EU Ban: PIA A310 & B747
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:56 pm
EU Ban: PIA A310 & B747
Do you believe that the corrective/remedial maintenance plan of PIA, approved by CAA & submitted to EU, was willfully left un actioned by PK in order to get the two types out of action?
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:40 am
- Location: London Heathrow
I am not a big fan of PIA and couldn't careless what happens to it as they were running on the bases of corruption, bribery & on the fate of politicians. Where on earth would you see 20,000 plus employees for an airline that don’t even have 50 (active) aircraft? That is like 400 people per aircraft (more tan it carries). And not to mention about the salaries of the head who is not even competent enough to hold that post.
However, I don't think that the PIA Management is the ONLY reason for these bans. We shouldn't forget that PIA preferred Boeing over Airbus by buying 777s and that could well be seen as disloyalty to the Airbus [EU].
However, I don't think that the PIA Management is the ONLY reason for these bans. We shouldn't forget that PIA preferred Boeing over Airbus by buying 777s and that could well be seen as disloyalty to the Airbus [EU].
Last edited by cpt_747 on Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The orbital speed of the Earth around the Sun averages about 30 km/s or 18 mps (108,000 km/h or 67000 mph).
Which means we're travelling 97 times the speed of sound. And yet we can't feel the motion, SubhanAllah
Which means we're travelling 97 times the speed of sound. And yet we can't feel the motion, SubhanAllah
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 2:24 am
- Location: bradford
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 3068
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:10 am
- Location: Lahore
Do you believe that the corrective/remedial maintenance plan of PIA, approved by CAA & submitted to EU, was willfully left un actioned by PK in order to get the two types out of action?
Give up the conspiracy theory zerbaer. We know PIA maintainance sucks and that is the reason the fleet got banned from the EU.
As for getting the two types out of action. Well the 747s were already going to be withdrawn, as PIA was planning to raise the 777 fleet to 12, and that could only mean a phase out of the 747s, which any case are averaging 21 years for the 747-300s and 27.5 years for the 747Ms.
As for the 12 A310s, well they form the backbone of PIA flights to UAE, Europe, Far East, Domestic and South Asian routes. Plus with no money, what would PIA buy to replace these 12 aircraft, which by the way are in
heavy demand due to cargo conversations of the type doing really well.
BTW your poll question and statement are not stating the same thing.
P.I.A
God's International Airline
God's International Airline
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:56 pm
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:56 pm
Never had any theory. I can only agree with you: It was eventually PIA maintenance - Couldn't have been done by Air India.Give up the conspiracy theory zerbaer. We know PIA maintainance sucks and that is the reason the fleet got banned from the EU.
Recommend you ask CAA the regulators for the reason & you could be surprised to hear what you say & know.
Keep your chin up!
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:56 pm
.. going to be withdrawn! Like: Since we all are going to die, you can take the liberty and do it earlier to someone you choose. Phasing out is one thing, destroying another. So if the sane objectives have been achieved by the PK invoked EU restrictions, then there isn't a thing to worry of. The lost revenues and much more, was also a well planned affair for the benefit/detriment of the community, arranged by the employees.As for getting the two types out of action. Well the 747s were already going to be withdrawn, as PIA was planning to raise the 777 fleet to 12, and that could only mean a phase out of the 747s, which any case are averaging 21 years for the 747-300s and 27.5 years for the 747Ms.
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 1231
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 11:31 am
- Location: n24e57
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:56 pm
But you all had the wonderful machines banned to the wonderful places.As for the 12 A310s, well they form the backbone of PIA flights to UAE, Europe, Far East, Domestic and South Asian routes. Plus with no money, what would PIA buy to replace these 12 aircraft, which by the way are in
heavy demand due to cargo conversations of the type doing really well.
Buying of airplanes has little relevance to the issue. Why kill the cow that gives milk & anything else that to a few may appear chic. Uninterrupted revenues would have also greatly be conducive to the acquisition of new aircraft, if that was in the way forward for the owners.
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:56 pm
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 2:19 pm
- Location: durban
No one seems to differ on the PIA Engineering incompetence. This is a GOOD sign.Amaad Lone wrote:
Give up the conspiracy theory zerbaer. We know PIA maintainance sucks and that is the reason the fleet got banned from the EU.
As for the 12 A310s, well they form the backbone of PIA flights to UAE, Europe, Far East, Domestic and South Asian routes. Plus with no money, what would PIA buy to replace these 12 aircraft, which by the way are in
heavy demand due to cargo conversations of the type doing really well.
As for the A310s- It is a fragile backbone because they don't fly to EU.
As for the money matters, AVM Niaz had the money to replace the A300s with these vintage A310 ISO converting them to A300 C4s.
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:56 pm
Should the poll be tried again!
PIA failed to address weaknesses: EU
By Ansar Abbasi
ISLAMABAD: The European Union (EU) claims to have imposed the recent ban on Pakistan International Airlines into the EU countries after airline’s failure to address the weaknesses pointed out earlier.
Jan de Kok, EU Ambassador and head of delegation to Pakistan, informed PPPP Senator Enver Baig in a letter that SAFA (several safety assessments of foreign aircraft) inspections carried out on PIA aircraft operation to airports in the EU during 2006 revealed negative findings indicating safety deficiencies.
These initial findings, the letter that is a response to Baig’s queries on the issue, said were further corroborated by some incident reports involving PIA aircraft from some EU member states.
However, correspondence between PIA and PCAA (Pakistan civil aviation authority) on the one hand and the relevant authorities in the EU on the other did not result in a satisfactory response. “Weaknesses in PIA maintenance and airworthiness were not addressed satisfactorily,†the letter said.
It added that following a meeting of the Air Safety Committee (chaired by the EC and composed of all EU member states’ air safety authorities) which took place in early October 2006, European Commission Regulation 1543/2006 was adopted. This regulation required PIA and PCAA the submission of a remedial action plan
It added that since the adoption of EC regulation 1543/2006, the European Commission services met with PIA and PCAA on more than one occasion in Brussels. “Since October 2006 findings identified during subsequent SAFA inspections on PIA aircraft operations in and out of EU airports led to the conclusion that deficiencies were mainly related to maintenance problems,†the ambassador said, adding, “Following consultations between PIA and the European Commission, the latter accepted an invitation for a visit of an EU air safety team to Pakistan. This visit took place from 12-16 February 2007.â€ÂÂ
Following the visit to Pakistan, KOK said, the EU air safety committee unanimously expressed its opinion that a large part of the PIA fleet should be subject to an operating ban within the European Community under EC Regulation 2111/2005. In practical terms this operating ban affects all of PIA’s fleet except its Boeing 777s.
The ambassador added that the PIA was informed of the forthcoming operational restrictions by telephone on 23 February in order to give them prior warning and allow for re-scheduling of their flights. As a result of the opinion expressed by the EU air safety committee, according to the letter, the EC had no other choice but to adopt a decision to include PIA in the third update of the “European Community list of airlines banned in the European Unionâ€ÂÂ. The letter said that the reference to PIA reads as: “Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) has been subjected to an operational restriction whereby it is allowed to operate into the Community solely with its Boeing 777 aircraft.†This decision, it is said, was adopted officially on 5 March 2007.
On 5 March 2007 the relevant services of the European Commission sent a letter to the aviation authorities advising them that the relevant decision to restrict operation of PIA to the EC was taken on 5 March 2007; that the relevant revised regulation was going to be published in the official journal of the European Communities on 6 March; and that it will enter into force on 7 March 2007.
The ambassador hoped that the PIA and the CAA would be able to take all remedial measures necessary, this is not only for safety of passengers flying in and out of EU airports, but also for other passengers availing of PIA services.
By Ansar Abbasi
ISLAMABAD: The European Union (EU) claims to have imposed the recent ban on Pakistan International Airlines into the EU countries after airline’s failure to address the weaknesses pointed out earlier.
Jan de Kok, EU Ambassador and head of delegation to Pakistan, informed PPPP Senator Enver Baig in a letter that SAFA (several safety assessments of foreign aircraft) inspections carried out on PIA aircraft operation to airports in the EU during 2006 revealed negative findings indicating safety deficiencies.
These initial findings, the letter that is a response to Baig’s queries on the issue, said were further corroborated by some incident reports involving PIA aircraft from some EU member states.
However, correspondence between PIA and PCAA (Pakistan civil aviation authority) on the one hand and the relevant authorities in the EU on the other did not result in a satisfactory response. “Weaknesses in PIA maintenance and airworthiness were not addressed satisfactorily,†the letter said.
It added that following a meeting of the Air Safety Committee (chaired by the EC and composed of all EU member states’ air safety authorities) which took place in early October 2006, European Commission Regulation 1543/2006 was adopted. This regulation required PIA and PCAA the submission of a remedial action plan
It added that since the adoption of EC regulation 1543/2006, the European Commission services met with PIA and PCAA on more than one occasion in Brussels. “Since October 2006 findings identified during subsequent SAFA inspections on PIA aircraft operations in and out of EU airports led to the conclusion that deficiencies were mainly related to maintenance problems,†the ambassador said, adding, “Following consultations between PIA and the European Commission, the latter accepted an invitation for a visit of an EU air safety team to Pakistan. This visit took place from 12-16 February 2007.â€ÂÂ
Following the visit to Pakistan, KOK said, the EU air safety committee unanimously expressed its opinion that a large part of the PIA fleet should be subject to an operating ban within the European Community under EC Regulation 2111/2005. In practical terms this operating ban affects all of PIA’s fleet except its Boeing 777s.
The ambassador added that the PIA was informed of the forthcoming operational restrictions by telephone on 23 February in order to give them prior warning and allow for re-scheduling of their flights. As a result of the opinion expressed by the EU air safety committee, according to the letter, the EC had no other choice but to adopt a decision to include PIA in the third update of the “European Community list of airlines banned in the European Unionâ€ÂÂ. The letter said that the reference to PIA reads as: “Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) has been subjected to an operational restriction whereby it is allowed to operate into the Community solely with its Boeing 777 aircraft.†This decision, it is said, was adopted officially on 5 March 2007.
On 5 March 2007 the relevant services of the European Commission sent a letter to the aviation authorities advising them that the relevant decision to restrict operation of PIA to the EC was taken on 5 March 2007; that the relevant revised regulation was going to be published in the official journal of the European Communities on 6 March; and that it will enter into force on 7 March 2007.
The ambassador hoped that the PIA and the CAA would be able to take all remedial measures necessary, this is not only for safety of passengers flying in and out of EU airports, but also for other passengers availing of PIA services.
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 3068
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:10 am
- Location: Lahore
Yes we get your point.
But you are trying to suggest (in your first statement of the thread) is that the PIA management deliberately screwed up it maintainance to reduce the value of the 747 and A310 fleet, so it could be sold cheap.
This point I do not agree.
Basically around three A310s were serving mainland Europe and UK. That is three out of a fleet of twelve. As for the 747s, they were mostly replaced by the 777-300ERs to London and Manchaster, with only around one 747-300 and one combi still flying to the UK.
I dont belive in your conspircy theory. I actually belive that the EU wants the correct people looking after the systems already in place to maintain aircraft, that is all.
But you are trying to suggest (in your first statement of the thread) is that the PIA management deliberately screwed up it maintainance to reduce the value of the 747 and A310 fleet, so it could be sold cheap.
This point I do not agree.
Basically around three A310s were serving mainland Europe and UK. That is three out of a fleet of twelve. As for the 747s, they were mostly replaced by the 777-300ERs to London and Manchaster, with only around one 747-300 and one combi still flying to the UK.
I dont belive in your conspircy theory. I actually belive that the EU wants the correct people looking after the systems already in place to maintain aircraft, that is all.
P.I.A
God's International Airline
God's International Airline
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 1285
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:34 am
- Location: Northern California Bay Area
I agree....no conspiracy theories, just a majour lapse by this sad and pathetic management (what's new there).....Amaad Lone wrote:Yes we get your point.
But you are trying to suggest (in your first statement of the thread) is that the PIA management deliberately screwed up it maintainance to reduce the value of the 747 and A310 fleet, so it could be sold cheap.
This point I do not agree.
Basically around three A310s were serving mainland Europe and UK. That is three out of a fleet of twelve. As for the 747s, they were mostly replaced by the 777-300ERs to London and Manchaster, with only around one 747-300 and one combi still flying to the UK.
I dont belive in your conspircy theory. I actually belive that the EU wants the correct people looking after the systems already in place to maintain aircraft, that is all.
-
- Registered Member
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:56 pm
NO ! The a/c market values are in significant. The operation it enabled was the goose that laid the golden eggs & that is what you have been robbed of. The value of business/operation (built over decades) was staggering and the liabilities incurred are catastrophic to say the least.But you are trying to suggest (in your first statement of the thread) is that the PIA management deliberately screwed up it maintenance to reduce the value of the 747 and A310 fleet, so it could be sold cheap.
The consistent & persistent non compliance over a very long period is confirmation (as if it was needed) of willful seduction of known & regulatory consequence/s - It can not be accepted as something mysterious that happened suddenly. As for the ulterior motive/s for doing so, review the outcome. Let us all know if you identify the beneficiaries & the losers.