Defect Reports
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
angryrat,
someone posed the question. I dont think anyone has made an accusation.It is pleasing to see you take offence. It shows integrity.
I dont know any Q pilot who has, or would knowingly fly with defects to keep getting paid but I do not want a situation to ever get to that either.
I worked for an OS contractor long ago and there was an incentive to fly.
Not all airlines are as good or as clean as Q pilot group or culture. We however cannot predict the future.
The industry is being dumbed down imho with new rules to allow cheaper, less qualified labour where financial or employment pressures may come to pass. That is something we must fight as professional groups. The engineering group is being carved up and I know the vast majority of them are digging in to uphold standards against quite tough time constraints.
Don't get cut by comments on largely anonymous chat rooms, just keep doing the right thing.
someone posed the question. I dont think anyone has made an accusation.It is pleasing to see you take offence. It shows integrity.
I dont know any Q pilot who has, or would knowingly fly with defects to keep getting paid but I do not want a situation to ever get to that either.
I worked for an OS contractor long ago and there was an incentive to fly.
Not all airlines are as good or as clean as Q pilot group or culture. We however cannot predict the future.
The industry is being dumbed down imho with new rules to allow cheaper, less qualified labour where financial or employment pressures may come to pass. That is something we must fight as professional groups. The engineering group is being carved up and I know the vast majority of them are digging in to uphold standards against quite tough time constraints.
Don't get cut by comments on largely anonymous chat rooms, just keep doing the right thing.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Past the rabbit proof fence
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you think you have lost the support of some pilots, I think you are paranoid as it is in our interest to have good aircraft.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Gods Country
Age: 65
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok guys at the risk of shooting from the hip, I will state only fact as I was personally there. I'm not getting into specifics.
A Narrow Body RPT tech crew from a normally unmanned station had an intermittent defect pre-dept, which if it reoccured would result in shutdown of a significant system.The flight would still proceed to base but in a degraded state.They elected not to write it up until return to main base as if they did it would result in a delay due to troubleshooting.There prime concern was running out of hours which would preclude them from a 8 hour flying day the next day and losing pay.
This was stated to me!
They were very professional guys and I would have no problem flying with them or that A/C which I didnt due to other commitments.
ITS JUST TO SHOW YOU IT DOES HAPPEN! NOT ALL DEFECTS ARE REPORTED UNTIL RETURN TO A MANNED BASE. If you disagree you either dont fly regularly to an unmmaned station or your too inexperienced to know.
Sorry, I dont mean to upset anyone, be it right or wrong this is a commercial fact.
A Narrow Body RPT tech crew from a normally unmanned station had an intermittent defect pre-dept, which if it reoccured would result in shutdown of a significant system.The flight would still proceed to base but in a degraded state.They elected not to write it up until return to main base as if they did it would result in a delay due to troubleshooting.There prime concern was running out of hours which would preclude them from a 8 hour flying day the next day and losing pay.
This was stated to me!
They were very professional guys and I would have no problem flying with them or that A/C which I didnt due to other commitments.
ITS JUST TO SHOW YOU IT DOES HAPPEN! NOT ALL DEFECTS ARE REPORTED UNTIL RETURN TO A MANNED BASE. If you disagree you either dont fly regularly to an unmmaned station or your too inexperienced to know.
Sorry, I dont mean to upset anyone, be it right or wrong this is a commercial fact.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HF3000 and other Crew who always do the right thing please understand. We have raised these issues with CASA and Qantas and they don't care. We know nearly all of you do the right thing but some do not. I have started this thread in an area where us as aviation people can talk about it because I don't know what else to do. I said before, it is not AIPAs job to pass it on.
The sad thing is that CASA and the airline don't care. The thread originally started with a pretty tame example that can be explained away as a paperwork error. I have one now that is real and in my view is shocking. What am I supposed to do with it? Without too much detail it goes like this -
If the above example was legit (I have seen the paperwork so pretty sure it is) does anyone think it ok to report a defect that has been known over 4 sectors on the last one?
The sad thing is that CASA and the airline don't care. The thread originally started with a pretty tame example that can be explained away as a paperwork error. I have one now that is real and in my view is shocking. What am I supposed to do with it? Without too much detail it goes like this -
- Nil
- Nil
- Nil
- After takeoff nose wheel vibration progressively getting worse each of last 4 sectors.
If the above example was legit (I have seen the paperwork so pretty sure it is) does anyone think it ok to report a defect that has been known over 4 sectors on the last one?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The company response would be, policy requires technical crew to enter defects into the log as soon as the defect is recognised.
I wouldn't be going out of my way to provide band aid solutions, in turn putting my tenure or licence on the line in the process.
Especially so that some other desk dweller can achieve their targeted KPI's.
MC
I wouldn't be going out of my way to provide band aid solutions, in turn putting my tenure or licence on the line in the process.
Especially so that some other desk dweller can achieve their targeted KPI's.
MC
Doesn't AIPA put out a quarterly magazine to members? Why not talk to them about submitting an article to help pilot education. Talk about defect reporting, MOD, common errors, traps, oversights. An education piece.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is terrible the way things are going, loss of lots of Engineering jobs and loss of LAME preflights, glad I am now retired and away from it all.
This sort of thing went on for all the 40 odd years I was in the Industry, but NOT if it was written up.
We had aircraft every day go up say to ROK-MKY-ROK and back to BNE with no defects then have many written up on return to BNE.
Often used to even get aircraft arrive from MEL via SYD (a major base) and have many defects logged into BNE, if you asked the Pilots what SYD said they would usually say we did not bother telling them as they would not do anything.
Not QF, the other mob.
This sort of thing went on for all the 40 odd years I was in the Industry, but NOT if it was written up.
We had aircraft every day go up say to ROK-MKY-ROK and back to BNE with no defects then have many written up on return to BNE.
Often used to even get aircraft arrive from MEL via SYD (a major base) and have many defects logged into BNE, if you asked the Pilots what SYD said they would usually say we did not bother telling them as they would not do anything.
Not QF, the other mob.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fed Sec. In answer to your LAX Hangar question.
A New hangar is to be (maybe even being) built in LAX, (Would make sense to be A380 capable) as the old double 747 hangar needs to be demolished (Maybe even gone by now) to accommodate the TBIT extension and relocation of one of theNorth South Taxiways.
Also heard (which is rumour) that some of the more eminent /critically acclaimed A380 engineering staff are being prepared for a sojourn in SOCAL. Who knows CN may be CEO yet!
A New hangar is to be (maybe even being) built in LAX, (Would make sense to be A380 capable) as the old double 747 hangar needs to be demolished (Maybe even gone by now) to accommodate the TBIT extension and relocation of one of theNorth South Taxiways.
Also heard (which is rumour) that some of the more eminent /critically acclaimed A380 engineering staff are being prepared for a sojourn in SOCAL. Who knows CN may be CEO yet!
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Perth
Age: 66
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concerned
Well I can assure you of this. I have never gone public during my career within the QF Group, ever. So this is the first time, something has to be done. The last 18 months has become so bad that many of us Drivers are actually seriously concerned while taking the wheel in some aircraft. We rely on Engineers and safety systems to keep us safe, as well as our own ability. Many of us do not have that confidence any more that when we enter the aircraft we will arrive safely at our destination.
We can read it on the engineers faces. We see it in the reports. We hear it during our walkarounds and then we see things first hand. Our final line of defense, the regulator, has been captured by the red beast and is toothless to act.
When will it end? Or more to the point, how will it end?
We can read it on the engineers faces. We see it in the reports. We hear it during our walkarounds and then we see things first hand. Our final line of defense, the regulator, has been captured by the red beast and is toothless to act.
When will it end? Or more to the point, how will it end?
It will end with smoking holes my friend. It always does.
Then there will be a belated realisation that Qantas has lost engineering control of its fleet. There will be a lot of hand waving about worlds best practice contractors and so on, but a simple audit will demonstrate "gaps" in the maintenance records of most if not all of the fleet.
This is what destroyed Ansett - the inability to determine the maintenance state of its fleet, leaving CASA with no choice but to pull its operators certificate.
To put that another way and in case a journo might be reading: An Aircraft is just a pile of scrap metal unless the entire operation and maintenance history of virtually every part of it is both certified and recorded and available at all times for scrutiny.
To put that another way, you don't get to declare an aircraft is airworthy, you have to be able to PROVE it is airworthy. If you have insufficient proof, then its just junk. That is why Ansetts B767 aircraft were broken up for scrap on the tarmac.
Then there will be a belated realisation that Qantas has lost engineering control of its fleet. There will be a lot of hand waving about worlds best practice contractors and so on, but a simple audit will demonstrate "gaps" in the maintenance records of most if not all of the fleet.
This is what destroyed Ansett - the inability to determine the maintenance state of its fleet, leaving CASA with no choice but to pull its operators certificate.
To put that another way and in case a journo might be reading: An Aircraft is just a pile of scrap metal unless the entire operation and maintenance history of virtually every part of it is both certified and recorded and available at all times for scrutiny.
To put that another way, you don't get to declare an aircraft is airworthy, you have to be able to PROVE it is airworthy. If you have insufficient proof, then its just junk. That is why Ansetts B767 aircraft were broken up for scrap on the tarmac.
Pith Helmet, are you for real?? 5 posts on the 1st day including this gem
You read more like a disgruntled Engineering troll masquerading as a Perth Based QF Pilot.
Before my Engineering brethren get up in arms, your Fed Sec started the tone of this thread and others have continued in kind.
As a QANTAS Pilot I see merit in some minor issues raised over MOD and threats to the integrity of the operation associated with Pilot pay contracts (ie no payment when not flying), however, I am as incensed at the not so subtle subtext the ALAEA is promoting as the TWU was last year
Spare us the histrionics, slander and mis-directed rage.
Bull****.
Fed Sec, put up or shut up.
Report all perceived breaches (why haven't you been doing this all along?)
I'm starting to believe Alan Joyce might have been right when declaring
Fight it out
Best of fighting to the bitter end. Better to die on your feet than on your knees. I am about to receive my marching orders as well.
PH
Best of fighting to the bitter end. Better to die on your feet than on your knees. I am about to receive my marching orders as well.
PH
Before my Engineering brethren get up in arms, your Fed Sec started the tone of this thread and others have continued in kind.
As a QANTAS Pilot I see merit in some minor issues raised over MOD and threats to the integrity of the operation associated with Pilot pay contracts (ie no payment when not flying), however, I am as incensed at the not so subtle subtext the ALAEA is promoting as the TWU was last year
the Transport Workers Union accused Qantas last night of "being silly" for implying in documents lodged with Fair Work Australia that the airline feared its jets would be sabotaged by disgruntled employees.
Spare us the histrionics, slander and mis-directed rage.
many of us Drivers are actually seriously concerned while taking the wheel in some aircraft
Many of us do not have that confidence any more that when we enter the aircraft we will arrive safely at our destination.
Fed Sec, put up or shut up.
Report all perceived breaches (why haven't you been doing this all along?)
I'm starting to believe Alan Joyce might have been right when declaring
They are trashing our strategy and our brand
Last edited by CaptCloudbuster; 23rd Nov 2012 at 00:54.
Fed Sec, I re read your posts and concede you have indeed been reporting all along.
I stand by the remainder of my post.
I stand by the remainder of my post.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
captcloudbuster I am struggling to follow you.
I get the impression that no matter which way this is handled you will find something wrong in it.
Perhaps we should go back to basics and ask some very simple questions-
Defect ratio's used to be spread across all stations more or less evenly because most stations had an engineer present.
Manufacturers however have still not produced the defect free aircraft. Aircraft go wrong all the time as the rate of defect reporting remains consistent. So the issue isn't whether we have defects because the same logbook statistics tell us we do.
All aircraft including modern ones depart station A, land at station B and usually have something defective. Could be minor could be more serious. An autopilot A fault is just as serious today as it was 40 years ago. No change. System redundancy is the same today as 40 years ago. The difference is only in the amount of space such systems take up on board and the increased reliance on technology to reduce size and weight.
Yet 40 years ago an engineer would have been at station B awaiting that defect. Now there are no engineers at stations so what do we do?
The fact is that based on a flawed logic that modern jets don't go wrong or defects are less serious than 40 years ago, the way defects are handled has changed.
How do we know this?
Globally defect ratio's are no longer evenly spread. ALL AIRLINES produce similar results 92% of defects are written up going into a manned base.
Airline management also like to compare aircraft maintenance with modern day cars often citing the need for less maintenance and longer servicing intervals. However we are not talking about scheduled maintenance we are talking about the daily operation of the aircraft.
And to make a further comparison with cars, national car breakdown associations have a similar statistic which reports 75% of their call outs are to cars out of home base. Only 25% of call outs are to the owners home. I would suggest this reflects reality and aviation should be reporting a similar statistic. It isn't.
And it is getting worse. Birds and lightning strike damage inspections are now being performed and assessed by pilots at unmanned stations. On what basis are you making these highly technical and safety based decisions?
amount of blood determines remaining airframe strength or severity of damage?
But where I do agree with you is that we need to find a solution to this situation. Safety is being undermined. Intentionally or not is actually irrelevant just as who is to blame. We need to come together to find a way of stopping it before more people die. I chose my words carefully because there have already been avoidable accidents due to this irresponsible attitude to handling defects.
I get the impression that no matter which way this is handled you will find something wrong in it.
Perhaps we should go back to basics and ask some very simple questions-
Defect ratio's used to be spread across all stations more or less evenly because most stations had an engineer present.
Manufacturers however have still not produced the defect free aircraft. Aircraft go wrong all the time as the rate of defect reporting remains consistent. So the issue isn't whether we have defects because the same logbook statistics tell us we do.
All aircraft including modern ones depart station A, land at station B and usually have something defective. Could be minor could be more serious. An autopilot A fault is just as serious today as it was 40 years ago. No change. System redundancy is the same today as 40 years ago. The difference is only in the amount of space such systems take up on board and the increased reliance on technology to reduce size and weight.
Yet 40 years ago an engineer would have been at station B awaiting that defect. Now there are no engineers at stations so what do we do?
The fact is that based on a flawed logic that modern jets don't go wrong or defects are less serious than 40 years ago, the way defects are handled has changed.
How do we know this?
Globally defect ratio's are no longer evenly spread. ALL AIRLINES produce similar results 92% of defects are written up going into a manned base.
Airline management also like to compare aircraft maintenance with modern day cars often citing the need for less maintenance and longer servicing intervals. However we are not talking about scheduled maintenance we are talking about the daily operation of the aircraft.
And to make a further comparison with cars, national car breakdown associations have a similar statistic which reports 75% of their call outs are to cars out of home base. Only 25% of call outs are to the owners home. I would suggest this reflects reality and aviation should be reporting a similar statistic. It isn't.
And it is getting worse. Birds and lightning strike damage inspections are now being performed and assessed by pilots at unmanned stations. On what basis are you making these highly technical and safety based decisions?
amount of blood determines remaining airframe strength or severity of damage?
But where I do agree with you is that we need to find a solution to this situation. Safety is being undermined. Intentionally or not is actually irrelevant just as who is to blame. We need to come together to find a way of stopping it before more people die. I chose my words carefully because there have already been avoidable accidents due to this irresponsible attitude to handling defects.
Birds and lightning strike damage inspections are now being performed and assessed by pilots at unmanned stations. On what basis are you making these highly technical and safety based decisions?
I have been personally stuck in unmanned ports on many occasions waiting for hours or occasionally overnight due to birdstrike, fuel leaks, fume events and even careless baggage handlers who scratch cages along cargo hold doors. One entire PER based 737 crew stayed overnight in the Aircraft at YNWN due no accommodation last year.
When a defect occurs though that is not minor we have a procedure whereby the Capt consults with Maintenance Watch who can authorise him to use an MEL or issue an ATP that does not require maintenance action.
I am very satisfied with the safety of this procedure. As the Fed Sec has stated himself this procedure has been in place quite satisfactorily for years.
He says now that MOD has changed the game. He talks about oil not being checked every turnaround. We have posters here claiming Main ports are now virtually the same as non-maintenance ports.
QF 737 Pilots do lots of sectors. I don't need QF to send me to a course to be able to ask one of the many Engineers I see on a daily basis at work to figure out a 737-800 takes approx 18 units of oil. I've never seen less than 14. I have a personal limit now if I see 10 I'll call for an Engineer. I'm told the indicator will show LO qty at approx 4 units. Engineers tell me the oil consumption normal range can be as much as 0.5 units per hour. It is simple maths to realise with the MOD requirement for an Engineering check 2 to be performed at a max of 30 hours we have the oil situation covered.
Lets get this straight. At most ports if we have an issue Engineers are made available - MOD.
Last edited by CaptCloudbuster; 23rd Nov 2012 at 09:07.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not in QANTAS there not. I have been personally stuck in unmanned ports on many occasions waiting for hours or occasionally overnight