Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

'Watchdog slams BA's safety'

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • DME
    DME
    Fly me to the Moon
    • Aug 2004
    • 914

    #21
    A statement from the article;

    As the captain prepared to land and the autopilot was disconnected, the plane started drifting to the right, forcing him to take corrective action.


    What is up with that?


    dme
    Loganair Islander from Papa Westry to Westry....Tower: Logan123 cleared for takeoff. Logan123: Cleared for takeoff Logan123. 38 seconds later....Logan123 finals for Westry!!!!!!

    Comment

    • Skymonster
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jul 2004
      • 1986

      #22
      Originally posted by redsquare
      Scary recent examples including the 3 engine 747 trans-atlantic flight and subsequent fuel emergency and the similar A319 flight where the instruments failed and then the crew continuing the flight is ridiculous.
      redsquare,

      Much of what you said makes sense, but I'm afraid that the two BA incidents you highlight have NOTHING to do with maintenance practices or standards. If there is anything to question in those cases (and in the former I have no issues with the pilots decision to operate trans-Atlantic as it was clearly allowed for in SOPs), then it is crew judgement that should be questioned and not maintenance.

      And as soon as we move onto crew judgement, then Ryanair is as much in the frame as BA, given Ryanair has had its share of such events including the late / flap overspeed descent in Sweden and subsequent return flight without any checks, the rather dodgy orbit on short final into Beauvais, etc.

      Andy
      "Light travels faster than sound-that's why some people seem bright until they speak"
      AirTeamImages
      - the best aviation photography

      Comment

      • Skymonster
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Jul 2004
        • 1986

        #23
        Originally posted by PMN
        One word: Aeroflot.
        I know you've now said this was meant in jest, but this is urban myth anyway. Given the size of the airline and the harsh environmental conditions in which Aeroflot sometimes have to operate, they have for many years had a pretty good record. Very few Aeroflot incidents in the past are attributed to maintenance or airplane airworthiness, and what accidents they have suffered have been predominantly weather or aircrew related.

        Andy
        "Light travels faster than sound-that's why some people seem bright until they speak"
        AirTeamImages
        - the best aviation photography

        Comment

        • MINIDOH
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Jan 2000
          • 711

          #24
          I have already talked about the issues with Ryanair aircraft. You claim there are no shortcuts taken, yet I have seen with my own eyes evidence of poor maintenence. There IS a difference between cheap and expensive maintenence. I am not claiming that every Ryanair flight is unsafe, but if you know so much about Ryanair then you will know what im talking about. Having seen the "lets do it next week" attitude in action I will never agree that Ryanair have high standards of maintenence. I was shocked when I saw what I saw, and it isnt just me who thinks their maintenence can be a bit iffy at times.

          Comment

          • Bmused55
            Aaahh Emu!
            • Oct 2003
            • 11136

            #25
            Originally posted by MINIDOH
            I have already talked about the issues with Ryanair aircraft. You claim there are no shortcuts taken, yet I have seen with my own eyes evidence of poor maintenence. There IS a difference between cheap and expensive maintenence. I am not claiming that every Ryanair flight is unsafe, but if you know so much about Ryanair then you will know what im talking about. Having seen the "lets do it next week" attitude in action I will never agree that Ryanair have high standards of maintenence. I was shocked when I saw what I saw, and it isnt just me who thinks their maintenence can be a bit iffy at times.
            I'm glad I'm not the only one then.

            Anybody remember my associate "bob"? well he was recently on loan to them to sort some maintenance issues out. Walked out within 5 hours of arriving at the office (he wouldn't tell me where it was). He said, and I quote:

            Their method of thought and approach to maintenance is shoddy. I've seen better logs in africa
            Bmused55

            Keep thy airspeed up, less the earth come from below and smite thee.

            My Blog
            My Designs

            Comment

            • Grey Area
              Punter
              • Apr 2004
              • 12157

              #26
              I hope some of you have unequivocal evidence to back up your assertions about Ryanair, just in case their legal folk take it into their heads to do the same thing to Key Publishing as they did to PPrune.

              Do be careful, chaps!

              GA
              Last edited by Grey Area; 4th January 2006, 16:57.
              You can't fool owls.

              Comment

              • PMN
                PMN
                PlaneObsessedBassPlayer
                • Aug 2005
                • 5594

                #27
                Originally posted by Skymonster
                I know you've now said this was meant in jest, but this is urban myth anyway. Given the size of the airline and the harsh environmental conditions in which Aeroflot sometimes have to operate, they have for many years had a pretty good record. Very few Aeroflot incidents in the past are attributed to maintenance or airplane airworthiness, and what accidents they have suffered have been predominantly weather or aircrew related.

                Andy
                I know. I was simply being sarcastic

                Paul
                Last edited by PMN; 4th January 2006, 17:46.
                My images on Flickr Jetphotos A.Net

                Comment

                • Cking
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Oct 2004
                  • 1000

                  #28
                  Getting back to the original thread quickly!!!!. This report was covered in "Flight International" about a month ago, so it's hardly new. I think it was covered in the Times last week on what is known as a slow news week!
                  Incidently the same issue of "Flight" had an artical about a report by the same "Watchdog" that criticised another british carrier for incorrect loading their aircraft. That didn't make the papers, slow news day or not!

                  Rgds Cking

                  Comment

                  • redsquare
                    Member
                    • Dec 2005
                    • 96

                    #29
                    MINIDOH,

                    I don't know what you've apparantly seen but if it is a breach of maintenance regulations then I urge you contact the relevent authorities asap with any edvidence. You have a massive responsibility! I know from first hand experience (not going to give myself away here) that what you are talking is pure rubbish. Show proof please.

                    Grey Area is right, be very careful, Ryanair has a very active legal department and will not hesitate to act because of the regular tyraids of lies.

                    Back to BA, the 3 engine transatlantic run and A319 incident are to do with maintenance especially the 3 engine job. Losing an engine a 100ft always has a reason but both incidents as of yet don't have reports so we'll wait and see. A similar engine failure last leek out of JFK adds fuel to the fire. Co-incidently, BA and Ryanair both have heavy engine maintenance done at GE in Wales.

                    The 757 with control problems was due to the flaps not being refitted proberly after maintenance causing it to get worse as they were extended asymmetrically on the approach.

                    At the end of the day, BA has an outstanding record and I for one would not hesitate in using them over many others.

                    Comment

                    • Skymonster
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Jul 2004
                      • 1986

                      #30
                      Originally posted by redsquare
                      Back to BA, the 3 engine transatlantic run and A319 incident are to do with maintenance especially the 3 engine job. Losing an engine a 100ft always has a reason but both incidents as of yet don't have reports so we'll wait and see.
                      No, yet again you are wrong. I repeat your original comment...

                      Originally posted by redsquare
                      Scary recent examples including the 3 engine 747 trans-atlantic flight and subsequent fuel emergency and the similar A319 flight where the instruments failed and then the crew continuing the flight is ridiculous.
                      The three-engined flight had NOTHING to do with maintenance. Maybe, MAYBE there was a maintenance related issue with the engine failure in the first place but as you rightly point out, the report hasn't been published yet so we don't know that.

                      The subsequent decision by the crew to continue the flight - you linked the "3 engine 747 trans-atlantic flight" (not the original engine failure, which as we've already agreed the cause of which is unpublished as yet) with maintenance problems - WAS NOT a maintenance issue but was a CREW DECISION, allowed under SOPs, and unrelated to the CAUSE of the original engine failure.

                      Engine failures happen, period. 99% of these failures to not make the news. In the case of the 747 out of LAX, you are implying that something that was relatively routine and un-newsworthy (an engine failure) suddenly became newsworthy because of a maintenance issue - well it didn't, it became newsworthy because of a crew decision, and in fact despite the fact that the crew decision was valid within the airline's SOPs.

                      Likewise, the A319 incident MAY (again we don't know because we don't have the report yet) have had a cause routed in maintenance, or it may not. But again, the decision to continue the flight - which you implied was the real problem - is not maintenance related but was a crew decision.

                      Now, having decided that both of the BA incidents you highlighted only became issues of notoriey because of crew decisions, and seeing as you're so keen to defend Ryanair (not that I particularly have a problem with Ryanair in this respect), how about talking about Ryanair crew decision making...

                      Andy
                      "Light travels faster than sound-that's why some people seem bright until they speak"
                      AirTeamImages
                      - the best aviation photography

                      Comment

                      • PMN
                        PMN
                        PlaneObsessedBassPlayer
                        • Aug 2005
                        • 5594

                        #31
                        Originally posted by Skymonster
                        how about talking about Ryanair crew decision making...
                        Is this line referring to a specific incident or have I completely missed something?

                        Paul
                        My images on Flickr Jetphotos A.Net

                        Comment

                        • exmpa
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • May 2005
                          • 321

                          #32
                          Likewise, the A319 incident MAY (again we don't know because we don't have the report yet) have had a cause routed in maintenance, or it may not. But again, the decision to continue the flight - which you implied was the real problem - is not maintenance related but was a crew decision.
                          The point of issue in this case is the engineering action after the event (or lack of it). The failure was serious (potentially disastrous in some circumstances) but it is perceived that the subsequent company investigation may have been inadequate and the aircraft returned to service before the cause had been properly determined. As you correctly say:

                          the decision to continue the flight - which you implied was the real problem - is not maintenance related but was a crew decision
                          The circumstances relating to the decision to continue to destination are unclear. We shall have to wait for the AAIB to report for that aspect to be resolved. However it is worth noteing that the policy of most scheduled carriers is that in-flight defects should be carried to destination if it is safe and prudent to do so.

                          exmpa

                          Comment

                          • Skymonster
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Jul 2004
                            • 1986

                            #33
                            exmpa - agree with you on both points, particularly in respect of the A319 incident where not only did the crew elect to continue to destination but the a/c was not pulled for detailed investigation for several days until external parties intervened. None the less, the original asertion that the decision to continue to destination was symptomatic of a maintenance culture problem within BA was incorrect.

                            Andy
                            "Light travels faster than sound-that's why some people seem bright until they speak"
                            AirTeamImages
                            - the best aviation photography

                            Comment

                            • redsquare
                              Member
                              • Dec 2005
                              • 96

                              #34
                              Skymonster, I agree that the decision not to return to base was not to do with maintenance but crew decisions. However, 3 recent 747 engine failures is worrying no matter which way you lok at it. With regard to the decisions of the crew, there are two outstanding RYR reports to be published, however, it should be noted that RYR and BA operations are far different specifically regarding airport approach infrastructure. Without excusing any event, BA ops normally result in ILS approaches, something which is often not the case at RYR therefore the higher likelihood of incidents.

                              Regards

                              Comment

                              • wysiwyg
                                Retard :)
                                • Jan 2000
                                • 3749

                                #35
                                Originally posted by redsquare
                                ...Without excusing any event, BA ops normally result in ILS approaches, something which is often not the case at RYR therefore the higher likelihood of incidents...
                                Whoa there!!! What are you trying to say with that sentence? I've worked for companies making many more non-precision approaches than the average Ryanair flight and I have never found them to be a concern. I trust your not trying to say it's just Ryanair pilots flying non-precision approaches...

                                Comment

                                • redsquare
                                  Member
                                  • Dec 2005
                                  • 96

                                  #36
                                  wysiwyg: As you know, non precision approaches carry significantly more risk than ILS's. Ryanair crews with between 4 and 6 sectors a day, often with many non precision approaches complete far more sectors than the vast majority of BA crews with long haulers doing what, maybe between 6 and 8 trips a month.

                                  For example, one of RYR's main bases, Rome Ciampino currently has no ILS but a dodgy, steep VOR/DME regularly used in 7kt tailwinds with a shortish runway, not easy in a heavy -800 never mind the circle-to-land to RWY 15...fun. Check out all the others with an ILS on one end and nothing or an NDB at the other if your lucky e.g. Szczecin,Tampere,Toulon,Tours Loire Valley,Trieste,Bydgoszcz, Gdask, Blackpool,Bergerac, Ancona, La Rochelle, Rzeszw, Wroclaw, Rodez, Poitiers, Lodz etc. Bags of fun during winter.

                                  Basically, what I'm trying to say is that RYR and BA are vastly different operations in terms of airports (or airfields ha ha) with one op more likely to cause problems (but doesen't)

                                  PS Sorry for the late reply, the day job gets in the way. Home early every night my backside.
                                  Last edited by redsquare; 9th January 2006, 01:52.

                                  Comment

                                  • kevinwm
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Jun 2004
                                    • 1131

                                    #37
                                    Originally posted by redsquare
                                    Skymonster, I agree that the decision not to return to base was not to do with maintenance but crew decisions. However, 3 recent 747 engine failures is worrying no matter which way you lok at it. With regard to the decisions of the crew, there are two outstanding RYR reports to be published, however, it should be noted that RYR and BA operations are far different specifically regarding airport approach infrastructure. Without excusing any event, BA ops normally result in ILS approaches, something which is often not the case at RYR therefore the higher likelihood of incidents.

                                    Regards
                                    How many other airlines have suffered engine failures?, or are you saying BA are they only company to experience this problem's cause that s what it sound like
                                    Yet again the press like to sensationalize the ordinary ,last week on this forum , there was the thread BA 747 engine explosion@JFK , then when you read the true fact it suffered a engine Surge a problem that is caused not by the lack of maintenance and the Lax story , again a engine Surge
                                    As for worrying , I would only be worrying if the aircraft had crashed
                                    KEEPING THE FLAG FLYING

                                    Comment

                                    • wysiwyg
                                      Retard :)
                                      • Jan 2000
                                      • 3749

                                      #38
                                      Still not sure why non-precision is to be considered so much more risky than an ILS. After all the lack of precision is more than catered for by considerably higher minima. I guess what you're really getting at is operating to places where approaches are poorly written procedural ones with little or no radar cover. In that case that is where our professionalism and training should take over and if we can't justify and descent when below the local MSA then the only way is up. With regard to non-precision approaches, life would have been much more straightforward if Ryanair had chosen an aeroplane that not only was capable of Track and Flight Path Angle but could also couple the autoflight system to it as well (or even present a pseudo ILS on the PFD and fly that fully coupled!) like easyJet can but that's a whole different argument...

                                      But...BA aircraft operate their fair share of 'dodgy' approaches too, Funchal, Corfu, Innsbruk, JFK (Carnarsie), to name just a few.

                                      Comment

                                      • strawsonh
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Jan 2006
                                        • 53

                                        #39
                                        BA Past Safety record

                                        May i point out that British Airways has only ever had one major crash where fatalities have occured and this was in the 1970s. It has had its fair share of incidents in the past but that is to be expected given the size of its fleet and age. Comparing it to other airlines of a similar size e.g. Air France it is quite obvious that BA has maintained a very high safety record. This can only reflect the high quality and techniques of its engineering department.

                                        Comment

                                        • redsquare
                                          Member
                                          • Dec 2005
                                          • 96

                                          #40
                                          wysiwyg,

                                          You are right, the main problem with non-precision approaches I've encountered is the reluctance to Go Around especially after doing an orbit to lose altitude and then mess it up a la Gulfair 320.

                                          On the side, all RYRs aircraft since 2003 are CATIIIB equipped, however for commonality are only(!) CATIIIA approved. The CATIIIA is good enough I guess and never came across CATIIIB conditions ie below 200m RVRs. We need more CATII airfields before anything else.

                                          Regards,
                                          bluesquare

                                          PS for clarity, I highly regard BA and its crews, no suggestion from me about anything other than being 1st class.

                                          edited for spelling..doh

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X