safety at qantas

[medhead]

It is RR...they have been appointed by QF to manage these engines.

So why have they held back on implementing these fixes?

You would hope they would proactive and QF would be managing their services too given they used to perform in house on the same services.

I still trying to understand how it is that QF is supposed guess that there was a manufacturing problem and then manage the RR to fix that problem. I would also think that the manufacturer was probably the best party to contract for maintenance. Especially given the small number of QF A380s, which are probably too few to bring the maintenance in house.

 

[yohy?!]

I still trying to understand how it is that QF is supposed guess that there was a manufacturing problem and then manage the RR to fix that problem. I would also think that the manufacturer was probably the best party to contract for maintenance. Especially given the small number of QF A380s, which are probably too few to bring the maintenance in house.

I'm just working off what has been published by others, QF previously took care of these services in house. They outsourced and an incident occurred to the point they are seeking redress from a supplier but I (along with others) don't think that leaves them off the hook. At least not with the facts at present.

There is an apportioning of blame that will take place, RR will take the lion share but someone will have to decide where QF's (as the carrier) duty of care comes into play.

 

[medhead]

I'm just working off what has been published by others, QF previously took care of these services in house. They outsourced and an incident occurred to the point they are seeking redress from a supplier but I (along with others) don't think that leaves them off the hook. At least not with the facts at present.

There is an apportioning of blame that will take place, RR will take the lion share but someone will have to decide where QF's (as the carrier) duty of care comes into play.

It was a manufacturing problem! Exactly how would QF doing the maintenance change that?

As for a QF duty of care - They purchased certified and approved engines, no doubt from a company that has all the ISO certifications. What are they suppose to do, the QC for RR? Set up a QF quality certification standard Quality standards exist for a reason.

Look at the Toyota recall last year of all their cars. That was a manufacturing problem. Does that mean every company that purchased a recalled toyota failed to fulfil their duty of car?

Personally, it sounds like you are putting too much faith in Crikey. It is of no better standard than News ltd.

 

[Sprucegoose]

I'm just working off what has been published by others, QF previously took care of these services in house. They outsourced and an incident occurred to the point they are seeking redress from a supplier but I (along with others) don't think that leaves them off the hook. At least not with the facts at present.

There is an apportioning of blame that will take place, RR will take the lion share but someone will have to decide where QF's (as the carrier) duty of care comes into play.

I understand that it was a RR responsibility. How could QF be responsible?


You talk about the facts at present.....elighten me??

 

[JohnPhelan]

Apparently QF's own engineers have x-ray vision, so they could have seen what was happening inside the components of the engine and fixed them.

 

[pauly7]

I'm just working off what has been published by others,

Which is very dangerous given the misinformation, bias and agenda driven drivel that is published.

Don't believe all you read.

At least not with the facts at present..

Your grasp of the 'facts' is being dictated from where you are sourcing them from....

Just because someone is a journo, is published and sounds knowledgable doesn't mean they know what they are talking about, or have the full insight or context to comment appropriately.

 

[yohy?!]

Like I've been saying if there's any source out there that refutes the conclusions being drawn I'm happy to stand corrected.
Http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/rolls-royce-regrets-qantas-scare-but-will-not-say-when-it-upgraded-design/story-e6frf7l6-1225953482958

 

[nlagalle]

I'm just working off what has been published by others, QF previously took care of these services in house. They outsourced and an incident occurred to the point they are seeking redress from a supplier but I (along with others) don't think that leaves them off the hook. At least not with the facts at present.

There is an apportioning of blame that will take place, RR will take the lion share but someone will have to decide where QF's (as the carrier) duty of care comes into play.

What you are not understanding is that the incident WAS NOT due maintenance being done outhouse. The incident was caused by a manufacturing fault. The reason the part failed sooner for QF is that it operates the engines at a higher thrust for LAX ops.

QF will reach a private settlement with Rolls Royce (as the manufacturer).

 

[yohy?!]

I don't have any difficulty seeing that RR is responsible, my point is that QF may need greater oversight on what their contractors are doing.

 

[yohy?!]

Apparently QF's own engineers have x-ray vision, so they could have seen what was happening inside the components of the engine and fixed them.

Apparently someone doesn't like to be disagreed with

 

[yohy?!]

I understand that it was a RR responsibility. How could QF be responsible?


You talk about the facts at present.....elighten me??

I've linked to several articles in previous posts

 

[nlagalle]

I don't have any difficulty seeing that RR is responsible, my point is that QF may need greater oversight on what their contractors are doing.

I don't think you understand, even if it was serviced in house - the odds of the accident happening were just the same as the engine was built with a faulty part that wasn't discovered until after the accident! That has nothing to do with RR servicing the engines, rather Rolls Royce having an issue with manufacturing!

 

[nlagalle]

Like I've been saying if there's any source out there that refutes the conclusions being drawn I'm happy to stand corrected.
Http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...-upgraded-design/story-e6frf7l6-1225953482958

That article was written before they discovered the faulty part - and determined it happened when it was made. What RR knew was there was abnormal wear in the engine.

 

[oz_mark]

That has nothing to do with RR servicing the engines, rather Rolls Royce having an issue with manufacturing!

Rolls Royce seems to have a quality control issue.

 

[simongr]

Just to switch tacks slightly. I saw the news article on the recent rapid descent and incensed by the stupid cow being interviewed.

The lead in line was that the aircraft had descended so low that stupid cow could get phone signal so she immediately called someone to tell them how frightened she was - isn't she the person creating a risk at that point? She was being championed by the journos who skipped over her awful behaviour...

 

[oz_mark]

The lead in line was that the aircraft had descended so low that stupid cow could get phone signal so she immediately called someone to tell them how frightened she was - isn't she the person creating a risk at that point? She was being championed by the journos who skipped over her awful behaviour...

If she got a signal, does that mean she had never turned her phone off??

 

[mannej]

Just to switch tacks slightly. I saw the news article on the recent rapid descent and incensed by the stupid cow being interviewed.

The lead in line was that the aircraft had descended so low that stupid cow could get phone signal so she immediately called someone to tell them how frightened she was - isn't she the person creating a risk at that point? She was being championed by the journos who skipped over her awful behaviour...

What controlled rapid descent? I thought it was a wild death defying plunge...well thats how it came across in the paper

 

[medhead]

I don't have any difficulty seeing that RR is responsible, my point is that QF may need greater oversight on what their contractors are doing.

I think the difficulty is that you are confusing the roles of RR as manufacturer/supplier of the engines and as maintenance contractor for the engines. QF could be have someone standing next to the maintenance contractor 24 hours a day and that will not prevent a problem due to faulty construction of the engine in the first place.

Even if RR as manufacturer of the engine knew there was a fault, there is no way for the maintenance contractor, be it RR, QF or someone else, or QF as owner to know there was a fault until informed by the manufacturer. No amount of oversight can discover that either.

 

[nlagalle]

Like I've been saying if there's any source out there that refutes the conclusions being drawn I'm happy to stand corrected.
Http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...-upgraded-design/story-e6frf7l6-1225953482958

Yohy?! I suggest you read the ATSB report which is totally unbiaised. I'll draw your attention to page 14:

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/2888854/ao-2010-089 preliminary report.pdf#page=0

On 24 June 2010, Rolls-Royce plc Service Bulletin RB211-72-AG329: IP Shaft Rigid Coupling - borescope inspection of the coupling splines was carried out on the engine. That inspection was mandated by EASA AD 2010-0008 dated 15 January 2010, which was subsequently revised by EASA as AD 2010-0008R1 on 4 August 2010.

So as you can see this AD you listed earlier was performed. And the AD had nothing to do with checking the part that failed.

Here is the part about the failure:

A recent key finding from those examinations was the presence of an area of fatigue cracking within a stub pipe that feeds oil to the HP/IP bearing structure. That cracking was associated with a misaligned region of counter-boring within the stub pipe outlet. The misaligned counter-boring had produced a localised thinning of one side of the pipe wall (Figure 9).

So again - this has nothing to do with how the engine was maintain and by who.

 

[tipsy.skipsy]

I don't know if this was hyperlinked before but anyways. Please ignore if was posted before

Qantas loses another Rolls-Royce engine, and the plot – Plane Talking

Ben Sandilands's Blog