SAS Claims Bombardier Q400 Construction Error; Canadian Airframer Answers Back

SAS Group, which last year grounded its Bombardier Q400 fleet following three landing-gear incidents, issued a very bold statement this morning.

Clearly not mincing words, SAS says that, following a thorough technical examination of the turboprops' landing gear, it found problems in 63% of the SSV valves on the inspected aircraft, and cannot be blamed for the undetected error that caused the first two accidents in the course of its maintenance work.

What does Bombardier have to say about all of this?

"There is no new evidence published by any investigation authority that alters the conclusions reached by the DAIB [Danish Accident Investigation Board] in its preliminary report, and the EASA in its statements, with respect to the cause of the O-ring blockage that prevented the main landing gear actuator from fully extending," says the manufacturer.

"While investigations into Q400 main landing gear incidents continue, Bombardier will not comment or speculate on specific issues in isolation, such as the SSV valve, without the context of the final reports."

Meanwhile, here is the full statement from SAS:

“We are waiting for the Accident Investigation Board’s final conclusion, and don’t want to speculate about the reason behind the third accident. We can confirm, however, that our technical department has found problems in 63% of the SSV valves on the inspected aircraft that we have permanently grounded after the accidents last autumn. SAS had no possibility of – and cannot be blamed for not – discovering these problems, or the undetected error that caused the first two accidents, in the course of its maintenance work," says executive VP of corporate communications Claus Sonberg.

SAS adds: "The Danish Accident Investigation Board has previously concluded that a construction error in the actuators was the cause of the first two accidents involving a Dash 8 Q400. The Accident Investigation Board has not presented any conclusion on the reason behind the third accident, but has in a provisional report stated that the most likely reason is that an O ring came loose from the SSV valve in the hydraulics system in combination with the following fault-tracing. The SSV valve also has a construction error and is currently being modified by the supplier."

SAS previously requested $77 million in compensation from Bombardier for costs and lost income associated with the accidents.

(Photo from Bombardier's Q400 web page - which it might want to consider updating: http://www.q400.com/q400/en/operators.jsp )

Where's the Love? US Airways Calls ATR Turboprop "Very Old Design"

I wonder if ATR is in any way miffed at the apparent reversal in enthusiasm shown by US Airways for the European airframer's aircraft?

Just this past November the Star Alliance member said ATR’s 72-500 turboprop made a favourable impression on the carrier during the aircraft’s North American tour.

Specifically, US Airways lauded the ATR 72-500’s quiet cabin, headroom and carry-on bin space. It said the aircraft runs “remarkably quiet due to six-blade props and unique airframe design that absorbs prop noise outside of the passenger cabin” and boasts “favourable operating economics and seating configuration runs in the 64-70 seat range”.

That's not quite the same sentiment expressed by senior VP, schedule planning and alliances Andrew Nocella in a January 10 employee newsletter.

Nocella says: "We continue to look at the multiple options available to replace or extend the life of Piedmont Dash 8s. Choosing a successor plane for Piedmont is no small task. The new fleet choice will be something we live with for 15 to 20 years.

“The Q400 made by Bombardier is an amazing plane and is being considered but with its high capacity and fast speed relative to a Dash 8 it maybe more suited to replace RJs than Dash 8s.

“The ATR is slower, smaller and cheaper to fly than a Q400 but at its heart a very old design and much less capable plane on longer mission.”

Ouch! For the record, ATR recently launched the newest version of its turboprop family, the so-called -600 series, and says the aircraft will be progressively introduced during the second half of 2010. New-build ATR 72-500s, meanwhile, now boast some of the latest developments from ATR in communications, navigation tools and passenger comfort.

But these particulars might not matter much one way or the other.

Tellingly, Nocella now says US Airways has "many pros and cons to evaluate with these choices as well as other ideas we intend to explore.”

Other ideas eh? Now that is interesting. US Airways has previously shown interest in the Q300. Could a Q300/Q400 mix be in the offing?

And is the carrier also looking at RJs for Piedmont? It doesn’t appear so.

A US Airways spokesman says: “Regional jets really fit into PSA [Airlines], since they are our all-jet operator. Additionally, as you know, turboprops go places jets can’t bother operationally and economically so we’d like to have an aircraft in the fleet that can still service those types of markets.”

(Photo courtesy of ATR web site http://www.atr.fr/public/atr/html/media/pictures.php )

Juicy presentation from Pinnacle Airlines about Colgan Air's Q400 expansion

My good friend and colleague, Air Transport Intelligence US Editor Lori Ranson, sniffed out this late-2007 presentation by Pinnacle Airlines executives to investors.

There is plenty of stuff worth chatting about in here, but highlights include Pinnacle subsidiary Colgan Air's potential to expand its feeder deal with Continental Airlines to include 30 Bombardier Q400s, and a list of projected cities to be operated by the regional as Continental Connection from Newark.

Amusingly enough, the route map mentions IATA code BTW (Batulicin Airport in Indonesia) as a destination, but I think it's safe to assume they mean BTV (Burlington, Vermont).

If that wasn't enough, however, airliners.net enthusiasts have started revealing initial cities to be served by Colgan at Newark in drips and drabs.

And now I'm being told that the first flights have been loaded into the CRS and include three daily flights from Baltimore/Washington to Newark starting on February 4.

Flushing the Bombardier Q400 and Using Playboy as Toilet Paper

Just as it was inevitable that Kyla Ebbert, the scantily-clad Hooters waitress who suffered untold mental anguish at the hands of Southwest Airlines, would pose for Playboy, so too is Bombardier assured that every Q400 glitch – no matter how minor – will be scrutinized for some time to come, following SAS Group’s decision to axe its Q400 fleet after three prangs.

Take an incident that occurred on November 5, which was only just picked up by the press this week (including by myself). A Q400 being delivered to Algerian operator Tassili Airlines experienced problems with its landing-gear shortly after taking off from a refueling point in Portugal.

To be precise, one of the landing-gear doors failed to close. The aircraft is currently being repaired at Flybe’s facility in Exeter, UK and is likely to be delivered to Tassili this weekend.

That the incident received any coverage at all is a sign of just how much the Q400 remains under the microscope, despite broad industry backing and regulatory clearance.

As a close colleague of mine said, after hearing about the Tassili glitch: “Ye Gods, hey the toilet didn’t flush first time – stop the presses!”

Stop the presses, indeed. And while we're at it, let's give a hand to Kylie, who has parlayed her agonizing Southwest experience into big bucks (photo above courtesy of Crissy Pascual/Union-Tribune).

Kylie's Playboy shoot, by the way, is titled "Legs in the Air" (sarcasm aside, you gotta love that).

Could Air Canada Jazz Make an SAS Q400 Asset Grab?

It didn't take long for operators to start sniffing around SAS Group's grounded Q400 fleet.

Air Canada Jazz officials revealed yesterday during an earnings conference call that they are checking out the goods.

It makes perfect sense. Well over two years ago, Jazz said it was looking to add 70-seat Q400s "at some point" possibly by trading in some older, 50-seat CRJ100s (it flies about 22 of the type).

At that time, Jazz said the Q400 would be useful for some of its high-frequency turboprop routes such as Vancouver-Victoria.

Toronto City Center-based newbie Porter Airlines - of which Jazz is locked in a fierce legal battle - also happens to operate Q400s and claims to be doing quite well after one year of service, thank you very much.

When SAS grounded its 27 Q400s in the wake of three landing-gear incidents (two related to corrosion, and the last revealed as a maintenance error), analysts predicted the turboprops wouldn't have a problem finding homes.

Looks like the talking-heads were right.

Stating the Bleeding Obvious: SAS Won't Buy More Bombardier Q400s

This one gets filed in the "No Shit Sherlock" folder. SAS CEO Mats Jansson reportedly said today that the company will not buy a new generation of Q400 aircraft.

His last statement is a little curious, however. Referring to the fact that SAS will not rule out buying other aircraft types from Bombardier, Jansson is quoted by Dow Jones as saying: "This is about a long-term relation and then the recent accident isn't of major importance."

Say what? Has something been lost in translation here? Did Jansson actually say this? If so, is it safe to assume that the back-peddling has begun?

Travel Detective Peter Greenberg has Strong Words About FAA's Response to SAS Q400 Incidents

Last night, I attended a party in DC to celebrate the launch of Today Show travel editor Peter Greenberg’s new Travel Detective Bible. After the event, I sat down with Peter (aka the Travel Detective) to discuss his take on the latest topic de jour – the spate of SAS Q400 landing-gear-related incidents, and the company’s subsequent decision to axe its entire Q400 fleet.

Of particular concern to Peter is the FAA’s decision to wait until October 30 to issue an airworthiness directive (effective November 14) covering Q400s certificated for operation in the USA - six weeks after seperate SAS Q400s suffered gear-collapses at Aalborg and Vilnius. Corroded retraction actuators, which had then disconnected, were found on the Q400s involved.

Horizon Air (sister to Alaska Airlines) operates a fleet of 33 of the type. Peter says he is “amazed that the FAA of this country did not ground these planes until their airworthiness could be proven. It’s more then just erring on the side of caution, it’s erring on the side of intelligence".

That the FAA has given operators so much time to complete the inspections “could border on what some might say is criminal negligence".

He later added: “If you have a problem which could jeopardize people’s lives and you make a conscious decision not to ground the aircraft immediately, then you are criminally negligent”.

Suffice it to say that a Travel Detective and a Runway Girl don’t always see eye-to-eye (actually, at 6ft tall, I don't see eye-to-eye with most folks, but that's beside the point).

While the FAA’s timeline for issuing it’s own AD does seem rather “Johnny come lately”, I think it’s important to note that, in the wake of the gear-collapse accidents at Aalborg and Vilnius, Horizon grounded its Q400 fleet and began conducting immediate landing-gear inspections in response to a Transport Canada airworthiness directive (which was preceded by Bombardier's own call for inspections).

Horizon gave all of it aircraft “a clean bill of health” and returned them to service on September 25.

The FAA's AD (released after reviewing Transport Canada's findings) does not address the Q400 accident on October 27 at Copenhagen. Danish investigators have indicated that a maintenance error led to that gear-up landing, and is unrelated to the accidents in Aalborg and Vilnius.

Additionally, the European Aviation Safety Agency today announced that the Q400 accident at Copenhagen was “not due to a design error” and adds that the airworthiness of the aircraft “is maintained”.

Nonetheless, Peter believes the FAA should be held to task for its response time to the initial two incidents, noting that the latest findings concerning the Copenhagen incident “still doesn’t get them off of the other two”.

Mickeying Around: Maintenance Error on SAS Q400 Accident Aircraft

When my three year old daughter asked to ride a train on Saturday at Disney World and I responded by taking her on Thunder Mountain Railroad, it became pretty clear about 10 seconds into the ride that we were in fact on a roller coaster, and that mommy had made a big mistake (easily judged by my wee one's ghostly white complexion and insistence that she doesn't like trains anymore). I quickly regained ground by acquiescing to every whim and fancy for the rest of the day. But the fact remains: I could have avoided a lot of anguish (and money) had I not rushed headlong into a decision before becoming well-informed.

It's a lesson that SAS Group might be pondering right now, after Danish investigators indicated that a maintenance error led to the landing-gear actuator blockage which caused a Scandinavian Airlines Bombardier Q400 to conduct a gear-up landing at Copenhagen last month, and SAS to axe it entire Q400 fleet.

The hoopla and negative press that followed may prompt Bombardier to take legal action. But the Canadian manufacturer has received a resounding vote of confidence from the industry, which largely sees SAS's decision as a knee-jerk reaction. Should SAS start back-peddling like a apologetic mom at Disney World, or stand it's ground? The roller coaster ride is just beginning, me thinks.

Level Heads Prevail At Austrian After Q400 Hiccup (And Goodrich Weighs In On SAS Withdrawal)

File this in the Bombardier "just can't catch a break" folder. Today an Austrian Airlines Q400 was forced to turn back on the runway at Vienna International due to a faulty propeller part. But kudos to Austrian, which quickly put the incident in perspective by calling the turn back "purely a security precaution", and to CEO Alfred Otsch, who says the carrier's trust in its Q400 fleet is unbroken "particularly as we have carried out around 116,000 takeoffs and landings with the fleet, without any problems".

Bombardier has faced an avalanche of bad press lately (particularly in Sweden), after SAS Group decided to ditch its entire Q400 fleet following three landing-gear incidents, the latest in Copenhagen. Q400 landing-gear manufacturer Goodrich today announced its disappointment in SAS's decision given that the latest incident is still under investigation by the Danish aviation authority.

"Goodrich is supporting Bombardier and the Danish aviation authority in the investigation of Saturday's incident and has sent a team to Copenhagen to assist with the investigation. Goodrich concurs with Bombardier's assessment of the situation which did not identify a systemic landing gear issue," says Goodrich.

Knee Jerking...Did SAS Make Mistake With Bombardier Q400 Withdrawal?

SAS Group's decision to withdraw its entire Q400 fleet, following three landing-gear incidents in less than two months, is the fodder for many discussions this week.

Industry players are considering the possible fall-out on Bombardier's reputation, Q400 residual values, and passenger perception. One conversation that deserves notes can be found at the ever-popular IAG blog. Could the SAS grounding be a big mistake? Is it related to the company's internal procedures, or maintenance practices? Time will tell.

Meanwhile, a glut of Q400s on the market would in fact be welcome news to airlines seeking large turboprop lift. As prominent consultant Doug Abbey points out, if the aircraft come available, they will "find homes and they’ll find homes rather quickly".