Update On A/c 700

[High Iron]

E-TRONS, good to see you on the board again...good to see you well.

I have to concurr about the troubleshooting. It's challenging enough just due to the nature of the beast itself. Trying to second-guess someone else's actions or inactions just complicates things exponentially more. The more complex the system, the more you rip your hair out following every possibility to the Nth degree.

 

[pitguy]

Does the FAA have some oversight/responsibility for these outsourced maintenance facilities.

I would imagine there must be some type of certification/licensing required.

Please remember the FAA is normally nothing more than a "Paper Tiger". Little if anything will be done over this issue.


--Heard a rumor that our one Captain (don't want to mention any names to protect the follicle challenged) may start doing the Men's Hair Club Commercials soon again since work is not going so well.

--Maybe he will comment on the Faa being a Paper Tiger.

 

[Smartest Loser]

Well aircraft 700 had to make a no flap landing in clt tonite , had a flap lock same problem its had from its departure from the great 3rd party maint in ala. The aircraft is out of severice one again...........when will they learn???????????

Let's play a game..." Who can pick the city where A/C 700 will break again "...??

For those whom don't understand aircraft systems heres something all of us can relate to:

If your car was running fine until you took it in for a oil change and a lube job, then when you got it back the windsheild wipers didn't work, it pulls to the left and the engine now smokes....Would you take it back to the same guy for more work..?? I don't think so....

SL

 

[A320 Driver]

Does the airbus require special training for a no flaps landing compared to the boeing? what is the difference between the two when it comes to that?

Does the airbus require special training for a no flaps landing compared to the boeing?

No

what is the difference between the two when it comes to that?

Both similar. It is highly unlikely to have a true no-flap approach in either aircraft. The flap system and slat system are independant and a true no-flap would require a failure of BOTH systems. Aircraft 700 problably had a "partial" flap or slat failure rather than a failure of both slats and flaps.

Just a guess on my part.

A320 Driver

 

[delldude]

check out MAE'S Q/A : pdf

 

[High Iron]

Let's play a game..." Who can pick the city where A/C 700 will break again "...??

For those whom don't understand aircraft systems heres something all of us can relate to:

If your car was running fine until you took it in for a oil change and a lube job, then when you got it back the windsheild wipers didn't work, it pulls to the left and the engine now smokes....Would you take it back to the same guy for more work..?? I don't think so....

SL

Classic!!

 

[AOG-N-IT]

During last nights overnight maintenance on Acft 700UW...I had a chance to talk to a few people on the Tech and Maint. Managaement side of the coin regarding Acft 700 , not only is thier Flap Issues...but Rudder control problems have crept into the program as well.

700's issues have become time and labor compounded due to parts shortages that I have warned and preached about for years too.

Last night 700 was robbed of a "Rail Assy" from one of it's engines to support Acft 112. The rail assy is an inclussive and fancy term for the engines fire loop that most A&P's will be familiar with.

So now we are not only addressing the actual problem..we are in fact doubling up effort on removing and replacing robbed parts on this Acft. Keep in mind that the narrow body Airbus fleet makes up 50% of the mainline fleet..yet we have little to work with...least of all with actual assets that could be robbed sitting in Mobile Al. and Goodyear Az. Remember those are out of the loop spares thanks to the tunnel vision of a poor management team that is attempting to destroy the lives of labor...and most likely the entire airline before it's over.

What we have here is errors and mistakes being magnified and compounded by more errors and mistakes.....Your requested contributions to these people will be nothing more than a tempest in a tea pot with the way things are being handled.

Let Dave and his team give until it hurts...we are already damaged goods !!

 

[Schwanker]

Last night 700 was robbed of a "Rail Assy" from one of it's engines to support Acft 112. The rail assy is an inclussive and fancy term for the engines fire loop that most A&P's will be familiar with.

Maybe this is the UCT/ICT. Turning perfectly good flying vehicles into can birds. Maybe this will help alleviate the parts shortage problem for awhile!

Great Job Dave!

 

[seeking the truth]

AOG,

Thanks for the informative and up to date information on this critical issue. I find it interesting that upper management keeps mum about this issue. Had the maintenance of this aircraft gone without a hitch, the company I'm sure would have had a media blitz, just to rub it in the mechanics faces.


This is getting very costly to the company, though they are to smug to admit it.

1. lost revenue due to mechanicals

2. the added cost of troubleshooting multiple (it seems) problems.

3. the ferrying of parts

4. the cost of robbing parts. As in time in removing parts from another aircraft. Then installing the part. Having to buy or ferry the same part again for the aicraft that was robbed.

5. the cost of litigation

6. the cost of lost revenue due to the airbus sitting on the ground needing their s checks done.

There's no doubt our mechanics will solve the problem. It will take time though. As our mechanics did not originally touch the aircraft and know what exactly was or was not done during the 3rd party check.

All of this could have easily been avoided if it were not for the arrogance of some upper management within this company.

 

[phllax]

This is all so ironic considering I just read "Airframe" on my last flight.

 

[AOG-N-IT]

AOG,

Thanks for the informative and up to date information on this critical issue. I find it interesting that upper management keeps mum about this issue. Had the maintenance of this aircraft gone without a hitch, the company I'm sure would have had a media blitz, just to rub it in the mechanics faces.


This is getting very costly to the company, though they are to smug to admit it.

1. lost revenue due to mechanicals

2. the added cost of troubleshooting multiple (it seems) problems.

3. the ferrying of parts

4. the cost of robbing parts. As in time in removing parts from another aircraft. Then installing the part. Having to buy or ferry the same part again for the aicraft that was robbed.

5. the cost of litigation

6. the cost of lost revenue due to the airbus sitting on the ground needing their s checks done.

There's no doubt our mechanics will solve the problem. It will take time though. As our mechanics did not originally touch the aircraft and know what exactly was or was not done during the 3rd party check.

All of this could have easily been avoided if it were not for the arrogance of some upper management within this company.

Wow....someone has seen the light on the path around here. God Bless you !!!

I can only hope it's contagious....all the way to the top !!!


Don't worry folks....Management will find a way to fix things in due course.

We will likely fix it by on of the following methods

(1) Slashing the employee salaries
(2) Slashing the mainline fleet even more
(3) Creating an "Alter-Ego" airline within the airline , applying a fru fru name to it..and letting the guys from "Queer Eye" apply a fluffy paint livery to it...and charge less to leisure destinations.

Why not save the money on fru fru liveries....apply that same funding to fixing the airplanes...and actually fix the fare structure. Why would anyone create a seperate operation to compete with yourself? Did the lessons of Metrojet , and CO Lite and others not teach a damn thing too these folks???

 

[PITbull]

AOG,

Am I missing something here, since aicraft 700 left Mobile, with all the mechanicals, are our mechanics fixing this airplane? Are we just waiting for parts? Where are the other 5 planes? Are they parked? Waiting for what?

Shouldn't 700 have been fixed when it was brought back by our mechanics and now in service for revenue flying?

 

[AOG-N-IT]

AOG,

Am I missing something here, since aicraft 700 left Mobile, with all the mechanicals, are our mechanics fixing this airplane? Are we just waiting for parts? Where are the other 5 planes? Are they parked? Waiting for what?

Shouldn't 700 have been fixed when it was brought back by our mechanics and now in service for revenue flying?

Pitbull,

Yes our mechanics have been working this Acft since the return from Mobile , however the repairs that check OK on the ground have failed in the air since it returned from Mobile....this is a 3 timer for failures since we got it back from Mobile.

The problem lies within the rigging of the flight controls...we have had issues like this with "In-House" work...yet We could always discover and correct the problems after a "Test-Flight" and a return to revenued operation. The problem is complicated by the same folks having performed the work no being the same ones to tweak the rigging to perfection....and a high degree of loss of communication has been inflicted upon us by introducing a 3rd party into the mix.

700UW is not currently a parts problem itself while sittng in the CLT Line Hangar being worked....it has become "Rob-Bait" for other Acft needing parts , as in my example of acft 112 last night.

Yes..700UW should have returned to revenued operation from Mobile in a turn-key fashion...but as noted it hasn't.

We have had three rather hard failures with this plane since it's return to service...the first was the B-System Hydraulics System in RIC....that caused a King-Air Air Taxi to RIC from CLT to RIC to move the parts to repair it enugh to ferry it to CLT for further inspection and ops checks....then the Flap system was noted as problematic.

Maybe you did miss something on the acft count.

700UW has been S-Checked and returned...but still not de-bugged from Mobile.
701UW is sitting in Mobile doing nothing by Court Order

2 A319's are sitting in GYR timed out (702 and 703)

2 more A319's drop dead in December for their required S-Checks (704 and 705)

We have 101 and 707 or 706 sitting in GYR doing nothing but collecting dust...these were lease returns that can be returned if a deal is struck?

 

[delldude]

PIT hangar 1- 706 in for 'c'-chk....

 

[Traveler]

Does the airbus require special training for a no flaps landing compared to the boeing? what is the difference between the two when it comes to that?

Robbedagain,

Also, most of the differences I’ve seen between the Airbus vs. other A/Cs is the extensive interface with computers.

A flap/slat failure is included on the Type Ride, I think, because it tests the Pilots knowledge and understanding of Computer integration as much, or more, than his airmanship skills.

Computers are usually the ones that first sense a problem with the Flaps and/or Slats. Depending on the phase of flight, whether the Plane is being cleaned up after T/O or configured for landing, there could be a GOTCHA on performing the ECAM actions using the computer generated electronic checklist. The Gotcha could result in an overspeed if absently performed thus inducing an inadvertent Wing Tip Brake (WTB) actuation preventing further movement. The AB seems to be sensitive to Flap Limits and costly to repair. All the other problems on the Boeing such as asymmetry, hydraulic failure, actuator failure, jamming and uncommanded actuation will lock the flaps and/or slats the same way.

Another thing uncommon to the Boeing are the various Flight Control Laws on the Airbus. Normal flight control inputs might be consistent for aircraft maneuvering on the Boeing. The Airbus, however, might transition through three phases of degradation affecting methods of aircraft control differently in each phase, as the crew sets up for landing.

Another point about the automation on the Airbus vs some Boeing aircraft is the computer generated performance/limitation displays. The Primary electronic flight display for a no-flap approach must be programmed differently changing standard computer generated performance parameters to correctly reflect the non-standard configuration.

Another fun part is the landing distance procedures. Here you must determine the multiplier for the various system failures then multiply the multipliers together taking the product of those multipliers and multiplying it times the landing distance unless one of the multipliers have an asterisk in which case you take the highest multiplier of the multipliers with asterisks and multiply this multiplier by the landing distance to arrive at the landing distance requirements... It’s a long story and a time consuming distraction of a manual mental exercise which is a gross contradiction to the advanced automation of the Aircraft. Like JetBlue, the USAirways Pilots should have laptops to quickly and efficiently handle these performance calculations.