OEI, I’m up for a healthy debate now that John is safely recovering. I am not throwing fuel on the fire, I was asking for further info. I’ll expand my questions further as Debeer has also heard the same report:
Lets review the accident factually: (extract from AAIU’s ongoing investigation)
On arrival these Inspectors carried out an initial technical investigation and found a foreign
object in the tail rotor driveshaft tunnel. This object, of cloth material, was entangled in the tail
rotor driveshaft, between the first and second bearings. The driveshaft had failed just forward of
the second bearing, which resulted in the drive to the tail rotor being disconnected. Initial
indications are that the foreign object was causal to the shaft failure. The Investigation is
focusing on the failure mechanism of the shaft and the origin of the foreign object.
Now when I heard about another aircraft finding a rag, I now have a few other question that will encourage further, healthy debate:
1) What is a Part 145 Facility?
2) What are the requirements of a Part 145 Facility?
3) How many engineers must be present during an inspection?
4) What items require a second signature from another present engineer?
5) As a pilot, what can you do to check if a 50 hour inspection has been completed?
6) Where is the line drawn in respect to ‘A’ check and the pilot checking the work of an engineer?
7) Has commercial pressure been over looked and gone to the engineer department? I have the support of other pilots when I tell my boss it’s not safe to fly. Do engineers have the same support?
8) Now that a second aircraft has ad a rag found inside it, what are the IAA doing about it?
9) What powers have or should have the IAA or AAIU to review or close a facility?
10) Should pilots and engineers be trained together so that they both can understand each others job and rolls?
11) Who is allowed work on an aircraft, be it open a panel or clean the interior/exterior?
Thousand Island