SAS Q400 u/c collapse at Copenhagen

Do you think KLM Cityhopper would give there some of there Fokker 50’s that they dont use for lsd?

James

Perhaps, it is true that they got a few spare frames. The reason they got the spare frames is because KLM does not have enough pilots. Now if even KLM has a problem with pilots, togethern with VLM one of the largest F50 operators around, then how is SAS going to man them?

[*]F50: not enough available second hand.

.

Do you think KLM Cityhopper would give there some of there Fokker 50’s that they dont use for lsd?

James

To be honest I don’t know what there is to comment on, 6 of the oldest dashes were grounded after the 2nd incident involving SAS for precautionary checks, and from what I can gather all Dashes in the fleet have been thoroughly checked.
The only statement that could be made is to reassure passengers that the Q400 has an excellent safety record with flybe

No news from the Westcountry on this yet

There seems to be a lack of any comment comming from Flybe as they have a large number of the Q400s.
If the media has not caught up with this story yet it must be just a matter of time and we know what the media can do to these types of reports.

And here’s Bombardier counter-statement to SAS’s statement that they would retire the dashes.

Bombardier can claim what ever statistics they want – SAS made the only possible commercial decision. They grounded their whole Q400 fleet forever.

During the first operational years SAS had an extreme amount of problems with the Q400 aircraft. This could ofcourse be related to the type being a new design – but afterall it was just a stretched version of a well proven baseline design. So you could actually consider SAS choice as a conservative choice.

The passengers were already frustrated at this time because of all the delayed and cancelled flights due to technical problems. But it got worse. After the first crash I heard about business travellers trying to avoid all flights involving Q400 aircraft. Simply because they felt uneasy about going for a flight on this particular aircraft.

After the second flight the cabin crew union stated that they were lacking confidence in the aircraft type and didn’t want to work in it.

After the third crash the pilot union in Sweden stated that SAS had a long way to go before the pilots would feel safe about flying this aircraft.

From that perspective there isn’t much more to do for SAS than to get rid of the aircraft. Surely, Bombardier and Goodrich could have a try in convincing the pilots and the cabin crew that it is a safe airplane but what good is that when the passengers won’t show up at the gate?

Regards,
Cliff

And here’s Bombardier counter-statement to SAS’s statement that they would retire the dashes.

http://bombardier.com/en/0_0/pressleft.jsp?group=0_0&lan=en&action=view&mode=list&year=null&id=7924&sCateg=3_0

Bombardier Statement Regarding The Sas Decision On Its Q400 Aircraft Fleet
Toronto, October 28, 2007

Bombardier is disappointed with the SAS decision to permanently discontinue flight operations with the Bombardier Q400 aircraft given that the landing incident is still under investigation by Danish authorities.

While SAS chose to ground its Q400 turboprop fleet following the incident on October 27, 2007, Bombardier’s assessment of this situation, in consultation with Transport Canada, did not identify a systemic landing gear issue. Based on this we advised all Q400 aircraft operators that they should continue with normal Q400 aircraft flight operations. Further, Bombardier and the landing gear manufacturer, Goodrich, have completed a full review of the Q400 turboprop landing gear system and results have confirmed its safe design and operational integrity.

Bombardier stands behind the Q400 aircraft. Since entering revenue service in February 2000, the Q400 turboprop has proven itself to be a safe and reliable aircraft with over 150 Q400 aircraft in operation among 22 operators around the world. To date, the fleet of Q400 aircraft has logged over one million flying hours and 1.2 million take-off and landing cycles.

Interesting side-note I just remember. Last thursday I saw a ARJ-85 (SE-DJ*) next to the paint shop at Eindhoven. It had SAS colours, but no titles. Might be the answer to above question on what SAS will no do.

*edit*
someone at A.net mentioned that this plane is going to Transwede, not SAS Commuter. Photo here:
http://www.skyliner-aviation.de/showphotos.main?LC=nav2&SkyID=43e6baa7964bef8bacee5eaf6d28ba45

Not surprisingly after so many incidents SAS has decided to retire the DHC-8 from their fleet. Announcement at SAS website:

SAS removes Dash 8 Q400 from service permanently
Following the recent period of events involving aircraft of the Dash 8 Q400 type, SAS’s management, following an unscheduled meeting of the Board of Directors held today, has decided to immediately discontinue services based on the use of this type of aircraft.

“Confidence in the Q400 has diminished considerably and our customers are becoming increasingly doubtful about flying in this type of aircraft. Accordingly, with the Board of Directors’ approval, I have decided to immediately remove Dash 8 Q400 aircraft from service,” says Mats Jansson, President and Chief Executive Officer of SAS.

In January 2000, SAS was the first customer to use the Dash 8 Q400 in its traffic operations. The aircraft have accounted for approximately 5 percent of the Group’s passengers. The aim is to replace traffic based on the Q400 by reallocating current aircraft in the SAS Group’s fleet and by means of leasing.

http://www.sasgroup.net/SASGroup/default.asp?ID=946

I wonder what they will do now. Getting new planes on short notice, especially 20odd, will be hard. And what are the alternatives?

And who in their right mind would want to buy a fleet of planes that are now well known as trouble. Sure the more recently delivered planes will probably be sold quickly. But the earlier delivered planes, those are gonna be hard to get rid of.

Next to that there will be schedule disruptions and very expensive (short notice) leases. Who will pay that? Could Bombardier be given those charges? I can imagine that Bombardier will not want to do that. Especially considering that SAS as a customer is a lost cause anyway.

I noticed around 8-10 Dash 8 wheels and some other parts/boxes sitting on the ramp at Belfast City when i landed on Wednesday from Stansted.

Maybe they were changing parts as surely if they had arrived as freight they would not be left sitting on the ramp?

….. When FlyBe grounded half of their fleet (~4 airplanes?)…..

Flybe currently operate 33 Dash 8-400s, with more on the way.

Video Here

Heres a video of the incident in question

http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/krimi/article.php/id-9133825.html?forside

I could be talking about of my a***, but if they have most of the probs do they have something different to others in their ops procedures?

I thought about that as well when the first two SAS aircraft went down with just a couple of days in between. But since then, they have found out that one of the bolts in the u/c was heavily corroded.

Considering that SAS is the first customer having operated this particular aircraft I’m not surprised that they are the first ones to experience this problem. They’ve flown it more than any other operator. When FlyBe grounded half of their fleet (~4 airplanes?) because they had more than 10 000 flights SAS had to ground their whole fleet (27 airplanes).

Regards,
Cliff

Qantas must have faith..they’ve just ordered another twelve to bolster their fleet
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=75369

I could be talking about of my a***, but if they have most of the probs do they have something different to others in their ops procedures?

Have any other Q400 operators had similar problems?1L.

From the top of my head I know of two other incidents; one in Japan and one in Germany both operated by other airlines where there was a similar problem. But in those incidents it was the nose landing gear instead of the main landing gear that failed.

Note that SAS was the first customer of this stretched version.

Regards,
Cliff

Have any other Q400 operators had similar problems?

1L.

Ask FlyBe!

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=74205&highlight=Flybe

Have any other Q400 operators had similar problems?

1L.

http://www.aftonbladet.se/
Video of the landing

Photo here:
http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=148&a=709822
(Dagens Nyheter website)

More info – SAS has 27 of this type of aircraft, and there have been at least 18 incidents involving them since they recently came into service.
No wonder passengers are beginning to worry, not to mention the SAS management. I bet Bombardier are starting to feel uncomfortable too!