Wheel breaks at tulla
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear a handful of VIRGIN LAME's are applying for jobs with the white Kangaroo....
And surely it has to be "LAME's", not "LAME". Why would you remove the 's if there are more than one?
....
me
And surely it has to be "LAME's", not "LAME". Why would you remove the 's if there are more than one?
....
me
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pre flight checks... Performed by a qualified Licenced engineer, trained specifically on the aircraft type he/she is dispatching. Generally with 10 to 35 years of industry experience carrying out various levels of visual inspections, component installation and damage assessment... Removed.
Flight readiness check... Performed by an individual with 6 months Line maintenance experience... Introduced.
I was pleased to see Mr Purvinas touch on changes to Virgin's maintenance schedule during his interview this morning in a public medium, and I applaud your honesty Mr Hammer for presenting the facts to pprune readers.
While Virgin's new and obviously cost effective maintenance program is within CASA guidelines, I fail to comprehend how the "race to the bottom" attitude towards aircraft preventative maintenance is in the best interests of the Australian aviation industry and the general flying public.
My two cents..
Flight readiness check... Performed by an individual with 6 months Line maintenance experience... Introduced.
I was pleased to see Mr Purvinas touch on changes to Virgin's maintenance schedule during his interview this morning in a public medium, and I applaud your honesty Mr Hammer for presenting the facts to pprune readers.
While Virgin's new and obviously cost effective maintenance program is within CASA guidelines, I fail to comprehend how the "race to the bottom" attitude towards aircraft preventative maintenance is in the best interests of the Australian aviation industry and the general flying public.
My two cents..
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Where the beer is cold!!
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Black hands..Obviously a mechanical trade!! So after your last post you wouldnt be one of those Airframe Engine guys that think they should be able to sign off Avionic work since you have had years of experience on type and know what your looking at?? (10 to 35 years) where did that come from?? And be paid the same?? gee i wonder how half the Eba s get up.. Oh thats right the majority vote is greasers..
I dont agree with most things that happen these days,one thing i personally think should never change is..
1 Your Avionics you are Avionics..
2 Your Mechanical you are Mechanical..
3 Your a Pilot you are a Pilot..
4 Your a Ground handler you are a ground handler..
5 Your a Flight Attendant you are a Flight Attendant..
Etc the list goes on..
As for Casa and the Airlines signing off on being qualified to do everything,what a load of ****!! It takes years of basic trade and on the the job experience before that tick in the box means anything..But due to public demand on airfares its all about money!! Qf JQ and VB are all the same..Im guessing your Qf and if you think VBs practices are bad just look in your own back yard after they come back from heavy maintenance!!
My 2 cents worth..
I dont agree with most things that happen these days,one thing i personally think should never change is..
1 Your Avionics you are Avionics..
2 Your Mechanical you are Mechanical..
3 Your a Pilot you are a Pilot..
4 Your a Ground handler you are a ground handler..
5 Your a Flight Attendant you are a Flight Attendant..
Etc the list goes on..
As for Casa and the Airlines signing off on being qualified to do everything,what a load of ****!! It takes years of basic trade and on the the job experience before that tick in the box means anything..But due to public demand on airfares its all about money!! Qf JQ and VB are all the same..Im guessing your Qf and if you think VBs practices are bad just look in your own back yard after they come back from heavy maintenance!!
My 2 cents worth..
1. Wheel halves are aluminium forgings.
2. They have a working life limit, most probably in number of cycles.
3. They don't always make it to the life limit.
4. Increase the the time between inspections, get more failures.
2. They have a working life limit, most probably in number of cycles.
3. They don't always make it to the life limit.
4. Increase the the time between inspections, get more failures.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know what they say about making assumptions...
Beeroclock, I am on the same page and echo your sentiments entirely. As a QF Lame I would be the last one to throw stones regarding the direction Australian maintenance is trending.
I am a firm believer that quality heavy maintenance is the key to dispatch reliability, and the most efficient way to carry out line maintenance, ensuring defects are diagnosed and rectified with minimal schedule interruption is to meet the aircraft with Lame's of both trades.
Whilst I understand an airline is a business, it also provides a public service and unfortunately, as long as the regulator allows aircraft operators to risk manage dispatch reliability and safety vs wage restraint, we will continue to see avoidable incidents.
You also questioned how I arrived at the experience level of the engineers that generally work in a line maintenance environment... In my experience, especially at QF in recent times,very few, if any, engineers are licenced within 6 years of completing their apprenticeship.
Beeroclock, I hope this eases your mind that not all blackhanders are out to try and steal your livelihood.
You couldn't be further from the truth...
Beeroclock, I am on the same page and echo your sentiments entirely. As a QF Lame I would be the last one to throw stones regarding the direction Australian maintenance is trending.
I am a firm believer that quality heavy maintenance is the key to dispatch reliability, and the most efficient way to carry out line maintenance, ensuring defects are diagnosed and rectified with minimal schedule interruption is to meet the aircraft with Lame's of both trades.
Whilst I understand an airline is a business, it also provides a public service and unfortunately, as long as the regulator allows aircraft operators to risk manage dispatch reliability and safety vs wage restraint, we will continue to see avoidable incidents.
You also questioned how I arrived at the experience level of the engineers that generally work in a line maintenance environment... In my experience, especially at QF in recent times,very few, if any, engineers are licenced within 6 years of completing their apprenticeship.
Beeroclock, I hope this eases your mind that not all blackhanders are out to try and steal your livelihood.
You couldn't be further from the truth...
Last edited by Black Hands; 22nd Oct 2009 at 14:06.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We've heard all the excuses before about putting LAMEs where they are needed most - fixing defects - but that won't occur if the defects aren't found which we suspect is the plan by Virgin. Why would we have such thoughts? Firstly because all airlines are about making money and despite what they say about safety before schedule, money always comes first.
Our suspicions are confirmed in the training document course ref VB 214-009/09 recently handed to the Engineers. Page two explains why the Engineering pre-flight is being removed and it is because it is "happening too late in the morning to enable time to rectify any work arising".
So now the check is renamed, it happens at the same time in the morning, but rather than have a highly qualified and experienced LAME carry out the check, an unlicenced approved person will do it after they have completed a 4 hour course.
Our union is not in the business of assisting Virgin to pull the wool over the publics eyes. We will make this a public issue and rightfully so.
To have a LAME carry out an Engineering pre-flight before every single flight would cost less then $1 per ticket. Now, to take him off the first flight of the day, Virgin are saving about 5 cents per ticket.
Our suspicions are confirmed in the training document course ref VB 214-009/09 recently handed to the Engineers. Page two explains why the Engineering pre-flight is being removed and it is because it is "happening too late in the morning to enable time to rectify any work arising".
So now the check is renamed, it happens at the same time in the morning, but rather than have a highly qualified and experienced LAME carry out the check, an unlicenced approved person will do it after they have completed a 4 hour course.
Our union is not in the business of assisting Virgin to pull the wool over the publics eyes. We will make this a public issue and rightfully so.
To have a LAME carry out an Engineering pre-flight before every single flight would cost less then $1 per ticket. Now, to take him off the first flight of the day, Virgin are saving about 5 cents per ticket.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Melb, Oz.
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Conveniently leaving out that the more thorough check will be carried out when the aircraft arrives last flight of day thus giving more time to fix any defects prior to first flight next morning.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Doing a pre flight inspection
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All aircraft are insepected (dailys) after they terminate, so once again the ALAEA are spreading more rubbish
so going Boeing during a daily anything is found before your first flight the next day, lets be honest this incident and the nose wheel incident are both something that can pretty much only be detected during a major check, but ALAEA you contine beating your own 'merry drum'
Sure I may throw bags but I still talk to LAMES and AMES because Im interested in that side of the airline operation.
so going Boeing during a daily anything is found before your first flight the next day, lets be honest this incident and the nose wheel incident are both something that can pretty much only be detected during a major check, but ALAEA you contine beating your own 'merry drum'Sure I may throw bags but I still talk to LAMES and AMES because Im interested in that side of the airline operation.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Conveniently leaving out that the more thorough check will be carried out when the aircraft arrives last flight of day thus giving more time to fix any defects prior to first flight next morning.
You could now see an aircraft terminate in CNS two nights in a row and not have a LAME walk around inspection for 48 hours.
Not to forget that the weekly inspection is now being moved to every 15 days.
However minor or major some of these changes are, as a stepped process of degradation, every change is reducing safety on these aircraft.
Hardly 'distentigrated' on this occassion the wheel hub didnt come apart until after it was removed , the aircraft taxied to the bay with a 'drag' noticed by the pilots, lets stick to the facts rather than your smear campaign
BOEING 7378FE[3246] WHEEL/SKI/FLOAT - WHEEL FAILED510009365After landing, the aircraft was found difficult to taxi and steer. A visual inspection of the RH landing gear found number four wheel to be on an angle. Wheel was removed and the inner wheel hub and bearing mount were found to have broken away from the wheel assembly.P/NO: 277A6000204TSN: 9854 Hours5711 CyclesTSO: 1776 Hours701 Cycles
If it didn't come apart until after it was removed, why was the aircraft difficult to steer and taxi. The wheel was found on an angle on the bay. Somehow I think we do know the facts.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Doing a pre flight inspection
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it didn't come apart until after it was removed, why was the aircraft difficult to steer and taxi. The wheel was found on an angle on the bay. Somehow I think we do know the facts.
The chance of an aircraft terminating in CNS or in another regional port two nights in a row is slim at best, but how is it an issue if it within CASA guidelines?
If you were any good as a union you make out to be you would not allow LAMES and AMES to be on two different rates at VB, but like all unions your a bunch of chest beaters.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure I may throw bags but I still talk to LAMES and AMES
As with the industry nowdays, costs are run down so low that someday something will give.
Be it a pilot on max hours, an engineer trying to do their job with two hands tied behind their back or an inexperienced, underpaid, under staffed cabin crew, or even a ramper being flogged all day and night, I hope I am not on board on such a day when all the moons align.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
tjc
yep and that is the point.
we are all responsible for our part in the industry for safety.In the loaders case it could be unreported damage to cargo liners, seafood spills tarmac driving around aircraft.
If virgin is increasing the maint level at some stage of the cycle thats a good thing for safety and jobs.Good on them.
If it is further increased as fed sec suggests someone please convince me its bad thing.
If the company were asking for it the trolls would not be here slagging those who are.
So pls the virgin management (read jq, qf, et al) apologists tell me exactly what constitutes too much maintenance and over-inspecting and how that decreases safety?
we are all responsible for our part in the industry for safety.In the loaders case it could be unreported damage to cargo liners, seafood spills tarmac driving around aircraft.
If virgin is increasing the maint level at some stage of the cycle thats a good thing for safety and jobs.Good on them.
If it is further increased as fed sec suggests someone please convince me its bad thing.
If the company were asking for it the trolls would not be here slagging those who are.
So pls the virgin management (read jq, qf, et al) apologists tell me exactly what constitutes too much maintenance and over-inspecting and how that decreases safety?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
vbpcguy
If you were any good as a union you make out to be you would not allow LAMES and AMES to be on two different rates at VB, but like all unions your a bunch of chest beaters.
and as for chest beaters, hell yeah maybe, but they were qf management beaters 1st.
Preflight /Daily insp etc
There is a fundamental fact concerning 90% of a/c incidents involving landing gear. If a brake is worn there is an indicator that can be clearly seen.A fully worn brake unit will usually do one or two trips to a nightstop base or where the downtime will be available if it's a worn tyre, thats obvious and should be changed asap . Cracks in trunnion links immediately, hydraulic leaks asap depending on the LAEs experience knowing when there is going to be adequate downtime with spares available. There is a 100 and 1 items that can be looked at an assessed as ...it will do a trip...that is experience!
I'm speaking with over 40 years exp and a LAE for 2/3rds of that time and I have to say it worries me what I am reading and seeing these days where a 4 hour course on wheels and brakes allows a signatory with 6 months experience to sign off a preflight!!tell me I am wrong!
Boeing and Airbus plus all manufacturers produce a MPD which airline operators tailor their maintenance iaw CASA or whatever national authority standards require in law. AS modern a/c are so reliable all operators will seek to escalate their checks and at the same time load OOP and other required items to the longest downtime checks whether its an A or b or c check . So it is down to consciencious engineers to be vigilant when they get a periodic inspection that work is carried out iaw mm requirements and all DD's cleared as required.
CASA requirements that pertain to current a/c types I have no idea, what I do know is that any a/c that has been on an overnight should have no landing gear problems.ie worn tyres or brakes! No excuse if at a manned engineering base . A PDI well before STD time would mean an ontime ATD.
Any engineering personnel who have signed out an a/c with an obvious problem have no excuse! An engineering failure for a corroded mainwheel what I heard on the news is a load of B........cks... !!! There is a story somewhere down the line on this mainwheel and a good development or QA eng will have the answer!
I was an original member of the UK ALAE retired a few years ago and have to say some of what I read these days do worry me...especially when I fly!!
But I know ramp engineers can have a rough time if they are trying to make the right decision with anything upwards of 100+ plus pax wondering what is going on when confronted with a problem !
I'm speaking with over 40 years exp and a LAE for 2/3rds of that time and I have to say it worries me what I am reading and seeing these days where a 4 hour course on wheels and brakes allows a signatory with 6 months experience to sign off a preflight!!tell me I am wrong!
Boeing and Airbus plus all manufacturers produce a MPD which airline operators tailor their maintenance iaw CASA or whatever national authority standards require in law. AS modern a/c are so reliable all operators will seek to escalate their checks and at the same time load OOP and other required items to the longest downtime checks whether its an A or b or c check . So it is down to consciencious engineers to be vigilant when they get a periodic inspection that work is carried out iaw mm requirements and all DD's cleared as required.
CASA requirements that pertain to current a/c types I have no idea, what I do know is that any a/c that has been on an overnight should have no landing gear problems.ie worn tyres or brakes! No excuse if at a manned engineering base . A PDI well before STD time would mean an ontime ATD.
Any engineering personnel who have signed out an a/c with an obvious problem have no excuse! An engineering failure for a corroded mainwheel what I heard on the news is a load of B........cks... !!! There is a story somewhere down the line on this mainwheel and a good development or QA eng will have the answer!
I was an original member of the UK ALAE retired a few years ago and have to say some of what I read these days do worry me...especially when I fly!!
But I know ramp engineers can have a rough time if they are trying to make the right decision with anything upwards of 100+ plus pax wondering what is going on when confronted with a problem !
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever VB and other airlines say, whether it is within the manufacturers guidelines etc etc, the less input a fully qualified (ie LAME) has then the less likely things are to be found. As CASA is now starting to go down the route of EASA style LAME licenses, you will see a huge erosion of the input from LAME's. More and more work will be given to the 'A' licenced mechanic. Obviously some of these are excellent, but at the end of the day the levels of experience for the majority of them is no where near the same as for a LAME. Removing the preflight by a LAME will be detrimentall to safety. As we all know it is all down to money...a LAME costs more.....if it wasn't about money then the airlines wouldnt do it. Simple.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NWT - 100% correct - the LAME preflight is not a luxury.
This is just another example of the regulatory regime being eroded in order to pander to airlines crying poor.
It will, like other safety processes that have been cut, ultimately end up in a coroner's report.
The SMS however will evade the Directors and CEO liability.
It is way past the time for the Minister to wake up and tug on the delegations lead.
Re: the wheel.
Heard a comment the a/c previously took a bit of a serious shunt from the aerobridge at pier F (like the 737 earlier this year) ? Any confirmation of the incident? - then of course the question is was it reported?
This is just another example of the regulatory regime being eroded in order to pander to airlines crying poor.
It will, like other safety processes that have been cut, ultimately end up in a coroner's report.
The SMS however will evade the Directors and CEO liability.
It is way past the time for the Minister to wake up and tug on the delegations lead.
Re: the wheel.
Heard a comment the a/c previously took a bit of a serious shunt from the aerobridge at pier F (like the 737 earlier this year) ? Any confirmation of the incident? - then of course the question is was it reported?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"the LAME preflight is not a luxury."
To be honest, it actually is just that. I have worked as a LAME at several different airlines in Europe, and there was no LAME Pre-flight required. The pilot could carry out and sign for the check. This is a fairly common practice, and has been for some time, and there are not aircraft falling out of the sky all over Europe on a regular basis.
And how about the E-Jets at VB? They have never needed a LAME pre-flight. Are they so much more unsafe because of it? (No, they are more unreliable because they are made by Embraer, but that is another discussion!
)
The fact is, VB were getting a lot of delays to the first flight of the day because guys were finding wheel and brake changes on the pre-flight. This was NOT, I can assure you, only on aircraft that had not had a Daily that night. So who is to blame? VB management, or the slack **** who couldn't be bothered to change that worn brake unit because he wanted to get off home early on his last night shift? Let's not kid ourselves that it doesn't go on either......
I am no fan of cutting maintenance, but if I'm really honest, I do not think that the changes to the SOM are really detrimental to the safety of the fleet. So the 737s will now have a 15 day service check? Big deal. The E-jet already has one. CASA have approved these changes and so legally VB are doing nothing wrong except perhaps trying to save a bit more cash without compromising safety. There is no way that that mainwheel assy would have been flagged as a dud if a LAME had done a walk around before VUI's flight. If there were no crew reports on the taxi out, there may well have been no outward indication of a defect. In that case it really doesn't matter if anyone, let alone a LAME did a walkround.
As for the ports where no Daily will be called up, well I would like to think that if there is a LAME at the airport when the aircraft terminates, he would, out of professionalism if nothing else, carry out a walkround of the aircraft. It should be a given in my opinion. If he choses not to, he falls into the slack **** category mentioned above, and again this is a problem with the LAME concerned, not with the VB SOM.
I know how reluctant to change people are, but rarely does it become the monster a lot of people feared. I saw the U.K move from LWTR to the Part 66 licence, and it was full of doom and gloom for years. All about how the B2 would disappear and the B1s would be signing off every defect willy nilly and planes would crashing all the time. It hasn't happened, and it won't happen here. As a friend said to me once: "sometimes you know the tide is changing and you can't stop it. All you can do is roll up your pants so they don't get wet".
I'm sure I'll get flamed now by the Fed Sec et al, but hopefully some of you will aknowledge (at least in your own head, if not aloud) that at the end of the day, we can moan about all the changes to save a few bucks here and there, but it's those few bucks that may keep the airline afloat and us all in a job. Who wants another Ansett?
To be honest, it actually is just that. I have worked as a LAME at several different airlines in Europe, and there was no LAME Pre-flight required. The pilot could carry out and sign for the check. This is a fairly common practice, and has been for some time, and there are not aircraft falling out of the sky all over Europe on a regular basis.
And how about the E-Jets at VB? They have never needed a LAME pre-flight. Are they so much more unsafe because of it? (No, they are more unreliable because they are made by Embraer, but that is another discussion!
)The fact is, VB were getting a lot of delays to the first flight of the day because guys were finding wheel and brake changes on the pre-flight. This was NOT, I can assure you, only on aircraft that had not had a Daily that night. So who is to blame? VB management, or the slack **** who couldn't be bothered to change that worn brake unit because he wanted to get off home early on his last night shift? Let's not kid ourselves that it doesn't go on either......
I am no fan of cutting maintenance, but if I'm really honest, I do not think that the changes to the SOM are really detrimental to the safety of the fleet. So the 737s will now have a 15 day service check? Big deal. The E-jet already has one. CASA have approved these changes and so legally VB are doing nothing wrong except perhaps trying to save a bit more cash without compromising safety. There is no way that that mainwheel assy would have been flagged as a dud if a LAME had done a walk around before VUI's flight. If there were no crew reports on the taxi out, there may well have been no outward indication of a defect. In that case it really doesn't matter if anyone, let alone a LAME did a walkround.
As for the ports where no Daily will be called up, well I would like to think that if there is a LAME at the airport when the aircraft terminates, he would, out of professionalism if nothing else, carry out a walkround of the aircraft. It should be a given in my opinion. If he choses not to, he falls into the slack **** category mentioned above, and again this is a problem with the LAME concerned, not with the VB SOM.
I know how reluctant to change people are, but rarely does it become the monster a lot of people feared. I saw the U.K move from LWTR to the Part 66 licence, and it was full of doom and gloom for years. All about how the B2 would disappear and the B1s would be signing off every defect willy nilly and planes would crashing all the time. It hasn't happened, and it won't happen here. As a friend said to me once: "sometimes you know the tide is changing and you can't stop it. All you can do is roll up your pants so they don't get wet".
I'm sure I'll get flamed now by the Fed Sec et al, but hopefully some of you will aknowledge (at least in your own head, if not aloud) that at the end of the day, we can moan about all the changes to save a few bucks here and there, but it's those few bucks that may keep the airline afloat and us all in a job. Who wants another Ansett?
Last edited by anawanahuanana; 23rd Oct 2009 at 11:53.