Flybe airline to maintain UK's A400M army plane-sources

[Lyneham Lad]

A brief article (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/07/07/uk-flybe-group-a400m-idUKKBN0FC0P920140707) on Reuters. And Flybe's experience in maintaining/supporting large military cargo aircraft is...

Presumably there are neither the Service personnel nor the space at BZN for such work?

[NutLoose]

Thought they were not to healthy, though they made a profit this year. Had enough of Marshalls?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

This article states that the spannering will be c/o at Brize.

Maintenance Contract Awarded for RAF A400Ms | Defense News | defensenews.com (http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140705/DEFREG01/307050016/Maintenance-Contract-Awarded-RAF-A400Ms)

[magicmick]

I didn't know Flybe had MAOS, oh well good luck to them.

[Linedog]

Maybe we don't have enough service engineers for the extra work. I wonder how that could have happened. :ooh:

[CoffmanStarter]

Army plane indeed :mad:

[Halton Brat]

What a sad state of affairs the RAF has been reduced to. Lord Trenchard must be doing 2,000 rpm in his grave.


HB

[Sandy Parts]

A chance for some ex-herc techies to top-up their pension for a couple of years while wearing flybe overalls? Can they certify the ex-mil guys to work on this civ/mil aircraft quick enough or will flybe need to use ready-certified guys?

[ericferret]

I believe the reason for the use of civil licensed engineers is most probably because the aircraft is also civil certified. For it to have a resale value it has to be maintained to civil standards.
This is not uncommon with a number of aircraft being maintained in this way e.g Bell 412, Agusta AW 139 and others. The MOD is trying to protect the tax payers investment rather than see aircraft sold for scrap value at the end of their military careers.

From a maintenance engineers point of view good news with salaries on offer of over £45k.
That can be compared with the appalling low rates of pay offered on other military contracts and indeed to military personnel. Elsewhere on this forum I believe the starting pay for an RAF aircraft technician was quoted as being £17,000. Less than a PTI or a military policeman. Maybe the penny will drop and we will see a decent pay rise for military aircraft technicians.
I can only see the exodus to civvy street of experienced staff continuing.

[NutLoose]

Yep Eric, during my time the wages were supposed to be equivalent, but they stupidly got rid of that and wonder why people are leaving in droves.

[TURIN]

I thought Monarch looked after Flybe's a/c. Or is that just Line Maintenance?

[NutLoose]

Flybe Aviation Services :: Home (http://www.flybeas.com/)


You get to the stage when you think, why bother having an RAF, simply sub the whole lot out...... What a stupid state of affairs.

[N.HEALD]

FlyBe do all their maint at Exeter (EGTE), given that EGTE has been very quiet in recent years it should hopefully be a boost for the airfield

[A and C]

The pay rates of aircraft technicians on military contracts is as you say very poor and I think the reasons are two fold.

First the employers see the employees military pension as the employees real income and consider the wages are just a top up to the military pension. I see this as the employees military pension subsidizing the employers business.

Second most military bases are away from the high cost housing area so the low pay is more attractive because it reflects the lower cost of living.

The pay rates also reflect the fact that civil licences are not required for military aircraft ( up until now) and those who don't hold a civil engineering licence can certify these aircraft........ Those ex military people who have taken the time and effort to get civil licences have by now migrated to the high pay positions with the airlines.

[ShotOne]

"Chance for ex herc techies to top up their pensions..." Except they're retired so probably don't want to. And they have no experience/qualification on A400. Apart from that, great idea.

[NutLoose]

It's ok all of these contract companies paying a pittance and relying on ex Services folks using their pensions to bolster their wages, but that was all well and good when you had a Service that was large enough to generate a steady flow of retiring service personnel.

The problem as I see it is as more and more of the Services get farmed out by the UK PLC to contracted companies, "because it's cheaper" and the Services shrink accordingly, that flow reduces to a trickle and with second time around retirements, these companies will suddenly find their supply of cheap labour gone, that then will force costs up and contract prices in line with that. The trouble is the Service will then be screwed as their skill base and facilities to do it themselves will be long gone, so they will end up having to bite the bullet and absorb those costs.....

[Scott C]

They've taken on this contract yet Monarch Engineering have taken over maintaining the fleet at BHX after they canned their own hangar...

[ShotOne]

Nutloose, you'll find that ex-service maintenance personnel are now very much in the minority in the airline world and the airlines have a good record for funding engineering training and apprenticeships.

[Sandy Parts]

ShotOne(andMissed:p) - "Chance for ex herc techies to top up their pensions..." Except they're retired so probably don't want to. And they have no experience/qualification on A400. Apart from that, great idea

I work alongside 3 ex-RAF who have 'retired' once already (including techies) although in IT not aircraft engineering admittedly. I also know many others in my locale who are well into their 'second careers'.
Re the quals for A400M - er, who has them at the moment? (isn't it a new aircraft.....?:))
Re the experience - I know who'd I'd like organising/managing my team of new aircraft engineers....and it isn't a greenhorn graduate or apprentice. I'd take the person with shopfloor (even only on C130) experience over shiny degrees any day.
Interesting to see the (reasonable) argument re the experienced ex-RAF guys being used for a pittance and then not being replaced due to a lack of replacements coming from the RAF. I've seen that being said for the last 20 years (Finningley Dominie maintenance?) but it doesn't seem to have stopped it so far. Hence adverts in my local press for experienced ex-SeaKing guys just last month to join the SK team at Lossie.

[NutLoose]

Nutloose, you'll find that ex-service maintenance personnel are now very much in the minority in the airline world and the airlines have a good record for funding engineering training and apprenticeships.


You missed the point, they get these contracts because they can be seen to be cheaper, and the main reason they are is the fact they tend to employ ex service personnel that have an RAF pension to fall back on, so they pay less than the rest of the industry.
Without those people they will have to pay the going rate, which means they cannot under bid as they did in the past.

[ericferret]

Sandy Parts

I don't know where you get the idea that fresh graduates or apprentices are organising this maintenance. I somehow doubt that any professional company is going down that road on a multi million pound contract.

The engineers they are recruiting to carry out the maintenance are experienced licensed engineers the majority of whom will have an ex service background.

As for type training the courses are all in place starting shortly.

I too have seen the adverts for seaking supervisors (£29000). Well there are two choices and both are down to the individuals. Put in the work (and it isn't easy) and get a civvy ticket or go on a military contract and accept the wage hit. Everybody's circumstances are different and therefore their choices.

I think the numbers game civvy versus ex mil depends on where you are. Where I am we 100% ex mil our neighbours are about 80%. At my previous job the Avionics guys were 100% ex mil and the mechs were about 90%. I believe that the forces are still the main provider of "experienced" engineers. This is especially the case when you consider that most companies shut down their apprentice schemes and have belatedly realised that the predicted manpower shortage is actually here, hence the numbers of companies now offering apprenticeships..

Out of interest that pay rate I saw for the Seaking supervisor is what we pay our apprentices towards the end of their apprenticeship!!!!!!!

[ShotOne]

It's an erroneous and patronising assumption, sandy parts that greenhorn new graduates are the only alternative to ex military engineers.

Perhaps we're talking about different things; clearly a contracted out operation like the Lossie SK one you mention will attract a high (100%?) ratio of ex service personnel. This isn't representative of the wider civil airline world.

[Sandy Parts]

ericferret - I think we are agreeing? My point was that any ex-techies in the Brize area (including ex-lyneham) may well benefit from this new short-term contract. I was being 'tongue-in-cheek' re the apprentices etc based on shotOnes comment about industry using them.
I do wonder how much Flybe will be investing in staff if the initial contract is only for 2 years? I know that in my new world (IT), our company beancounters expect a return on all capital/staff costs within contract - not based on 'possible extension' to that contract.
Hopefully, at least some former RAF colleagues can benefit from this arrangement. It would be nice if their adaptability in acquiring new skills puts them at the top of any lists (assuming of course that as shotOne says, they don't just wish to remain 'retired').

[Rigga]

The working model for Flybe Mil is likely to be this:

One CAT C Licenced engineer per maintenance check.

Several Maintenance Team Supervisors (e.g. Wings/Engines/Controls, etc.)who are likely to be B1 qualified but who won't actually use their AML's.

Several Team Members - perhaps up to eight mechanics - working for each Team.

Where's the panic over LAE's?

You'll only need CAT B engineers for line ops...three or four per shift for 10-12 aircraft at a main operating base.

[kapton]

Having worked in both civilian and military aviation I think I am able to comment on the continuing moves to making the RAF into a militia. Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses. The civil system is far more flexible than the military. Fewer people are in the decision making progress, and you have to be a current maintenance engineer to make important decisions. The military have lots of highly qualified people at certain ranks, but their practical maintenance experience is either nil or close to nil. The actual engineer who is doing or supervising a task has very little say in the ultimate decisions. That is why the military will spend weeks gazing at their navels, whilst a civilian organisation will make a decision and have an aircraft flying in a few days. What the military get from their own engineers is someone who can fix aircraft, a firefighter, a half decent first- aider, someone who can fire a rifle reasonably straight ( although the RAF Regiment will laugh their tits off at that statement), and lastly, someone who is prepared to pay the ultimate price if need be. I suppose the current decisions to civilianise the military will only be borne out when we face an adversary who not only fights back but is determined to destroy us. Then, those who made the decisions can say "We may have been beaten, but look how much we saved".

[Al R]

Shot one: It's an erroneous and patronising assumption, sandy parts that greenhorn new graduates are the only alternative to ex military engineers.

He may have been wrong, but I don't think that Sandy was being patronising. However, when you previously suggested this (below) in response to the suggestion of ex servicemen starting a second engineering career, you possibly were being.

Except they're retired so probably don't want to.

I apologise if you're not being patronising. Maybe you're simply erroneous, maybe you're just a bit out of touch or too willing to believe civvy stereotypical perceptions. But not all servicemen and women on immediate pensions are quite as ready to be written off or put out to pasture as you seem to think.

[ShotOne]

No intention of being patronising, Al. As an ex-serviceman myself (albeit not on a pension) there was no suggestion of such folk being "out to pasture". My point is these chaps obviously have their own reasons for becoming "ex" so why should the A400 be their cue for a Frank Sinatra comeback? Of course if that's not the case then I don't doubt Sandy is correct about their adaptability standing them in good stead.

[Vendee]

The actual engineer who is doing or supervising a task has very little say in the ultimate decisions. That is why the military will spend weeks gazing at their navels, whilst a civilian organisation will make a decision and have an aircraft flying in a few days.Ain't that the truth. The military engineer isn't allowed to use his initiative any more. He's not allowed to deviate and if he comes across a problem not covered by the procedure, he has to pass it upward, even though the fix may be blindingly obvious and simple. As the problem gets passed upwards, it gets further away from the person best placed to solve it and consequently, it keeps going up until it gets to the manufacturer who charges a fortune to authorise the engineer to do the thing he wanted to do in the first place.

Concession requests in civilian aviation are dealt with speedily to minimise downtime and revenue loss. In the military world they can (and often do) take weeks.

[Rigga]

Vendee - Don't ever think that Marham's disorganisation and blurred view of a workflow is anything near similar to anyone else's organisation. In 40 years of working the shop floor I've never ever seen that amount of burocracy. Typical of a manufacturers view of work, I think.

I once said to one of my Bosses there "This is a really naïve way of work - as though BAE has never done maintenance before"
He said "We've been doing Tornado Maintenance like this for 20 years in Saudi!"
"But did you ever think you weren't doing it right?" was my closing statement.
He never replied.

[Vendee]

Actually Rigga, I wasn't talking about Marham. Try working for the AAC. Its amazing they get anything in the air. Some days they don't. :(

[Rigga]

LOL! Same confusion - different venue.

[Out Of Trim]

Flybe Engineering.. Crikey!

They used to have a few Engineers at LGW; and then decided to get rid of them all. Sometimes had to get an Engineer up from Southampton to fix a few things and then eventually got Monarch Engineering to sort out any issues.

Not an organisation I would have approached for the A400m contract!

Oh well time will tell if their up to it!:sad: