LAME Imposter.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Here
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You sign the Qantas paperwork. The Qantas paperwork is part of the system of approved maintenance.
You are approved by QF to sign their paperwork, part of that approval is that you have a valid licence.
You sign the paperwork on behalf of QF, not on your own behalf.
You are approved by QF to sign their paperwork, part of that approval is that you have a valid licence.
You sign the paperwork on behalf of QF, not on your own behalf.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sydney
Age: 57
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the responsibility of a person who co-ordinates maintenance?
3.3 A person who co-ordinates the carrying out of maintenance within a category of maintenance must ensure:
(a) that each stage of maintenance is performed by a person who is permitted by regulation 42ZC to carry out the maintenance; and .......
3.3 A person who co-ordinates the carrying out of maintenance within a category of maintenance must ensure:
(a) that each stage of maintenance is performed by a person who is permitted by regulation 42ZC to carry out the maintenance; and .......
/for lame
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: WZRCHS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MP found wanting
Oop,s big mistake MP,
If you did have knowledge of the CASA approved system of maintenace that applies to Qantas, you would not have posted such stupid wind ups.
If you are infact employed as an M within QFA, then I suggest a phone call to QA and perhaps another one to CASA,
If you ask nicely, they will explain to you how it all works and comes together withregards to QF.
Can you dial internal, or would you like me to provide you with the outside numbers.... That's is you wish to "brush up"
HaHa
If you did have knowledge of the CASA approved system of maintenace that applies to Qantas, you would not have posted such stupid wind ups.
If you are infact employed as an M within QFA, then I suggest a phone call to QA and perhaps another one to CASA,
If you ask nicely, they will explain to you how it all works and comes together withregards to QF.
Can you dial internal, or would you like me to provide you with the outside numbers.... That's is you wish to "brush up"
HaHa
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: WZRCHS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LME 400, yes, there was a time, long ago and in this world of accountants running Engineering Departments, no longer there.
When I was employed by QF, my EQ and HRI showed I held a 737-200 licence. Never held it, never worked on the aircraft.
/ for lame , can only show what someone has entered..not what is real
When I was employed by QF, my EQ and HRI showed I held a 737-200 licence. Never held it, never worked on the aircraft.
/ for lame , can only show what someone has entered..not what is real
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: WZRCHS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, another post and I know I must be getting boring..
How many QA Managers, seniors, and personnel within the Qantas QA Department hold a CASA licence type rated on Qantas aircraft.
The pay drop is awesome..
An Industrial Manager in charge of Syd Dom ?
I never saw a QA department member, during my +10 years with QF, on the floor, in the hangar, or talking to LAME's etc etc
How would they know the situation, the problem, the whatever?
Most are AME's from the workshop and have never certified for Maintenance on QF aircraft...
Feel free to correct me.... pls........ I really hope my opinon is wrong..
How many QA Managers, seniors, and personnel within the Qantas QA Department hold a CASA licence type rated on Qantas aircraft.
The pay drop is awesome..
An Industrial Manager in charge of Syd Dom ?
I never saw a QA department member, during my +10 years with QF, on the floor, in the hangar, or talking to LAME's etc etc
How would they know the situation, the problem, the whatever?
Most are AME's from the workshop and have never certified for Maintenance on QF aircraft...
Feel free to correct me.... pls........ I really hope my opinon is wrong..
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that, another monumental contribution to the topic.
Looks as though there are a few that need to refresh their knowledge in Airworthiness Administration, and how it applies to the licenced engineer.
Further remedial reading can be found here: http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/aac/part-1/1-063.HTM
And here: http://www.casa.gov.au/ame/download/aac9-01.pdf
Do come along boys and girls, you are dragging your feet again.....
Please try to keep up, the rest of the aviation community relies upon you lot.
- MP.
Looks as though there are a few that need to refresh their knowledge in Airworthiness Administration, and how it applies to the licenced engineer.
Further remedial reading can be found here: http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/aac/part-1/1-063.HTM
And here: http://www.casa.gov.au/ame/download/aac9-01.pdf
Do come along boys and girls, you are dragging your feet again.....
Please try to keep up, the rest of the aviation community relies upon you lot.
- MP.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: n.s.w
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I usually disagree with 99% of what MP says, he is correct in saying that certification is in accordance with the CASA approved system of maintenance. Everything in the PM which tells you what, how and when to do it is CASA approved or should be, you sign with a CASA license not a QANTAS one, QANTAS gives you the authority to sign but you need a CASA license to do so. Even overseas lame's who are authorised by QANTAS still require a CASA OK.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: WZRCHS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CS, your post is correct,
Everything within the PM is CASA approved, or should I dare to say, rubber stamped, any deviation from the CAR'S are approved internally by CASA approved persons employed by QF.
CASA monitor, and the rest of the industry would have no idea as to the details of the deviation.
CASA monitoring depends on manpower and the politics of the situation.
The purpose of the posts are to show every reader that MP Imposter has no knowledge of how the system works within QF, has no access to the QF policy manual and therefore "throws stones in glass houses" to wind QF LAME'S up.
He/She has an opinion, which he/she has a right to post, however, that opinion is irrelevent with regards to QF's system of maintenance, as I do not believe MP has any idea of how it works.
His/Her comments are uninformed rubbish, from someone who thinks that all things are equal. Guess what, they are not in the real world.
Example
A QFA aircraft is flying with a defect, which has been deferred under the CASA approved MEL, for rectification, within the allowable time frame of Cat A, B or C.
The allowable time frame for recification expires due to lack of spares, lack of manpower, lack of anything.
The questions to you,... MP...., are
1. What happens now ?
The spares are a week away, the CASA approved MEL states, to the effect, that the defect must be rectified within a time frame that has expired.
2. Legally, can the aircraft fly?
If so how ?, who takes the responsability should a incident occur after the MEL has expired, that is directly related to the defect?. Who will be answerable in a court of law?
From your posts I doubt that you even know what MEL stands for.....(a hint, it does not stand for Melbourne).
Let all the readers see how you knowledgeable you are with regards to QF maintenance procedures!
Prove yourself as someone who knows what they are posting about, and should be taken seriously by QF LAMES.
3.Do you hold an CASA AME Licence?
4. Have you ever certified of the competion of maintenace on a group 20 aircraft.
Don't bother about pointing out spelling mistakes, I know the answer to the first 2 questions, and can say yes to the second 2.
Good Luck
Everything within the PM is CASA approved, or should I dare to say, rubber stamped, any deviation from the CAR'S are approved internally by CASA approved persons employed by QF.
CASA monitor, and the rest of the industry would have no idea as to the details of the deviation.
CASA monitoring depends on manpower and the politics of the situation.
The purpose of the posts are to show every reader that MP Imposter has no knowledge of how the system works within QF, has no access to the QF policy manual and therefore "throws stones in glass houses" to wind QF LAME'S up.
He/She has an opinion, which he/she has a right to post, however, that opinion is irrelevent with regards to QF's system of maintenance, as I do not believe MP has any idea of how it works.
His/Her comments are uninformed rubbish, from someone who thinks that all things are equal. Guess what, they are not in the real world.
Example
A QFA aircraft is flying with a defect, which has been deferred under the CASA approved MEL, for rectification, within the allowable time frame of Cat A, B or C.
The allowable time frame for recification expires due to lack of spares, lack of manpower, lack of anything.
The questions to you,... MP...., are
1. What happens now ?
The spares are a week away, the CASA approved MEL states, to the effect, that the defect must be rectified within a time frame that has expired.
2. Legally, can the aircraft fly?
If so how ?, who takes the responsability should a incident occur after the MEL has expired, that is directly related to the defect?. Who will be answerable in a court of law?
From your posts I doubt that you even know what MEL stands for.....(a hint, it does not stand for Melbourne).
Let all the readers see how you knowledgeable you are with regards to QF maintenance procedures!
Prove yourself as someone who knows what they are posting about, and should be taken seriously by QF LAMES.
3.Do you hold an CASA AME Licence?
4. Have you ever certified of the competion of maintenace on a group 20 aircraft.
Don't bother about pointing out spelling mistakes, I know the answer to the first 2 questions, and can say yes to the second 2.
Good Luck
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: WZRCHS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where is MP IMPOSTER and his/her answers.
To be fair, let's see and give him/her a chance to answer.
I am quite happy to read MP IMPOSTERS posts, to see, and try to understand, a different perspective of events with the industry, especially QF.
Still, the time has come for MP IMPOSTER to prove that he/she actually has a knoweldge of what he/she is writing about.
MP, no rush for your answers, however pls remember that 90% of lame's employed by QF reading this forum, will never listen to you again until you do...and then you have to be right...I will give you the same as CASA and QF gave me..... 75% you pass, 74% you fail..l!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cheers and good luck,
Splash.......
I am quite happy to read MP IMPOSTERS posts, to see, and try to understand, a different perspective of events with the industry, especially QF.
Still, the time has come for MP IMPOSTER to prove that he/she actually has a knoweldge of what he/she is writing about.
MP, no rush for your answers, however pls remember that 90% of lame's employed by QF reading this forum, will never listen to you again until you do...and then you have to be right...I will give you the same as CASA and QF gave me..... 75% you pass, 74% you fail..l!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cheers and good luck,
Splash.......
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: WZRCHS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh give the man/lady a chance,
He/she might be on one of Mr Harris's, Qantas sponsered, weekends away. Paddleing up the whatever river, feeling good, and having no problems about shafting the people who have worked along side them, and taught them a thing or two about aircraft maintenace.
Before you sign off on the expenditure, Mr David Cox, think about how much all these trips have cost, and what has been achieved. Hope the shareholders agree.
The only one gaining from all this is Fred and Co.
He/she might be on one of Mr Harris's, Qantas sponsered, weekends away. Paddleing up the whatever river, feeling good, and having no problems about shafting the people who have worked along side them, and taught them a thing or two about aircraft maintenace.
Before you sign off on the expenditure, Mr David Cox, think about how much all these trips have cost, and what has been achieved. Hope the shareholders agree.
The only one gaining from all this is Fred and Co.