due to bad weather (windshear), until more accurate info is released.
But lately in these days, three F100s of TAM had problems:
The most serious was PT-MQH that was written off after it landed having run out of fuel due to a leak at a farm near Araçatuba while flying from São Paulo to Campo Grande (Mato Grosso do Sul). Luckily the pasengers did not suffer any serious injury. This was August 30th.
The same day another F100 had to land on the belly after gear problems at the airport of Campinas (São Paulo)
Last monday, Sept. 9th, another F100 (reg# not reported) had to remain grounded when 30 pax had already boarded at Corumbá (Mato Groso do Sul), because the door presented lock problems. The passengers had to switch airplane.
The last one has occured today, sept 11th, at 09:45 local time (14:45 CET, meaning less than four hours ago).
Again a F100 (reg# unknown) has landed at Pelotas airport (Rio Grande do Sul) due to turbine vibration, while flying from Buenos Aires to São Paulo.
Of course three of them can be qualified of "non-event". And for sure, a landing due to turbine vibration is nothing else but preventive, and can occur at any moment to any airplane of any company anywhere in the world. Right now (13:10 Atlantic Brazil time) the passengers remain at Pelotas, until they will be flown to São Paulo in the next hour (about 14:00)
Now that, after the tragic accident that killed all 96 on board plus 3 on the ground in 1996, again on Fokker 100, TAM had gained again the trust of the public, it is time to wonder how expensive the F100 maintenace has become after Fokker shut down... and if they should (could?) accelerate the retirement of the 100s...
They are doing very well lately, and fly good service to CDG on their own A330s, codesharing wiht Air France. They started substitution of the 100s a couple of years ago, with 319s and 320s. Don-t know how viable is to accelerate it, even leasing some 320s, but that's too much for me to say.
I've flown TAM F100 PT-MQM, two sectors of one flight from Goiânia to Salvador with stopover in Brasilia (You can read my report here). They do not look old or bad taken care of at all, and everytime there's a speech, they finish saying that they are "the company that's proud of being Brazilian". I enjoyed that flight a lot, the F100 cabin is absolutely quiet and the onboard service excellent, despite the delay we suffered due to a late connection.
Let's hope they can cope with these events, and go ahead with the quality improvement they've reached lately.
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4401 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1300 times:
Turbulence I don't know if you've ever flown in the Amazon region, but if you would you probably know how difficult it is. Moreover all aircraft flying in Brazil are used quite extensively and operate in very bad weather conditions. I've flown a F100 on a Recife - Belem flight and I believe that any airliner which has to endure what the F100's(my flight needed two F100's as the first one broke down at Fortaleza with oxygen problems on the flight deck) and other airliners have to endure, it's probably due to the great skill of the Brazilean pilots that there aren't more accidents.
BTW I'm sad to learn that one of Rico's EMB 120 crashed. I had to best flight untill know on one of the ohter EMB120's (PT-WRO).
Turbulence From Spain, joined Nov 1999, 963 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1279 times:
I know what you're saying, LJ, but the TAM incidents were not in Amazonia.
Also I say that the TAM Fokkers do not look old or bad taken care of. A windshear problem faced by a small airplane such a 120Brasilia, is something very dangerous.
Either I never said about a lack of maintenance, we all know how many hours a day these airplanes are on the air, and about the "frog" flights flown in six or seven sectors by one crew only.
For sure, this and many other factors, despite the five latest incidents, make Brazil one of the safest "airborne" countries...
As a side note, I was in Brazil for 2000's newyear, more specifically on Aracaju's beach, when the whole world were crying "do not fly to South America for the millenium bug", and at 11:51pm, December 31st, 1999, a VASP 732 was taking off roaring her lovely JT8Ds above us.
But I was just wondering about the very cycled F100s and the substitution by 32Xs already going on.
BTW: I forgot to mention that my sister in law, who lives in Goiânia, was flying with her husband the same flight I explain in my report, GYN-BSB-SSA, on another F100 of "Transportes Aéreos Meridionáis", six months before my wife, our then 13-month-old daughter and I did it. They had brakes problems, and the captain explained that the airplane was absolutely airworthy, but was not able to slow down. The baggages would remain at Brasilia, and the passengers who did not want to fly, located at a hotel for the following day. But that he was going to fly to Salvador along with whoever wanted to go together. My sister in law and her husband went with only a few more pax (so few that the captain accepted even to take the baggages) and even being so light, the plane used the whole runway to stop.
This proves again what has been said: the good skills of the pilots. And I would fly a JJ F100 right now if I was in Brazil. But the 32Xs are very welcome, as soon as possible. Not only (and/or exactly due to technical reasons) but also for the amounts of money these 100s are costing to the companies operating them right now (not only TAM)
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4401 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1258 times:
I didn't mean to imply you're saying that TAM's aren't well maintained. Anyway you're right about the high number of cycles. My flight originated in Salvador and went via Recife, Fortaleze, Sao Luïs, Belem, Santarem to Manaus (and these are twice daily flights).
BTW the census list lists 36 TAM A32X's as delivered. However, I haven't heard of any F100 being retired