B1.3
Yep time to get your c.v in, everybody else is!!!!!!
I agree 8 is thin, better would be a B1 and a B2 on an early shift, 2xB1 and a B2 on lates with two back to back shifts total 10 as a minimum.
People should not underestimate reliability on newer aircraft. Talking to a 139 guy he reckons that the aircraft comming out of the factory now from an avionics standpoint are making him redundant from a defects point of view. Scheduled maintenance is much lower than previous generation aircraft. I would expect this to carry on in to the 189.
If they are only doing 400 a year (not sure about that figure) then scheduled maintenance will hardly cause a ripple.
If an aircraft goes u/s how many people can you get on a snag? 2 or 3 max.
If would have to be a main box failure to generate a requirement for more people.
Engine changes are not a big deal anymore with very little in the way of set up procedures.
The joys of modern digital systems. Tracking and balancing done with onboard maintenance computers with little in the way of test flying required.
The biggest problem on the 139 for engineers on a 1000 hour a year aircraft is boredom!!!!!
A big change from when they first came out.
Again after the 189 settles it should be similar. Maintenance on this generation of aircraft is light years on from the Seaking/S61.
Not in a position to comment on the S92 maybe somebody else can give an impression.
Your comments on the MEL are spot on.
In the end it will come down to what the contract says so we should all know soon.
Last edited by ericferret; 22nd Mar 2013 at 23:38.