One Rule For One?

[12 twists per inch]

One rule for one and one for the other..........or so it seems. Having seen aircrew 'damage' aircraft either thru incompetance, genuine mistakes or pure accidents I really haven't seen any comparable justice with oily engineers doing the same. Over my many years I have come across instances from both sides of the fence, however in my experience the techies seem to 'kop it' a lot more than the fly boys. Do any others feel the same or are the fly boys as severely reprimanded but it is kept in house? :sad:

[Hueymeister]

You'll need a stronger breaking strain and possibly a better class of lure me' old.

[12 twists per inch]

Yeah fair play fella. I'm a new poster and bloody furious at that due to recent events. Even tho I appear to be phishing!....and apologise to you veteran Pruners:confused:

[MSF]

Drunken behaviour vs 'High Spirits'

Seen a lot of double standards in my 9 years.
Sh1t rolls downhill and they will always hang an airman to protect their 'good name'.

[BEagle]

The only RAF VC10 ever to have been written-off after an incident (XR806) was entirely down to 'engineers' carrying out ground maintenance procedures incorrectly....

I'm sure someone will have the photo of the aircraft sitting on its tail; a seriously damaged fin and cracked pressure hull were too expensive to repair.

[Biggus]

How often do movers drive a fork lift into an aircraft? What happens then?

If you read most published accident reports the board always seem to manage to criticise the pilot for something, they almost seem to delight in it!

[dionysius]

A Sqn/Unit inquiry with the individual being disciplined if found at fault........:suspect:


Please lets not go down the "lets slag off movers" route........................


http://www.pixture.co.uk/Airfields/Selected%20Images/Brize/ImageL/VC10-Incident-L.jpg

[rivetjoint]

Nice to see they kept the power cart still connected even after it'd tipped!!

[monkeybumhead]

It gets on my tits when overly keen prop driven aeroplane drivers manage to overtorque 3 engines for no good reason, apart from showing off to some girly sat on the flight deck. Don't get me wrong there are times when overtorques can be forgiven, but pure hamfistedness and ar$eing around!!!!
What happens to these fools? A bit of grief off the techies and then they go and do it again at a later date. I think a fine of at least 1 slab per engine for the techies who carry out the remedial work should be suitable, it may lessen the occuranaces.

Rant over. (for the moment)

[WSO1]

I remember going into work on the night that 806 reared her head- it was foggy, and all I could see was the nose and cockpit sticking out of the low fog- surreal!!!

[BEagle]

When a mate overstressed an F4 at Wattisham several years ago, the SEngO invited him to assist with the overstress check.

He learned that there are something like 120 fasteners to be removed to acomplish that check - for guess who was invited to remove them!

He never overstressed one again!

[charliegolf]

When Steve 'Scummole' (a well meant monicker) bent a puma of 33 Squadron, the traditional first question at the board was trotted out:

"Had the Loadmaster completed a trim sheet?"

Look out, here it comes!

CG

Ex 33 Loadie, funnily enough.

[southside]

the SEngO invited him to assist with the overstress check

But when the same brave Pilot was tasked with a Low level bombing run over Basra at night and in a sand storm with lots of Bad guys (and Americans) shooting at him....where was SEngO then ?

Tucked up safe and sound in Norfolk no doubt !!!

[Bluntend]

If you read BEagle's thread, the overstress occured over Wattisham so the risk of being shot at by bad guys (and Americans) and the risk of sand storms is dramatically (if not entirely) reduced.

;)

[rej]

dionysius

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please lets not go down the "lets slag off movers" route........................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that would be way way too easy (even the laziest pruners want a bit of a challenge!!!)

[Kengineer-130]

overtorques :mad: :mad: :mad: , ok in an emergency (such as XV217 almost flying into the oggin :p ) you can forgive them as it was neccascery, but on normal route flying etc why overtorque??? its a LIMIT not a target, and with 1 person constantly monitoring and 2 people somtimes monitoring, they should NOT occur on a regular basis like they do at the moment, the amount of work they cause is hideous, not just for lyneham eng but also for NDT from brize. Its not just so engineers have to do less work, but it means a valuble frame is yet again grounded for a completly avoidable problem.

IMHO damaging an aircraft by genuine accident or whilst carrying out normal ops should not be punished, just reported to hopefully prevent a re-occurence, negligence or downright stupidity/laziness should of course be punished. Rant mode off :ok:

[Safeware]

Southside,But when the same brave Pilot was tasked with a Low level bombing run over Basra at night and in a sand storm with lots of Bad guys (and Americans) shooting at him....where was SEngO then ?
He was probably where he was required by Lizzie to be, leading his troops, working long hours in sh!tty conditions to ensure that said Pilot had the right kit to be brave in.

Letting JPs know exactly what has to go on when a jet is avoidably bent is a good way of teaching respect for what the groundcrew do, as Beags illustrated. It isn't used as a matter of course, and when I've seen it done, has always been accepted 'graciously'.

sw

[Tourist]

Oh b@llocks!
Pilots have a god given right to d1ck around and explore the envelope, and occasionally this will mean a bit more work for loafing engineers. Its not like they do much normally!:E

[southside]

leading his troops, working long hours in sh!tty conditions


WHAT ??? A SEngO..??? Leading his troops..????

Working long hours...????

I truly can't believe you wrote that.... you must be a SEngO...

Now if you had said that the Chief Tech was leading his troops in sh!tthy conditions...now thats more believable...but a SEngO...Nah, sorry mate...far to incrdedulous

[Griz]

If we persist in the policy of employing people to make work for others by making up rules as they go along (Eng Os). Then we should at least insist on them being trained as lineys so that they are on hand immediately to sign for something they know nothing about when leaflet 26 rears its stupid head on a see-off. :E

[BEagle]

But don't BEngOs still get some time to get their hands oily during work experience time away from their academic courses?

JEngOs used to do all the academics first, then hit the squadrons knowing all the theory but none of the practice - I thought their course was then changed into a sandwich course, with the jam in the middle being practical hands-on time?

SEngOs leading? Well, a couple I knew of 2 who certainly united the squadron oilies..... Perhaps not in the way they would have liked. One was an autocratic fool with the man management skills of Attilla the Hun, the other a bumbling idiot who hid behind a wall of paperwork.

[Kengineer-130]

engo's/sengo's having a clue how to weild a spanner??? :{ :{ , tell me another one, please my sides are hurting, why do you think lyneham is such a mess at the moment? People who have a commision who THINK they know best/what they are doing, implementing policy they have no idea about :mad: :mad: to be honest, a big step forward would be a job swap week, where tekkies could shadow the aircrew all day, from plans to brief to flying to de-brief, and aircrew follow the tekkies round all day, fixing the fooked frames :ok: , would give a good appreciation of just how much is involved in each job, and might just increase morale and squadron ethos a bit :hmm: . To be fair, the SF crews are spot on, always interested and appreciative of the engineers work :ok: