Caravelle From Norway, joined Aug 2000, 666 posts, RR: 1 Posted (13 years 8 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1603 times:
According to Nettavisen, SAS has decided to ground its 43 MD 80´s, after an unspecified mechanical problem was discovered in one of the aircraft.
Today, 150 SK flights are cancelled, according to Nettavisen.
TR From UK - England, joined May 2001, 954 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (13 years 8 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1467 times:
SAS grounded the MD-80s at arround 2 PM local time in Scandinavia and expect the first aircraft to be back in service tomorrow morning. The grounding is just a precaution.
SAS still operate it´s fleet of 51 NG737s (736/737/738) as well as 19 MD-87 and 8 MD-90s. Let´s not make a crisis out of it but instead be happy that SAS takes action as soon as a problem is located on a specific type of aircraft! All MD-81, -82 and -83 will be back in service by monday morning.
Further A321 no. one, OY-KBK (ex.SE-REI), will depart from Finkenwerder airport in HAM on the afternoon Monday 12NOV and arrive CPH arround 18.00 LT, according to Airbus fleet office.
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4641 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (13 years 8 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1427 times:
This info comes from an official SAS press release (I 've no URL yet as I see it on my Bloomberg terminal):
SAS has discovered during a routine check of an aircraft a fracture in a cylinder of one of the legs of the landing gear. The checks is being carried to ensure that there is no risk of fractures in the remaining MD80 aircraft.
The proces takes 8 hours per aircraft. The aircraft will be taken out of service on Friday on landing at one of the Scandinavian homebases. The checks are expected to be completed during the weekend and are conducted in cooperation with the manufacturer.
Flanor From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (13 years 8 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1410 times:
Has only SAS done this? Has Boeing given a notice to other customers? Is it a problem that is specific to the SAS configuration of the MD-80? It all sounds a bit strange to me. Anyone with more information?
GOT From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 1912 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (13 years 8 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1291 times:
It's bad for SAS, but the time is quite right. The y missed some parts of the valuable traffic on Friday, but the inspections can be made during the weekend, with less cancelled flights.
Be glad that SAS ordered inspections, who knows what would have happend otherwise?
Just like birdwatching - without having to be so damned quiet!
Caravelle From Norway, joined Aug 2000, 666 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (13 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1256 times:
Right, GOT: Better safe than sorry.
But as others here have remarked: What do other airlines do? "Structural damage" sounds worrying, and the quality of SAS maintenance is up there among the best.
A SAS spokesperson appeared on the telly here, saying the company would take no risks at all, as far as safety is concerned, due to what he termed "recent events".
LN-MOW From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1912 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted (13 years 8 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1248 times:
Makes you wonder though. It is not normal that you pull aircrafts out of service like this. Normally you scehedule the aircrafts into check over the next week or so without disrupting traffic.
Which makes it interesting to see what other operators will do. This can not be a SAS-unique problem!
SUDDEN From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 4135 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (13 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1143 times:
I give SAS a big credit for doing this check on all of there MD-80's.
What can be more important then safety! I don't think SAS deserves any critic from the media (who is very fast with that), or from anyone else. They chould get a rose for going public about it instead, and telling everybody that they take on the problem instead of waiting till it's to late.
That earns my respect!