Tyres burst on MyTravel A320
Guest
Posts: n/a
It takes balls to post on a forum? Come on now... It would take balls to do something about unsafe practices, If you two are not willing to do something about it , get off your soapbox and kiss my brown star. From what I understand SSV just completed a national Transport Canada audit and did very well, but I am sure you will spew some more crap about that as well. Not only are you guys crybabies you are cowards as well
Scourge of Bad Airline Management!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Global Nomad
Age: 55
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I could be wrong here, and will gladly take corrections...
I spent most of Monday at EGFF, and I think I am right in saying that the A320 in question lost a tire earlier in the day.... the airport closed for a very short time whilst something was going on (I was flying at the time), and I was told that the 320 had lost a tyre.
Later in the day, it came back from somewhere, and the smell of burning rubber when it landed was strong enough to raise comments over on the south side.... we don't get to smell rubber very often, but this time it STANK. No sign of reverse thrust being used either.
Was this all the same plane? Are these facts facts? Are they connected?
TA
I spent most of Monday at EGFF, and I think I am right in saying that the A320 in question lost a tire earlier in the day.... the airport closed for a very short time whilst something was going on (I was flying at the time), and I was told that the 320 had lost a tyre.
Later in the day, it came back from somewhere, and the smell of burning rubber when it landed was strong enough to raise comments over on the south side.... we don't get to smell rubber very often, but this time it STANK. No sign of reverse thrust being used either.
Was this all the same plane? Are these facts facts? Are they connected?
TA
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 30 West
Age: 65
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the pool up to temperature, well I'd better dive in then !
The problems encountered by SSV in Indonesia did not result in their ETOPS being withdrawn, they stopped it themselves pending engineering inspections on C-FBUS. The aeroplane had been operating around active volcanoes during it's period in Indonesia and that was alledged to be part of the cause of the engine shutdowns.
I flew C-FBUS in the LHS the following year under a subcontract for MYT and found that not only were SSV's flight training very good, but their engineering back up was good as well. At no time were we asked to defer, cover or ignore tech problems and I can personally say that I was completely happy working for them.
The problems encountered by SSV in Indonesia did not result in their ETOPS being withdrawn, they stopped it themselves pending engineering inspections on C-FBUS. The aeroplane had been operating around active volcanoes during it's period in Indonesia and that was alledged to be part of the cause of the engine shutdowns.
I flew C-FBUS in the LHS the following year under a subcontract for MYT and found that not only were SSV's flight training very good, but their engineering back up was good as well. At no time were we asked to defer, cover or ignore tech problems and I can personally say that I was completely happy working for them.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HST
Why do I think you are?....'cause you said so..., but of course you could be both
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...&threadid=4968
Why do I think you are?....'cause you said so..., but of course you could be both
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...&threadid=4968
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: your momma's house
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello HighSpeedTape. Rest of this edited.. pathetic, childish post attempting to out another poster. Grow up.
Keep it clean....
Keep it clean....
Last edited by Sick Squid; 7th Aug 2003 at 06:02.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: EGNT
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trimtank2
Hmmm.. Well one of the things that surprised me was how easy it was for SSV to gain extensions on MEL items from Transport Canada. It would appear that all they had to do was convince Transport Canada that they were unable to procure parts for defects and magically a 10 day extension to the already 9 day old MEL limit was granted. This happened several times and for defects that could be easily corrected with easily obtainable parts. If SSV did not have the parts in their UK inventory they were readily available from pool or on loan (I know because on these occasions, with the MEL drop dead date looming Stock checks revealed that the required parts were available and this option was presented to them every time but they never took it up.) I suspect that SSV found it cheaper to pull the wool over the eyes of Transport Canada.
MEL time limit extensions or permission to operate outside of the MEL could be reasonably requested if the aircraft was in some place at the back of beyond but it wasn't. It was within a 3 hour drive of a readily available source of spares from MYT, Air France and FLS and within a 45 minute drive of SSV's main UK spares base.
I wouldn't know about cowardice. I know that on occasion MORs and ASRs have been filed for breaches of the MEL, specifically the lack of implementation of MEL requirements for maintenace actions and/or operational restrictions. This is the correct way to report these "lapses" and the authorities should deal with it (if they ever got to see them after SSV had handled them). I don't know the end result and to elaborate would be guesswork.
HST
Hmmm.. Well one of the things that surprised me was how easy it was for SSV to gain extensions on MEL items from Transport Canada. It would appear that all they had to do was convince Transport Canada that they were unable to procure parts for defects and magically a 10 day extension to the already 9 day old MEL limit was granted. This happened several times and for defects that could be easily corrected with easily obtainable parts. If SSV did not have the parts in their UK inventory they were readily available from pool or on loan (I know because on these occasions, with the MEL drop dead date looming Stock checks revealed that the required parts were available and this option was presented to them every time but they never took it up.) I suspect that SSV found it cheaper to pull the wool over the eyes of Transport Canada.
MEL time limit extensions or permission to operate outside of the MEL could be reasonably requested if the aircraft was in some place at the back of beyond but it wasn't. It was within a 3 hour drive of a readily available source of spares from MYT, Air France and FLS and within a 45 minute drive of SSV's main UK spares base.
I wouldn't know about cowardice. I know that on occasion MORs and ASRs have been filed for breaches of the MEL, specifically the lack of implementation of MEL requirements for maintenace actions and/or operational restrictions. This is the correct way to report these "lapses" and the authorities should deal with it (if they ever got to see them after SSV had handled them). I don't know the end result and to elaborate would be guesswork.
HST
