Should've been fixed by now?

[ivor toolbox]

Hello chaps, sorry to intrude; as former 'Phantom Phixer' I noticed one of HM's finest swing-wing contraptions turned up at my local airport
some 10 days hence, with an apparent technical problem.

It sat there for at least 4 days, then spent a week in the large maintenance hangar, still not fixed, after a weekend off, its still in same
place.

Now, 'when I' ; if an aeroplane was in similar predicament a gang of troops would be despatched to stay until it was fixed; it appears not so these days. Is this because of cost cutting and 'contractorisation' or de-skilling of the remaining workforce?

ttfn

[Stuff]

I have no idea why the jet you are talking about is there so I'm guessing.

What if the fault has been diagnosed but the part to repair it isn't in stock and needs a lead time? No point having people sat around wasting time and money when you could send a team to fit the part once it's in stock.

[Skeleton]

And that's the point. In days gone by the part and manpower would have been available.

Not a good advert i would suggest, to have, what is obviously a Tornado, parked, doing bugger all except attracting the wrong attention.

[R-A-F-Off]

There's that many serviceable GR4s that the odd deployed broken one doesn't matter. I can't think of a much better advert ;).

[Genstabler]

Cardiff? Is it on bricks yet and has it still got its radio?

[AGS Man]

I would have thought most parts are available with the RTP program still ongoing at Leeming. I'm sure theres a hangar queen about or don't they rob anymore?

[sturb199]

Robbing does still happen but once a jet starts RTP the bits become the property of BAE and part of the ATTAC contract. This means that to get an item from RTP on D state is a proper faff on. Additionally items like nose landing gear legs are as rare as rocking horse crap but need to go to the bay at Maryanne for a serviceability check this can mean that a jet can sit D state for a leg for 2 to 3 weeks!!

From what I have noticed these days the big issue with Tonka is wiring and its aging!! Whilst skill fade and spares do on occasion hurt, the majority of long term problem children would appear to be sorted once a good old school lecky is wheeled out and chained to it!!

So your jet could still be there for a few reasons!!!

[Rigga]

I think its more to do with ground trades degradation of capabilities.

In the new MOD training regime; Fault Finding is a separate course from trade training?

In the last few weeks I have heard a few disturbing stories ranging from: Chinook engineers struggling to fix one at Staverton for some four days when a passing "old boy" recognised a visiting WO (sent to see what the issue was) stuck his nose in and pointed out what the issue was, more than 18 years since leaving the RAF!

In a second example; There was recently a perceived "need" for a WOs pre-departure walk-around before Puma's left a certain maintenance base? When the WO left the Stn Questions of who was going to do the check were asked! Surely Team Sgts and Chiefs are supposed to do that sort of thing? (or why can't they?)
What on Earth is going on?


Possibly the trouble with RTP is that the parts removed are...not good enough for use without being checked/repaired?

Just having "Lots of bits" does not make any of them serviceable.

[Ogre]

Rigga

Especially when the servicing philosophy in certain areas seems to be based on "what boxes do we have on the shelf" rather than "what boxes could actually cause the fault?"

Allegedly

[melmothtw]

one of HM's finest swing-wing contraptions


If you mean Tornado, just say Tornado.

Why do ppruners talk in this manner? It's something I've noticed a lot - 'the sand box' instead of Afghanistan, referring to airports by their four letter ICAO designator rather than just saying Heathrow or wherever, or saying 'those windswept islands in the SA just off Argentina' when you mean the Falklands etc.

Being cryptic doesn't make you clever, just an annoying knob.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

For some of us, it's part of the game and a bit of fun; and there is more than one way to be "an annoying knob".
Edited to add one of those bloody annoying smiley things.

[Chris Kebab]

melmothtw - Cannot help notice your location stated as "The Back of Beyond" - annoying knob or just a hypocrite? Shall we have a vote:yuk:

[Halton Brat]

Melmo, your tone would suggest that you are not military/ex-military.

Please advise lest I comment inappropriately.

HB

[dctyke]

I seem to remember when the Tornado came into service we were issued with a booklet with all the acronyms used in relation with the a/c. Took a while but soon became second nature.

[diginagain]

If the implications are that there exists several ways to be an annoying knob, I feel it would be more correct to use the expression and there are more ways than one to be "an annoying knob".

:)

[melmothtw]

Chris Kebab - fair enough, and well spotted. A hypocrite then I guess.

Halton Brat - not ex/Military (a stint in the CCF notwithstanding), but a forces brat so well versed in the vagaries of forces humour.

[TT2]

Spot on Ogre!. Spot on. As a driver and engineer the philosophy of people changing bits rather than working out what caused the fault gets on my tits.

Too many electric aeroplanes these days........takes all the fun out of it.:ok:

[Halton Brat]

Melmo, dear chap; in case you hadn't noticed, this is a military forum, in which your Boy Scout/Girl Guide/CCF experience counts for nought.

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers who have taken the Oath, worn the uniform & even loitered in harm's way occasionally, have cultivated our own vocabulary and (often rich) manner of speech. This has been so for centuries. It has sustained us in hard times, and is an intrinsic facet of Service life.

I am not surprised that you cannot comprehend readily the scribings of the pprune community; you are not qualified to stand amongst these august ranks. Think yourself fortunate that you are able to spectate from the touch-lines, and have the courtesy to refrain from using offensive & disparaging language towards those who have served their country -unlike yourself, whose greatest peril was probably an ill-fitting pair of Boots, DMS.

HB

[MarkJJ]

CCF, you ****!

[peppermint_jam]

Melmo, if I were to use the correct term for you I suspect that it would get picked up by the swear filter.

I shall therefore try to be cryptic.

You sir, are something that would be found at the end of a bell.

[melmothtw]

Touché Halton Brat, and written like a true ppruner.

GFB was correct, there is more than one way to be "an annoying knob"

[paull]

Halton Brat.
If I might just remind you of the description of this forum.

A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.

I am pretty sure that one of the backroom boys or girls from non-UK forces would have a hard time understanding some of the more obscure jargon. Perhaps your intention is to exclude by other means, and of course your are always free to do so, but it does not seem to be in the intended spirit of the forum.

Oh, and in anticipation of the obvious question, no I am not ex-Mil, but being responsible for some of the mathematics that keeps missiles away from those that are, I at least feel I have a valid interest.

[melmothtw]

unlike yourself, whose greatest peril was probably an ill-fitting pair of
Boots, DMS.


It depends on what you mean by 'peril' Halton. While it's true that I didn't storm the beaches at Normandy or mix it up with Messerschmitts in the Battle of Britain, as a defence journalist I have spent time in some of the less savoury parts of Afghanistan (is there any other part?).

I travelled in the same vehicles as the soldiers I was embedded with, walked the same roads and, dare I say it, shared the same perils. In fact, seeing as the Taliban actively target journalists and I had nothing on my person with which to defend myself save for a pen, a notebook and the bargain basement body armour I had to buy myself off Ebay, it could be argued I was in somewhat greater peril than the soldiers who kindly let me accompany them.

The point about an internet forum such as this Halton Brat and others is that it is anonymous, and that you know nothing about the other people you are chatting to other than their moniker. Consequently, you know nothing about who they are or what their life experiences are.

Just something that might be worth bearing in mind.

[Halton Brat]

Paull, indeed, "all equally welcome here".

However, I object to anyone using offensive language towards my fellow ex/current servicemen/women. Especially ex-CCF cadets...........

Melmo, kudos for you for going to a war zone voluntarily & hopefully shedding light on this conflict. Your choice to go, and your choice to leave no doubt; those who serve would envy such freedoms.

Perhaps you suffered from an excess of military banter/repartee & vocabulary during this experience; please indulge us our whimsical expressions - this is the habit of a lifetime for many.

Here's how it works - you respect us, we respect you - simples!

HB

[melmothtw]

all equally welcome here


So it would seem.

[melmothtw]

Melmo, kudos for you for going to a war zone voluntarily & hopefully
shedding light on this conflict. Your choice to go, and your choice to leave no
doubt; those who serve would envy such freedoms.

Their choice to join, and I didn't do it for kudos.

[SOSL]

Then why boast about it?

Even anonymously.

Rgds SOS

[oldmansquipper]

FAO: Peppermint Jam

The campanologist person you referred to earlier...is that the famed Richard Cranium, perchance?

[melmothtw]

Then why boast about it?

Even anonymously.

Rgds SOS


I certainly didn't post it as a boast. I only mentioned it as this was the second time I have been called out on here for 'never having been in peril', as though peril were the sole preserve of military types.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

you respect us, we respect you

Hold on. We have to respect the hired help these days?

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

GFB was correct,
Quote:
there is more than one way to be "an annoying knob"



Melmothtw, Sir; I trust that your journalistic endeavours exercise greater accuracy than your quotes. :}

[melmothtw]

We've already established I'm not military, so you can dispense with the 'sir'.

[goudie]

Meanwhile, is the bloody tonka still u/s?

We do need to know!

[Rigga]

..did you mean Tornado?

[Out Of Trim]

Anyway, is the MRCA about to be fixed then??

[Ogre]

TT2

My comment was more around the principle of "There is a fault (allegedly) therefore you must change something" backed up with the problem of not having the spares you need.

Therefore you change something that you do have a spare of in the hope that it makes the fault go away, although how many "faults" end up being unrepeatable was always a cause for concern.

But I agree the level of diagnostic engineering appears to be on the wane. It was so much easier with valves, you just looked for the cold ones.....

[AR1]

15 years and the most dangerous thing I did was travel to work in a fine fully enclosed horseless carriage.
Still, my time equipped me to express myself in suitably cryptic terms.

As for the Tornado - If it were somewhere nice, I'm sure it would have a full compliment of Her Majestys finest spanner weilding fiends and 24 EngO's to look after it.:ok:

[flipflopman RB199]

Rigga,

Having read your post, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to call BS on your points.

I think its more to do with ground trades degradation of capabilities.

In the new MOD training regime; Fault Finding is a separate course from trade training?

In the last few weeks I have heard a few disturbing stories ranging from: Chinook engineers struggling to fix one at Staverton for some four days when a passing "old boy" recognised a visiting WO (sent to see what the issue was) stuck his nose in and pointed out what the issue was, more than 18 years since leaving the RAF!

In a second example; There was recently a perceived "need" for a WOs pre-departure walk-around before Puma's left a certain maintenance base? When the WO left the Stn Questions of who was going to do the check were asked! Surely Team Sgts and Chiefs are supposed to do that sort of thing? (or why can't they?)
What on Earth is going on?


Firstly, as someone who is now involved in both the development and delivery of this "new MOD training regime" I can tell you categorically and first hand that fault finding is very much an integral and repeated part of engineering trade training. The students are repeatedly tested and examined on their fault finding abilities throughout their FT course, just as you yourself once were.

Whilst certain areas of training may differ in the degree of depth they once covered, that reflects upon the scope the engineer now has to adjust and play with those components. I could tell you the ins and the outs of the Adour 104 fuel systems and all of it's inner workings down to spill valves and bellows, but ultimately, we were limited to small FCU and SIFCU adjustments only, before replacement was required. Even these adjustments were taken from us with the introduction of the Adour 106, with any adjustments to be carried out by the manufacturer only.

This does not mean in any way that the technicians of today are trained any less, just differently. Just as your forebears would scoff at you not being a trained expert in wing rigging and canvas and dope repairs.

Regarding your stories, I would point out that there are two sides to every story and in my experience, the truth usually lies somewhere between the two. I'm sure you can picture the handful of salt I'm currently taking those stories with.


Flipflopman

[Stuff]

FFM - you jest but EASA part-66 Cat B1 are still taught doping and carpentry while the current generation of mil maintainers stopped with that nonsense years ago.

In many ways the mil system is still a long way ahead of any Part 145 organisation although you'll never hear the civvies admit it.

I still remember a particularly stubborn GR4 that refused to pass it's CSAS BIT before a TF sortie until the trade assist appeared and whacked 7 types or *%^$ out of the outboard pylon with the rubber chock. Aircraft passed the CSAS BIT right away after that. When we were doing battle with LITS on the sign-in he reappeared to explain in minute detail how the system worked and why the "fix" fixed the issue.

The training might be a bit different but someone is going to have to try very, very hard to convince me that civ trg produces better results than mil trg. In my experience the opposite is the case.

[Beancountercymru]

Meanwhile back to the original post, it appears that this spurred the fixers into action and the GR4 flew off last night

[Rigga]

FFM,
I admit that I was only told about the Fault Finding course - But I know personally the "old boy" and the two WOs in the "stories".

The fact that Engo's feel that Sgts and Chiefs can't do Walk-Arounds is a sign of trade and responsibility degradation for both senior ranks, commissioned and non-commisioned, and those that should be doing the job.

I agree that military training nowadays is somewhat different to former days, but there is something lacking somewhere! Whether it is financially driven or not - someone, somewhere is not giving the full story to your trainees. I am not a tutor, but even I know that school fault finding tests probably won't cover the huge array of fault finding techniques that are developed and used daily.

Alternatively; your trainees are told to forget their training as soon as they get out and are then converted to "the Real World" from a sengos PoV?

The current practices of many (thankfully, not most) military line staff seems to be to change "a box" to get one more sortie. And when that lands, to change it again, for one more sortie. I hear about this regularly and one example, fairly recently, reached 20+ "box changes" before a fault was sought? In times of no money; How expensive is that?

In my previous job, the price for replacing a broken switch in a secure radio selector box was €17,000...for a little switch. We (not in MOD) did that twice before we learned our lesson.

Leaving the flight safety hazards of this foolish practice aside - How much will it cost for 20+ computer and control boxes (on one aircraft) before someone learns their fault finding lesson?

[woptb]

The A licence is a self certifier within an approved organisation
The B1 is the replacement for the old A and C & X Licences,in old RAF Terms B1.1 is a Rigger,Sooty,Lecky - with some avionic stuff (eg black box change) on bigg'ish aircraft,slightly different tickets for rotary,piston.
B2 is Avionics.
The C licence holder clears the whole aircraft in a large approved company and is really only an administrator
It has to work for light aircraft too but it is totally inappropriate. Engineers need to know subjects only used on large aircraft and conversely subjects applicable to small aircraft are not taught or tested ie no wood,canvas etc
To address the light aircraft maintenance issue the B-3 is being created & is intended to be a ‘lighter’ B1/B2.
Maybe your thinking of the American A&P system,as part of the cert you're required to learn wooden structures,canvas doping & baseball stitch.
Unfortunately under the EASA licencing regime,the so called level playing field RAF,in fact all military technical training/experience is not recognised.

[Rigga]

Some slight corrections to mil misperceptions.

B1 Licence Syllabii are taught to aircraft weight classes and types:
B1.1 (Large turbine aircraft)
B1.2 (Small piston aircraft)
B1.3 (Turbine Helicopters)
B1.4 (Piston Helicopters)
B3 (Very light aircraft)

It can be seen that Wood and Fabric construction NEEDS to be taught to some prospective engineers. There is also a lot of wood, fabric and composite aircraft "out there" and that means a lot of work out there too.
(If you are being taught wooden construction - don't expect to work on Jumbo's!)

When I did my first Licences (A&C turbine helicopters - now B1.3) I also had to learn about supersonic intakes and exhausts, propellors and wood/fabric structures, Kinetic Knives, Digital Compasses and Mach Meters. Not many heli's with those in 'em.

I currently hold Licences for B1.1, B1.2 and B1.3 with some type ratings. I hold a senior maintenance position but I dont have a C licence (In the last 23 years since getting my Licences I haven't done 5 years certifying and I don't need one).

Contrary to popular beliefs and to specifically address the light aircraft Issues; the CAA Section L A&C Licence is still bumping along and will be, possibly, for another few years. (and I think some "D" Licences are still out there too!) They will of course be replaced through expiry dates, when they will be converted to the relevant B1, B2 or the new B3 Licences.


As for the Level Playing Field; "Military Training" is recognised in France Switzerland, Holland.... just not in the UK because, in 2001, the UK Mil declined the invitation to take part!

[Mandator]

Rigga:

The UK national BCAR Section L licences will still be needed as long as there are Tiger Moths, Chipmunks, Dragon Rapides and a lot more Annex II aircraft flying on a CofA. We will continue tio need the D Licence to keep their Gipsy engines going also.

[Rigga]

See! I knew some were about...and long may the old boys live!

Mandator,
Thanks for the advice and correction, happily received.

[flipflopman RB199]

With apologies for my lateness to the party...

Ironically enough, the reference to rigging and fabric repair came from the fact that my own B1 notes have been out of the loft this week during a house move and have been passed around the RAF lads as a comparison to the subjects we teach...

Rigga,

With the utmost of respect, I'd have bet my mortgage on you telling me that you knew the subjects involved in those stories. I'd bet it again on the fact that the others involved would tell a different tale. A very good friend of mine had to jump out of a Hawk sliding down Scampton's runway, and I've heard that story direct.. But I'll bet you a pound to a pinch of salt that the pilot would tell a different story...

Are you really suggesting that fortune put an aged aircraft engineer into a position whereby an entire detachment of current and experienced Chinook engineers who have undoubtedly operated the aircraft operationally, in an Afghanistan war zone and have carried out some of the neatest battle damage repairs that I have seen on a operational type... couldn't diagnose a fault on their aircraft, leaving HIM ALONE to single handedly diagnose the fault after 18 years off the aircraft type?

Really?

As goes "my" trainees being turned to the 'real world' by SEnGo's and the like..Engo training has recently been moved, and you can trust my word that the training that the comissioned cadre gets does not even reach 20% of that, that the non commissioned cadre receive and are tested on. PM for details...

I agree that military training nowadays is somewhat different to former days, but there is something lacking somewhere! Whether it is financially driven or not - someone, somewhere is not giving the full story to your trainees. I am not a tutor, but even I know that school fault finding tests probably won't cover the huge array of fault finding techniques that are developed and used daily.

What you appear to be forgetting is that 'my trainees' are just that. Trainees. They are trained in exactly the same way that you and I were and come out looking for experience and guidance. You were certainly not the engineer and technician you portray yourself as when you plopped out of the training regime, neither are they... You should not expect them to be.

You speak as if I am unaware of the way things work in the civil world, despite the fact that I have actually been having to earn a living for years!!


Flipflopman

[Rigga]

"Are you really suggesting that fortune put an aged aircraft engineer into a position whereby an entire detachment of current and experienced Chinook engineers who have undoubtedly operated the aircraft operationally, in an Afghanistan war zone and have carried out some of the neatest battle damage repairs that I have seen on a operational type... couldn't diagnose a fault on their aircraft, leaving HIM ALONE to single handedly diagnose the fault after 18 years off the aircraft type?"

No! I'm not suggesting it - it's all true. You'll lose your money.

"Entire detachment"? - more like 4 techies on a jolly. And admittedly, they may not have been the bloodied superheroes you describe who may all have been busy elsewhere with something more important. I can't even say if the techies were from any particular Sqn or not.

My friend works at the airport in question where all visitors are placed just across from the Airport Cafe and along from the hangars (and he's nosey enough to stick his nose in everywhere - especially if it makes Wokka noises) and why on earth would a Sqn send a WO-man (that he worked with as Cpls) out for a snag? (and my friend won't like being called "aged" - he's only 51)

I too spent 10 years on Chinooks up to 1996 (Mk 1's - thats where I met these guys too) and went to FI several times and into KSA/Iraq/Kuwait deserts ripping off heads and gearboxes as I passed the time of day - Doesn't mean I know everything about them either.

"Every day, another lesson".

You're welcome.

[flipflopman RB199]

I'm welcome?

Well thank you very much.

It's true is it? I'll lose my money will I? Bloodied superheroes you say?

Not quite, old chap. But nothing you've actually said there changes anything does it? You're blatantly admitting that you've had nothing to do with the type in the last 16 years and certainly nothing to do with what goes on with the daily business of a type that is now carrying out constant operations in a war zone.

Four 'techies on a jolly'... On a jolly? If you had any knowledge of how it worked nowadays, you'd realise how ridiculous that sounds. Nobody does 'jollies' any more without good reason. Back in 2009 whilst working for BAE I was part of a team sent to Prestwick to dismantle a Harrier and bring it back by road to Cottesmore as the RAF couldn't spare the manpower or time to send their own team up, let alone send them on a jolly up there... Things have changed quite dramatically Rigga... But one thing remains the same..

Lessons are only learned by those who want to be taught.


Flipflopman

[Rigga]

FFM,
Check your PMs.