Question asked by hotdog...........
"If, as some of the correspondents seem to imply; that the duct leak or rupture happened at a previous site of repair, how do they know the repair was carried out by MAS?"
Answer: because we have task cards / additional workcards to say that that is exactly what happened. Shoddy maintenance may get a customer aircraft over the fence but, the paperwork will always catch up with you eventually.
As for the so called 12 engineers sent to oversee the check, only six (two avionic and four mechanical) were actually LAME's. The rest is typically made up of planners and a "Team Leader", from Sydney. Whose main skills seem to be producing excel charts, and avoid making decisions (particulary if they might effect turn time). Yet who also seem intent on burying the tech reps (LAME's) in duties such as "Vetting" task cards. Rather than allowing them to spend as much time as possible on the aircraft overseeing the maintenance being (we hope) carried out. Coupled with the fact that there are over two thousand individual task cards to monitor on such a check (not counting additional or non-routine work cards), it is impossible to expect 100 % supervision. Unless Qantas send more engineers with the aircraft to oversee the work. At which point, you might as well get the work done in-house anyway.
Also, in defence of the sacrificial bunnies that were sent to Malayasia with TJU (No, I'm gladly not one of them.), the engineers at any MRO you go to know you're there to scrutinize them. They will quite cleverly try to bury you in technical enquiries whilst they aquitt other work whilst you're too busy to look at what they're up too. They also put on quite a performance when you ask to look at the stuff they tried to hide behind your back. Only thing that matters to an MRO is turntime. Because if they don't deliver on time, they have to pay. Hence, corners are likely to be cut in order to avoid penalties.
So hotdog, you survived flying aircraft for over 30 years without a major mishap. I'm glad. You say Australian LAME's are no better than overseas LAME's. I don't doubt that there are some great operators out there. Just that we in Australia don't like to aim just for the manufacturers minimum standards but, in fact, like to aim a lot higher than that.
A reputation for which, before the likes of Dixon and Cox came along, made both Qantas (and once upon a time a company called Ansett) the envy of the aviation world. A reputation that sold a lot more tickets than any marketing campaign could ever hope to.
