onur in belgium

A318 · Post by **A318** » 12 May 2005, 22:47

Seen Onur and Fly Air planes frequently in EIN, believe me when I say the condition of the planes looks really terrible.
Since I am only trained as sheet metal worker I can only make the statement about those visible parts, it didn't look good at all.
Correndon is flying around with very good equipment and from Inter I am also not so sure.
I see them this week with a 737-300 (not 100% sure it was a 300 or 400) but also this one looked not in a to good shape.
Don't know to much about Inter by the way.

Erwin

LJ · Post by LJ » 12 May 2005, 22:53

Fact is, that Onur is banned in the Netherlands and Germany, and i think this safety boards have good reasons for that, and not take the decision after hearing the radio news....

From what I've read on the various forums especially the one on pprune) is that the issues the IVW aren't solely the technical state of their aircraft but also the lack of correct paperwork (like no proper manauls, no manual loadsheets etc.). Needless to say the engine incident last week was almost asking for a ban (moreover as they must have seen that the iVW is keen on issuing bans to airlines).

Anyway the IVW must be certain as the legal implications (read damages), if they're wrong, are very big

mstaviation · Post by **mstaviation** » 12 May 2005, 22:58

mstaviation wrote: Of course there are but that's not a reason to let them fly is it

Ok I agree with that... but only if the paint looks bad....

Ok if a plane looks like this one:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/835958/M/
Then it`s a bad plane?? ...It`s only the paint...
I think you cant look under the metal from the plane.....and maybe thats better....

And all airlines have got techincal problem only onur air have got all problems at 1 month time.....

AN124 · Post by **AN124** » 13 May 2005, 08:15

It's indeed good that Onur is temprorarily band from the Netherlands and dutch sky's.

But as alreadt said before the media has blown all this to big. Every incident with the Onur planes are explained more worse then they actually are.
Not to talk about the MST stories publixhed by the media, nothing serious as mentioned above happened. This would have been at least in the local news paper but nothing about that only about the landing incident Rob explained us earlier.

Greetings,
Yvo

snowbird · Post by **snowbird** » 13 May 2005, 08:40

This is really a severe decision. The Dutch government is almost the first one who takes such a measurement.
An incident is something that has happened during a flight. As an airline you must report that.
Besides that there are inspectionteams on the ground that inspects the airplane during groundtime. When they found something, they make a report. This is not an incident. Nobody knows what those teams has found during those inspections within .

WEhat I heard on radio an tv is that there is a long list of failures/reports of onur and that there are also such lists of other airlines and will be monitored very closely by the dutch gov

The german decided also to abondon Onur form their airports.

What about Belgium???

regi · Post by **regi** » 13 May 2005, 10:07

just to repeat it: Onur is banned in Germany as well, as been said on ZDF today.
If you ask me, Onur has plaid it badly. Transat came away easely after loosing its rudder. Everybody looks at Airbus.
Onur should blame Lockheed after the burnout of its engine.

AN124 · Post by **AN124** » 13 May 2005, 12:37

regi wrote:just to repeat it: Onur is banned in Germany as well, as been said on ZDF today.
If you ask me, Onur has plaid it badly. Transat came away easely after loosing its rudder. Everybody looks at Airbus.
Onur should blame Lockheed after the burnout of its engine.

Regi there never was a burnout from a engine at a Lockheed flying for Onur.
The only thing that was said here is that one of the engines should have been replaced because it was already over it's max service hours.

Greetings,
Yvo

forever_boeing · Post by **forever_boeing** » 13 May 2005, 14:25

Dear Sir/ Madam,

After an inappropriate action, Onur Air has been subject to a rather unfortunate and unfair treatment by Dutch Air and Sea Transport Authority - Inspectie Verkeer en Waterstaat and our flights to Netherlands are stopped for one month as of yesterday. Onur Air has been holding 50 percent of whole package holiday market in Netherlands as result of its long time satisfactory performance and commercial stability. We have a well-earned reputation in Netherlands as proven by millions of travallers and nearly all Dutch tourism organisations chosen us. The reason of the ban was reported to be the result of a technical problem on one of Onur Air's aircraft last week in Amsterdam, but statistically, it is reported that one airline has a technical delay everyday in Netherlands. In this case dozens of airlines should be stopped operating to Netherlands every month. Unfortunately, German DGCA has followingly stopped our operation to Germany without any event, just as a result of Netherlands's decision. We currently fly to 73 airports in Europe with our 25 aircraft since 14 years now. Our highest achievement awards from Airbus, Boeing and many tour-operators have been acknowledged by all authorities. We believe we have right to be treated equally and fairly with all other airlines in Europe under EASA regulations Yours Sincerely, Hamit Cankut Bagana President Onur Air Turkey

Yours Sincerely,

Hamit Cankut Bagana
President Onur Air
Turkey

note:copied from onur air web page www.ourair.com.tr

Joeb · Post by **Joeb** » 13 May 2005, 14:57

stange onur site is off line
www.ourair.com.tr
www.onurair.nl

B-52 · Post by **B-52** » 13 May 2005, 14:59

if you ask me this whole Onur story is ridiculous. IVW should never have stopped Onur from flying into Netherlands. This is a perfect example of how powerfull the media have become in influencing government (political!) decisions. every little problem around Onur has been hyped in the newspapers and on television having such a big influence on public opinion that the government had no choice anymore but to do something.
I have flown myself with Onur on various occasions and I am an aviation professional so I can judge what I see. Yes, their operation is a crappy with lots of delays and lousy service etc. etc. but hey, you get what you pay for! accept it! it sucks, but it is not dangerous as long as the comply to safety standards, which they do.
does anybody really think that an airline captain will take off in an aircraft knowing it is not safe and there are serious risks involved!?!?
if anybody should know it's the captain and trust me, NO captain will take off knowing he might be heading for an accident.
I think that martinair, transavia, arkefly etc. will be very happy with this decision and pretty shortly we will all be paying a ot more for our holidays to Turkey and gues who has the most to win in that scenario....
Onur is the victim of foul play.

Thor · Post by **Thor** » 13 May 2005, 16:16

Joeb wrote:stange onur site is off line
www.ourair.com.tr
www.onurair.nl

http://www.onurair.com.tr/

Fixed it for you ..... :thumbsup2:

TCAS_climb · Post by **TCAS_climb** » 13 May 2005, 16:39

Disinformation at its best ! But can we really consider "corporate communication" as objective information ? I think not.

It's exactly because Onur Air is treated like the 700 other operators flying in and out of Europe which were inspected last year by SAFA teams that Onur Air ended in this uncomfortable situation.

There have been safety issues in the past (gear up landing, overrun, write-off, etc.). Onur Air showed increasing compliance, made some improvements but repeatedly demonstrated standards below the requirements. There's a whole pattern of safety concerns leading to the IVW's decision. Not just one event. There's no way you can go around that. Onur Air can only blame itself.

I don't think it is wise to play the victim and blame the others. You can play the victim if your company is FULLY compliant with the regulations and has an impeccable safety record (which, unfortunately, is not the case of Onur Air). Then maybe you can prove there's a lack of fair-play from one administration or another.

Onur Air doesn't want to become a new Flash Airlines in European media, I totally understand that. But when you're trying to distort the truth and to impress people with awards and numbers that don't mean much from a flight safety point of view, you're simply showing disrespect to your customers and you're shooting yourself in the foot. They deserve better than TO awards or useless stastics. They deserve top-notch flight crews, well-maintained aircraft and good in-flight service because that's what they pay for !

Onur Air made mistakes. Ok, then admit it and come back when the problems are fixed.

TCAS_climb · Post by **TCAS_climb** » 13 May 2005, 16:45

By the way, I'd be interested in knowing if, by any chance, "forever_boeing" and "B-52" IP addresses weren't the same.

B-52 · Post by **B-52** » 13 May 2005, 17:02

@TCAS
no i am not the same person as forever boeing. also do not take me wrong, I am not really defending Onur nor do i think they have a good business concept! actually I mention they are a "crappy airline". However as crappy as they are I think what has happened to them is not fair and a tremendous over-reaction by dutch government very much infuenced by public opinion. EVERY airline has the same sort of problem Onur has been suffering only it is not blown up in the press so you do not hear about it. I suspect some parties had a serious interst in influencing public opinion and making sure the public DID hear about when it condidered Onur.

earthman · Post by **earthman** » 13 May 2005, 17:51

What do you propose, let Onur fly around until people actually die in a crash? I fail to see how getting banned for skimping on safety is unfair treatment. The ban is a result of a series of incidents and a whole slew of deficiencies found during inspections. If Transavia would show such disregard for safety they would get banned all the same.

Let them be a crappy airline, but being a crappy airline should NOT mean an unsafe airline, and as it stands now Onur is NOT a safe airline.

Joeb · Post by **Joeb** » 13 May 2005, 18:28

ALSO Band in swiss
http://www.aviation.admin.ch/aktuell/me ... ml?lang=de
(german)
Next Belgium???????????

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 13 May 2005, 18:31

Things don't seem to improve for Onur. Today Switzerland banned Onur Air from their territory as well.

http://www.aviation.admin.ch/aktuell... ... ml?lang=de

I suppose that the Belgian authorities have done inspections on both A300's who came to BRU today ? Does someone know the result ?

EDIT: Joeb you were too quick

Post by **Bruspotter** » 13 May 2005, 19:51

Hello

Personally I wouldn't mind to receive all those Tristars and A300's at BRU if it concerns my spotting activities. Although I must admit. As a pax I wouldn't feel very confortable.

But I missed it on the news , but me was told that Onur Air will (at least this week) fly at BRU instead all the flights at AMS AND FRA.....so we'll receive much A300's these days. For as long as that will less. In mean time OHY planes in Belgium are keeped an eye on. I guess that's the reason why those two more OHY A300's wich arrived this afternoon arrived at BRU were grounded until tomorrow...(???) no ETD given , or are they grounded? I hope just for inspection....I hope they will maintain the planes good....I wouldn't like it , that I have to see disappearing the last of few A300's at BRu , the second nicest (after MNG airlines Jetair) airline operating A300 at BRU....Onur Air A300's are really awesome to see , or at least that's what I think about it.

Hope they keep them safe and good , and that all the troubles will be solved quickly and good.

Best regards: Yannick

V-Bird · Post by **V-Bird** » 13 May 2005, 20:17

Next tuesday, dutch, german and swiss airline safety official face officals of onur in court. Onur air takes this to courd because of 75% of there market is banned.

AMSTERDAM - Het Turkse Onur Air, dat vorige week een vliegverbod kreeg opgelegd van de Nederlandse luchtvaartdienst, onderneemt juridische stappen. Luchtvaartjournalist Arnold Burlage meldt in de Telegraaf dat de bekende luchtvaartjurist mr. Frans Vreede is ingeschakeld om de mogelijkheden daarvoor te onderzoeken.

De Turken zijn woedend over het opgelegde vliegverbod, dat ondertussen is uitgebreid naar Duitsland, Frankrijk en Zwitserland. Op dit moment wordt uitgeweken naar het Belgische Charleroi.

Directeur Hamit Cankut Bagana van Onur Air noemt het intrekken van de vliegvergunning op de website van de maatschappij uiterst oneerlijk. Volgens de vakantievervoerder zijn er geen redenen om niet te mogen vliegen

TCAS_climb · Post by **TCAS_climb** » 13 May 2005, 22:18

Not a smart move at all !

Any millionaire on the forum interested in starting a new charter airline ? There should be a need of capacity between Europe and Turkey in the following months, if not weeks, to replace a busted charter operator that never learned from it's mistakes.