACT
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well all this is very interesting but I for one will not be signing any technical log return to service entries without a formal engineering qualification ie: A LICENCE!
If you guys are prepared to lay your nuts on a legal chopping board go right ahead.
This economic rationalisation is getting out of hand. Lets remember that it costs money to run an airline safely and there is no way out of that.
Beancounters and overpaid executives should be held accountable and liable, if god forbid the unthinkable ever happens.
Familiarity breeds contempt something thats lost on the part of airline managers looking to bolster their bonuses each year!
Wake up!!
If you guys are prepared to lay your nuts on a legal chopping board go right ahead.
This economic rationalisation is getting out of hand. Lets remember that it costs money to run an airline safely and there is no way out of that.
Beancounters and overpaid executives should be held accountable and liable, if god forbid the unthinkable ever happens.
Familiarity breeds contempt something thats lost on the part of airline managers looking to bolster their bonuses each year!
Wake up!!