PDA

View Full Version : Downfall of Pakistan International Airline


sajjadahmad
27th Aug 2022, 16:52
Little known reasons for the downfall of PIAThe back-breaking causes of fall, apart from four lethal air crashes during the last 30 years that include Kathmandu A-300, Multan Fokker, Hevellian ATR-42 and Karachi A-320, another list of five completely scrapped aircraft during last 10 years includes, BHJ (ATR-42) aircraft landed off the runway during cross-wind landing at Lahore and declared scrapped, BHP (ATR) skidded off the runway at Gilgit and scrapped, and BKW (bigger version ATR of 72 seats) became out of control of Engineering personnel during Engine Testing and scrapped.

Strangely, one BHN (ATR-42) aircraft has been dismantled to provide parts to other aircraft due to shortage of parts owing to procurement procedures intricacies. For imagining the loss, a smaller ATR-42ís market price is around 15 Million US$ and an ATR-72 price is around 25 Million US$.

Further, 98% of PIA Aircraft Engineers are Not Graduate Engineers. They are Apprentice Mechanics who got certifications through technical courses and recognized by Civil Aviation as aircraft engineers. 75% of employees have got their children employed in PIA. Even, a few have got all of their children employed in PIA.

The biggest loss to PIA is that high yield ethnic Pakistanis of North America and Europe have started travelling by Gulf airlines and biggest advantage PIA has is direct flight option

Its time to recognize the irreparable damage by prolonged confines of Public Procurement Rules since 2004 that proved to be 2nd nationalization and broke the backbone of the spirit of sourcing and supplies and wreaked havoc with the serviceability of aircraft, airport equipment and onboard supplies.

These rules have limited the supplier numbers and have given the selected ones so much of leverage, they go and seek stay orders at will and hardly leave PIA. These rules should be simplified to the extent of open bidding and sufficient Bidding Time by amending PIAC Act and nothing more. In the interim, the purchasing department must be de-centralized into engineering purchase, catering purchase and airport handling purchase for prioritized supplies.

hoistop
29th Aug 2022, 13:48
Further, 98% of PIA Aircraft Engineers are Not Graduate Engineers. They are Apprentice Mechanics who got certifications through technical courses and recognized by Civil Aviation as aircraft engineers.

Just to let you know. Within EU, EASA regulations allow that anyone (yes, anyone) can get PART-66 B1 maintenance licence for large jet airplanes by:
-passing prescribed exams/modules (13 for B1.1 - jet airplanes)
-proving 5 years work experience in appropriate airplane maintenance.
That is enough to get "empty" Part-66 licence.

To endorse a type (a must), one need to complete Type rating (theory and practice) that normally takes 4 weeks theory and 2 weeks practical, and for first type rating, additional On Job Training, that is not prescribed in time but in number and variety of tasks (to be done on actual aircraft in real maintenance) This takes at least 6 weeks to complete, mostly more than that (could take months). So, EASA never asks for formal education, nor formal classroom training. Just pass the exams and you are done.

So, not only in Pakistan, all over Europe licensed engineers are actually (former) apprentices/fitters with sufficient experience and self-studying their way thru exams.
EASA finally recognized a problem, and in a few years, a thorough practical assessment/exam will be required for those who did not take full 2400h course (that means almost everybody) How this will work out and if it will help in any way, remains to be seen.

All maintenance training organizations, providing above, must have full courses available (for B1, it takes minimum 2400 hours (cca 2 years) full time theory and practical training - but there is no demand for this, as almost everybody today follows the simplest route, described above. Including licenced engineers, working for biggest legacy EU carriers.
So far, so good, but it is obviously on maintenance companies to weed-out those that have a licence, but have not much clue about.
FAA A&P is even much simpler system.