Melbourne LMO Merger
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar and Virgin don't for their domestic operation, they do daily's. Etops preflights being the exception. Only need to call an engineer out if there is a problem, last time I looked their OTP was pretty close to Qantas.
Even I as a worker for Qantas can see the writing on the wall in this area.
Even I as a worker for Qantas can see the writing on the wall in this area.
OTP is an arbitrary figure and can/is manipulated to suit one's desires/requirements. OTP doesn't come down to just walk-arounds. As I'm sure you'd understand, being a worker with QF, many variables play a role in the final OTP. Late arrivals, connecting flights, NIL/NIL incoming defects, last minute status message, missed catering, etc, etc.
The writing is and has been on the wall for a number of years, and if one doesn't at least question why things are being changed, then as history will show, not only LAME's, but workers in general get steam-rolled into a situation, and then have to dig themselves out of the rubble long after the decision makers are gone. Change should not just be for change sake, but for a real benefit that REALLY improves a work practice. Not just reduce a cost so it looks good for the bean counters, and the manager implementing it gets a feather in his/her cap.
As blackhands said, OTP can be really great when you don't look at defects. If policies and maintenance practices were to be followed to the letter, barely an aeroplane would get off the ground in the turnaround times scheduled.
I seem to have noticed over the recent years that Safety Before Schedule or Take 5 has died a quiet death. Not saying to drag your feet and deliberately delay an aeroplane, but if a delay is going to happen, so be it. Much cheaper to have a 10-15 minute delay than having something blowing out the side of an aircraft at 30,000ft or experiencing darkness on approach to BKK in the night, etc, etc.
Read the mechanic's creed below. Something lost with management and some engineers in pursuit of their own agenda:
"Mechanic's Creed
UPON MY HONOR I swear that I shall hold in sacred
trust the rights and privileges conferred upon me as a
certified mechanic. Knowing full well that the safety and lives
of others are dependent upon my skill and judgment, I shall
never knowingly subject others to risks which I would not be
willing to assume for myself, or for those dear to me.
IN DISCHARGING this trust, I pledge myself never to
undertake work or approve work which I feel to be beyond
the limits of my knowledge; nor shall I allow any non certificate
superior to persuade me to approve aircraft or equipment
as airworthy against my better judgment; nor shall
I permit my judgment to be influenced by money or other
personal gain; nor shall I pass as airworthy aircraft or equipment
about which I am in doubt, either as a result of direct
inspection or uncertainty regarding the ability of others who
have worked on it to accomplish their work satisfactorily.
I REALIZE the grave responsibility which is mine as a
certified airman, to exercise my judgment on the airworthiness
of aircraft and equipment. I, therefore, pledge unyielding adherence
to these precepts for the advancement of aviation and for
the dignity of my vocation."
You can read this at:
The Mechanic's Creed-Aviation Maintenance - Topic Powered by Eve Community
Some may say it's tacky or corny, but when you actually read what is written, it's as applicable today as it was when it was written. The job and responsibility to the job has not changed. That is the writing on the wall that I read.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will be surprised if the LAME less tarmac is not back on the agenda.
This can only be for the Domestic ops as International ops require LAMES regardless, i.e New Gen A/c, multi eng A/c, etc.
You have to remember that these current managers, like before, are followers and not leaders as they look at what the rest of the world is doing, not willing to make their own decisions.
Funny thing with the overseas airlines that these managers cite, the log still has to be answered each transit, (even NIL), just no walk around certified for. Under our current regs, a LAME is required to answer the log. So currently, I see no gain, unless a reg shift is on the cards, (EASA still reqs log answered).
This can only be for the Domestic ops as International ops require LAMES regardless, i.e New Gen A/c, multi eng A/c, etc.
You have to remember that these current managers, like before, are followers and not leaders as they look at what the rest of the world is doing, not willing to make their own decisions.
Funny thing with the overseas airlines that these managers cite, the log still has to be answered each transit, (even NIL), just no walk around certified for. Under our current regs, a LAME is required to answer the log. So currently, I see no gain, unless a reg shift is on the cards, (EASA still reqs log answered).
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
A couple of weeks ago I heard that a sharp eyed line mech noticed a dodgy tyre just prior to push. (ex hangars). They put a gauge on it and it was around 100psi. Tyre was replaced before the plane took off, avoiding a burst on takeoff roll.
Now fast fwd a few years (if we have a LAME-less tarmac), then the results would definately be very different indeed.....
Just some food for thought.
Safety always has its price. And if we are happy to save a few thousand by removing LAMEs off the tarmac, yet pay a few mill for a CEO (who did a cr@p job), then there is something seriously wrong with our business principles.
Now fast fwd a few years (if we have a LAME-less tarmac), then the results would definately be very different indeed.....
Just some food for thought.
Safety always has its price. And if we are happy to save a few thousand by removing LAMEs off the tarmac, yet pay a few mill for a CEO (who did a cr@p job), then there is something seriously wrong with our business principles.
Last edited by Ngineer; 10th Dec 2009 at 00:51.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: brisbane
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heads in the sand......or somewhere else
yes yes yes ...the no lame preflt is only for domstic ops it always was....and yes a nil does require sign off,but not only from a lame a cat A can sign....but fast fwd a little if the pilot does not put "nil" in the book[maybe he/she will be told not enter anything if nothing wrong]...well there you have a situation where you dont need a lame....of course you will always need lame's but maybe a lot less on tarmac ....dont for one second think that they would get rid of us if they could or at the very least down size us in line,thats what they did in heavy,and now bne and mel come under heavy mmmmm something brewing
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safety always has its price. And if we are happy to save a few thousand by removing LAMEs off the tarmac, yet pay a few mill for a CEO (who did a cr@p job), then there is something seriously wrong with our business principles.
The LAMEless tarmac is for domestics only, as international have New Gen aircraft? What about the NG737, A330 and the 787, if/when it arrives? They're all new gen aircraft, and used/will be used on the domestic sectors.
I'm beyond trying to work out what management are up to or the silly mind games they play at. They do nothing but threaten us and play the doom and gloom game, and some of us engineers buy it, which leads to the divide we have.
Two things are infinite: The universe and management's stupidity; I'm just not sure about the universe. Just a little play on Einstein's words.
I guess if you turn a deaf ear to management's dribble, they may just stop dribbling. Who knows? Stranger things have happened.
Funny thing with the overseas airlines that these managers cite, the log still has to be answered each transit, (even NIL), just no walk around certified for. Under our current regs, a LAME is required to answer the log. So currently, I see no gain, unless a reg shift is on the cards, (EASA still reqs log answered).
A couple of weeks ago I heard that a sharp eyed line mech noticed a dodgy tyre just prior to push. (ex hangars). They put a gauge on it and it was around 100psi. Tyre was replaced before the plane took off, avoiding a burst on takeoff roll.
Thats how the system of maintenance is designed, its all in place for LAME-less tarmac, it will just cost Qantas too much in workforce dissent at the moment.
ETOPS being the only exception to all of the above as it is elsewhere in the world.
As you can see, Jetstar come in and go all day long, Virgin come in and go all day long. None of their jets have speared in yet. The cost vs product works out in their favour.
Its not like we are going to be unemployed, there is still plenty of work to be done, new aircraft are arriving every week, they are still mechanical beasts and need engineers to do actual work to fix them, but the days of signing for a check 1 nil nil are coming to an end I believe.
It's a bit like the music industry fighting the digital audio format and pirating on the internet. They are making a big fuss about it and the drop in CD sales but the world moved on 5 years ago, they just haven't realised yet.
Once again, this is just my opinion.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
A couple of weeks ago I heard that a sharp eyed line mech noticed a dodgy tyre just prior to push. (ex hangars). They put a gauge on it and it was around 100psi. Tyre was replaced before the plane took off, avoiding a burst on takeoff roll.
Yes a good find no doubt, but the pilot does a walkaround inspection, CASA are happy with just that. Ask Virgin. The justification that an incident somewhere was avoided because of someone won't stop CASA joining the rest of the world. You're not even supposed to be checking the tyres of wear, only for damage(which the pilot is supposed to do) on the transits anyway. Thats what a check 3 is for. In the eyes of CASA and Qantas, if you are doing your job properly then the next day of flying should not have any issues with worn tyres, as an example.
A couple of weeks ago I heard that a sharp eyed line mech noticed a dodgy tyre just prior to push. (ex hangars). They put a gauge on it and it was around 100psi. Tyre was replaced before the plane took off, avoiding a burst on takeoff roll.
Yes a good find no doubt, but the pilot does a walkaround inspection, CASA are happy with just that. Ask Virgin. The justification that an incident somewhere was avoided because of someone won't stop CASA joining the rest of the world. You're not even supposed to be checking the tyres of wear, only for damage(which the pilot is supposed to do) on the transits anyway. Thats what a check 3 is for. In the eyes of CASA and Qantas, if you are doing your job properly then the next day of flying should not have any issues with worn tyres, as an example.
We know QF and CASA work hand-in-glove so QF can get its way. Sure Virgin and Jet* come and go domestically without LAME's on every transit.
I've seen some (not all) pilots on their walkaround, and they're either looking skyward, past the aeroplane, or won't get too close to the aeroplane in case they get their tie greased or rub against a wheel.
All in all, another cost reduction program that will cost more than is actually saved. LAMEless tarmacs may be coming to a domestic terminal near you, but if history is anything to go by, the tarmacs could be filled once again with LAME's as it may be realised that a premium airline actually needs premium servicing on its transits.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In what I'm sure to many will appear a futile, final, desperate attempt to minimise obvious "system induced error" scenarios and maintain some semblance of pride in my chosen vocation, I will continue to carry out extremely vigilant walkaround inspections of my allocated aircraft regardless of QANTAS policy for non-er transit aircraft, submitting form 500's and SDR's for all discrepancies noted throughout the duration of the turnaround...
Whilst I endeavour to understand the many commercial pressures faced by airlines operating in todays environment, the ability to comprehend the "race to the bottom" philosophy regarding aircraft preventative maintenance continues to evade me... As long as my bum points to the ground, the safety of the aircraft and those on board will remain my priority...
A pin prick, you betcha...
"If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles"... Sun Tzu.
Whilst I endeavour to understand the many commercial pressures faced by airlines operating in todays environment, the ability to comprehend the "race to the bottom" philosophy regarding aircraft preventative maintenance continues to evade me... As long as my bum points to the ground, the safety of the aircraft and those on board will remain my priority...
A pin prick, you betcha...
"If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles"... Sun Tzu.
Last edited by Black Hands; 11th Dec 2009 at 16:05.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Black Hands said above.
Correct me if I'm wrong 600ft lb, and I'm not crticising you, but isn't our job's priority to avoid incidents? From an engineering perspective anyway as we have no control of an aeroplane once it's dispatched.
If we see something wrong, we fix it. Tyre wear is part of a pre-flight. When inspecting for tyre damage, you invariably look at the tyre/wheel assembly as a whole. Tyre shoulder wear, under-inflation, missing or broken wheel tie bolts, cuts, etc etc.
I believe the idea of preventative maintenance is lost on management. Prevention is better than cure, and a whole lot cheaper in the long run. In the past, we may have over-serviced our aircraft, but it sure is a lot better than under-servicing and having the problems we now have. As aircraft age, it necessarily follows that more servicing and maintenace will be required. The RR 744's now avaerage about 15-16 years in age. The GE 763's and the 734's just a little bit more.
As new as the 330's and 380's are, they have their fair share of problems, that need more LAME's/AME's per aircraft than their older counterparts.
We are on a track to nowhere, as the plan is set in motion and is only a matter of time before it comes into play. As LAME's, we still have to do our job, and that is to maintain and keep the aircraft in the best possible condition we can, regardless of cost-cutting measures being implemented.
Yes a good find no doubt, but the pilot does a walkaround inspection, CASA are happy with just that. Ask Virgin. The justification that an incident somewhere was avoided because of someone won't stop CASA joining the rest of the world. You're not even supposed to be checking the tyres of wear, only for damage(which the pilot is supposed to do) on the transits anyway. Thats what a check 3 is for. In the eyes of CASA and Qantas, if you are doing your job properly then the next day of flying should not have any issues with worn tyres, as an example.
If we see something wrong, we fix it. Tyre wear is part of a pre-flight. When inspecting for tyre damage, you invariably look at the tyre/wheel assembly as a whole. Tyre shoulder wear, under-inflation, missing or broken wheel tie bolts, cuts, etc etc.
I believe the idea of preventative maintenance is lost on management. Prevention is better than cure, and a whole lot cheaper in the long run. In the past, we may have over-serviced our aircraft, but it sure is a lot better than under-servicing and having the problems we now have. As aircraft age, it necessarily follows that more servicing and maintenace will be required. The RR 744's now avaerage about 15-16 years in age. The GE 763's and the 734's just a little bit more.
As new as the 330's and 380's are, they have their fair share of problems, that need more LAME's/AME's per aircraft than their older counterparts.
We are on a track to nowhere, as the plan is set in motion and is only a matter of time before it comes into play. As LAME's, we still have to do our job, and that is to maintain and keep the aircraft in the best possible condition we can, regardless of cost-cutting measures being implemented.
Last edited by QF94; 13th Dec 2009 at 10:33.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: brisbane
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oooohhh aaaahhhh
dont get me wrong i am all for maintaining our aircraft and for the safety of all who fly ....but beating our chest and quoting some chinaman about war and bodies floating past does nothing for our image...if the company change the way we do things then it will change and not much you can do about ....yes i hear you saying i will go out there and snag the sh*t out of it ......what if you are not there.....then in a few months i can see the lames that are left looking out the windows saying gee we used to actually go out to the aircraft.....hey who's deal
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
If any one believes there is, or ever will be, an excess of LAME's -I suggest you should think again! If still in doubt just ask CASA!
I am sure if there is a shortage of LAMEs then QF can have the regulations changed to sidestep this issue.
Who is "CASA"? Don't you mean Qf?
I am sure if there is a shortage of LAMEs then QF can have the regulations changed to sidestep this issue
I am sure if there is a shortage of LAMEs then QF can have the regulations changed to sidestep this issue
I defer to your obvious knowledge having just gleaned the contents of CASA's NPRM0604MS!!!!!! CASA does it again!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the loss of customer airlines the combined LMO workforce must now be overstaffed.Whereto for the LAME once they are now longer reqd for domestic turnarounds?
With all the noise about the shortfall in domestics, it sounds like they are going to suffer a similar fate as the S.I.T. boys. We had our customers scared off by QF management, and they now want LAMEless tarmacs at domestic.
Surplus guys might even get offered VR.....NOT!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I defer to your obvious knowledge having just gleaned the contents of CASA's NPRM0604MS
It is absolutely critical that a response to the NPRM is sent by as many LAMEs as possible, before Friday.
Pass this on.
Just another ruling to degenerate standards.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: brisbane
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
too late...hahahah...sorry a joke in another time...but
yes its past friday's dead line but casa will still take replys so send them in ....i have sent my own in[some what longer]but all responces will be received by our regulator....unfortunally i dont think much will happen as i think that casa has endured much bashing in the media of late and a change in the way we do things will give the public the idear that casa has made some changes and all will be good again.......some of the changes are already in some form and most are already covered by QF's PPM ,,,,get use to it "times are a changing" ....dont get me wrong i dont like it........DBM
