PlanesNTrains wrote:

jumbojet wrote:

:thumbsup:


Its times like this I am so very proud of Delta. Way to go Delta, you earn my respect more and more. Why should they help out Emirates? Sorry but screw them. Why didn't they go to Alaska Airlines in the first place? I just love the fact that DL let them install the part only to remove it. Absolutely brilliant.

Yet another reason to avoid Delta. Thanks for the reminder.

the pleasure is mine.

This story really made my night. Absolutely love it. DL plays hard ball with the ME3, shocking. Love DL's style.

jumbojet wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

jumbojet wrote:

:thumbsup:


Its times like this I am so very proud of Delta. Way to go Delta, you earn my respect more and more. Why should they help out Emirates? Sorry but screw them. Why didn't they go to Alaska Airlines in the first place? I just love the fact that DL let them install the part only to remove it. Absolutely brilliant.

Yet another reason to avoid Delta. Thanks for the reminder.

the pleasure is mine.

This story really made my night. Absolutely love it. DL plays hard ball with the ME3, shocking. Love DL's style.

Well, then feel free to risk the payback when your next flight goes tech and the city you land in isn't a DL spare parts store. Enjoy your layover.

Spoke to one of the crew last night, part was sourced, fitted and then removed again. Not the line guys decision but came from higher up, make of that what you will.

seanpmassey wrote:

That;s one of the things that's weird about this story. Why go to someone you don't have a relationship with before going to someone you do?

If there is an _urgent_ unfullfilled by my own stores demand for a spare part:
I contact my regular supplier.
if _really_ urgent or not available there:
I contact my stash of known to potentially have it in stores service shops i am aquainted with.
If it is a part that I have used in designs for other customers I may even ask that customers
if he has this part at hand.

Easiest/shortest available offer is taken. ( some modifiers may apply.

To make it short: you phone around, see what sprouts up and then take up the first offer.
The source may not reflect some hierarchical order of preferability.

emiratesdriver wrote:

Spoke to one of the crew last night, part was sourced, fitted and then removed again. Not the line guys decision but came from higher up, make of that what you will.

So it could be a case of the line engineers fitting the part quickly without realizing the fact that it was the last part in stock, and when EK ops wants to settle accounts only then did the DL ops team realize that they gave away the last part.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

emiratesdriver wrote:

Spoke to one of the crew last night, part was sourced, fitted and then removed again. Not the line guys decision but came from higher up, make of that what you will.

So it could be a case of the line engineers fitting the part quickly without realizing the fact that it was the last part in stock, and when EK ops wants to settle accounts only then did the DL ops team realize that they gave away the last part.

Seems to be only two options:

1. As described above.

2. Pure pettiness on the behalf of Delta.


I would also say if it was 1 then it was still pettiness as the part was fitted already.

To me it reflects poorly on Delta.

StTim wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

emiratesdriver wrote:

Spoke to one of the crew last night, part was sourced, fitted and then removed again. Not the line guys decision but came from higher up, make of that what you will.

So it could be a case of the line engineers fitting the part quickly without realizing the fact that it was the last part in stock, and when EK ops wants to settle accounts only then did the DL ops team realize that they gave away the last part.

Seems to be only two options:

1. As described above.

2. Pure pettiness on the behalf of Delta.


I would also say if it was 1 then it was still pettiness as the part was fitted already.

To me it reflects poorly on Delta.

I agree, and I guess to most it seems to reflect poorly on Delta, yet the replies by some here are a little disturbing in their rabid support of what should have been avoided by a company of DL standing. Its the way of the world now I suppose, take what you want/need and screw the rest.

I think it's very possible that the folks on the ground in SEA with DL decided to help EK out without considering that it was leaving them without a spare or worrying about being without a spare - one of the two. When someone up the chain found out about it, they said "NO!" While most would say "a deal is a deal", in this case it sounds like the DL guy in SEA went back to EK and said "Sorry - I made a mistake and will need it back".

Alas, once DL had ended its game of arseholery and wasting EK's and 300 passengers' time by first selling the spare part, then allowing it to be installed and ultimately having it removed again, EK apparently was able to quickly source the spare part from AS (which, given the non-existent Triple Seven fleet of AS, must have been a standard spare part). Which raises the question why, even it was the last spare part in DL's inventory, DL could not have relied on AS's inventory for the unlikely event that it was needed until its own stock was replenished (which probably was just a matter of hours anyway). Or why DL did not allow EK to keep the spare part and ask EK to hand over AS's spare part for DL's inventory to avoid the need to de-install and re-install DL's precious spare part from EK's aircraft.

However you spin this story Kellyanne Conway-style, the egg is in DL's face - regardless of the undisputable fact that DL was under no obligation to help out EK in the first place. But there are, in each industry, unwritten rules companies tend to stick to for the mutual benefit of all in the long-term.

Here's another way of looking at it. I bet you DL had more than 1 of this part that Emirates needed but since we all know that Emirates marches to the beat of its own subsidized financial tune, decided to withhold the part. Again, good for Delta. I for one have no issues with what they did nor do I doubt anyone outside of this website does. Now, yet another way of looking at it. Korean Air needed the part yet there was only one in Delta's stock. Korean gets the part right quick, no questions asked, hasta la vista baby. To bad for Emirates. Next time ask JetBlue or Alaska, your two best American buddies.

vfw614 wrote:

[However you spin this story Kellyanne Conway-style, the egg is in DL's face - regardless of the undisputable fact that DL was under no obligation to help out EK in the first place. But there are, in each industry, unwritten rules companies tend to stick to for the mutual benefit of all in the long-term.

Nobody outside of this website thinks that so I doubt DL really gives a rats a$$ if a dozen people on Anet think egg is on their face, LOL...OK. Egg is on Delta's face to 12 or so people from Anet. What is DL to do? Oh No....12 people that already hate DL and don't fly DL won't ever fly DL. LMAO.

Emirates got exactly what they had coming to them and they deserved it.

jumbojet wrote:

Emirates got exactly what they had coming to them and they deserved it.

Ah, yes "Karma". That explains it.
And you decide who had what coming. right?

WIederling wrote:

jumbojet wrote:

Emirates got exactly what they had coming to them and they deserved it.

Ah, yes "Karma". That explains it.
And you decide who had what coming. right?

nope, not me. The fine folks down in ATL. I just happen to agree with the decision whole heartedly whereas some don't. this is not the end of the world folks but because this is DL, it is and it garnishes the # of posts on this thread that it has to this point. Gotta love it.

All's fair in love and war folks...

You are aware Delta fucked over a planeload of people with no skin in the game right?

coolian2 wrote:

You are aware Delta fucked over a planeload of people with no skin in the game right?

that was no skin of Delta. ( at least they appear to think so.)
lets see what the blowback will be.

Be interesting to see the borrowing balance between Emirates and Delta.

It is bad PR. Passenger who board an EK plane in Seattle are potential future DL customers. Also, the story was carried by Bloomberg, Reuters, the Seattle Times etc. I have now seen in it German, Spanish and Dutch publications as well. Not a terribly big deal, of course, but unnecessarily bad PR anyway.

In my opinion, the episode wasn't going to be a 'Big Deal' if DL hadn't displayed its petulance months ago over the ME3 issue. But because they did display petulance, DL is now and forever will be a target of EK's PR engine.

vfw614 wrote:

It is bad PR. Passenger who board an EK plane in Seattle are potential future DL customers. Also, the story was carried by Bloomberg, Reuters, the Seattle Times etc. I have now seen in it German, Spanish and Dutch publications as well. Not a terribly big deal, of course, but unnecessarily bad PR anyway.

yah, just like when DL 'blocked' the Qatar A380 from using a gate back in July. All that bad P.R. just killed DL, LOL. To recap, other than about 312 or so people on this earth, NOBODY CARES about this. Life goes on (at least you would think).

chrisnh wrote:

In my opinion, the episode wasn't going to be a 'Big Deal' if DL hadn't displayed its petulance months ago over the ME3 issue. But because they did display petulance, DL is now and forever will be a target of EK's PR engine.

Until DL resumes service to DXB and other areas of the middle east, EK can rant and rave like lunatics all they want. Wont matter.

jumbojet wrote:

....

little cuts work in both directions.

You appear to be a perfect example for the clouds of belligerence forming on the horizon.

After small cuts have escalated to bigger cuts and then murder
and later insight grows that this is not a workable condition a lot of people
will have to relearn more civilized and polite interaction.

jumbojet wrote:

yah, just like when DL 'blocked' the Qatar A380 from using a gate back in July. All that bad P.R. just killed DL, LOL. To recap, other than about 312 or so people on this earth, NOBODY CARES about this. Life goes on (at least you would think).

I don't think this incident will stop me from flying DL if they have the right flight at the right price, but it does diminish them slightly in my regard for them. This was child's playground stuff.

Bricktop wrote:

jumbojet wrote:

yah, just like when DL 'blocked' the Qatar A380 from using a gate back in July. All that bad P.R. just killed DL, LOL. To recap, other than about 312 or so people on this earth, NOBODY CARES about this. Life goes on (at least you would think).

I don't think this incident will stop me from flying DL if they have the right flight at the right price, but it does diminish them slightly in my regard for them. This was child's playground stuff.

I'll laugh if a DL 757 goes tech in Dublin because Aer Lingus does to them what DL did to EK. DL wont reappear in the Middle East. Book it.

Lol at this thread.

Serious question for all the arm chair maintenance people tossing stones....

How many of you actually work in maintenance?


spoiler, this stuff happens quite frequently. I have seen plenty of parts put on airplane #1, taken back off and put back on airplane #2 because the ready time of the airplane #1 was closer and the company is going to fly in another part, one is going to come out of a shop, one is coming from the warhorse, or hell one if coming off airplane #3, for airplane #1 because it has 6 more hours before its ready time.
Just like I have seen an airplane go into the paint bay, get a full repaint, fly a week then head to the bone yard. This isn't working on your car folks, its a completely different world.

All that happened here is EK is drumming up its spin machine so that people who have no f'in clue how maintenance works or how complicated it is can.....well this thread is a perfect example. While local SEA EK and DL management are probably having lunch together.

Simple fact, had Delta done this to say American. Or American done it to Delta.......not a single word would have ever hit the press.

Oh and why did DL only have one part? plenty of reasons. First, wall street doesn't like the airlines to be sitting on billion and billions worth of airplane parts (i.e. cash) because its a "waste" and that money can be better used on something else (like buy backs). Second, it could be that DL was on the last part and an order had been sent in to the warehouse but had yet to arrive in SEA. It would be incredibly stupid for DL to sell the part to EK, the EK jet leave and 3 minutes later now DL needs that same part for a plane that just went tech. So you guys are complaining about the PAX on the EK flight but what about the potential PAX on the DL flight? Who do you think DL is going to care more about? Also, maybe local management made an order for more of that part, so went a head and told the mechanic to put it on the airplane, the manager goes to put all of it in the computer, red flag comes up in Atlanta. DL can't get a new shipment to SEA for a few days. Don't sell the part.


Like i said, its pretty clear 99.9% of you have no idea how complex a situation like this can be. I know i'm going to be label a stupid fanboy and probably have this posted pulled for tossing some logic into a DL hate thread, but at maybe i was able to educate a few of you on how the world of airplane maintenance for a company like DL (who is not only responsible for DL but also 150+ other airline via TechOps) really a huge cluster. In those clusters, s**t happens.
and I'm willing bet 100 bucks that if EK needs help again, and DL/DTO is there to provide the local management teams won't think twice about calling each other. Generally these airline pissing contests are saved for the c-suite not the local management.

oh PS, DL and DTO aren't in the same mind set. DL has plenty of "enemy" airlines that DTO does work for. Example, unless there has been a recent change, that other SEA based airline that DL hates(!!!!!!) sends its CFM56s to Atlanta for overhaul. *Shock* *Gasp*
Also DTO does a ton of work for Sun County, its main competitor in MSP. *More shock* *More gasp*
American use to do work for Delta. Delta use to do work for American!

I imagine heads are exploding right now.

With all this childish ME3 bullying from DL, I guess it will not make a big difference should DL ever need the good-will of QR or EY instead of EK. And for that matter, EY is the first of the three ME3 that already runs airlines in Germany, Italia, Serbia, Switzerland etc. As history has just shown that "if they go low we go high" does not pay off, it will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Anyway, world politics will probably take care of this ME3 vs. US3 nonsense sooner than later anyway when flight bookings to the US will begin to tank even more and the US3 and the ME3 will be in the same boat, i.e. being forced to cut back TATL flying. Total US bound net bookings were already down 6.5 per cent last week compared to the same week for 2016 and this was even before the drama about the howeveryouwannacallthemnewtravelrules fully panned out.

Like i said, its pretty clear 99.9% of you have no idea how complex a situation like this can be. I

So what exactly was so complex about a 300 USD spare part that apparently (at least) DL and AS had in stock at SEA? Would have AS refused to let DL have the spare part it happily borrowed EK in the unlikely event that DL instead of EK needed it because it had borrowed its last spare part to EK? Common sense rules elsewhere, but apparently not at DL HQ. It is not as if the local DL folks had not made a decision based on common sense in the first place - and I would find it surprising if a) only DL HQ was aware that it was the last spare part sitting on the shelf at SEA and not the folks standing right in front of that shelf and b) the folks in SEA were not aware of the oh so strict DL policy.

By the way, some non-armchair MRO people have so eloquently explained in this thread, once the spare part was installed in and removed from a third-party airplane, there was no way the spare part could have been put back in the shelf and immediately used on a broken DL plane. Assuming this information is correct and not an alternative fact, how exactly was DL any better off after removing the spare part from the EK plane other than getting an ego boost from stranding 300 EK passengers?

vfw614 wrote:

With all this childish ME3 bullying from DL, I guess it will not make a big difference should DL ever need the good-will of QR or EY instead of EK. And for that matter, EY is the first of the three ME3 that already runs airlines in Germany, Italia, Serbia, Switzerland etc. As history has just shown that "if they low we go high" does not pay off, it will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Anyway, world politics will probably take care of this ME3 vs. US3 nonsense sooner than later anyway when flight bookings to the US will begin to tank even more and the US3 and the ME3 will be in the same boat, i.e. being forced to cut back TATL flying. Total US bound net bookings were already down 6.5 per cent last week compared to the same week for 2016 and this was even before the drama about the howeveryouwannacallthemnewtravelrules fully panned out.

Like i said, its pretty clear 99.9% of you have no idea how complex a situation like this can be. I

So what exactly was so complex about a 300 USD spare part that apparently (at least) DL and AS had in stock at SEA? Would have AS refused to let DL have the spare part it happily borrowed EK in the unlikely event that DL instead of EK needed it because it had borrowed its last spare part to EK? Common sense rules elsewhere, but apparently not at DL HQ. It is not as if the local DL folks had not made a decision based on common sense in the first place - and I would find it surprising if a) only DL HQ was aware that it was the last spare part sitting on the shelf at SEA and not the folks standing right in front of that shelf and b) the folks in SEA were not aware of the oh so strict DL policy.

By the way, some non-armchair MRO people have so eloquently explained in this thread, once the spare part was installed in and removed from a third-party airplane, there was no way the spare part could have been put back in the shelf and immediately used on a broken DL plane. So how was DL any better off after removing the spare part from the EK plane other than getting an ego boost from stranding 300 EK passengers?

ugh.

first. read my post. That will answer your question. I explained plenty of possibilities as to why it could have happened. Short answer is, people screw up. Not every single thing that happens in this industry is because airline X is out to get airline Y.
Really and truly if this was a DL hates EK thing, DL would have told EK to f-off from the start. It would be a pretty well known company policy to tell them to f-off. I have yet to hear that one.

second, the bold, unless we know the exact part......bull crap.

as I said, I have literally done the exact something, with my own two hands. Now if its a filter, yeah its pretty much done. If its an engine? nope.

Example, I was doing a goer change on a 757 once. Apparently DL needed an PW2037 for another airplane. Crew came in, took the engine off of the plane that was in the hangar for gear change and sent it to the other aircraft that needed an engine. Gear change plane got an engine that was coming out of the engine shop a few days later.
Also on a lot of new built planes during indoc brand new engines come off and will get swapped out with other older engines. Common practice.

Some parts once opened, yes are done. Some aren't. But I didn't read 5 pages of crap tossing to see if the exact part was listed. (and since I wasn't there I'm not going to make a rash judgement.)

The other aspect to this is it is unlikely that EK do their own line maintenance in SEA so this would be contracted out to another airline that has line maintenance at the airport, which could even be Delta TechOps. As far as DL ATL would have been concerned the initial part inquiry would have come from the line maintenance organisation (as for part QA purposes it would go from one QA system to another) .It was only when EK tried to pay for the part using their credit card to ATL that the the end user of the part was picked up DL ATL.

It has been widely reported that it was a spare part in the 300 USD range and it obviously was not aircraft-type specific (as AS provided it in the end).

Even if it was re-usable, what is the point of removing it from the EK aircraft if apparently other airlines have the exactly spare part available as well? Surely one of the other airlines would have helped out DL in the unlikely event that DL needed it before its inventory was replenished, just as AS did for EK. And even if DL has unfriended all other airlines at SEA and have no one to turn to, they could have asked EK to hand them over the spare part EK bought from the AS inventory instead of forcing EK to remove the spare part provided by DL and install exactly the same part from the AS inventory.... In whatever way the story is spun, I see no way how DL could come out on top...

By the way, some non-armchair MRO people have so eloquently explained in this thread, once the spare part was installed in and removed from a third-party airplane, there was no way the spare part could have been put back in the shelf and immediately used on a broken DL plane. Assuming this information is correct and not an alternative fact, how exactly was DL any better off after removing the spare part from the EK plane other than getting an ego boost from stranding 300 EK passengers?

VFW614 You'll have to do a lot better than that, in most instances as I'm sure you are ABUNDANTLY aware, if there's no cycles or it's not been used etc, it merely requires an inspection and a functionality test. I happen to know what the part was, it's not cycle limited, it is therefore merely an inspection item..i.e. 20 seconds worth of work, then back to the parts store.

jumbojet wrote:

Until DL resumes service to DXB and other areas of the middle east, EK can rant and rave like lunatics all they want. Wont matter.

The only lunatic ranting and raving is you. I've come across several of your posts in this forum where you viciously defend DL. I have no problem with one backing their preferred carrier, but when a poster so drunk on the kool aid starts spouting off false information (which I've personally called you out on and corrected you on in another thread) and promotes classless behavior like DL is apparently exhibiting, then you're taking it too far.

And let me remind you that while DL may have no intentions to serve DXB, AUH, DOH, etc., they DO serve stations like SYD & JNB where EK is a 777 operator, and may very well in fact be in need of help in the future. Your answer may be "well then DL will just go to a partner like KL or AF or VA," but as we've clearly seen in this instance partners aren't always the first to have what you need. So let's hope your precious DL is prepared for any and all scenarios because karma ALWAYS come back to bite you in the a$$.

What can you get for 300 USD that is compatible with other Boeing aircraft and required for flight? A bolt, one or the other cabin emergency equipment, light bulbs?
The fact of the matter is, if EK pax are delayed because of the malfunction on an EK aircraft, it's an EK problem.
Blaming a delay on DL's refusal to provide the part and talking about it in the press to victimise themselves is a show of incompetence on the part of EK's PR department. Free press is good for them.

Personally, I wouldn't want to fly EK to SEA knowing how the smallest thing on one of their aircraft made out of millions of parts is going to get me grounded for 8 hours. I'd rather fly DL that prioritises on their own pax and has their own parts stores.

Waterbomber wrote:

What can you get for 300 USD that is compatible with other Boeing aircraft and required for flight? A bolt, one or the other cabin emergency equipment, light bulbs?
The fact of the matter is, if EK pax are delayed because of the malfunction on an EK aircraft, it's an EK problem.
Blaming a delay on DL's refusal to provide the part and talking about it in the press to victimise themselves is a show of incompetence on the part of EK's PR department. Free press is good for them.

Personally, I wouldn't want to fly EK to SEA knowing how the smallest thing on one of their aircraft made out of millions of parts is going to get me grounded for 8 hours. I'd rather fly DL that prioritises on their own pax and has their own parts stores.

The fact is that you cannot have every spare part in every out station you fly to. Airlines co-operate to keep their own part holding costs down as well.

Some of you guys are just so damned petty in how you think.

There is an unwritten rule in the airline industry that you help your competitors in times of need. taking back the part was a bonehead decision. I am sure EK staff explained in details to the stranded passengers what Delta had done and I'm sure those passengers will not forget that. again what goes around comes around. planes go tech all the time and next time this happens to Delta, some airlines may be reluctant to help them.

when United and Delta used to fly to Dubai, there were many times when their flights got cancelled because of technical problems. passengers were often rebooked on EK flights. EK could have told them to go jump in a lake but they did not. I for one do not like to fly with EK and i remember at least on three occasions when UA flights got cancelled because of tech problems and I opted to stay another night the plane got fixed instead of being rebooked with EK. I am no fan of EK but professional courtesy goes a long way.

emiratesdriver wrote:

By the way, some non-armchair MRO people have so eloquently explained in this thread, once the spare part was installed in and removed from a third-party airplane, there was no way the spare part could have been put back in the shelf and immediately used on a broken DL plane. Assuming this information is correct and not an alternative fact, how exactly was DL any better off after removing the spare part from the EK plane other than getting an ego boost from stranding 300 EK passengers?

VFW614 You'll have to do a lot better than that, in most instances as I'm sure you are ABUNDANTLY aware, if there's no cycles or it's not been used etc, it merely requires an inspection and a functionality test. I happen to know what the part was, it's not cycle limited, it is therefore merely an inspection item..i.e. 20 seconds worth of work, then back to the parts store.

Pretty much this.

most parts can in-fact be reused. Now it can get a little messy if it went from the 121 carrier to a 145 operation on a plane then pulled to be put back on the 121 plane.
But even then it would, part depending, just mean a little more paperwork and possibly go through an OSR inspection. I'm not exactly sure how all the legalities of that one works because I'm not in QA.

vfw614 wrote:

It has been widely reported that it was a spare part in the 300 USD range and it obviously was not aircraft-type specific (as AS provided it in the end).

Even if it was re-usable, what is the point of removing it from the EK aircraft if apparently other airlines have the exactly spare part available as well? Surely one of the other airlines would have helped out DL in the unlikely event that DL needed it before its inventory was replenished, just as AS did for EK. And even if DL has unfriended all other airlines at SEA and have no one to turn to, they could have asked EK to hand them over the spare part EK bought from the AS inventory instead of forcing EK to remove the spare part provided by DL and install exactly the same part from the AS inventory....

Because its DL's part and DL always comes first? its pretty simple. If you are running a company you care about YOUR company first. Not company A, B, C, D etc.
See you want to blame DL but where is the EK blame? I mean since, in your eyes this is so simple, they know DL is just trying to screw them at every turn.....why even ask them? Why not go to AS, BA, LH, UA, AA etc. etc.?

Its also clear you aren't into any kind of mechanic but no mechanic worth his salt would rather sell the part he bought and buy someone else's part. Who knows if AS has the same QA and QC as DL standard?(could be too low or too high, calm down AS fan boys) On top of that, DL sells the part to EK, then needs to asks AS and AS says sure, 400 bucks. Now what? Or hell AS tells DL to go pound sand.
Ah but just get EK to buy it for DL, do you think mechanics and management work for free? EK isn't going to be a middle man without payment. Now that part that was 300 is 400 from AS and then a 100 dollar fee from EK.
Basic math say only a complete idiot would do that.
Maybe the DL part was one vendor and the AS part another? Maybe the DL part is from a part out plane and AS brand new from the vendor? Maybe the other way around? Maybe DL gets the part due to order size at 300 dollars but the best AS can do is 400 or 500? Airline part buying is just like anything else. If you by one part its priced at X, if you by 100 its X with Y% off. If you buy 1000 its X with Z% off. That is exactly why airlines like AS and WN love the single fleet type, they can part buy in bulk and its saves them a ton of money. (plus it helps in training, MRO contracts, supply chain, yada yada etc. etc.)

There are multiple factors that play into this situation.


but even if it is all as simple as you want it to be, its Delta's part. Someone, somewhere messed up and Atlanta or Minneapolis said no take it back. Now local management for EK knows to tell them to call Atlanta first before putting it on the plane. Simple as that. Really the only ones who have hard feelings about this are the uneducated on the matter and the airline fanboys. *shrug*

vfw614 wrote:

In whatever way the story is spun, I see no way how DL could come out on top...

Of course you don't. Its clear you have made a opinion on the subject without any facts or data really.
and quite frankly are clearly in way over your head.

My post wasn't really meant for people like you in the first place. Those that are going to jump to a conclusion without knowing anything about it just blame big bad airline X shouldn't even read it honestly. Probably should have put a disclaimer.

but in the old days some people use to come to anet to learn something and I was just trying to pass on my (limited) knowledge on these subjects to them. But if you are going to start with a bias....meh hard to learn that way.

like it or not that part is now a used part. it will not be used again until it is properly "vetted" and that is a fact. Can you imagine the liability if this part is used again without being checked and it failed and resulted in an incident or accident.

Too right StTim! Can`t believe what some are saying. You can imagine how they`d feel being on the affected
EK flight....be a different tune eh? Co-operation on parts is so important, & if what we are being told is correct,
the guy at Delta who made the decision should be ashamed & at least reprimanded. Delta can rescue the
situation with an apology perhaps, but reading some of the contributors here, if Delta`s board are similarly hawkish
then it`s unlikely to be offered.

Its also clear you aren't into any kind of mechanic but no mechanic worth his salt would rather sell the part he bought and buy someone else's part.

There appears to be a fundamental misunderstanding here. Nobody disputes that Delta does not need to help out other airlines and is free to take a somewhat autistic approach to operate in the airline world as a matter of corporate policy. But that is not what we are discussing in this thread. We are discussing this:

1) Person A buys something from person B.

2) Person B uses purchase as intended in good faith.

3) Person A has second thoughts, shows up and says "return purchase", because "we were not supposed to sell it as (pick one)...
--(a) we had not read our corporate policy
--(b) we only found out that it was the last part in the inventory because we have no proper inventory management or
--(c) we did not know exactly who was supposed to make binding contractual decisions re the sale of spare parts"
(all of which, by the way, would make DL a laughing stock as soon as a lawyer would take a look at the situation).

4) Person B has to yank purchase from aircraft and ask person C at the next counter to provide exactly the same to which person C happily obliges.

Now you tell me who is the amateur and makes a complete fool of himself? Would not any half-decent professional person let common sense prevail and try to come up with a sensible solution in such a circumstance, given that the mess was created by Delta's amateurish handling of EK's request in the first place which resulted in 300 people sitting on a plane waiting for take-off? If not, it tells a lot about Delta's corporate culture (that - or rather its lack of - has been illustrated with various examples in this thread. e.g. their apparent move away from industry standard to reprotect other airlines' passengers).

Who knows if AS has the same QA and QC as DL standard?(could be too low or too high, calm down AS fan boys)

So I take DL never uses spare parts from other airlines because all others might be crap? Or is that only an argument as soon as DL wants to yank a spare part it has sold to EK from an EK airplane although AS could readily provide exactly the same spare part in the unlikely event it is needed?

On top of that, DL sells the part to EK, then needs to asks AS and AS says sure, 400 bucks. Now what? Or hell AS tells DL to go pound sand.
Ah but just get EK to buy it for DL, do you think mechanics and management work for free? EK isn't going to be a middle man without payment. Now that part that was 300 is 400 from AS and then a 100 dollar fee from EK. Basic math say only a complete idiot would do that.

So you seriously think that EK would argue about a 100 USD fee in that situation if DL had suggested "Excuses for the mess we created, how about you keeping the spare part and purchasing us another example of the same thing from the AS warehouse?" 100 USD is probably the cost of pouring an extra round of sodas to the passengers sitting for an extra hour on the plane while the spare had to be yanked from EK's plane. C'mon.

coolian2 wrote:

You are aware Delta fucked over a planeload of people with no skin in the game right?

Since this flight was originating in Seattle, more than a few of those on board were likely from Seattle or the Pacific Northwest and were travelling to either Dubai or connecting onward to Asia/Africa/etc. A six hour delay on their first leg might have meant missing a connection and a 24 hour delay getting to their final destination. I believe it's safe to say EK let the passengers know that DL went out of their way to create the delay and they only departed when they did because of AS. And it's also safe to say that some of those Seattle & Pacific Northwest passengers will remember that on their next flight out of Seattle when they might be choosing between DL, AS, or WN or other carriers. DL actually gained nothing from their pettiness and may lose at least a handful of future tickets and some goodwill.

Aptivaboy wrote:

I'm hearing some mixed messages, as it were, in the thread. Was the part "borrowed" or sold by Delta?

If it was sold, then as another poster stated, then it belongs to Emirates and Delta really couldn't demand it back. If it was "borrowed," then yes, Delta probably could as it was still their property, although it may not have been a wise PR move. As a non-aviation industry person, I'm curious if someone in maintenance or operations could fill us in on how the process actually works, when one airline requests a part form another. Do airlines have reciprocal agreements to provide spares, or is more of a gentleman's agreement?

Many thanks,

Bob

These are formal agreements. you either join a parts pooling agreement or you don't. No airline has every part everywhere and it's good business to do so. If the airline has the parts to do so then it can be a gentleman's agreement. But? I don't think Emirates and Delta are like that. So ?
Emirates had better come to the USA a little more correct as they're no big deal here and negotiate a parts pooling agreement.

emiratesdriver wrote:

Spoke to one of the crew last night, part was sourced, fitted and then removed again. Not the line guys decision but came from higher up, make of that what you will.

Exactly what I expected. This isn't DL frontline guys..

MSPNWA wrote:

A disgusting culture infests that airline.

You mean like the culture that was at your title airline?