Originally Posted by Bus429
I know of one organisation that occasionally sends replacement engineers to one line base on the jump seat, overnight,more than likely to be on duty on arrival (working on the aircraft in which he/she flew). When questioned about this, an individual in the organisation stated that it was not economically viable to send personnel on scheduled flights if alternatives were available. I don't know if the Accountable Manager holds this view but the cause of safety is not best served in this way.
Believe me, and I can speak from a QA and hands-on perspective, the effort that goes into EASA 145/JAR 145 Human Factors training is largely wasted. Those engineers inclined to push the limit are sometimes not actively discouraged from doing so.
Throughout my career, I have also experienced QA managers' complicity in pushing the limits, often with very creative interpretations of the regulations and even company procedures. Those companies now taking this issue seriously may be those who were stung by not taking it seriously (if you understand my drift).
Again from personal experience, the pressure applied on an engineer for refusing to release an aircraft to service is huge; you may expect coercion rather than support from your superiors.
BUS429 I have a similar background to Yours and could not agree with You more I have recently been involved in a major hangar incident in which an un-licensed(and IMO uncompetent) engineer almost caused a serious accident in My view this was one of the most dangerous incidents I have been involved with in My 30 years in the incident when i brought this to the attention of those concerned what was done? nothing in My own view this is because the Industry has had to take in a low calibre of new People over the past 5 to 10 years and this is the consequence the Engineer in question really believed he had done nothing wrong which astounded Me,sorry I cannot go into the specific incident as it would far to easy for My identity to be known.
MK