fireflybob

Just wondered whether any engineers wanted to comment on this thread:-

Reporting of faults

Vortechs Jenerator

Pilots and Engineers talk to each other mostly (face to face or othrwise) every day, all over the world regarding any defects on aircraft as rhey occur.

There is so much back up redundancy in a modern aircraft and approved legislation for rendering systems inoperative for short periods in complete safety whilst awaiting repair/replacement. It is our, collective, job (pilot/engineer) to make professional adult decisions on aircraft serviceability and ability to operate.

There is no taking off with serious faults effecting flight safety, that is a golden life preserving rule.

Mybe the odd inconseqential thing gets left until the end of the day on the odd flight in the odd airline but that would be about it.

I have worked for some very rough freight companies with old dogs for aircraft where lots of trivial items were ignored (and I mean very trivial) otherwise no company would make money - prettying up flying shitboxes is not anyones priority, they are workhorses... BUT even they attend the flight safety issues by the rules (eventually...spares permitting)

nosefirsteverytime

Ah, the anti-aviation Independable, as hated as, well, the Daily Hatred:

Good newspapers are dead and gone these days

winglit

I would like to think that our lot are pretty sensible. If there's a minor fault that's not in the MEL, bring it home and report it on the I/B leg. If it is in the MEL can it be deferred with advice from Maintrol? If yes, raise an ADD and bring it home. If no, find an engineer and spares to fix it.

It's all written down in the MEL, how difficult can it be? I have yet to meet a pilot who has operated outside it.

asheng

Lets be honest, its pretty cut and dried really.

No pilot is going to fly an unsafe aircraft, if he's got a problem downroute he calls maintrol and seeks advice. If that problem stops the flight, an engineer is sent to assess/fix it and recover the aircraft.

If the problem can be deferred, thats what the MEL is for, with the stipulations put in place it can be defered by either a licensed engineer or the captain as he is licensed and responsible for the safety of the aircraft as long as there are no maintenance actions required to allow onward passage.

Engineers and pilots nowadays talk pretty much on a level and both are ultimate professionals in this business, any pilot who won't talk a problem over with an engineer isn't worth the time in my opinion.

Years ago I had a captain on a long haul flight who arrived with a defect but insisted on the F/E trying to describe it. Unforturtunately the defect could only be felt tactilly by the captain through his column and he pointedly refused to talk to an engineer. We offloaded 300 pax and left him with his aircraft and the defect on the pan. After the F/E's 2nd visit to the line office (and being told unless the captain comes in person to discuss what he's feeling) the captain was informed by his company to speak to us in person and eventually arrived in the office.

The defect was resolved pretty quickly and the captain told in no uncertain terms what an idiot he was and the aircraft departed some hours later.

Thankfully the world has moved on and the relationships today between engineers and pilots are as equals .

Safety Concerns

@asheng and vortex

are you seriously suggesting that organisation's mentioned (AEI and ALEA) would risk their reputations on making the comments they have and releasing the press releases they have based on a few niff naff items?

I suspect this is just the beginning of an interesting summer/autumn

Vortechs Jenerator

I'm not suggesting anything other than what my personal 25 years experience has shown me.

Any serious breaches with evidence should be directed to the authority if they have something.

Fishy fishy!

asheng

Like Vortex, I'm not suggesting anything underhand is going on but the reality is that air travel is the safest form of transport and is so because both the pilots and engineers are consumate professionals and neither would consider allowing an aircraft to fly in an unsafe condition.

There are procedures in place to allow aircraft to fly with recorded defects (Mel/DDPG) and as long as the defect can be defered in accordance with the MEL/DDPG correctly with any maintenance or operational actions accounted for and cleared by the allotted time allowed, this is perfectly legal and normal pratice in every airline, dependent on their operating procedures.

If the ALAE or the AEI have concerns then rightly so they should be investigated but personally I would rather this done by discusion with the organisations concerned and the enginering members of both rather than through the press medium.

There are far bigger issues to discuss with regard to engineering in this industry, but this one will sell papers this weekend. I have just read the same story on a russian website with a photo of the Helios incident attached, looks good, sells papers but accurate????????????

Safety Concerns

I am sure you are genuine in your beliefs but I have to question whether you
Have a view of the bigger picture?
Have feedback and access to the information from 45,000 engineers?
(that is not intended to be insulting just factual)

Now I am sure you haven't witnessed anything yourselves but what are you trying to achieve by claiming it doesn't happen. You posts are both quite clear in the english language, it doesn't happen.
By the same token I feel sure that an organisation such as AEI have or at least should have exhausted all other possible avenues before bringing this subject to the fore. If they haven't then they deserve to be ridiculed.

I also believe that all parties involved are telling the truth as they see it. Therefore please consider very carefully as individuals what you hope to achieve by contradicting a body representing 45,000 of your colleagues.
I would suggest that they do have a better view of the bigger picture.

There are many issues within the engineering environment thats a fact but safety must be number one priority and that includes maintaining aircraft and recording faults properly. Engineers and pilots included.

Balpa's response coupled with the very fact that Flyglobespan have just paraded themselves before a court of law for flying an aircraft in a non airworthy condition is proof enough that this is a real problem. And yes that court case also highlights that pilots do take unnecessary risks. (albeit well intented I'm sure)

To put this into perspective though the article was more about europe and less about the UK in my opinion. Do our european cousins have strong reporting systems in place or in fact does their culture allow for such open reporting. How many other countries have CHIRP or equivalent. Whatever the answer I suspect that the UK comes out very well as far as a reporting culture is concerned. Therefore logic also dictates that if we have cases here that have reached the high court then there are undoubtedly many more unreported cases in countries where reporting is frowned upon or a mature reporting system doesn't exist.

To me it would seem more prudent that all engineers got behind AEI to ensure that there are no safety holes in the bigger picture even if your local area is doing very well.