Qantas Sacking Tarmac Engineers
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Downunda
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They couldn't get enough licences out of the training school even if they were prepared to put people on course. There aren't enough instructors left.
There will be a significant number of 738 licences that get recognised with all the extra work including possibly the interior reconfigs.
There will be minimal new 330 licences considering they are the new "legacy" type.
God knows what's going on re 380. The EOI didn't even make sense. People don't even know what it is they're applying for
There will be a significant number of 738 licences that get recognised with all the extra work including possibly the interior reconfigs.
There will be minimal new 330 licences considering they are the new "legacy" type.
God knows what's going on re 380. The EOI didn't even make sense. People don't even know what it is they're applying for
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bit off topic
Looks like the lunatics are running the asylum. I took VR last year from the SIT . The job market in the outside world is a tough one , hang on to your jobs as long as you can. Any idea how long after VR you can be reconsidered for any position in the company ? 12 months ? don't like my chances , but nobody could have foreseen what happened around August to October last year . Anything can and does happen with QF .
Good luck to all those guys who got there jobs back from QE transition centre.
Good luck to all those guys who got there jobs back from QE transition centre.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very good point Stuntcock!
The amount of Contractors in our labour environment now holding all required Licences makes for a very competitive environment.
If you take the VR and you wish to stay in Aviation the opportunities are becoming limited.
The amount of Contractors in our labour environment now holding all required Licences makes for a very competitive environment.
If you take the VR and you wish to stay in Aviation the opportunities are becoming limited.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Canberra
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey stuntcock,
Pretty sure that the being able to be considered for a company job rules is currently 24 months. Used to be 12 months then I think it went down to six months (which seems darn short to me) and then went up to 24 months (very recently, seems they had a lot wanting back in...).
Pretty sure that the being able to be considered for a company job rules is currently 24 months. Used to be 12 months then I think it went down to six months (which seems darn short to me) and then went up to 24 months (very recently, seems they had a lot wanting back in...).
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA BOUGHT BY AUSTRALIAN AIRLINES
Senate defeats attempt to dumb down air safety inspections | Plane Talking
GOOD TO SEE THE OTHER POST DRAWING ATTENTION TO THIS LUNACY
(SEE DISALLOWANCE MOTION).
THANK GOD FOR SENATOR NX AND THE LIKES OF THE ALAEA!!!!!
GOOD TO SEE THE OTHER POST DRAWING ATTENTION TO THIS LUNACY
(SEE DISALLOWANCE MOTION).
THANK GOD FOR SENATOR NX AND THE LIKES OF THE ALAEA!!!!!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAT A LICENCE
How Senator Xenophon's action might prevent an air disaster | Plane Talking
At this stage ALAEA do not endorse any LAME signing for CAT A experience journals........this one is a political hot potato.......I certainly do not support the watering down of the authority of the B1/B2 licence and will certainly not be signing any journal, as unfair as that may seem, seeing as I do already certify for the work that some of these AMEs c/out.
That is life and I am honest with these guys on where I stand with their CAT A journals.......no signature from me.
At this stage ALAEA do not endorse any LAME signing for CAT A experience journals........this one is a political hot potato.......I certainly do not support the watering down of the authority of the B1/B2 licence and will certainly not be signing any journal, as unfair as that may seem, seeing as I do already certify for the work that some of these AMEs c/out.
That is life and I am honest with these guys on where I stand with their CAT A journals.......no signature from me.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While we are on the subject of watering down,why not get the good Senator to ask CASA how they basically have destroyed 3 trades(AVIONICS)to put in place B1 un-restricted?
Picked up after a whirlwind 6 week theory,3 week practical which used to take 4 year apprenticeship then years of experience!!
NOW THATS WATERING DOWN!
Picked up after a whirlwind 6 week theory,3 week practical which used to take 4 year apprenticeship then years of experience!!
NOW THATS WATERING DOWN!
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: downunder
Age: 73
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
100% Agree howyoulikethat on water down of the Avionics Trade and allowing B1 to Certify for Avionic Systems, it is very dangerous having little or no troubleshooting experience and signing off Avionic chapters, oh and the computer BITE test is never wrong!! And its not like the Avionics has got less on the new gen aircraft
6 Weeks Theory and 3 week practical, What a joke!!
6 Weeks Theory and 3 week practical, What a joke!!
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Downunda
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
100% Agree howyoulikethat on water down of the Avionics Trade and allowing B1 to Certify for Avionic Systems, it is very dangerous having little or no troubleshooting experience and signing off Avionic chapters, oh and the computer BITE test is never wrong!! And its not like the Avionics has got less on the new gen aircraft
6 Weeks Theory and 3 week practical, What a joke!!
6 Weeks Theory and 3 week practical, What a joke!!
Accept the new system or step aside dinosaurs.
The smart sparkies are retraining to become B1. There will be very few B2 LAME left in 10 years time.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
I agree Krispy with what you say.
Unfortunately it looks as if it will be around for some time.
The smart ones did all their eng/af basics years ago. These B2's could be trained up to B1/B2 very easily, however we are going down the path of spoon feeding some B1 guys (who have never done any cross trade basics off their own back) into removing their restrictions and running on their qualifications and experience alone. The latest EOI is testiment to that. There is no balance of experience going forward.
Yep, and years of experience passed down through apprenticeship training will be lost for good. By that time I will be long sitting on the sidelines watching the calamity unfold. My concerns are for the next generation.
I am not having a shot at the B1 or B2 guys here, just stating the obvious. I cant help feeling however, that some guys have a lot of resentment against their fellow trade. This helps no one, or the cause of safety.
Accept the new system or step aside dinosaurs.
The smart sparkies are retraining to become B1.
There will be very few B2 LAME left in 10 years time.
I am not having a shot at the B1 or B2 guys here, just stating the obvious. I cant help feeling however, that some guys have a lot of resentment against their fellow trade. This helps no one, or the cause of safety.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: downunder
Age: 73
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coolb1,
i do agree the smart sparkies are actually getting a B1 and B2 License, They are not converting to a B1 only, that's just stupid. As you would know these LAME's will be more cost effective in the long run as you are doing 2 peoples jobs. I have even seen some B1 lames that have realized this and are not signing there books!!
I just believe we should keep the trades separate as they have been, we each know our trade well and it has been proven time and time again.
i do agree the smart sparkies are actually getting a B1 and B2 License, They are not converting to a B1 only, that's just stupid. As you would know these LAME's will be more cost effective in the long run as you are doing 2 peoples jobs. I have even seen some B1 lames that have realized this and are not signing there books!!
I just believe we should keep the trades separate as they have been, we each know our trade well and it has been proven time and time again.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Downunda
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coolb1,
i do agree the smart sparkies are actually getting a B1 and B2 License, They are not converting to a B1 only, that's just stupid. As you would know these LAME's will be more cost effective in the long run as you are doing 2 peoples jobs. I have even seen some B1 lames that have realized this and are not signing there books!!
I just believe we should keep the trades separate as they have been, we each know our trade well and it has been proven time and time again.
i do agree the smart sparkies are actually getting a B1 and B2 License, They are not converting to a B1 only, that's just stupid. As you would know these LAME's will be more cost effective in the long run as you are doing 2 peoples jobs. I have even seen some B1 lames that have realized this and are not signing there books!!
I just believe we should keep the trades separate as they have been, we each know our trade well and it has been proven time and time again.
As for refusing to sign people's books. I call BS on that one. If someone has carried out a task from their OJT book and signed as the AME in the log or in Mx you are a very game man if you refuse to sign their OJT book.
You can "believe" the trades should be separate all you like. Fact is it's B1 and B2 nowa days grandpa. Has been for quite some time. Ever heard of the A380?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: downunder
Age: 73
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CoolB1,
Well you can call BS all you like on the OJT books and Lames not signing them, i do agree they are game man not signing there book after MX signature etc. I believe the same is happening with the Cat A books.
Thanks for allowing me to believe that the trades should be separate
I will let you in on a little secret CoolB1, i am not a grandpa and i hope i do know the A380 as i do hold a license on that type.
Well you can call BS all you like on the OJT books and Lames not signing them, i do agree they are game man not signing there book after MX signature etc. I believe the same is happening with the Cat A books.
Thanks for allowing me to believe that the trades should be separate
I will let you in on a little secret CoolB1, i am not a grandpa and i hope i do know the A380 as i do hold a license on that type.
TAIC report on aircraft engineering mishap
Investigation 13-007
Boeing 737-838, ZK-ZQG, stabiliser trim mechanism damage, 7 June 2013
On 7 June 2013 a Boeing 737-838 operated by Jetconnect Limited was undergoing scheduled maintenance at Auckland International Airport. During an inspection of the forward electronics and equipment compartment area under the flight deck, metal filings were found next to the stabiliser trim cable drum. On closer inspection a rag was found trapped under the stabiliser trim cable windings on the forward cable drum.
The rag had made the cable windings bulge outwards, which caused the cables to contact the cable guides, creating the metal filings and damaging the guides. The rag had increased the cable tension of the stabiliser trim system, which resulted in damage to a number of cable pulleys through which it was rigged. The control cables had also started to wear through contact with the steel bolts that held the cable guide spacers in place.
The Transport Accident Investigation Commission (Commission) found that it was highly likely the rag originated from the Qantas Sydney maintenance hangar, and that the presence of the rag trapped in the cable drum windings compromised the integrity of the aeroplane's stabiliser trim system manual control.
This report also comments on a maintenance-related incident involving a Jetconnect aircraft that had undergone maintenance at the Qantas Melbourne maintenance hangar in September 2013. The Commission did not investigate that incident, but notes that, as with this incident, compliance with procedures during maintenance operations is important for aviation safety.
The key lesson learnt from the inquiry into this occurrence was that all personnel must take care not to leave anything behind inside an aircraft after completing maintenance or cleaning tasks, especially in areas or near systems critical to flight safety.
Boeing 737-838, ZK-ZQG, stabiliser trim mechanism damage, 7 June 2013
On 7 June 2013 a Boeing 737-838 operated by Jetconnect Limited was undergoing scheduled maintenance at Auckland International Airport. During an inspection of the forward electronics and equipment compartment area under the flight deck, metal filings were found next to the stabiliser trim cable drum. On closer inspection a rag was found trapped under the stabiliser trim cable windings on the forward cable drum.
The rag had made the cable windings bulge outwards, which caused the cables to contact the cable guides, creating the metal filings and damaging the guides. The rag had increased the cable tension of the stabiliser trim system, which resulted in damage to a number of cable pulleys through which it was rigged. The control cables had also started to wear through contact with the steel bolts that held the cable guide spacers in place.
The Transport Accident Investigation Commission (Commission) found that it was highly likely the rag originated from the Qantas Sydney maintenance hangar, and that the presence of the rag trapped in the cable drum windings compromised the integrity of the aeroplane's stabiliser trim system manual control.
This report also comments on a maintenance-related incident involving a Jetconnect aircraft that had undergone maintenance at the Qantas Melbourne maintenance hangar in September 2013. The Commission did not investigate that incident, but notes that, as with this incident, compliance with procedures during maintenance operations is important for aviation safety.
The key lesson learnt from the inquiry into this occurrence was that all personnel must take care not to leave anything behind inside an aircraft after completing maintenance or cleaning tasks, especially in areas or near systems critical to flight safety.