5th August 2013 at 21:22 #566595
Anonymous5th August 2013 at 21:22 #566596
Have a look:5th August 2013 at 21:58 #566597
G-CIVX, had just returned from maintenance and went tech on first flight with an under-carriage problem.
Only two days ago B777 G-VIIX returned from maintenance and went tech on first flight with a hydraulic problem.
27th July A321 G-EUXG didn’t even make a first flight, damaged in maintenance by something falling from the roof on the hangar.
Not exactly reassuring really.5th August 2013 at 22:23 #566598
Worrying……especially in light of the other recent engineering issues with latches etc……..hmmmm what is going on?5th August 2013 at 23:18 #566599
Reducing losses, that is what is happening, by saving on maintainance.6th August 2013 at 00:08 #566600
@ SimonS1 – 05/08/2013 21:58 GMT
I was wondering whether you had been keeping an eye on the frequency of Titan stand-ins for EZY of late as this is something you have highlighted w.r.t. BA LGW operations. There have been quite a few of these with EZY over the past few weeks; not exactly delivering consistency…? And dare I ask what this might suggest about EZY maintenance standards and economising on said? Or is it that EZY has put together a schedule that is simply greater than the capacity of its fleet?6th August 2013 at 03:54 #566601
Have you looked on
It is very interesting to see the ammount of technical issues, but is this in proportion to the size of the feet?. It is also interesting to see how much a Titan 767 is subchartered by BA6th August 2013 at 04:49 #566602
AnthonyDunn – 06/08/2013 00:08 GMT
I looked at easyJet source and as you say there have been a number of technical diversions in line with a very busy airline (which carries a lot more passengers than BA) at the height of the summer season.
However, what I didn’t see was
– an aircraft on first flight after mx losing it’s engine cowl, causing an engine fire
– an aircraft with an engine written off by a cargo scanner left in the intake
– an aircraft on first flight after mx with gear retraction problems
I agree with other posters that it is concerning.6th August 2013 at 05:41 #566603
It is disconcerting, but not that unusual, especially with older aircraft. Mind you newer ones as well which seem to have “teething” troubles as well! Have a look at AVHerald.com and you’ll see what I mean, and Simon Hradecky does not even report all the incidences so there are many more.
I think our perception is that big airlines, eg. BA , should suffer no tech issues, and they shouldn’t, but they do!6th August 2013 at 06:38 #566604
Looking at http://www.thebasource.com im wondering why so many flights to Cairo are being cancelled and then flown by a 767, anyone know the reason?6th August 2013 at 07:40 #566605
It must have been a quiet day at the BBC because flights having to return base mid flight for technical or medical issues is a regular occurance and barely newsworthy.
Looking at the bigger picture, as already stated, BA has a large and ageing fleet and the frequency of maintenance issues is possibly higher than some airlines with younger fleets.
It is important to remember that BA’s safety record is the envy of many airlines and I’m sure that most flights that experience technical issues are cancelled purely as a precaution. As a passenger I would much rather be delayed than fly and there be a serious risk of not making it to my destination at all.6th August 2013 at 08:34 #566606
I can only assume SimonS1, pdtraveller, FormerlyDoS all work in BA Maintenance or have access to the logs and know what was done on G-CIVX and that it was to do with the undercarriage? There are any number of reasons why a plane could have been in the hanger, and equally any number of reasons a part could fail at any time. Who’s to say that the undercarriage was even a focus on the maintenance?
I’m no BA apologist – I’ve given Frank van der Post a piece of my thoughts on more than one occasion – but this seems like a story straight out of a quiet news day on the BBC in the middle of Summer’s ‘silly season’.
“Plane returns to base after minor tech issue” or “Plane returns to base as precaution” don’t quite have the same ring to it.
And to those comparing this ‘incident’ (if one can call it that) with the engine cowls – are you genuinely trying to suggest the two are the same?6th August 2013 at 08:40 #566607
Flew a few days ago on a 747 with a very tired old First. Problems with lighting, entertainment ( not unusual ) cabin was very jaded with damaged interior. Not a technical issue although the poor old bird was groaning a little. Interestingly the captain was the oddest I have ever encountered and almost lectured passengers, at one point I expected him to ask us not to ring the bell but to sit on our seats and shut up ! Oh and the ‘this is the Captain, crew doors to manual’ was rather rudely said and no he didn’t say and cross check.6th August 2013 at 09:06 #566608
last summer i spent the day at crane bank on the 747 400 simulator with a retired pilot (40 years flyin )who does training with other pilots from ba and other airlines
as i have a fear of flying safety was one of the main areas we covered
i was told different airlines have different margins regarding aircraft going tech, and while all within the regulated safety margins BA may not let a aircraft fly due to tech reasons while another airline will let it6th August 2013 at 10:54 #566609
I agree with JordanD, who always seems to make good posts, that the undercarriage may not have been checked during maintenance because the plane might have gone in for something totally different.
It is very unlikely that the entire plane would be checked just because there is a fault in a certain area. The entire plane would be checked if it went in for a ‘C’ check for example.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.