Originally Posted by
oversteer
re. the maint log, I see lots of busywork and resetting things, but nothing to actually trace and fix a problem. Is that unfair, or is that typical in aircraft maintenance?
It looks like that first flight when there was NCD on the Capt side a reset and test was done, FIM/TSM is followed. Pretty normal for a first occurence.
2nd flight they also had NCD on the Capt side but also picked up an issue with the AOA sensor. Again a reset was done fault cleared. Still faily common practice. Also perhaps a heads up was given to Bali to be ready for an AOA probe change.
3rd flight again NCD fault on on Capt side. Fault with AOA sensor reconfirmed and replaced. Following replacement aircraft released as tests passed. Still following fairly normal troubleshooting process.
4th flight IAS/ALT disagree reported, FIM/TSM consulted. Flush performed. Slightly different defect. Possibly engineer considered it unrelated to NCD on the previous flights.
Whats missing in these logs are stall warning reports going off and unknown trim commands. If its in the tech log the entries must be answered but telling engineers or putting it in a follow up report is no good. Doesn’t highlight the problem. Good example most airlines now don’t even have licensed engineers meet aircraft. So that message/conversation supposedly had by the crew on arrival of the fourth flight may have not even reached the engineer who did the work.
Simple, if it happens put it in the tech log... anywhere else there’s a risk it will get missed or forgotten. To flight crew from an engineer one of my pet hates is every once and a while you’ll get a post flight brief (when you get the chance to have one) and then find the defect discussed not in the log, should simply not happen.