SB's , AD's,MM publications

[speedtape king]

ok guys n gals - some help required.

Which sort of manuals do you prefer to work from for maintenace on light aircraft ? paper , micro fiche or CD ??

I know avantext do the FAA AD's on CD but no idea if anyone else does, or if the CAA ads, maintenance manuals/SB's etc from GA companys (piper,cessna,aerospatiale etc are available on CD or if they are - who produces them ?

look forward to your views an help

speedy

[CessnaEng]

I prefer to work from paper - however it is impractical and at the moment fiche is the best answer.

However Avantext are currently adding the Cessna range to their CD collection ( they already do Piper and Lycoming). The 172 is unsurprisingly the first to come out in 1-2 months. The problem with these are the costs of $199 per model.

Ideally I'd like Avantext on a laptop!

[FNQTech]

Depends on the application. CD on a laptop is far better for line maintenance, however I would much prefer hardcopy during heavy maintenance. Australian CASA docs are available on CD, and we use Saab 340 and Metro MM, WDM etc on CD.

[HeliEng]

In my opinion, you can't beat good ol' paper.

The only problem with it, is that you rely on your 'amendment' person having done their job on time and properly, and it has been proven that at some places, you just can't get the staff!!!

Some days you are the pigeon some days you are the statue!

[Bus429]

Does anyone know if SBs are available free on the net?

[Blacksheep]

MyBoeingFleet.com has Boeing SBs but only for airlines that surrender their rights to paper copies. Your own airline is planning to surrender their rights to paper SBs 'soon.' Honeywell and Rockwell Collins already provide SBs on-line, as do certain other vendors. See your friendly local Technical Services section for details... ;)

**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[Bus429]

Blacksheep,

I dón't think we have a friendly Tech Services section! :D :p

[LDG_GEAR _MONITOR]

if ur in a small enough company - whats a tech service dept ? in my case its about 6 sp inches of my desk along with QA,Projects etc !!

so the big boys(so to speak) do there manuals on cd - looks like avantext or bust for the GA type of aircraft ??

[Jango]

CFM, Airbus, P&W (limited),Gulfstream, do it all on CD and web based too..but you may have to be an operator to get a password. We use ATP (aircraft technical publications)in the States to get loadsa smaller stuff on CD, Cessna , Twin Otter etc.. they do plenty of biz jet types too. They will do a complete FAA library on CD, which is real easy to use.

Biggest complaint on CDs is you can't flick back from one section to anotehr as easy as a couple of fag packets wedged in a book.. but folks seem to get used to it.

[Kiwiconehead]

I prefer both for differing reasons.

CD is good for quick research, or maybe printing out short functional checks from a number of chapters. Also IPC on CD good for p/n or search by LRU ref nos (like on the dreaded 146).

Hard copy is good for big jobs - rigging, big troubleshooting charts. Long functional checks (saves printing out 80 pages or hunting thru the FDR test for the one parameter you want to test, highlighting it, then printing it).

Hard copy also good for the 'should be somewhere in this chapter' parts hunt. Nothing beats a flick thru the manual 'til something familiar catches you eye.

[Blacksheep]

Seems like a lot of paper-addicts in Engineering then? Helieng's post highlights the main problem with paper. A B757/767 IPC or MM runs to around twenty four inch thick volumes and takes an average 30 manhours per revision. With four revision cycles a year thats 120 manhours (or womanhours as the case may be) a year per manual or 240 per aircraft type for a single user's MM and IPC alone. Add on the gigantic Boeing CMM and WDM for each type and multiply by the number of users and we expend 4000 manhours on manual revisions in our small airline. Get the picture? It may be convenient for the user but paper copy revisions are a huge cost - the equivalent of 76,000 quid in our case. Are digital copies really that much harder to use?

Bus429 old chap, if you insist on working in QA, how do you expect anyone to be friendly? :D

**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[HeliEng]

Blacksheep,

I think that both methods have their drawbacks.

With paper copies, you have the already mentioned issue of having to trust a person/dept to update them. You also have the familiar problem of pages getting dirty and sometimes even falling out!! (NO, surely not !!! :) )

With computer copies you have a different set of issues entirely. You can now get AIS's on CD ROM rather than the 3+ hefty binders full, but they are only valid from a certain date to a certain date.
1) Would the same be applicable with MM's etc..?
2) What would happen with rush revisions? Would the operator get authorisation (via a CD re-writer, of course) to amend the disk?
3) Computer illiterate engineers, and there are plenty of them out there! Training costs etc, not THAT bad if you are a small company, but where you have a whole swarm of engineers....?? Would the computer skills then have to be covered in 'Continuation training'
4) Cost of computers and upkeep thereof.

On a plus for the computers, if you could have a search facility that would enable you to type in a component name and it will tell you where there is a referance to it, that would eliminate the need for the common phrase as previously mentioned of 'it's in this chapter somewhere'.

Also we must remember that some aircraft manufacturers haven't even adopted the ATA system, let alone a computerised programme!!

Either way, I don't really have a distinct preferance, I can read a book and use a computer, so it makes no odds!

[ 09 November 2001: Message edited by: HeliEng ]