SAS Grounds Entire Q400 Fleet

[200hr Wonder]

Just grab this off CBC, looks like SAS has had it and is dropping all Q400s from service.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/10/2 ... ml?ref=rss

Scandinavian Airlines drops Bombardier Q400 turboprops

It's 'very safe,' Montreal-based Bombardier says of aircraft assembled in Toronto

Scandinavian Airlines System has decided to permanently stop flying Canadian-made Bombardier Q400 turboprops after a string of crash landings blamed on landing gear malfunctions, the airline's chief executive said Sunday.

SAS, the joint flag carrier of Sweden, Denmark and Norway, made the decision the day after an SAS turboprop — also known as the Dash 8 Q400 — crash-landed with 44 people on board in Denmark when part of its landing gear collapsed.

A Scandinavian Airlines turboprop carrying 44 people en route from Bergen to Copenhagen after it was forced to make a safety landing at Copenhagen Airport, Saturday.A Scandinavian Airlines turboprop carrying 44 people en route from Bergen to Copenhagen after it was forced to make a safety landing at Copenhagen Airport, Saturday.
(Gert Jensen/Associated Press/POLFOTO)

No one was seriously injured in the accident, the third crash landing involving the airline's Bombardier-built Q400 turboprops in less than two months.

"Confidence in the Q400 has diminished considerably and our customers are becoming increasingly doubtful about flying in this type of aircraft," SAS chief executive Mats Jansson said in a statement.

"Accordingly, with the board of directors' approval, I have decided to immediately remove Dash 8 Q400 aircraft from service," Jansson said.

It was not known what effect the SAS decision might have on sales of the aircraft, which is assembled at Bombardier's Downsview plant in Toronto. But one analyst said it could be a blow for the company.
Continue Article

"Anything like this hurts your brand name. There's no question," said Barry Prentice, director of the Transport Institute at the University of Manitoba.

Bombardier Inc. said there are 165 Q400 planes in service with more than 20 airlines around the world, including Toronto-based Porter Airlines, and that it's not aware of any other incidents with any other airlines.

"We are very disappointed to hear that Q400 will be getting out of the SAS fleet," said Marc Duchesne, a Bombardier spokesman.

"It's a very safe aircraft and we're standing by our product," he told CBC Newsworld on Sunday.

Duchesne said Bombardier officials spoke on Saturday with Transport Canada, the certification authority for the aircraft, and that it supported Bombardier's decision to send a message to its operators, advising them of the latest incident and that they should continue normal operations with their Q400 fleet.

"I think people can still be confident flying on this aircraft," said Lucy Vignola, a Transport Canada spokeswoman, who added the Q400 was certified and that flight crews are required to do a pre-flight check to make sure everything is safe before take off.

SAS grounded Q400 fleet after crashes

Saturday's accident followed two similar crash landings in September with the same type of plane, after which SAS temporarily grounded its fleet of turboprops. No one was seriously injured in any of the accidents.

SAS said it will replace its 27 turboprops, made by Montreal-based Bombardier with other types of aircraft in its fleet, as well as with leased aircraft. SAS warned that it will have to cancel flights "in the period immediately ahead," but did not say how many.

SAS had already cancelled about 50 flights Sunday and Monday after Saturday's emergency landing at Copenhagen's airport.

The plane slid down the runway on its belly after the landing gear collapsed, with one wing scraping the ground in a shower of sparks. All passengers and crew were evacuated safely.

Earlier crashes in Denmark, Lithuania

On Sept. 9, a SAS turboprop made a crash landing in Aalborg, Denmark, because of a landing gear problem. Another of the airline's Q400 planes was involved in a similar incident three days later in Lithuania.

SAS grounded its entire fleet of 27 Q400 aircraft for three weeks following the first two accidents in September, but had resumed flights earlier in October after replacing landing gear parts.

The airline has said it would demand 500 million kronor or about $75 million in compensation from Bombardier for costs and lost income for accidents involving the plane. It wasn't clear whether SAS would make additional claims after Sunday's decision. But SAS said it will try also to get other companies to take over the Q400 leases.

[Four1oh]

I find it interesting that the last three gear up landings were all from the same company...SAS. I'm not ruling out a maintenance screw up just yet.

[xsbank]

Sorry for all the pilots, FAs and ground crews that will likely get laid off, too. Terrible situation for all.

[Hedley]

What a waste of Canadian taxpayer dollars.

[Liquid Charlie]

I was over in Copenhagen during the start up and the contract maintenance crews stayed at the same hotel as we did -- the whole program for whatever reason was one big screw up from the beginning. I over heard a couple of heated conversations in the business lounge at the airport with the reps calling back to canada -- it was the first major start up for the 400 and there was major teething problems. Seems the issues never got fully resolved. I did also hear some complaints from the contractors that the Danes were difficult to work with.

No matter who is at fault - if anyone - the corporate decision to ground was the only option they had. Too bad for the Bombardier but part of the biggest issues with Little SAS was product support and parts.

[twotter]

So why is it that SAS is the only one to have this problem?

[the_professor]

-- it was the first major start up for the 400 and there was major teething problems.

What sort of problems, can you be more specific? I don't understand how an airplane can go through the rigors of certification and yet the operator (or perhaps the manufacturer) can't get their shit together when it comes to putting it on the line? It's not like SAS was trying to fly a Dash 8 prototype...???

[Alex YCV]

So why is it that SAS is the only one to have this problem?

The one thing I noticed from numbers tossed out there is that SAS appears to be flying many very short routes with this plane. They were also amoungst the first to take delivery. They may be in a situation where they are first to reach certain milestone numbers in cycles and such.

[xsbank]

I read that the latest accident was caused by an incorrectly installed o-ring that blocked an oil passage. Not related at all to previous problems. They are/do look like dorks for reacting so quickly to shut down all the 400s when it was a faulty maintenance issue and not a design fault.

[THEICEMAN]

I read that the latest accident was caused by an incorrectly installed o-ring that blocked an oil passage. Not related at all to previous problems. They are/do look like dorks for reacting so quickly to shut down all the 400s when it was a faulty maintenance issue and not a design fault.

I agree with you!
But SAS had no choice but to get rid of them. It was more a business decision & not a liability issue.
It does not matter whether the situation is resolved or not, the public in Denmark lost complete confidence in the Q400.
As far as most travelers are concerned, "i don't want to fly on that airplane because it's not safe."
An unfortunate attitude!

[Liquid Charlie]

Ice hit it right on the head -- and yes there were major issues for the start up. The biggest problem from Bombardier was the lack of parts to support all the aircraft -- I over heard a heated conversation where a rep was talking to someone in head office. It seemed that at that point there were about 15 aircraft U/S and waiting for parts -- The star up was not pretty - from the outside it almost looked that Bombardier was caught with their pants down and never foresaw the need for so much product support and wasn't ready for such poor serviceability. The one thing that can't be denied -- their dispatch reliability was very sub standard.

In defense of Bombardier I also got the impression that maintenance and even a lot of the flight crews opposed the airplane from the start and that there was never going to be a satisfied customer -- no matter what -- for reasons I do not know -- it could be as simple of the introduction of a turbo prop and someone felt jets were better.

[BoostedNihilist]

.

[Bravo1Six]

It seems someone has some 'splainin to do...

http://www.havarikommissionen.dk/graphi ... 112007.pdf

[998877]

HI

[teacher]

SAS Q400 accident probe points to maintenance error

By David Kaminski-Morrow

Danish investigators are indicating that a maintenance error led to the landing-gear actuator blockage which led a Scandinavian Airlines Bombardier Q400 to conduct a gear-up landing at Copenhagen last month.

It follows their discovery that an O-ring from a newly-replaced door valve caused the blockage of a restrictor valve in the actuator assembly. The blockage prevented the right-hand landing-gear deploying.

The subsequent gear-up landing was the third suffered by a Scandinavian Airlines Q400 since early September and the carrier opted to remove the entire fleet permanently from service.

But while the underlying reasons for the first two accidents, which resulted from actuator corrosion, have yet to be determined, Danish investigation agency HCL is suggesting that a maintenance error contributed to the third.

The finding lends support to claims from manufacturer Bombardier that there is no inherent problem with the aircraft.

HCL says that in-depth analysis of the Q400’s hydraulic system shows that the O-ring “could not have travelled” from the solenoid valve to the actuator because certain components, such as the mechanical sequence valve, would prevent passage.

But it points out that the right main landing-gear’s solenoid valve was replaced on 16 October and the mechanical sequence valve was replaced on 22 October – just five days before the Copenhagen accident.

Scandinavian Airlines replaced a number of landing-gear components on its entire fleet after the first two gear-up events, at Aalborg and Vilnius, on 9 and 12 September.

HCL says that, during replacement of the mechanical sequence valve, the rogue O-ring could have “unknowingly been transferred…by maintenance personnel” from one side of the valve to the other.

If this was the case, it says, the O-ring would have been able to travel through the hydraulic lines towards the landing-gear actuator. HCL states that the investigation is continuing and the organisation has yet to reach final conclusions.

But Bombardier says that the Danish evidence “clearly support” its view that the Q400 is “safe and reliable”. The manufacturer has been forced to defend the Q400 in the wake of the three closely-spaced Scandinavian Airlines accidents and the carrier’s decision to axe the type.

“We have unwavering confidence in the Q400 aircraft and we stand by our product,” says Bombardier Regional Aircraft president Steven Ridolfi.

“We are concerned about the impact negative comments might have had on Bombardier and the Q400 turboprop’s reputation and we will do all that is necessary to protect our brand and, by association, the reputation of our Q400 aircraft customers.”

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... error.html

[twotter]

I guess that that means the engineers involved did not inspect the fittings for serviceability before installing them and calling them serviceable. To me that would lay the blame on SAS.. I guess their people did not do their job so they should keep the blame there rather than try to transfer it to Canada!!!

[2R]

O rings again !!!
There should be a special two week course for anyone installing O rings .
Not everyone can do such a simple task as replacing seals .I have seen guys use sharp tools on specially machined finishes and then wonder why they have such a high failure rate on seals they install.Once you score the metal the seals will never worked as designed .
It is often the simple things that cause leaks and failures of O rings .The primary failure is caused by the contempt and lack of patience when removing the old seals and uneven streching during installation of new O rings.That is assuming that the correct size and type of O ring has been used in the first place.

[teacher]

Wideroe pressing for new Q400s to replace grounded fleet
By David Kaminski-Morrow

Wideroe will not reinstate the Bombardier Q400s grounded by parent SAS Group last October but is pressing to replace the fleet with newer examples of the type.
The Norwegian regional carrier had four Q400s at the time of the grounding and has since added a brand new Q400 which, like the others, is parked. Some 30% of Wideroe's fleet has been put out of action.

Wideroe insists that the airline will no longer fly any of the Q400s affected by the original grounding, but says the carrier is trying to convince the SAS Group board to take new Q400s instead.

"We would like to keep operating the Q400. It's a fantastic aircraft for Wideroe," says the airline. "What we want is new Q400s. To fulfil our needs now, we need five aircraft."

Wideroe still has five Q400s on option. The carrier plans to sell or lease its current fleet - the four aircraft caught up in the October grounding are about six years old.

Although SAS Group has stated that it will address long-term replacement of the Q400 by the second half of this year, Wideroe says: "We have signals now that a decision is very close to hand."

Wideroe has been leasing Fokker 50 turboprops from Dutch company Denim Air and a Fokker 100 jet from France's Blue Line to cope with the shortfall in capacity created by the grounding.

[BoostedNihilist]

.