ThegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2274 posts, RR: 3 Posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 13151 times:
You guys remember in December 2007 storm that crippled Skybus when they had 25% out of commission due to "mechanical problems"
I was looking at their wiki page and this is what I came across
"The airline made news during the Christmas 2007 holiday travel season, when it encountered problems with two of its seven planes, resulting in the cancellation of about 25% of its scheduled service over a two-day period. The planes were actually taken out of service due to ground support equipment striking aircraft caused by the operations of its outsourced ramp crews. The outsourced ground crews simply ran their equipment into the aircraft and caused damage that mandated their being taken out of service for necessary repairs to the fuselage."[10]
First I barely remember anything from 07 but did this really happen? Ramp agents running equipment like belt loaders into aircraft? How despicable is that?
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5934 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 13111 times:
Quoting ThegreatRDU (Thread starter): Ramp agents running equipment like belt loaders into aircraft? How despicable is that?
Whoa, whoa, whoa, it doesn't say "intentionally" anywhere in there Maybe it was intentional, but it may well have been accidental (how many times has Menzies Aviation banged up birds for AS, as an example?).
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Hatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1452 posts, RR: 15 Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 13027 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 1): how many times has Menzies Aviation banged up birds for AS, as an example?
As many times as any in house employees do and sometimes the rate is less. You'd be surprised. Being a contract worker doesn't always equate to less quality.
PGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2516 posts, RR: 45 Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 12925 times:
Quoting ThegreatRDU (Thread starter): Ramp agents running equipment like belt loaders into aircraft? How despicable is that?
What? Even if true, they didn't do it intentionally.
Ground crews (in house and outsourced alike) run all sorts of equipment into aircraft all the time. It has to be inspected (and fixed if necessary) before the aircraft continues flying.
If you are an airline like Skybus with seven aircraft and two go down for ramp rash, it's a lot more consequential to your operation than if you are United or American with hundreds of planes.
Rolfen From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 1764 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 12682 times:
How could 2 planes get incapacitated at once.
Did something really heavy fall down on both planes while they were parked alongside?
Im sure little incidents happen all the time. But how likely is it to put the plane out of service for an extended period of time, let alone 2 airplanes at the same time!
Jbmitt From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 509 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 12622 times:
IIRC- it was 2 individual acts in different locations, but due to their small fleet, high utilization, irregular or 1x daily services, full planes, lack of spares, and no interline agreements it spiraled out of control.
PGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2516 posts, RR: 45 Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 12559 times:
Quoting Rolfen (Reply 4): How could 2 planes get incapacitated at once.
If Wikipedia is correct, they were both struck by ground equipment in seperate incidents. Two planes, two collisions.
Quoting Rolfen (Reply 4): Im sure little incidents happen all the time.
Yes they do.
Quoting Rolfen (Reply 4): But how likely is it to put the plane out of service for an extended period of time, let alone 2 airplanes at the same time!
The planes are grounded until they are inspected. When the required maintence procedures take a while or mechanics are not readily available, the planes remain grounded. There is nothing unusual about having two aircraft grounded at a time; it was an unfortunate statistical event for an airline with only seven aircraft.
There is nothing noteworthy about this case in any way.
OA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4980 posts, RR: 25 Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 12559 times:
Quoting ThegreatRDU (Thread starter): I was looking at their wiki page and this is what I came across
That was your first mistake. Seriously, I don't know if any of it is true, but do keep in mind that wikipedia is notoriously bad when it comes to airline info.
September11 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3623 posts, RR: 23 Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 11593 times:
I seem to recall this happened around Christmas time.
SW733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6072 posts, RR: 10 Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 11097 times:
Quoting September11 (Reply 8): I seem to recall this happened around Christmas time.
ThegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2274 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 10733 times:
BNAFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 10567 times:
Quoting PGNCS (Reply 6): If Wikipedia is correct, they were both struck by ground equipment in seperate incidents. Two planes, two collisions.
Why do people rely on Wikipedia for their sources? It can be good for some things, but any website that allows "contributions" is bound to get some things wrong, and it seems particularly in the airline industry, it's "facts" aren't always up to date. There are a lot of sources of information out there without having to rely on Wiki.
SW733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6072 posts, RR: 10 Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 9607 times:
Quoting BNAFlyer (Reply 11): and it seems particularly in the airline industry, it's "facts" aren't always up to date.
it seems that way because you know the airline industry. facts are wrong in many, many topics, but I am assuming those of us who know the airline industry don't really know, say, particle physics too well, yet I have had a physicist friend say that wikipedia's entries on that are FUBAR and a half.
you can't find mistakes in what you don't know...thus, we all think the airline industry is particularly screwed up on wikipedia when it really is not any worse than many other topics.
JoePatroni From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 199 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6780 times:
Quoting Hatbutton (Reply 2): As many times as any in house employees do and sometimes the rate is less. You'd be surprised. Being a contract worker doesn't always equate to less quality.
I couldn't agree more. I deal a lot with contracted ground handlers and I have to say that often times, the contracted handler has created less incidents than our own, in house staff.
JBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3160 posts, RR: 21 Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6726 times:
Wasn't one of the incidents related to a door getting ripped off by a misplaced staircase?
PGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2516 posts, RR: 45 Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6586 times:
Quoting BNAFlyer (Reply 11): Quoting PGNCS (Reply 6):
If Wikipedia is correct, they were both struck by ground equipment in seperate incidents. Two planes, two collisions.
Why do people rely on Wikipedia for their sources? It can be good for some things, but any website that allows "contributions" is bound to get some things wrong, and it seems particularly in the airline industry, it's "facts" aren't always up to date. There are a lot of sources of information out there without having to rely on Wiki.
I hear you, BNA! I never cite Wikipedia as a source; I wanted to make it clear that since that's where the OP got his data, that I wasn't actually saying that these events happened, rather, that if the events happened, this was the explanation.
Wikipedia is great for a quick search to get you pointed in the right direction, but I wouldn't ever cite it as a definitive source. I taught a few graduate classes at a local university a couple of years ago and some of the students were incredulous that in the middle of my syllabus section dealing with their final term paper for the semester I had in bolded all caps the words "NO WIKIPEDIA!" I thought going into it that would be a nonevent, but you should have heard the whining!
Flyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1919 posts, RR: 11 Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6138 times:
Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 14): Wasn't one of the incidents related to a door getting ripped off by a misplaced staircase?
There were multiple incidents that actually occurred because of the ramps. There were three seriously enough to have to be paid by the insurance company of DGS. The two that occurred within the same time frame was really expensive....
Srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 16888 posts, RR: 51 Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5523 times:
At this point, this thread has essentially run its' course and has now turned into a discussion about the merits of Wikipedia. If members wish to discuss that topic, please do so in the Non-Av Forum. This thread is now locked.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2274 posts, 
Maybe it was intentional, but it may well have been accidental (how many times has Menzies Aviation banged up birds for AS, as an example?).
From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 1764 posts, 
Seriously, I don't know if any of it is true, but do keep in mind that wikipedia is notoriously bad when it comes to airline info.
Printer friendly format 
