|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 4, 2005 1:41:30 GMT 12
I saw on One News tonight that the RNZAF Boeing 757's have been grounded for possible longterm.
Apparently they have corrosion problems with their engines and have to wait two months before they can be fixed in Hong Kong.
One is currently grounded in the US having work done, the other is in Auckland.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 4, 2005 1:49:56 GMT 12
tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/608637Huge repair bill for Airforce planes Sep 3, 2005 The Airforce is to spend up to $8 million repairing its two 757 aircraft which are out of action because of mechanical problems. The first 757 arrived with great fanfare more than two years ago, but now the Airforce's two 757s have had their wings clipped because of engine problems. Last year a 757 was grounded with engine problems in Nadi after dropping Prime Minister Helen Clark off at the Pacific Forum in Samoa. The problem is an engine compressor that stalled on one of the planes when it took off in July causing flames to shoot from one of its engines. The compressor in the engines have suffered from damage cause by corrosion. One of the planes is now in the US undergoing maintenance checks, but it too has an engine problem and so the one good engine on the plane in New Zealand has been sent to the US. While one of the 757s will be back in operation next week, the other will remain out of action until its engine is fixed in Hong Kong, which is expected to take two months.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Sept 4, 2005 13:41:25 GMT 12
Unfortunately this state of affairs demonstates someone made some shortcuts when aquiring the 757s a few years ago (are we surprised....). As I understand the 757s are leased and the package comes with access to a pool of spares, shared with other operators. This is a fairly common arrangement in the airline world, however no airline would tolerate an arrangement that grounds its fleet completely - something has gone wrong somewhere. Aircraft and engines do develop faults - no issue there - but the management of resources in this case seems flawed. Did the RNZAF not arrange the contract with sufficient spare engines? They obviously didnt specify priority access to spares (which would cost more) and the available spares pool is obviously too small as well. One of the advantages with lease arrangements is that situations like this should be taken care of.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Sept 4, 2005 13:42:15 GMT 12
BTW - that will mean Helen will have to fly Air NZ (her favorites) for the next 2 weeks anyway....
|
|
|
|
Post by turboNZ on Sept 8, 2005 21:33:25 GMT 12
BTW - that will mean Helen will have to fly Air NZ (her favorites) for the next 2 weeks anyway.... Just as long as the Air NZ pilots don't take the p1ss....... |
|
|
|
Post by hairy on Sept 11, 2005 9:06:42 GMT 12
I have heard that they have had a number of inflight shutdowns as well.  |
|
drakey
Leading Aircraftman
Posts: 7
|
Post by drakey on Dec 8, 2005 20:15:25 GMT 12
...This is a fairly common arrangement in the airline world, however no airline would tolerate an arrangement that grounds its fleet completely ... Most airlines dont have a fleet of two mate |
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Dec 9, 2005 7:52:06 GMT 12
The smaller the fleet, the more critical it is to ensure sufficient spares access. One aircraft down loses 50% of fleet capacity, whereas in a 20 aircraft fleet it would only be 5%. There are plenty of small commercial operators with small fleets (e.g Air Nauru, Tongan Airlines, Freedom, various charter airlines) and in these cases when they lease aircraft they always buy priority access to the spares pool, in addition to buying a large stock of "line spares" which they hold themselves. Small operators cannot afford the risk of fleet unserviceability, however the MoD obviously didnt consider it important when arranging the 757 lease.
as an example, remember that the RNZAF bought THREE 727s back in 1981 - one of these was solely for use as spares (50% spares holding) and even then they had to purchase additional parts.
Spares should never be considered an "extra" as they are an essential requirement of operating a fleet. We never had enough spares when I was managing the CityJet fleet (5 aircraft) and this contributed to the sorry state of affairs that that became.....
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Dec 9, 2005 9:36:20 GMT 12
Good point, Bruce. I think it is an absolute scandel that this was allowed to happen. I hope someone in Defence got a right kick up the arse over this. Mind you, the way things seem to work in Defence, it wouldn't surprise me if 757 spares weren't a priority because if they were it would've meant the Army could only buy 100 LAVS instead of 105!  |
|
|
|
Post by SEAN on Dec 10, 2005 9:58:21 GMT 12
Hi All
The actual problem is not a lack of spares, it is because we do not fly the aircraft enough. The engines are designed to run practically forever if thats what you want, and that is why we never brought a spare engine.
We have the problem where we do not fly these aircraft enough, and they may sit around for days without flying which lets the corrosion set in. As you would know airlines do not have aircraft sitting around doing nothing.
This was the first time the the manufactures had experienced this sort of issue. A fix has been inplemented (some sort of grond hot air blower). But as we did not think these engines would have any problems, we never hopped on any logistics type arrangements for them, whch meant when they did break, we were at the back of the que. And as you would imagine if someone elses engines brake, and they do have a contract etc, guess who gets pushed back to the end of the que. This is further componded as we have to send these engines so far away to be repaired, and also because these engines are so reliable, there are not a lot sitting around in any "pools" anywhere. It is one of those hard lessons...
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Dec 10, 2005 10:38:15 GMT 12
Well hopefully the 757s will be utillised a great deal more often now that they are to (finally!) have cargo doors installed. I guess the salt laden air around Whenuapai hasn't helped the corrosion situation either?
Did I hear correctly that the intention is to eventually have the 757s based at Ohakea?
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Dec 11, 2005 10:09:43 GMT 12
Hi All Snipped But as we did not think these engines would have any problems, we never hopped on any logistics type arrangements for them, whch meant when they did break, we were at the back of the que. Thata a pretty bizarre logitiscs engineering theory. If I used that I'd be on my bum before lunchtime  |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Dec 11, 2005 12:25:19 GMT 12
Thanks for the explanation Sean.
Craig, Government intention seems to have everything based at Ohakea in a few years time. Then they'll only have one base left to close!
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Dec 11, 2005 16:28:23 GMT 12
What's the old saying about placing all your eggs in one basket?  ? ;D |
|
? ;D