PIONEER

Just got this in a chain email. Not sure of the original source, and apologies if already posted. (The business about being the only major airline without an accident is probably incorrect because you would think that they must have had an on-ground non-fatal collision or run off a runway or something, and of course Southwest has had no fatalities due to accident.)

After every flight, Qantas pilots fill out a form called a gripe
>sheet, which tells mechanics about problems with the aircraft. The
>mechanics correct the problems, document their repairs on the form, and
>then pilots review the gripe sheets before the next flight. Never let it
>be said that ground crews lack a sense of humor.
>
>Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by Qantas pilots and
>the solutions recorded by maintenance engineers. By the way, Qantas is the
>only major airline that has never had an accident.
>
>
>(P= The problem logged by the pilot.) (S= The solution and action taken
>by the mechanics.)
>
>P: Left inside main tire almost needs replacement. S: Almost replaced
>left inside main tire.
>
>P: Test flight OK, except auto-land very rough. S: Auto-land not
>installed on this aircraft.
>
>P: Something loose in cockpit. S: Something tightened in cockpit.
>
>P: Dead bugs on windshield. S: Live bugs on back-order.
>
>P: Autopilot in altitude-hold mode produces a 200 feet per minute
>descent. S: Cannot reproduce problem on ground.
>
>P: Evidence of leak on right main landing gear. S: Evidence removed.
>
>P: DME volume unbelievably loud. S: DME volume set to more believable
>level.
>
>P: Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick. S: That's what
>they're for.
>
>P: IFF inoperative. S: IFF always inoperative in OFF mode.
>
>P: Suspected crack in windshield. S: Suspect you're right.
>
>P: Number 3 engine missing. S: Engine found on right wing after brief
>search.
>
>P: Aircraft handles funny. S: Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly
>right, and be serious.
>
>P: Target radar hums. S: Reprogrammed target radar with lyrics.
>
>P: Mouse in cockpit. S: Cat installed.
>
>P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget pounding
>on something with a hammer. S: Took hammer away from midget.

NavyChief

As a retired Navy aircrewman and maintenance man, one maintenance sign-off I did still sticks in my mind:

The aircraft commander wrote: "UHF2 totally inoperative during entire flight."

My sign-off: "Placed UHF2 "ON-OFF" switch in "ON" position. UHF2 works 4.0."

Needness to say, the old maintenance chief did have a talk with me after he read it...but he left it in the book.

And then there was the time a C-9 crew asked me (I was the maintenance chief at the time) to play a joke on one of their new female pilots. When she came in to read the maintenance book and sign-out the aircraft, I placed a bottle of scotch on the counter and said, "If you're going to fly THAT aircraft, you're going to NEED this!"

boilermaker

^

NM

Yes, that lot has been doing the rounds for several years, and over the times I have seen them, they have been attributed to many airlines and military services.
For the record, Qantas has never had an accident involving a jet aircraft resulting in loss of life or writeoff of the aircraft. They did put a 747-400 (VH-OJH) off the end of the runway at BKK and onto the golf course during a major storm, however the aircraft was repaired and is still in service. The repairs cost more than the value of the aircraft, but they can still claim to not have lost a hull from their jet fleet.

They did lose some prop aircraft back during the second world war with loss of life (Flying Boat enroute from PNG to Singapore from memory), and I also recall a F27 lost off the north Queensland coast, but that was way before airlines like Southwest were even considered. As the second oldest airline in the world (KLM started just before Qantas), their safty record is very good. But I don't know how any airline would be able to claim to be the safest - how do you measure that in a meaningful and consistent manner??

WHBM

Yes, they have been, several times. But don't worry, we all had to see them the first time.Yes it is. Apart from the Bangkok incident covered above doing abut $100m-plus of aircraft damage, there have been others, eg:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/1960/600824-1.htm

which is not to say that QF is not a throughly competently run airline. There are plenty of operators who have never lost an airframe at all. Most of the UK holiday airlines, for example. It's partly (not entirely, of course) down to chance factors outside the airline's control.