Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SAS Dumps All Dash 8Q400s Part 3  
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12145 posts, RR: 17
Posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12193 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Following on from Part 2, SAS Dumps All Dash 8Q400s Part 2 (by 777ER Oct 29 2007 in Civil Aviation)

107 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1608 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12040 times:

So -- do we have any updates regarding this? Any new news coming out of CPH regarding this?

It is interesting that how now that there are preliminary reports (by governmental bodies), this thread has almost petered off to nothing..

Any updates?

1011yyz



Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
User currently offlineAirevents From Germany, joined Jan 2002, 881 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 11962 times:

Also I think it would be interesting to hear what other aircraft are now used instead of the grounded DH8-4s. In the reservation systems it still says DH4 on many routes, but these are definitely not flying, are they?


www.airevents.com
User currently offlineElliott From Greece, joined Mar 2000, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11727 times:

Not sure if reported already.
(i try to search all 3 other topics).

The 3rd incident as it looks is not related by the 9th September one.

All these according to Denmark Aviation Safety Board Preliminary Reports. I can not understand completely the explanations of the drawing (yet).

http://www.airtransportnews.aero/article.pl?mcateg=&id=7014

Elliott


User currently offlinePnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2238 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11686 times:

The paper called it a "foreign" O ring. Sounds like one was used that wasn't spec or didn't belong. This would lead you to believe it is a maintenance issue but someone else would know better.

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 5, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11685 times:

Are the Q400's being grounded immediately? Or being removed from service over a short period of time?


Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6448 posts, RR: 54
Reply 6, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 11565 times:

The situation is unchanged since yesterday. The name of the game is still, as the preliminary report says: "The continuing investigation will focus on the source of the O-Ring".

I could easily imagine, that while the cause of the 3rd accident was found and reported at record speed, then the last step may take a long time.

The source of the o-ring - which side of the Atlantic - may already be known beyond (practically) any doubt. But there is a lot of money involved for various insurance companies.

Therefore the solid facts may be a lot more complicated than pointing fingers in one direction with 99.99% certainty and leave the rest to possibly illegal, undocumented work, sabotage or whatever a lawyer can invent to try to protect his client.

I think that the investigation board will spend some time on details such as fingerprints and "DNA analysis" of the o-ring and then use the hard facts for their testimony when the insurance companies go to court to decide who has to pay.

The final report may not be published until the court has talked. And that can take a long time. Very likely some time into the trial the court will require further auditing of operator and manufacturer records, and time will drag on for many months, probably a year or more.

Any urgency has been removed since it has been documented that the 3rd accident unlike the two first is not a generic problem, and therefore it air safety wise falls into an entirely different class.

This is of course pure guesswork from me. But it is my guess that it is very likely that for a long time into the future we may only hear rumors about how this happened. And since this is a.net, then we will (of course) also hear unconfirmed "facts".  Wow!



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6448 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11486 times:

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 5):
Are the Q400's being grounded immediately? Or being removed from service over a short period of time?

Dear Yyz, you must have been away from this forum for some time.

Saturday afternoon the Scandinavian authorities grounded all SAS' 27 Q400 with immediate effect following the third emergency landing with a landing gear problem since 9th September.

On Sunday afternoon the SAS board of directors at an unscheduled meeting decided to retire the Q400 from the SAS fleet with immediate effect.

Tuesday it was confirmed by the accident investigation board that the third accident was caused by an individual problem on the accident plane, not a generic problem as on the two first.

It is unknown whether the grounding has been lifted again. But it has little relevance since there is no longer Q400s in operation in the three Scandinavian countries.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineAeronut From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 11303 times:

Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 1):
So -- do we have any updates regarding this? Any new news coming out of CPH regarding this?

It is interesting that how now that there are preliminary reports (by governmental bodies), this thread has almost petered off to nothing..

Any updates?

1011yyz

Whats interesting is the group of people that have had the most to say about the poor design of the Q400 now have the least to say all of a sudden. They also don't seem to want to speculate anymore about anything and suggest that its in the lawyers hands now and we all will have to wait a very long time.

Come on, people out of CPH, whats going on?


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6448 posts, RR: 54
Reply 9, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 11244 times:

Quoting Airevents (Reply 2):
I think it would be interesting to hear what other aircraft are now used instead of the grounded DH8-4s. In the reservation systems it still says DH4 on many routes, but these are definitely not flying, are they?

Qimber Air has put in all their spare capacity to help SAS on some Danish domestic routes with their ATR-42 and -72.

Sterling Airlines take on some longer European flights with B738s freeing up SAS MD-80 and 737 capacity for short haul.

On some high frequency routes with 8 or 10 daily departures two Q400 flights are made into one MD-80 or 737 flight.

Spannair has also put in its spare capacity, probably Blue1, Estonian and Air Baltic as well.

Still roughly half of the departures previously served by Q400 are cancelled. Things seem to move on pretty well, most likely due to a lot of overtime work at SAS planning.

From SAS press release:

1. Review of network and reallocation of aircraft capacity within the SAS group (0-3 months)
2. External wet lease* capacity (0-1 month)
3. External dry lease* capacity (3-6 months)

In parallel, work has already been initiated how to replace the aircraft type long term. SAS expect to start to implement a long-term solution by second half of 2008.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineElliott From Greece, joined Mar 2000, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 11207 times:

how does all these cost to SAS?

I have another quistion to put on the topic. What if SAS announce an order for Bombardier Regional Jets soon?
(Not sure if you understand what i am saying )  Wink


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6448 posts, RR: 54
Reply 11, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 11108 times:

Quoting Elliott (Reply 10):
how does all these cost to SAS?

SAS says that direct extra ops costs will end up being around SEK (Swedish kroner) 500 million (US$80m). But nobody can produce more than a rough estimate.

The key point is that it is estimated to be more expensive to continue Q400 ops even if it proved successful in the future. The reason is that they have already during seven years lost tons of business to the competition, and would lose even more at an accelerated rate.

So the decision to dump the Q400 is in reality a necessary ECONOMIC decision which shall save money for SAS.

Even if we imagine reliable SAS Q400 ops from today and into the unknown future, then it would take at least two years to regain a level of customer confidence which smells of the level needed for SAS to continue as the major player in Scandinavian air traffic.

Quoting Elliott (Reply 10):
What if SAS announce an order for Bombardier Regional Jets soon?

That's absolutely a possibility. SAS partner Qimber Air operated them with great success. ATRs are also likely, and so are new Q400, even if I doubt that they have the inside track.

There could also be a major strategy change which means that the 27 Q400 will never be replaced by a similar number of short haul low capacity planes on a one to one basis. They might for instance leave a bigger part of short haul low capacity flights to partners like Qimber, and concentrate more on only higher capacity jets.

Pure guesswork, nobody knows today, and certainly not the SAS CEO.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineTangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 924 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 10999 times:

Does anyone know if SAS has a legitimate legal claim against Bombardier with respect to any compensation they are after? If any of the affected aircraft were still under warranty, I suspect there could be claims for corresponding business loss due to loss of productivity as well as the claim to fix the aircraft with BBD's money. But if the last incident ends up bearing no responsibility on BBD's part, and the fact that Horizon, Flybe, and Porter have come out saying that they stand behind the Q400, what chance of success does SAS have in arguing that they can walk away from the product (assuming out of warranty and no fault on BBD for the last incident) ? Sure they can pay the liquidated damages if they are tied-in with their leases, but I assume the cost would be high. There have been far more disastrous events in history, such as the B737 rudder hard overs that killed everyone on board two US operators, but the carriers did not drop the type even though they also had A320s in their fleets (US and UA).


Only the paranoid survive
User currently offlineLnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1608 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 10993 times:

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 11):
The key point is that it is estimated to be more expensive to continue Q400 ops even if it proved successful in the future. The reason is that they have already during seven years lost tons of business to the competition, and would lose even more at an accelerated rate.

It really is too bad that they've had such a horrible time with the aircraft. It's predecessors have proven to be a very valuable addition to many fleets.

Porter so far isn't having any issues, so that's also good.

1011yyz



Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
User currently offlineCPHGuard From Denmark, joined Jun 2006, 278 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks ago) and read 10812 times:

Quoting Aeronut (Reply 8):
Whats interesting is the group of people that have had the most to say about the poor design of the Q400 now have the least to say all of a sudden. They also don't seem to want to speculate anymore about anything and suggest that its in the lawyers hands now and we all will have to wait a very long time.

Come on, people out of CPH, whats going on?

I'll tell you this.

The first production of Q400's that ended up with SAS are poor aircrafts.

I'll stand by that comment ANYTIME.
Issue after issue, hundreds of safety landings, and two accidents related to poor design. Yes the first production aircrafts are indeed poor.

I beleive however that never Q400's are probably good aircraft, but not the ones with SAS.

I


User currently offlineDegenfly From Norway, joined Aug 2007, 24 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 9785 times:

Quoting Aeronut (Reply 8):
Whats interesting is the group of people that have had the most to say about the poor design of the Q400 now have the least to say all of a sudden. They also don't seem to want to speculate anymore about anything and suggest that its in the lawyers hands now and we all will have to wait a very long time.

What, you want them to dismiss the results if this latest investigation based on nothing, like the investigation of the first two accidents was dismissed by the Bombardier camp?

9-to-1 against Bombardier getting the blame for this latest accident.

[Edited 2007-11-01 05:00:28]

[Edited 2007-11-01 05:03:27]

User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12532 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 9667 times:

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 6):
I could easily imagine, that while the cause of the 3rd accident was found and reported at record speed, then the last step may take a long time.

The source of the o-ring - which side of the Atlantic - may already be known beyond (practically) any doubt. But there is a lot of money involved for various insurance companies.

Therefore the solid facts may be a lot more complicated than pointing fingers in one direction with 99.99% certainty and leave the rest to possibly illegal, undocumented work, sabotage or whatever a lawyer can invent to try to protect his client.

That's quite a vivid imagination.

If the source is known, the investigators have the obligation to say, so that operators can avoid introducing such foriegn matter into their aircraft in the future.

Your imagination would seem to run in conflict with all the statements in parts 1 and 2 of this thread about how incredibly honest the Scandanavians are....



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineCRGsFuture From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 536 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9554 times:

Here's something I wanted to ask. If not for ATR's or newer turboprops, will this order free up something SK wanted for a while, the replacement for the MD-80? Could it be the SSJ, ERJ, or BRJ?


Flying you to your destination; your girlfriend to her dreams.
User currently offlineCPHGuard From Denmark, joined Jun 2006, 278 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9523 times:

Quoting CRGsFuture (Reply 17):
Here's something I wanted to ask. If not for ATR's or newer turboprops, will this order free up something SK wanted for a while, the replacement for the MD-80? Could it be the SSJ, ERJ, or BRJ?

I don't beleive the MD's will be phased out for another 5-8 years.

The problem is that no manufacturer will be able to deliver aircraft with a short notice.

My money is actually on Bombardier. They will take the Q400's back, and then deliver new Q400's or RJ's. That will be a solution all parts can live with.


User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9387 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CPHGuard (Reply 18):
My money is actually on Bombardier. They will take the Q400's back, and then deliver new Q400's or RJ's. That will be a solution all parts can live with.

I think the SAS marketing and sales department will resign en masse if they accept new Q400s. The decision to dump the Q400 was made for sound commercial reasons unique to SAS and its experience with the aircraft. Their customers will not understand, nor will they accept, an explanation that these new Q400s (which to the passenger look exactly like the old ones) are OK and you don't need to worry.

This is an unfortunate set of circumstances for both SAS and Bombardier. I think the Q400 is a good airplane, and so do a lot of other carriers, despite the reliability issues. But it isn't good for SAS, and if it does a deal with Bombardier I bet it is for CRJ7s or CRJ9s -- not for new Q400s. SAS has a very strong bargaining position on this (despite the apparent MX cause for this latest episode) and Bombardier will make sure they get the CRJs for an appropriate price.

They both need to put this behind them as quickly as possible.



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineOlympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9377 times:

SAS didn't get all the early production Q400s.
They got MSNs 4008-13, 18-25, 33-36, 38, 40, 41, 43, 44.
Augsburg got 4003, 28, 29, 45.
Tyrolean got 4014, 15, 26, 27, 42.
Horizon got 4030-32, 37, 46-51
Flybe's first was 4094.

That accounts for most of the first fifty odd. I don't know who got the MSNs not listed above.

Olympus69


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6448 posts, RR: 54
Reply 21, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9280 times:

There was a press conference today. It was told that the foreign o-ring is as small as 14 mm diameter (just over half an inch).

Finger pointing seem to be mostly in direction of SAS, but there is no firm conclusion, and investigations continue with assistance from SAS and BBD.

The last accident plane had a specially troubled history. It had the components including the actuator exchanged with new spares following the two first accidents. Having been in service for a few days pilots reported that the right hand MLG extended notably slower than the left hand one. It was then taken out of service. Then a third new actuator was mounted Wednesday last week following which it was tested OK on Thursday and put into service again. But two days later...

The authorities haven't issued a new press release since Tuesday. But since the press after the press conference indicates finger pointing against SAS, then I would guess that BBD can sleep well tonight.

The investigation continues with assistance from SAS and BBD, and no stone will be left unturned.

From the Danish daily Jyllands-Posten quoting the investigators:
"14 mm o-rings are used at several places on the Q440 plane. Therefore the investigation board has initiated an investigation to find out exactly which make of o-ring it is. In principle the o-ring can have entered the hydraulic system any time from the birth of the plane until the emergency landing.
The investigation board confirms that one theory is that the o-ring has entered the hydraulic system on SAS's own service shop. Another theory is that it was already inside one of the components which was replaced on the plane".

That's the most "official" words I can find. But as I already said, the press dares to point fingers in direction of SAS which may indicate the more likely outcome. A third option could be that it proves impossible to confirm with 100% certainty what happened when and where.

In any case, we should not expect a fast final accident report. It has only been proved 100% that this third accident, unlike the first two, was caused by a human fault totally unrelated to the quality of the plane or its design.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineLnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1608 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9230 times:

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 21):
The last accident plane had a specially troubled history. It had the components including the actuator exchanged with new spares following the two first accidents. Having been in service for a few days pilots reported that the right hand MLG extended notably slower than the left hand one. It was then taken out of service. Then a third new actuator was mounted Wednesday last week following which it was tested OK on Thursday and put into service again. But two days later...

That is interesting -- IF indeed the report is as suggested, this latest accident appears (again, heavy on the 'suggested and appears") that the introduced O-Ring would appear to be the concern.

As a troubleshooter, and now that we have something to maybe look at (O-Ring).. IF the O-Ring were present during all three swap-outs of the Actuator, you could (heavy on the could) possible deduce that the O-Ring was the factor that made THIS incident very unlike the others.

Wow.

1011yyz



Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6448 posts, RR: 54
Reply 23, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9161 times:

Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 22):
That is interesting -- IF indeed the report is as suggested, this latest accident appears (again, heavy on the 'suggested and appears") that the introduced O-Ring would appear to be the concern.

It was proved already Tuesday that the "extra" o-ring blocked the actuator valve and thereby prevented gear extension. The only thing missing: How did that o-ring end up floating in the hydraulic system.

Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 22):
IF the O-Ring were present during all three swap-outs of the Actuator

There were only two swaps, making the failing actuator the third one on the plane.

Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 22):
you could (heavy on the could) possible deduce that the O-Ring was the factor that made THIS incident very unlike the others.

The third incident is technically totally unrelated to the first two.

But we can guess that a tired and sleepy overtime worker accidentally placed that o-ring where it shouldn't be. Following the first two incidents 24 SAS planes plus an unknown number world wide had to have corroded parts exchanged asap.

That many spares were not available and had to be produced. The o-ring may have been placed by the spare parts producer or the mx people mounting them on the planes. That way there might be a "mental" relationship.

The third and unlikely option would be that the o-ring has been floating in the hydraulic system on the plane since it was built.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineOlympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 8989 times:

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 23):
The third incident is technically totally unrelated to the first two.

Technically unrelated yes. However, I find it hard to believe that it is purely a coincidence that a failure in the same area of the plane should occur on an aircraft that had so recently been inspected, and belonging to the same airline. As Prebennorholm suggests, there almost has to be a connection of some kind.


25 CF105Arrow : Any update on the subject.
26 Post contains links PKK : Latest update in English from HCL (Danish NTSB) can be found here: http://www.hcl.dk/graphics/Synkron-L...iminary%20Report%20UK_03112007.pdf The updat
27 CPHGuard : I partly agree. They do however say the following in the report: During the replacement of the MSV, the rogue O-Ring found blocking the orifice in th
28 CF105Arrow : By bad design are you refering to the latest incident or to previous ones?
29 JoeCanuck : How does this make it a design problem...?
30 PW100 : It is by no means unusual to have a rough mesh "last chance strainer" in hydarulic/oil lines just in front of critical system components. Many engine
31 Post contains links Sebring : Bombardier issued a statement yesterday that I haven't seen posted here, expressing guarded satisfaction at the outcome of the investigation to date.
32 CPHGuard : In my humble opinion I beleive it is a design problem if the o-ring has QUOTE: "unknowingly been transferred from one side of the MSV to the other si
33 JoeCanuck : I work on devices that have dozens of o-rings from 4mil to 330. All of them are critical to the operation of the device and under very high pressure.
34 Sebring : Wishful thinking. Any accident where maintenance has implications could be prevent, in theory, by adding another layer of redundancy, but in the end,
35 GCT64 : Actually, FlyBE's first was #4052 G-JEDI (#4094 G-JECE is the first alphabetically)
36 Post contains images Aeronut : The term is fool-proofing I beleive.
37 Tdscanuck : Well, it's clearly not flight critical since the plane flew just fine and landed without any injuries. A "last chance strainer" would have have preve
38 Post contains links CF105Arrow : Latest info: AFX News Limited SAS says Bombardier Dash Q400 problems to cost it 700 mln skr 11.05.07, 3:19 AM ET STOCKHOLM (Thomson Financial) - SAS A
39 PW100 : From an airworthiness point of view, landing phase is considered part of flight. Landing gear is most certainly considered to be "flight critical com
40 XT6Wagon : Its interesting how supposedly a "first rate airline with a spotless MX record" could miss the writing on the wall with the 3rd occurance. Seriously W
41 Post contains links Viscount724 : Latest news from the Danish investigation says that a part intended for the nosegear was reconfigured by SAS maintenance staff for use in repairing th
42 Gigneil : I am surprised that they have not announced an order for ATR72-500s or even the shiny new -600s to get those -400s replaced. Is there any gossip on th
43 Prebennorholm : Dear XT6Wagon, where did you learn to read? The paragraph which you quoted continues: Of course SAS never put a plane in the air with a known fault.
44 Post contains links Prebennorholm : From the preliminary report: "....the replacement MSV (mechanical sequence valve), supplied, was a P/N 48303-7 which was initially configured for ins
45 Olympus69 : You're right. If I had turned the page in my book I would have seen a whole bunch with lower serial numbers than 4094.
46 Olympus69 : Yoiu're right. If I had turned the page in my book I would have seen a whole bunch with serial numbers lower than 4094.
47 Post contains links JoeCanuck : http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...e-points-to-maintenance-error.html
48 Someone83 : So based on the findings so far could we almost conclude that Bombardier (and maybe Goodrich) are to blame for the 2 first crashes, while SAS is to be
49 Post contains links XaraB : Out 20 minutes ago; Aftenposten, one of Norways biggest newspapers, reports that SK did not follow the correct procedures while changing a spare part
50 XT6Wagon : Well, certainly BBD is on the hook for at-least partial blame for the first two... HOWEVER, it must be noted the final reports are not out, and ratio
51 Post contains links SKA380 : Here's some nice fun for the family.. Didn't take them long to make this, hehe.. http://www.dr.dk/spil/dashncrash/ For the english users: a and z land
52 Threepoint : Which doesn't seem to dissuade them from filing for compensation from Bombardier for lost revenue after SAS decided to withdraw Q400 service. If the
53 Post contains links Threepoint : http://www.dr.dk/spil/dashncrash/ Awesome. Nicely done. Got it on the centreline smooth as silk each time, but those damn rusty bolts and loose bits o
54 Post contains links CPHGuard : Earlier today EASA decided to support Bombardier, and demanded that the Scandic authoroties cancel the ban of Q400's in Scandinavia. Link in danish on
55 Post contains links Arrow : CNN report in English: http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/...OWJONESDJONLINE000893_FORTUNE5.htm European Agency Review Affirms Safety Of Bombardier Q
56 Threepoint : Can EASA demand what an individual carrier chooses to fly and enforce a 'ban reversal'? I understand much of the reason SAS has withdrawn the Q400 is
57 Post contains links Elliott : There was a meeting with EASA for the Q400 in Europe today according to this: http://www.airtransportnews.aero/article.pl?mcateg=&id=7165 any further
58 Prebennorholm : Me thinks that you mix up two things. Two things happened after the third accident: 1. SAS removed the Q400 from their active fleet. 2. The Scandinav
59 Threepoint : I did mix them up. And see that the EASA point refers to number 2 alone. Thanks. I wonder if SAS may incur early lease-termination penalties in that
60 Aerokiwi : Very good post. Sums it up nicely from the manufacturer's point of view and, I think, legal perspective. I still hope for an NZ D84 order.
61 Prebennorholm : That's a very good question. My guess would be that this issue will keep an army of lawyers busy during the next several years.
62 DYflyer : I wonder if this means Wideroe eventually will start flying them again. Apparently they are very happy with the Q400 and not only want to keep the on
63 Alessandro : Well, Wideroe´s Q300 aren´t incident free either, an emergency landing was made after a windscreen cracked on one of there planes.
64 DYflyer : Well, SK has had a couple of 737s with cracked windscreens this year. Should they ground all their 737s too? Cracked windscreens happens on occasions
65 Alessandro : DYflyer, I didn´t say that they should ground them. It was long time ago since a windscreen failure could be traced to faulty design, Be-10 comes up
66 CF105Arrow : Any clue on where are the Q400 stored?
67 Someone83 : SAS Denmark said today according that they will lease 12 aircrafts from Q1 2008 as a mid- to longterm replacement for their Q400. SAS Denmark operated
68 T prop : Does anyone know what has happened to LN-RDK, the first SAS Q400 that had the gear collapse? Has it been written off?
69 Someone83 : None has been written off so far, and I think the plan is to repair them, but that's up to the owner of the aircraft and not SAS (as the Q400 are lea
70 Post contains links T prop : I was curious because this production list, although not official, shows that one as being written off. Go to page 26 of the listing.
71 Post contains links PAViking : And now SLV has been informed that Bombardier admits faults in the hydraulic system/filter that lead into the last accident ... Sorry only in Danish s
72 Lnglive1011yyz : There's a reason it's only in Danish -- because there was never an official release from Bombardier as of yet. If Bombardier admitted anything, it wo
73 Post contains images Someone83 : I see the Canadians are still grumpe after the Scandinavians accused Bombardier for building shitty aircrafts
74 Bravo1Six : We may be grumpy, but at least we're polite enough not to accuse anyone of sh***y maintenance...
75 Post contains images Someone83 : Ha ha, you're way too easy to fire up
76 Eddgge : All Q400s gone from CPH, delivered to their new owner... but the biggest question still remains, who bought them?
77 SKAirbus : Well considering the first two incidents were attributed to a construction fault... and maybe the third incident too... maybe the aircraft manufactur
78 Eddgge : Well, I departed CPH friday nov 30 and they were all parked outside the SK hangar. When returning dec 5 they were all gone. I also heard, from a guy
79 Post contains images N14AZ : Maybe Spantax But seriously, no pictures of all the stored Q400s? Would be a nice picture for the cover of the next JP Fleet book...
80 Post contains images Hightower : Maybe we will never know. It might be in the buyers interest, atleast if it's an European one.
81 Alangirvan : Were the Q400s listed on EBay? I missed a chance to bid.
82 Post contains images SKAirbus : Maybe they will be sold and turned into roadside cafes
83 Post contains images JoeCanuck : Maybe they'll be sold to someone who can turn them into profit...just like every other operator in the world... [Edited 2007-12-10 03:27:03]
84 MEA-707 : Can you share it with us (sorry if already described, didn't read every post in this thread)
85 Prebennorholm : Instead of a transatlantic flame war, better exchange the information in plain English language: Bombardier exchanges filters on all Dash 8 Q400 plane
86 Someone83 : Still not been decided. Currently their using Dash-8-300 and a leased ATR-42 and a Fokker-100 although they need the Q400 for some of their routes, b
87 Prebennorholm : From RB-Boersen: SAS traffic not influenced by Dash-scandal. The number of passengers at at the Scandinavian airline company is still growing, the num
88 Vfw614 : I am surprisded that 23 Q400 can literally disappear from the surface of the earth. Someone must have seen them in the past 10 days.... ?
89 Someone83 : Think 8 of them was in CPH 29/11. In addition the one that crashed in AAL was still there are the time. WF's 4 Q400 are parked at TRF
90 Eddgge : As said before, they were all gone from CPH december 5.
91 CPHGuard : Does anyone know if the SAS markings on the airplanes were removed, during their stay in CPH ? I too find it a little odd, that no one knows anything
92 Vfw614 : By the way, in addition to the 23 (?) SAS planes, another 2 ex SAS Q400 have just been returned by Royal Jordan, so even more on the 2nd hand market a
93 Post contains links and images SKAirbus : After a request i have found the article on Danish state television's website about how SAS said goodbye to the Dash 8... The original article is in D
94 DYflyer : I think they were going to BOO to complete the upgrades before being put into service again with the new operators. Not that i have heard any confirm
95 Post contains images Multimark : And still there is no rumour as to who bought them?
96 Alangirvan : The legal action will probably end with terms of settlement undisclosed.
97 Bravo1Six : Nobody has bought them yet.
98 Someone83 : Wrong. Flew from CPH yesterday and could count a total of 9 Q400. 3 were parked at the engine test bay, and 6 were parked outsite SAS Technical Servi
99 Eddgge : Well, not totally wrong, I swear there were none of them to be seen when I picked up my car at P15 on the morning of dec 5. Perhaps they were all ins
100 Someone83 : But that means 13 Q400 can be accounted for. 9 SAS at CPH and 4 WF at TRF/BOO. In addition do I believe the plane that crashed in AAR still are there
101 Post contains links Someone83 : http://www.takeoff.dk/news.cfm?choic...ID=241&nNewsWeekly=0&nNewsId=14420 It has now been decided that their Q400 will be replaced by regional jets. N
102 Someone83 : And if I've understand correctly, WF will most likely continue to use their Q400 although they would be heavily modified. Including their 5th Q400, wh
103 Post contains images OHLHD : I just flew TRD-ARN and next to me was the F100 of BlueLine who is doing the TRD-CPH leg for WF instead of the Q400. At ARN I counted at least 6 or 7
104 Vfw614 : The CRJ700/900 seems to be a logical choice as it allows a nice deal with Bombardier concerning the Q400s. OTOH, while everybody is getting enthusiast
105 Someone83 : Wideroe needs a 70 seter om many of their regional routes, such as TRF-SVG/BGO/TRD/CPH, SVG/BGO-ABZ, TRD-CPH. The -300 are too small for many of thes
106 SKAirbus : Well SAS owns 100% of Widerøe which in theory means that maybe some of these CRJs could be transferred to the SAS Norge fleet and used on ex Q400 ro
107 Post contains images OHLHD : But only after I flew them. Do you know how many they have already?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
SAS Grounds All B737s posted Thu Apr 26 2001 15:44:00 by Thom@s
Any Info About The Two "crashed" SAS Dash-8s? posted Mon Sep 24 2007 10:26:38 by NA
Another SAS Dash 8 Accident In VNO posted Wed Sep 12 2007 02:39:07 by CPHGuard
Luxair Gets A Dash-8. The End Of The All-jet Age? posted Mon May 28 2007 18:22:32 by Steph001
SAS Launches Biometrics All Over Sweden posted Mon Dec 4 2006 18:38:40 by Solnabo
Does SAS Offer Wireless On All Long Haul? posted Fri Dec 1 2006 22:54:24 by Vio
SAS 330 Part Of The Wing Fell Off Inflight posted Sun May 21 2006 02:34:59 by Lindy
Qantaslink Dash-8 Fleet? Why All Together? posted Sun Jan 30 2005 14:01:34 by ClassicLover
SAS Dash 8's posted Sun Sep 19 2004 23:38:40 by Ba319-131
BA Dash 8s - All The Same? posted Tue Aug 17 2004 00:42:58 by BFS