SIA pulls 3 A380s out of service

[1fast1]

And three ways for me to waste time at work?

 

Yes, and I'll be proud to have helped you out in such a worthy endeavour as cheating your employer.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Turboflat4

[Sosaria]

A380 is already has a lot of problems from the start.

Even the TV shows how they design wrong landing gear system that is stuck when it is operated because of wrong design spec.

So engine problem is not a surprise with the way they design the things.

 

Those who've worked with French or Germans (major Airbus contributors) will know how difficult it is to work with them. Not only language problems (with French), but their seeming stubbornness to see others' point of view. Once they've come up with a way of doing things - okay, everybody has to accept it or be converted to it! It's a certain cultural superiority, I think - but that's how they end up with these problems.

 

[Darryn]

"Mutiny" is a rather too dramatic term to use.

 

It's an acceptable occurrence in airlines that the Captain may refuse to accept the aircraft if he has any reason or belief that there is an unsafe situation. Even if the manuals and operational procedures allow flight, the Captain may refuse, citing overriding safety reasons. This is normal in airlines operational environment, not mutiny.

 

Example: Aircraft is allowed to fly without certain automated flight systems being operational, but for a certain lengthy flight, the Captain may cite crew fatigue (without the benefit of automation) affecting safety.

 

Example: Pilot seat position adjustment is faulty or not working. Captain may decide that his seat is stuck in an unsuitable position for safe flight. Even with cushions to prop his seating position, he may refuse to accept the aircraft.

 

Of course, in such situations the Captain will have to stick his head out, so to speak - because he will need to answer for it later. If his reasons don't stand scrutiny, then... imagine the costs of the cancelled or delayed flight... how to answer??

 

And if the cabin crew knew about the oil and then went to the captain as a group and said - look mr captain, we are jolly well not taking off with this plane. If you want to fly it, you can push the drinks trolley yourself.

 

What would that be called?

[Sosaria]

That'd be some kind of insubordination, I think. I don't think there's anything in the book that allows the chief purser or inflight supervisor or senior cabin crew to decide whether a flight goes or not.

 

Usually won't happen also. Crew, both pilots and attendants, are a pretty tight knit group, with few exceptions. They have to trust the judgement of the guys flying the airplane in order to keep on flying day after day.

 

On the example, by the way, the flight went with the cushions and a solemn promise by the technical/engineering side to get it rectified at the destination.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Sosaria

[Darryn]

That'd be some kind of insubordination, I think. I don't think there's anything in the book that allows the chief purser or inflight supervisor or senior cabin crew to decide whether a flight goes or not.

 

Usually won't happen also. Crew, both pilots and attendants, are a pretty tight knit group, with few exceptions. They have to trust the judgement of the guys flying the airplane in order to keep on flying day after day.

 

On the example, by the way, the flight went with the cushions and a solemn promise by the technical/engineering side to get it rectified at the destination.

 

hmmm...the "crew" telling the "captain" that they won't fly is insubordination but not mutiny. Of course there's nothing in the procedures to "allow" for it. Wasn't that the whole point of the traditional mutiny? that the crew stood outside of the captain's authority and effectively over-ruled him?

 

Don't you feel like you are splitting hairs, and to what end?

 

 

[Sosaria]

hmmm...the "crew" telling the "captain" that they won't fly is insubordination but not mutiny. Of course there's nothing in the procedures to "allow" for it. Wasn't that the whole point of the traditional mutiny? that the crew stood outside of the captain's authority and effectively over-ruled him?

 

Don't you feel like you are splitting hairs, and to what end?

 

Okay, I see now where the misunderstanding arose. In airlines, "crew" can refer to both cabin crew and flight crew (pilots, captain included). I think the news article meant the same way too.

 

It's not like a sea-going vessel where "crew" refers to sailors, with the captain as a separate figure.

[Windwaver]

That's why I told my boss that I'm not flying A380 this time, maybe even next few times

[Darryn]

Okay, I see now where the misunderstanding arose. In airlines, "crew" can refer to both cabin crew and flight crew (pilots, captain included). I think the news article meant the same way too.

 

It's not like a sea-going vessel where "crew" refers to sailors, with the captain as a separate figure.

 

can clarify a little? If the head pilot, the final IC, of the plane said "I am ok to fly" but the rest (or a significant portion) of the SQ staff on board said, "Hold on, we're not risking our lives" what would it be?

 

Just to be a little clearer, in common parlance mutiny does not have to refer to a sea going vehicle.

 

The sales staff can mutiny against the sales manager to get a policy changed and so on.....its just a code for "those lower down the ladder acted together to exert their wishes onto a superior who is (supposedly) in charge of them"

Edited November 10, 2010 by Darryn

[The_Bear]

And if the cabin crew knew about the oil and then went to the captain as a group and said - look mr captain, we are jolly well not taking off with this plane. If you want to fly it, you can push the drinks trolley yourself.

 

What would that be called?

 

budget airline?

[Gadgeter]

Hi - I didn't mean to, honest. Must have been a glitch, I didn't even click multiple times on anything; I'm using Chrome.

 

Could you please delete the other threads and merge the posts here, if it's not too much trouble? Thanks a lot!

 

EDIT - can't find the other threads, have they already been deleted?

 

Yes, the other 2 thread have been removed by me.

[Gadgeter]

Hi Gadgeter,

 

Not to turn this into a thing about network - but yeah, I find that sometimes when using Firefox I will end up with accidental multi postings....not sure if it is a "come an go" glitch with the browser or some sort of network problem also...

 

 

Try posting your question in the feedback folder. I'll get admin to look into this.

[RelaxLah]

..I still believe in and trust...Hercules C130!....

[Mike1234]

Better to be safe than sorry...

 

[B777jubilee]

crew mutiny? u think singaporean workers so daring? we r not protected by union also...if they do it, they can be blacklisted la...and also..not difficult to find replacement for crews..so many want the job.

 

 

This is not crew mutiny, the Pilot in Command has to assess the aircraft and situation and determine if the aircraft is safe to fly. if he is aware of the oil leaks in the engine, and takes a precautionary meansure not to fly, its a indication of good airmanship and safety awareness.

[Babyt]

the plane model that kenna the most accidents are the boeing 737...but it also happens to be the most popular models for short flights..

 

OT a bit, SQ006 crashed due to environmental factor on a very wet night therefore i still consider SQ a very safe airline to take compare to Qantas.

Edited November 11, 2010 by Babyt

[Silver_blade]

A380 is already has a lot of problems from the start.

Even the TV shows how they design wrong landing gear system that is stuck when it is operated because of wrong design spec.

So engine problem is not a surprise with the way they design the things.

This particular engine type in question is not built or design by Airbus but RR.

 

I am surprise RR engine has such serious design fault (at least that is the impression I am getting from the news)...cos RR has been been building engine for plane for a long time and reliability has been good.

[Bommii]

I flew the SQ A380 on 5-Nov from Heathrow to Changi, right after the Qantas incident, infact the flight was jampacked and inflight systems did not work for the first few hours, the crew had to reset it a few times, but the flight was smooth except for some minor turbulence. Really scary to know i might have flown on the flight with faulty engines..

[Maroon5]

seriously the failure happened to qantas n not sq, i can believe as qantas in the past year alot of flight issues..anyw the past 2 mths, took 2 diff a380s to london n zurich...zero issues on all 4 legs..