gas path

Just had a chat with John Sawyer (Gen.Secretary) ALAE with reference to duplicate/2nd inspections. Apparently there are moves afoot to do away with them.
Driven no doubt by some turnip in the eu.(note small letters!) To quote John "The CAA have of course no evidence except the aftermaths (few) of duplicates going wrong, what is not ducumented is how many duplicates are failed by inspection and redone, so obviously this is the opinion/feedback required,from as many people as you can provoke into replying direct to the email address, by mid June".
I think the duplicate/2nd inspection is vital from a safety point of view.
What are your thoughts?
Replies and comments guys to

[This message has been edited by gas path (edited 10 June 2000).]

[This message has been edited by gas path (edited 10 June 2000).]

Multi-X

Fully agree that Dups are essential. They ensure safety & protect the engineer.

The biggest problem at present seems to be that they are being used to protect maintenance organisations & save them having to get sufficient staff to allow good working practices.

FLS have more dups than you can wave a stick at.
Slides - why someone incorrectly installed slides.
Cowlings - Why someone allowd an aircraft to take off with cowls unlatched.
What next? Bev makers because one bcame loose?
Should the maintenance companies not be looking at the causes ie lack of staff, pressure, nightshift, weather etc rather than just raising another Dup Insp?

I beleive that the cowling incident was the evening after FLS layed off a load of engineers - That was sure to help the engineers concentrate n the job in hand.


The BCAR requirement was for things that affecte PRIMARY flight & engine controls. Not every component that can be misinstalled due lack of staff or pressure to get aircraft away.

Dups will stay in company requirements regardless of what the JAA say but there will still be the problem that if everything needs a duplicate inspection, it will dilute the importance of the inspection.

With more & more ETOPS aircraft & too many Dups, people will become complacent until there is an incident due oil loss half way accross the atlantic.

Blacksheep

If they are deleted from JAA requirements, duplicate inspections of primary controls will stay in the company procedures of reputable companies.

A public listing of all airlines that do not voluntarily carry out duplicates will allow the travelling public to make an informed decision when they buy a ticket.

**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

The regulators

The CAA is engaged in joint reviews (both with UK industry and other JAA member states) of the duplicate inspection process: although these reviews are not yet complete, the early indications are that the duplicate inspection process does deliver safety benefits. The reviews have also indicated that, in the interests of standardisation, it would be desirable to better clarify the intent of the duplicate inspection.

Although there is not at present an equivalent JAA rule, CAA would promote the adoption of the (duplicate inspection) process as a general JAA standard.

In accordance with our established processes for the development of changes to requirements, CAA would consult UK industry, on any proposed changes to significant requirements, such as that requiring duplicate inspections.

WideBodiedEng

Good to see the Regulator lurking!!
I think SENSIBLE dupes must be kept. Engine / Flight control ones definitely. Others, well, I'm not so sure. Some look like the "I must be seen to be doing something...." stable door syndrome. Ones like dupes for oil filler caps 'cos one or two came off in a short while. They are the ones where personal awareness is better. I've known a 146 Chip detector drop out and it WAS duped and ground run!! Result, OPEN THE COWLS and do it properly don't try to get in the little access panel. Since then - no probs!!

------------------
The Stamp is mightier than the Toolbox!!

WideBodiedEng

Any chance the CAA would survey those of us actually doing the dupes?
How about a questionnaire with the next issue of ANs or CHIRP or even a web based one?
I'd be happy enough with the Capt doing some, just as long as they get done.

------------------
The Stamp is mightier than the Toolbox!!

tim-ing

The company I work for has Ramp One worksheets, Transit worksheets and ETOPS worksheets and with a few exceptions like tyre pressures the Etops and Transit worksheets carried out immediately prior to dept duplicate the whole Ramp one that was done 1 hour previous. Waste of manpower or what? I do feel however that the thought of an in flight turnback of an ETOPS 13hour flight to Peking, due oil loss, can justify
the practice if the company is prepared to pay for it and budget for the manpower.
I would say further that a flight crew walkround properly done is yet another inspection of some items and then the pushback crew do some of the items for the fourth time.

If nothing else a second inspection focuses the attention of somebody doing a job that it
is an important task. You shouldn't have to ram this home so often, but familiarity breeds contempt and it has to be recognised and addressed.

Also there is a destinction between a duplicte inspection and a second inspection.

4Rvibes

Surely duplicate inspections CAN'T be got rid of. In the company I used to work for, Dupes were carried out only for the usual flight/eng controls. After a near disasterous incident however,duplicate/vital
inspections were extended to include rotating dynamic assemblies. This, I think, was a good thing. Better to have two pairs of eyes look at a job than one, even if it is only a pilot.