PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Haddon-Cave, Airworthiness, Sea King et al (merged)
Old 8th Jul 2010, 21:03
  #203 (permalink)  
Rigga
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Anglia
Posts: 2,076
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Tallsar said:
"...No, any operational risks taken should and must be confined to their specific context and then not run on (in ignorance or due to financial stringency) when the neccessity to take such risks is gone. "

Agreed - But should you add to that 'operational' risk by going to war in an aircraft that doesn't meet the spec for the mission?

I believe you confuse "operations" with "maintenance" and the two are very different beasts when we talk of aircraft.

I have never seen any Fixed Wing "maintenance" done in a combat area... Combat 'Zones' - yes, but 'Areas'? (and I have done rotary wing maintenance in combat areas where no plank dared stop)

I wholeheartily agree that every 'operational' necessity should indeed be taken to defeat an enemy. But that this is best done in an operationally fit aircraft and not one of a "near enough" nature.

The military do not hold the monopoly of "Live Ops", nor are they the only ones in danger of being shot at - though they are more exposed to that.

I have recent experience of civil maintenance (perceived as rigid and unwavering by most military personnel) standards for state aircraft operations at a constant 5 minutes readiness, 24/7/365 (yes, 5 minutes.) It can be done - and relatively easlily, with very few aircraft.

The use of 'normal' and 'proper' maintenance practices increases the reliability of most aircraft by a factor of five or six and reduces the risk of mission cancellations due to airborne system failures by an enormous amount.

There are almost no circumstances where proper and correct maintenance practices cannot be conducted. Being somewhere hot, dry and remote with a threat of incoming munitions isn't one of them.

What I describe above is known as "Continued Airworthiness". Some of which can be found in Def-Stan 05-130 (MAOS) - or - if you want the full story, read EASA 2042/2003.

Believe it or not - even in the civil world it is possible to move away from the required maintenance and 'go wild' (Contingency Maintenance?) - but you have to say when you do it and do a formal recovery afterwards.
Rigga is offline