Air NZ: 2nd incident losing parts in flight
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Syd
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey sheepboy, if it's a production problem why aren't they falling off decent airlines' 747s. BTW, is that "losing" or "loosing". I see the education system in NZ is of the same standard as the rest of the country.
Maybe someone "LOOSENED" the bolts holding them on. Or were they "LOSED"
Maybe someone "LOOSENED" the bolts holding them on. Or were they "LOSED"
Kiwi PPRuNer
Join Date: May 2000
Location: rockingham, western australia
Age: 42
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i only said i heard it could be a production problem, i never said it WAS, decent airlines employ decent people, so that generally means the one u work for isnt, oh and u might want to start getting worried your socalled decent airline is gettin upwards of half its 747 fleet serviced and fitted with ptvs over here, so maybe u might expect bits so start falling off, then again we dont have golfcourse at the end our our runways to crash into,
and as i recall in one of your earlier posts in the year, u tryed to pin the apia ils problem on air nz, when it is actually an airport problem, the air nz pilots noticed it (like all good pilots would) and landed safely,and btw as for the education thing, nz has a highly regarded education system, i happened to go to the same highschool as lord ernest rutherford, and the secutary of the commenwealth don mckinnon, and the standard of the teaching was very high.
and as i recall in one of your earlier posts in the year, u tryed to pin the apia ils problem on air nz, when it is actually an airport problem, the air nz pilots noticed it (like all good pilots would) and landed safely,and btw as for the education thing, nz has a highly regarded education system, i happened to go to the same highschool as lord ernest rutherford, and the secutary of the commenwealth don mckinnon, and the standard of the teaching was very high.
Last edited by ZK-NSJ; 3rd Sep 2002 at 07:50.
Kiwi PPRuNer
Join Date: May 2000
Location: rockingham, western australia
Age: 42
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and wot record might that be, every airline has its faults, some more than others, it just seams in the world of dunnunder aviation, whoever does have faults gets hammered in the media, these things happen everyday right around the world, but u dont hear about each and every one, i would fly with air nz anyday of the week, just as i would fly with qantas as well, compared with other airlines around the world our two have a pretty decent safety record, and i hardly see how a couple of bits falling off will change that.
and bb what do u mean by the jets staying north of the southern tip of nz???
and bb what do u mean by the jets staying north of the southern tip of nz???
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Syd
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZK, I've got you pegged now. You're 17 years old with a student licence, studying hard for a private licence because one day you want to fly "big jets". Am I right? Why don't we just let this one go? No hard feelings.
Kiwi PPRuNer
Join Date: May 2000
Location: rockingham, western australia
Age: 42
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bb firstly i am not 17 , i am 21 secondly i do not have any ambition to fly planes, i work in a totally unrelated industry, and have a casual interest in aviation, and to follow on from what i heard on the radio a boeing spokesperson has announced that the same problem has affected 7 other operators since 1996, and they are considering issueing a safety notice,so there ........
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done Boeing Belly. Correcting ZK-NSJ's poor grammar was spot on, by the way, when you address someone as "sheepboy" it is in fact being used as a proper noun, so the first letter should be a capital, as in "Sheepboy"
Keep up the good work and congratulations also on introducing the first sheep joke to the thread. After all, once the bigotted ranting and raving dies down, there's nothing like a good old-fashioned bestiality related insult to earn the respect of one and all.
And while my keyboard is warmed up... cribble you are correct. Although they do walk-rounds, ANZ crew don't normally sign off transit checks, this is done my a licensed engineer at each port, however this fact is irrelevant. The photos I have seen show one of the inner slotted flaps broken on the 747, so I doubt anyone would see it unless the flaps were lowered.
As far as slagging off other airlines maintenance, let he who has not had a f**k-up cast the first stone....
Keep up the good work and congratulations also on introducing the first sheep joke to the thread. After all, once the bigotted ranting and raving dies down, there's nothing like a good old-fashioned bestiality related insult to earn the respect of one and all.
And while my keyboard is warmed up... cribble you are correct. Although they do walk-rounds, ANZ crew don't normally sign off transit checks, this is done my a licensed engineer at each port, however this fact is irrelevant. The photos I have seen show one of the inner slotted flaps broken on the 747, so I doubt anyone would see it unless the flaps were lowered.
As far as slagging off other airlines maintenance, let he who has not had a f**k-up cast the first stone....
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi folks,
These two reports were in the NZ Herald. Looks very much like human error.
Cheers
=============================
Jumbo panel missing 116 screws
04.09.2002
By MATHEW DEARNALEY
Investigators are believed to be trying to find how an Air New Zealand Boeing 747 was allowed to fly with just four screws in a wing panel that needed about 120.
The screws failed soon after the huge jet took off for Japan on Saturday, August 24, and the 10kg "non-structural" part plummeted into a Manukau carpark.
Air New Zealand will not discuss an investigation it is conducting under Civil Aviation Authority supervision, but an industry source said yesterday that there should have been a Machine screw in each of about 120 holes around the panel, which measured 130cm by 80cm.
It is understood from several sources that the four screws were inserted purely as a temporary measure, pending more work on the part.
But a communication mix-up meant the plane was cleared for takeoff, possibly after the intended work was done - but on the wrong panel.
"Whoever was working on it thought there was more work to be done and just put in four screws to hold it in place in case it rained or to keep bird droppings out," said one insider.
The aircraft concerned had been out of service at Air New Zealand's world-class Auckland maintenance base for several weeks, or possibly even months, because of the downturn in air travel.
Work was done on it sporadically by many different people, who wheeled it in and out of hangars to fit it around more pressing maintenance on other aircraft.
Air New Zealand spokesman Mark Champion said it was far too early to speculate on the causes of a mishap that might take several more weeks of investigations.
Neither would the Civil Aviation Authority discuss the investigation.
But its director, Captain John Jones, said on Monday that he was confident of Air New Zealand's safety performance and of the systems in place at the airline, which is renowned for its engineering excellence.
He was commenting then after the loss of another part from an Air New Zealand 747 on Friday night, when a 2m piece of wing flap fell into the Manukau Harbour.
The Transport Accident Investigation Commission has only just started its inquiry into that event but it might have been a manufacturing fault because Boeing says several 747s have lost similar parts.
The Seattle-based aircraft manufacturer said at first that it had not heard of similar instances but changed its tune late yesterday after checking its databases more thoroughly.
Regional communications director Ken Morton said from Sydney that several operators had reported similar separations of inboard "fore-flaps", those closest to the main wing structure and also to the aircraft fuselage.
But Mr Morton said it was too early to suggest a link to the Air New Zealand flap loss.
The airline said last night that engineers in Los Angeles had found a broken fastening lug on the detached flap assembly, a discovery which hastened more intensive tests on its other seven jumbos.
Three were cleared through inspections yesterday, and Air New Zealand expects to finish testing the rest by noon today.
Boeing 747s have two sets of three flaps on each wing, which are rolled out to increase lift on takeoff and to slow aircraft for landings.
The Los Angeles-bound 747 is 13 years old, making it the oldest of Air New Zealand's fleet, but Mr Morton said the airline's long-haul operations meant the flaps had far less than average wear. Pilots could land without flaps if necessary, although at speeds higher than desirable.
Air New Zealand also confirmed yesterday that a Boeing 767 flight was delayed from leaving Auckland for Rarotonga on August 5 while a cockpit light was replaced, but for only 144 minutes, not the three hours complained of by a Herald reader.
Mr Champion denied that this and an incident reported in the paper yesterday, in which a faulty hydraulic pump delayed a 767 from leaving Rarotonga for Auckland on August 9 for 24 hours, indicated any worrying trend.
He said delaying flights to replace such parts demonstrated the airline's commitment to high safety standards.
=====
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...ection=general
Wing panel on Air NZ plane marked unfit for flight
05.09.2002
By STAFF REPORTERS
Air New Zealand admitted yesterday that a wing panel that fell off in flight had been marked for repair and the jet should not have been cleared to fly.
The panel, which was never properly screwed on to the wing of the Boeing 747, had a cross marked on it with red tape, indicating that it was undergoing engineering work.
The cross was visible when the panel was first photographed after its recovery, but the tape had been removed when the panel was shown to journalists a few hours later.
The airline was last night investigating how the aircraft came to be put back in service with the "work-in-progress" markings clearly onit.
The panel fell from the Boeing 747-400 on August 24 and crashed into a Manukau carpark. Last Friday a second panel fell from another aircraft into the Manukau Harbour.
The Herald revealed yesterday that the panel lost on August 24 had been attached to the wing by just four screws instead of the 125 needed.
Air New Zealand has now confirmed that most of the screws were missing, and that the wing panel was tagged with red tape "indicating that engineering work was in progress on it".
"There were signs of pull-through tearing at each corner of the panel indicating that it had been held in place by only four screws instead of the usual 125 fastening screws," the company said.
Spokesman David Beatson said Air New Zealand was aware the panel had been photographed with the cross and its removal was not an attempted cover-up.
"It would have been a foolish thing to do."
He said the investigation would address the issue and if any attempt at a cover-up had been made, it would be discovered.
After a 2m section of panel fell from the wing flap of another Air New Zealand Boeing 747 last Friday, an inspection found a broken bracket fastening.
Yesterday Air New Zealand said inspections of all its Boeings had revealed signs of corrosion staining on the same type of fastening on yet another plane.
The aircraft had remained on the ground and the part was replaced as a precaution.
Air New Zealand's acting chief executive, Andrew Miller, said last night that the red tape was not noticed because it was on the top of the wing and aircraft were checked from the ground before takeoff.
"The panel was on the upper surface of the wings and it wasn't noticeable from the ground.
"Things on top of the wings are checked. It's currently subject to an investigation. Engineering's a very technical area."
Air New Zealand's senior vice-president, operations and technical, Bill Jacobson, said the incident "requires us not only to check the manner in which work was carried out and checked out on this particular aircraft, but also the basic operating procedures and instructions for carrying out this kind of work.
"We need to determine with as much certainty as we can if the detachment resulted from human error, a process flaw or a combination of both.
"We must determine the causes of the detachment beyond reasonable doubt."
Air New Zealand had to satisfy the Civil Aviation Authority that its personnel and procedures complied with accepted safety standards, he said.
Air New Zealand yesterday used a helicopter to scour the Manukau Harbour for aircraft parts after Friday's incident.
Fishermen found the wing-flap section on Saturday morning, but no other parts were found in the airline's searches this week.
Air New Zealand spokeswoman Shannon Huse said the searches had followed the Los Angeles-bound aircraft's flightpath on the harbour and to Manukau Heads. More searches might be carried out.
Mr Miller confirmed that the aircraft which lost the panel over the harbour showed signs of corrosive staining on the broken part.
But Air New Zealand said it was too soon to say if the broken bracket was the cause of the "detachment incident".
The Transport Accident Investigation Commission has widened its investigation to include the latest revelations.
Inspector Ken Matthews said the commission would contact Boeing to see if the aircraft manufacturer was aware of any other cases involving the component.
He was still waiting for the broken bracket fastening from the aircraft in Los Angeles to be returned to New Zealand for inspection.
He said the investigation would also examine Air New Zealand's maintenance procedures.
* Air New Zealand's chief executive, Ralph Norris, is overseas on leave
These two reports were in the NZ Herald. Looks very much like human error.
Cheers
=============================
Jumbo panel missing 116 screws
04.09.2002
By MATHEW DEARNALEY
Investigators are believed to be trying to find how an Air New Zealand Boeing 747 was allowed to fly with just four screws in a wing panel that needed about 120.
The screws failed soon after the huge jet took off for Japan on Saturday, August 24, and the 10kg "non-structural" part plummeted into a Manukau carpark.
Air New Zealand will not discuss an investigation it is conducting under Civil Aviation Authority supervision, but an industry source said yesterday that there should have been a Machine screw in each of about 120 holes around the panel, which measured 130cm by 80cm.
It is understood from several sources that the four screws were inserted purely as a temporary measure, pending more work on the part.
But a communication mix-up meant the plane was cleared for takeoff, possibly after the intended work was done - but on the wrong panel.
"Whoever was working on it thought there was more work to be done and just put in four screws to hold it in place in case it rained or to keep bird droppings out," said one insider.
The aircraft concerned had been out of service at Air New Zealand's world-class Auckland maintenance base for several weeks, or possibly even months, because of the downturn in air travel.
Work was done on it sporadically by many different people, who wheeled it in and out of hangars to fit it around more pressing maintenance on other aircraft.
Air New Zealand spokesman Mark Champion said it was far too early to speculate on the causes of a mishap that might take several more weeks of investigations.
Neither would the Civil Aviation Authority discuss the investigation.
But its director, Captain John Jones, said on Monday that he was confident of Air New Zealand's safety performance and of the systems in place at the airline, which is renowned for its engineering excellence.
He was commenting then after the loss of another part from an Air New Zealand 747 on Friday night, when a 2m piece of wing flap fell into the Manukau Harbour.
The Transport Accident Investigation Commission has only just started its inquiry into that event but it might have been a manufacturing fault because Boeing says several 747s have lost similar parts.
The Seattle-based aircraft manufacturer said at first that it had not heard of similar instances but changed its tune late yesterday after checking its databases more thoroughly.
Regional communications director Ken Morton said from Sydney that several operators had reported similar separations of inboard "fore-flaps", those closest to the main wing structure and also to the aircraft fuselage.
But Mr Morton said it was too early to suggest a link to the Air New Zealand flap loss.
The airline said last night that engineers in Los Angeles had found a broken fastening lug on the detached flap assembly, a discovery which hastened more intensive tests on its other seven jumbos.
Three were cleared through inspections yesterday, and Air New Zealand expects to finish testing the rest by noon today.
Boeing 747s have two sets of three flaps on each wing, which are rolled out to increase lift on takeoff and to slow aircraft for landings.
The Los Angeles-bound 747 is 13 years old, making it the oldest of Air New Zealand's fleet, but Mr Morton said the airline's long-haul operations meant the flaps had far less than average wear. Pilots could land without flaps if necessary, although at speeds higher than desirable.
Air New Zealand also confirmed yesterday that a Boeing 767 flight was delayed from leaving Auckland for Rarotonga on August 5 while a cockpit light was replaced, but for only 144 minutes, not the three hours complained of by a Herald reader.
Mr Champion denied that this and an incident reported in the paper yesterday, in which a faulty hydraulic pump delayed a 767 from leaving Rarotonga for Auckland on August 9 for 24 hours, indicated any worrying trend.
He said delaying flights to replace such parts demonstrated the airline's commitment to high safety standards.
=====
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...ection=general
Wing panel on Air NZ plane marked unfit for flight
05.09.2002
By STAFF REPORTERS
Air New Zealand admitted yesterday that a wing panel that fell off in flight had been marked for repair and the jet should not have been cleared to fly.
The panel, which was never properly screwed on to the wing of the Boeing 747, had a cross marked on it with red tape, indicating that it was undergoing engineering work.
The cross was visible when the panel was first photographed after its recovery, but the tape had been removed when the panel was shown to journalists a few hours later.
The airline was last night investigating how the aircraft came to be put back in service with the "work-in-progress" markings clearly onit.
The panel fell from the Boeing 747-400 on August 24 and crashed into a Manukau carpark. Last Friday a second panel fell from another aircraft into the Manukau Harbour.
The Herald revealed yesterday that the panel lost on August 24 had been attached to the wing by just four screws instead of the 125 needed.
Air New Zealand has now confirmed that most of the screws were missing, and that the wing panel was tagged with red tape "indicating that engineering work was in progress on it".
"There were signs of pull-through tearing at each corner of the panel indicating that it had been held in place by only four screws instead of the usual 125 fastening screws," the company said.
Spokesman David Beatson said Air New Zealand was aware the panel had been photographed with the cross and its removal was not an attempted cover-up.
"It would have been a foolish thing to do."
He said the investigation would address the issue and if any attempt at a cover-up had been made, it would be discovered.
After a 2m section of panel fell from the wing flap of another Air New Zealand Boeing 747 last Friday, an inspection found a broken bracket fastening.
Yesterday Air New Zealand said inspections of all its Boeings had revealed signs of corrosion staining on the same type of fastening on yet another plane.
The aircraft had remained on the ground and the part was replaced as a precaution.
Air New Zealand's acting chief executive, Andrew Miller, said last night that the red tape was not noticed because it was on the top of the wing and aircraft were checked from the ground before takeoff.
"The panel was on the upper surface of the wings and it wasn't noticeable from the ground.
"Things on top of the wings are checked. It's currently subject to an investigation. Engineering's a very technical area."
Air New Zealand's senior vice-president, operations and technical, Bill Jacobson, said the incident "requires us not only to check the manner in which work was carried out and checked out on this particular aircraft, but also the basic operating procedures and instructions for carrying out this kind of work.
"We need to determine with as much certainty as we can if the detachment resulted from human error, a process flaw or a combination of both.
"We must determine the causes of the detachment beyond reasonable doubt."
Air New Zealand had to satisfy the Civil Aviation Authority that its personnel and procedures complied with accepted safety standards, he said.
Air New Zealand yesterday used a helicopter to scour the Manukau Harbour for aircraft parts after Friday's incident.
Fishermen found the wing-flap section on Saturday morning, but no other parts were found in the airline's searches this week.
Air New Zealand spokeswoman Shannon Huse said the searches had followed the Los Angeles-bound aircraft's flightpath on the harbour and to Manukau Heads. More searches might be carried out.
Mr Miller confirmed that the aircraft which lost the panel over the harbour showed signs of corrosive staining on the broken part.
But Air New Zealand said it was too soon to say if the broken bracket was the cause of the "detachment incident".
The Transport Accident Investigation Commission has widened its investigation to include the latest revelations.
Inspector Ken Matthews said the commission would contact Boeing to see if the aircraft manufacturer was aware of any other cases involving the component.
He was still waiting for the broken bracket fastening from the aircraft in Los Angeles to be returned to New Zealand for inspection.
He said the investigation would also examine Air New Zealand's maintenance procedures.
* Air New Zealand's chief executive, Ralph Norris, is overseas on leave
Guest
Posts: n/a
The NZ Herald has happily got hold of the fact that the Director of NZ CAA goes to great lengths to say that in spite of parts falling off Air NZ aircraft on a regular basis the airline has sound main procedures. Unfortunately, the Herald points out, same director was working for most of his career with Air NZ previous to his current job and was recommended to CAA by Air NZ itself. Dodgy. If you think of Air NZ as a First world airline then current events aren't too acceptable but I suppose if you see it as another struggling South Pacific airline like Air Nuiguini or Air Naru then it's just another day at the office
Air NZ lapse forces extra checks
06.09.2002
By MATHEW DEARNALEY and PAULA OLIVER
The head of the Civil Aviation Authority said last night that Air New Zealand accepted checks on extended aircraft maintenance programmes were not as "robust" as they could have been.
But Captain John Jones, the agency's director, assured the travelling public - and those on the ground - that additional inspection procedures had already been put in place since an Air New Zealand Boeing 747 took off to Japan with 121 screws missing.
Aircraft would not now be cleared for takeoff until engineers independent of those who had done maintenance work made visual inspections of all panels.
Although a 10kg wing panel fell off the Japan-bound jumbo and into a Manukau carpark on August 24, it was not until after a disclosure by the Herald this Wednesday that Air New Zealand confirmed the piece was pinned to the aircraft by just four screws.
Captain Jones accepted that he had expressed confidence in the airline safety systems before this was made public, but said it was in the knowledge that steps had been taken to prevent a recurrence. He said the aircraft in question had undergone "non-normal" maintenance over several weeks, being towed in and out of hangars as other more urgent work permitted, and a large red cross indicating work still in progress was not noticed as it was on top of a wing.
Transport Minister Paul Swain also expressed confidence that such a "human error" would not happen again, and he said he had no intention of swapping his own booking to fly with Air New Zealand next week for a seat on Qantas.
He also defended the CAA's audit procedures, and its independence, after questions in Parliament about how the aircraft could have been cleared for takeoff. He said an agency inspector rushed immediately to where the panel was found and quickly established that a one-off human error was the cause.
Captain Jones was operations manager for Air New Zealand subsidiary Mt Cook Airlines before joining the CAA last year but Mr Swain said he had full confidence in his integrity and independence.
He also noted that the CAA was audited within the past two years by representatives of the International Civil Aviation Organisation. Captain Jones told the Herald he was absolutely clear about which organisation he worked for - the CAA.
"I'm not working for Air New Zealand or Mt Cook. My job now is quite different," he said.
Not only did the CAA audit Air New Zealand's engineering section 16 times a year, but that operation was checked rigorously by regulatory agencies from the countries of all airlines that used its maintenance facilities.
Air New Zealand spokesman Mark Champion refused yesterday to discuss any of the airline's maintenance procedures, given that they were under a CAA-supervised investigation.
He denied that the airline was in the throes of any crisis, or that there was any need for chief executive Ralph Norris to curtail an overseas holiday, after a second incident last Friday in which part of a wing flap fell into the Manukau Harbour from another Boeing 747. He understood Mr Norris would be overseas for about another fortnight.
And then this turned up. I would have thought saying that aurcraft is perfectly safe but then flying it back empty may not be the smartest move. Nor is the apparent lack of answers from NZ CAA about anything to do with Air NZ and the 58 safety alerts the CAA has issued in the past 3 months. Understandibly, the papers are calling it a cover up. Nor is having a CEO who stays away on holiday while passenger confidence plummets.
Air New Zealand 747 flying home empty
06.09.2002
11.45am
An Air New Zealand jumbo jet which lost part of a wing flap over Auckland last week will be flown back to Auckland this weekend, without passengers, to undergo maintenance.
Air New Zealand said today while it was "unusual" for its 747 to return from Los Angeles to Auckland without passengers, the aircraft was perfectly safe to fly.
"It requires further maintenance and is going to go into the shop straight away but that was planned maintenance unrelated to the incident," said Air New Zealand spokesman Mark Champion.
The aircraft lost parts of its wing flap moments after it took off from Auckland last Friday.
The flight crew felt a slight bump but put it down to turbulence and discovered the problem only when the captain tried to lower the wing flaps to land at Los Angeles.
The missing flap which fell onto the mudflats of the Manukau Harbour next to the Auckland International Airport, is extended to slow the plane on its final landing approach and it landed faster than normal.
Mr Champion said the airline made the decision to bring the aircraft back without passengers after the flap incident.
"There is an element of public confidence in that as well."
The airline said when the 747 was taken out of service in Los Angeles for repairs the fleet was "jiggled around" to cover all the flights because it was not known when the aircraft would be returned to service.
The airline said because of the rescheduling of the fleet which the wing flap incident caused, one aircraft would have had to return from Los Angeles without passengers.
Mr Champion said reports that 58 safety alerts involving big passenger aircraft had been hushed up did not apply to Air New Zealand.
Today's Dominion Post newspaper reported the incidents around New Zealand occurred in the three months to June and that the Civil Aviation Authority had refused to identify the incidents, the aircraft or the airlines involved.
However, Mr Champion said his airline adhered to its statutory obligations to report all incidents. There had been four recently, including a wing part which fell through the roof of a south Auckland warehouse in May last year, a panel which fell on to a Canterbury farm in May this year and a panel which fell into a Manukau carpark on August 24.
"That lot covers all of them. I am not aware of any others."
However, he said he may not have been aware of all incidents because they had no operational impact, although there may have been a regulatory obligation for them to be reported.
Mr Champion said the airline had instigated additional checks after the wing flap and wing panel incident, including a visual check from the cockpit of wing panels.
The panel which fell off on August 24 was held in place by only four screws instead of the usual 125.
Because the panel had not been properly secured to the aircraft a crossed red tape was put on the panel to indicate "work in progress".
The red tape on the upper wing surface was not seen during an inspection and the aircraft was given its final clearance documentation to fly.
The failure of staff to see the tape was part of the inquiry, the airline said.
"We have put in extra checks and double checks," Mr Champion said.
He said those additional checks included checks from the cabin and the wing top.
He said the wing flap assembly had also had additional, non-destruct tests, over and above those required by regulatory authorities.
Mr Champion said the incidents had not affected the airline's relationship with other airlines and operators, including the United States defence department.
He said Air New Zealand had maintenance contracts for many aircraft.
"We are FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) accredited in terms of third party work which means we are getting US defence work."
He said Air New Zealand also had contracts with the US Coastguard, the Royal New Zealand Air Force, Qantas, Air Pacific, and Virgin Airlines.
"They have comfort and confidence," Mr Champion said.
Air NZ lapse forces extra checks
06.09.2002
By MATHEW DEARNALEY and PAULA OLIVER
The head of the Civil Aviation Authority said last night that Air New Zealand accepted checks on extended aircraft maintenance programmes were not as "robust" as they could have been.
But Captain John Jones, the agency's director, assured the travelling public - and those on the ground - that additional inspection procedures had already been put in place since an Air New Zealand Boeing 747 took off to Japan with 121 screws missing.
Aircraft would not now be cleared for takeoff until engineers independent of those who had done maintenance work made visual inspections of all panels.
Although a 10kg wing panel fell off the Japan-bound jumbo and into a Manukau carpark on August 24, it was not until after a disclosure by the Herald this Wednesday that Air New Zealand confirmed the piece was pinned to the aircraft by just four screws.
Captain Jones accepted that he had expressed confidence in the airline safety systems before this was made public, but said it was in the knowledge that steps had been taken to prevent a recurrence. He said the aircraft in question had undergone "non-normal" maintenance over several weeks, being towed in and out of hangars as other more urgent work permitted, and a large red cross indicating work still in progress was not noticed as it was on top of a wing.
Transport Minister Paul Swain also expressed confidence that such a "human error" would not happen again, and he said he had no intention of swapping his own booking to fly with Air New Zealand next week for a seat on Qantas.
He also defended the CAA's audit procedures, and its independence, after questions in Parliament about how the aircraft could have been cleared for takeoff. He said an agency inspector rushed immediately to where the panel was found and quickly established that a one-off human error was the cause.
Captain Jones was operations manager for Air New Zealand subsidiary Mt Cook Airlines before joining the CAA last year but Mr Swain said he had full confidence in his integrity and independence.
He also noted that the CAA was audited within the past two years by representatives of the International Civil Aviation Organisation. Captain Jones told the Herald he was absolutely clear about which organisation he worked for - the CAA.
"I'm not working for Air New Zealand or Mt Cook. My job now is quite different," he said.
Not only did the CAA audit Air New Zealand's engineering section 16 times a year, but that operation was checked rigorously by regulatory agencies from the countries of all airlines that used its maintenance facilities.
Air New Zealand spokesman Mark Champion refused yesterday to discuss any of the airline's maintenance procedures, given that they were under a CAA-supervised investigation.
He denied that the airline was in the throes of any crisis, or that there was any need for chief executive Ralph Norris to curtail an overseas holiday, after a second incident last Friday in which part of a wing flap fell into the Manukau Harbour from another Boeing 747. He understood Mr Norris would be overseas for about another fortnight.
And then this turned up. I would have thought saying that aurcraft is perfectly safe but then flying it back empty may not be the smartest move. Nor is the apparent lack of answers from NZ CAA about anything to do with Air NZ and the 58 safety alerts the CAA has issued in the past 3 months. Understandibly, the papers are calling it a cover up. Nor is having a CEO who stays away on holiday while passenger confidence plummets.
Air New Zealand 747 flying home empty
06.09.2002
11.45am
An Air New Zealand jumbo jet which lost part of a wing flap over Auckland last week will be flown back to Auckland this weekend, without passengers, to undergo maintenance.
Air New Zealand said today while it was "unusual" for its 747 to return from Los Angeles to Auckland without passengers, the aircraft was perfectly safe to fly.
"It requires further maintenance and is going to go into the shop straight away but that was planned maintenance unrelated to the incident," said Air New Zealand spokesman Mark Champion.
The aircraft lost parts of its wing flap moments after it took off from Auckland last Friday.
The flight crew felt a slight bump but put it down to turbulence and discovered the problem only when the captain tried to lower the wing flaps to land at Los Angeles.
The missing flap which fell onto the mudflats of the Manukau Harbour next to the Auckland International Airport, is extended to slow the plane on its final landing approach and it landed faster than normal.
Mr Champion said the airline made the decision to bring the aircraft back without passengers after the flap incident.
"There is an element of public confidence in that as well."
The airline said when the 747 was taken out of service in Los Angeles for repairs the fleet was "jiggled around" to cover all the flights because it was not known when the aircraft would be returned to service.
The airline said because of the rescheduling of the fleet which the wing flap incident caused, one aircraft would have had to return from Los Angeles without passengers.
Mr Champion said reports that 58 safety alerts involving big passenger aircraft had been hushed up did not apply to Air New Zealand.
Today's Dominion Post newspaper reported the incidents around New Zealand occurred in the three months to June and that the Civil Aviation Authority had refused to identify the incidents, the aircraft or the airlines involved.
However, Mr Champion said his airline adhered to its statutory obligations to report all incidents. There had been four recently, including a wing part which fell through the roof of a south Auckland warehouse in May last year, a panel which fell on to a Canterbury farm in May this year and a panel which fell into a Manukau carpark on August 24.
"That lot covers all of them. I am not aware of any others."
However, he said he may not have been aware of all incidents because they had no operational impact, although there may have been a regulatory obligation for them to be reported.
Mr Champion said the airline had instigated additional checks after the wing flap and wing panel incident, including a visual check from the cockpit of wing panels.
The panel which fell off on August 24 was held in place by only four screws instead of the usual 125.
Because the panel had not been properly secured to the aircraft a crossed red tape was put on the panel to indicate "work in progress".
The red tape on the upper wing surface was not seen during an inspection and the aircraft was given its final clearance documentation to fly.
The failure of staff to see the tape was part of the inquiry, the airline said.
"We have put in extra checks and double checks," Mr Champion said.
He said those additional checks included checks from the cabin and the wing top.
He said the wing flap assembly had also had additional, non-destruct tests, over and above those required by regulatory authorities.
Mr Champion said the incidents had not affected the airline's relationship with other airlines and operators, including the United States defence department.
He said Air New Zealand had maintenance contracts for many aircraft.
"We are FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) accredited in terms of third party work which means we are getting US defence work."
He said Air New Zealand also had contracts with the US Coastguard, the Royal New Zealand Air Force, Qantas, Air Pacific, and Virgin Airlines.
"They have comfort and confidence," Mr Champion said.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear QF are not overly happy with some of the outsourced maintenance that has been coming back with questionable reliability and has been found lacking in appropriate maintenance procedures and inspections.
Kiwi PPRuNer
Join Date: May 2000
Location: rockingham, western australia
Age: 42
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if ya live in a glasshouse don't throw stones,
as i recall ansett maintenance wasnt exactly spot on either
and as for qantas, well they have had thier share of problems when it comes to skimping on maintenance, if qantas wern't that happy with it they would have pulled the plug....
as i recall ansett maintenance wasnt exactly spot on either
and as for qantas, well they have had thier share of problems when it comes to skimping on maintenance, if qantas wern't that happy with it they would have pulled the plug....
Last edited by ZK-NSJ; 6th Sep 2002 at 04:33.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep your hair on ZK for crying out loud. I'm not attacking the f****** NZ populace! It's what I have heard on good authority from non AN people. And as for QF pulling the plug...it's amazing what a cheap price will do for your perspective.
having seen what an were sending anz to 'fix' ...... Im not even going to bother. were flooging a dead horse.
But whilst were here, is there any truth to the rumour that FJ are being donated a 744 by QF.... Bangkok Betty herself. Whats the PDA like on that piece of tin?
But whilst were here, is there any truth to the rumour that FJ are being donated a 744 by QF.... Bangkok Betty herself. Whats the PDA like on that piece of tin?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah right CI300. That's why RMCs despatch reliability went up about 30% after AN had it for six months.
And how do you explain the ex British Midlands 737 that went through ANZ for a C check and arrived in Australia with the ILS and VOR receivers cross connected. And why when AN (or QF for that matter) LAMEs supervise the check being carried out, the manager at the place threatens to kick them out if they don't 'lose that torch'
Quote me some examples or pull your head in.
And how do you explain the ex British Midlands 737 that went through ANZ for a C check and arrived in Australia with the ILS and VOR receivers cross connected. And why when AN (or QF for that matter) LAMEs supervise the check being carried out, the manager at the place threatens to kick them out if they don't 'lose that torch'
Quote me some examples or pull your head in.