PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   Second Fake LAME Identifed (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/361173-second-fake-lame-identifed.html)

fordran 6th Feb 2009 18:22

Second Fake LAME Identifed
 
We knew there must have been a reason all our licences were being checked. Maybe Glen can share a jail cell with Tim.




Qantas sacks fake engineer Ben Schneiders


February 7, 2009

QANTAS has allowed an unqualified employee to undertake critical and specialist maintenance work on its aircraft, The Age can reveal, in the latest blow to the safety reputation of the airline.

Last night the Civil Aviation Safety Authority said it had ordered Qantas to immediately identify all the work done by the employee over the past two years and assess the risk to air safety of each piece of work.

A CASA directive identified the employee as Glen Townsend, and well-placed airline sources said the man had been working as a licensed engineer in Sydney, work he was not qualified to do, on aircraft used for domestic and international flights.

The authority has also ordered an audit of the qualifications of all Qantas licensed engineers ó a process that Qantas said it is undertaking.

CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said the issue was serious as licensed engineers are required to have the highest-possible qualifications and sign off and supervise the maintenance work done by others.

He said responsibility for checking qualifications lies with the airline that employs licensed engineers.

The latest case follows the sentencing in December of Timothy McCormack to a minimum of two years' jail after he faked qualifications to work as a licensed engineer at Qantas.

McCormack had been employed as a lower-level maintenance engineer but started wearing the uniform of a licensed engineer and performing more important tasks.

It can often take 10 years training to work as a licensed engineer, with 25 basic exams, a four-year apprenticeship and hundreds of hours learning to work on a particular type of aircraft.

A Qantas spokesman confirmed that the latest case involved an employee who was an aircraft maintenance engineer who was doing work "he was not licensed to do".

The spokesman said the matter was being treated "very seriously" and the man's employment had been terminated. He was qualified to undertake Boeing 767 maintenance work but not to certify the work of other engineers.

"We do not believe there are any flight safety issues," the Qantas spokesman said.

Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association federal secretary Steve Purvinas expressed regret at the latest incident.

"He is not a member of ours but it is very disappointing that people are falsifying records to try and acquire the same qualifications that we studied for many years ourselves to obtain," he said.

Mr Purvinas said CASA was ineffective.

"I don't blame Qantas; they only work within the framework and guidelines set by CASA," he said. "Some organisations are proactive, others with a little less foresight are reactive, but the only word we could use to describe CASA is inactive."

Sources also blamed cut-backs to the Qantas training programs in recent years as part of the problem.

The latest case follows a string of safety problems at Qantas last year including a mid-air drama where a 747 was forced to make an emergency landing after a hole was blown in its side. In another case an aircraft returned from maintenance in Malaysia with problems with its rudder and navigation systems while a flight attendant soon after received two electric shocks in the galley.

Qantas was also involved with the engineers association in a long-running industrial dispute for much of last year that saw, at its peak in May and June, the grounding of scores of planes. The airline estimated about 100,000 passengers were either seriously delayed or had their flights cancelled during those eight weeks.



hadagutfull 6th Feb 2009 19:07

What does this mean from the above article " He was qualified to undertake Boeing 767 maintenance work but not to certify the work of other engineers."

Was he a LAME but not 767 rated or did he only have a Transit Authority on the 767???

As for having my licence checked again... for the 3rd time, My reply is "go to hell". It has been verified already as legit and its all on CASA records as me having passed all my basics, type exams etc for each type I hold.

What difference is it going to make if another "manager" looks at it again to tell me if its legit or not. :ugh:

another superlame 6th Feb 2009 20:05

Or had he done a JTP course but wasn't on Eq and unable to sign.

This is just poor journalism not reporting all the facts, or doesn't

understand the licensing system. Either way the poo is likely to hit the fan

Nepotisim 6th Feb 2009 21:07


Originally Posted by hadagutful
What does this mean from the above article " He was qualified to undertake Boeing 767 maintenance work but not to certify the work of other engineers."

Was he a LAME but not 767 rated or did he only have a Transit Authority on the 767???

Wouldn't that mean he was an AME (qualified to work on aircraft), but not certify the work of other engineers(not licenced)?

fordran 6th Feb 2009 21:38


Or had he done a JTP course but wasn't on Eq and unable to sign.

This is just poor journalism not reporting all the facts, or doesn't

understand the licensing system.

This is not poor journalism, this has been written for the average Australian to understand. The guy has been sacked means a lot more then - he had completed a JTP 767 Airframe course and had obtained a CASA rating but hadn't completed a lame induction course and therefore was not recorded on the EQ system.

This tool didn't even have all his basics and word coming back from Sydney is that there may be 2 others also.

Ngineer 6th Feb 2009 22:13

If he had done the JTP course and had a CASA Licence that was not on EQ, then I would agree that this is a cost cutting issue. (if the airline would not pay him to use it). However if this was the case, one would be crazy to be signing as a LAME.

If all he had was a JTP completed course and no basics, this is not an issue of cost cutting.

Either way in an instance such as this, it would be the individual at fault who knew he was signing illegaly. And of course, there are issues and cracks within the airline system of maintenance to allow this to happen on many occassions.

Expect the usual [email protected], that is we will put an auditing system in place to ensure this does not happen again.

Who was it that said "Imitation was a form of flattery"?

mention1 6th Feb 2009 22:34


McCormack had been employed as a lower-level maintenance engineer but started wearing the uniform of a licensed engineer and performing more important tasks.
Maybe Leonardo DiCaprio could play him in the forthcoming Hollywood movie!:O

Ngineer 6th Feb 2009 22:47


This tool didn't even have all his basics
If this guy did not have all his basics and held a CASA licence, then obviously there are flaws within CASA who granted it to him.

framer 6th Feb 2009 22:55

The next thing will be that he worked on one of the recent incident a/c and they'll have to determine the extent of involvement etc.

Ngineer 6th Feb 2009 23:00

A few years ago you could have used "/for lame" to check out any licence credentials of the guys you were working with within QF. You can't even do that these days since it has been changed. This has further opened up an avenue for this to happen.

fordran 6th Feb 2009 23:20


If this guy did not have all his basics and held a CASA licence, then obviously there are flaws within CASA who granted it to him.
Have heard he didn't have the basics or a CASA licence, he just started signing.

I was forwarded a CASA directive to Qf issued yesterday (I don't know how to post it here) ordering Qf to check all their records and report back in 3 weeks. This is just got to be some sort of a sick joke. When will casa work out the self auditing doesn't work. Do we need to wait for 300 funerals before they actually do something?

fordran 7th Feb 2009 00:26

Here we go -




Instrument number CASA 82/09

I, William Bruce Byron, Director of Aviation Safety, on behalf of CASA, make this instrument under regulation 11.245 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR 1998).

[Signed Bruce Byron]

Bruce Byron
Director of Aviation Safety and
Chief Executive Officer

5 February 2009

Directions ó Qantas Airways Limited

1 Commencement

This instrument commences on 6 February 2009.

2 Application

This instrument applies to Qantas Airways Limited, Aviation Reference Number (ARN) 216147 (the operator).

3 Directions

(1) The operator is given the directions mentioned in Schedule 1.

(2) Each direction in Schedule 1 is a separate direction.

Schedule 1 Directions

Direction 1

1 The operator must undertake an audit to identify and verify the currency and validity of the maintenance- and engineering-related qualifications, authorisations, ratings, endorsements, approvals and permissions held by all of the operatorís personnel who:

(a) hold an aircraft maintenance engineer licence issued under regulation 31 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988); or

(b) hold an airworthiness authority issued under regulation 33B of CAR 1988; or

(c) authorised to approve the design of a modification or repair of an aircraft or aircraft component under regulation 35 of CAR 1988;

in the performance of their duties as the operatorís employees, may certify for the completion of maintenance in relation to aircraft operated by the operator, and aircraft components and materials fitted to, or used in or on, those aircraft, approve the design of a modification or repair of an aircraft or aircraft component at any location within or outside Australian territory.

2 On or before 27 February, the operator is directed to provide CASA with the full name and ARN of any person whose qualifications were assessed for the purposes of the audit mentioned in clause 1 and who was found to have exercised the privileges of a maintenance engineer licence (including a rating or endorsement in respect of such a licence), an airworthiness authority or an authorisation to approve the design of a modification or repair without holding the necessary licence (rating or endorsement), authority or authorisation including the date(s) and the location(s) where this occurred.

Direction 2

The operator is directed immediately to:

(a) identify all maintenance certified by Glen Andrew Le Marseny Townsend, ARN 513513, on any of the operatorís aircraft, aircraft component or aircraft material over the 24-month period preceding the date of this direction; and

(b) provide to CASA in writing by, or before, 27 February 2009, the following information:

(i) the date(s) on which, and location(s) where, Glen Andrew Le Marseny Townsend certified for the completion of maintenance; and

(ii) an assessment of the risk to air safety the operator believes each such instance posed at the time, and thereafter.

Direction 3

1 The operator is directed to undertake immediately an assessment of the risk to air safety presented by the operation of the systems, processes and procedures the operator relies on to monitor and manage, on an ongoing basis, the validity and currency of the licences, authorities and authorisations held by the operatorís maintenance and engineering personnel.

2 The operator must submit to CASA on, or before, 27 February 2009, a report, in writing, describing and discussing the results of that risk assessment.


link

ComLaw Legislative Instruments - Attachment - CASA 82/09 Ė Directions Ė Qantas Airways Limited

UPPERLOBE 7th Feb 2009 02:19

Funny how this never happened before the cost cutting started.

There was a long established system to ensure that all certifiers were in order. Had someone listened to or indeed actually bothered to involve those who ran those systems none of this would have happened.

Looks like Qantas Engineering is neck deep in buzzword sprouting, ego centric, sham artist, faux managers.

What is it going to take to clean the place out and restore some sanity?

another superlame 7th Feb 2009 02:21

Wow you know you have done wrong when the Head of a national authority calls you by your full name.

There is a person on Facebook of the same name anyone know if it is the same person

Qantas 787 7th Feb 2009 05:35

With all the stories in the media about QF, why do they all go to the engineering union for a quote? That guy is getting plenty of chances to have his name in the papers thats for sure. All the union does is says "CASA needs to do something" etc - come up with something constructive if you are going to comment

employes perspective 7th Feb 2009 06:46

Quote:
Originally Posted by hadagutful
What does this mean from the above article " He was qualified to undertake Boeing 767 maintenance work but not to certify the work of other engineers."

Was he a LAME but not 767 rated or did he only have a Transit Authority on the 767???


Wouldn't that mean he was an AME (qualified to work on aircraft), but not certify the work of other engineers(not licenced)?




you don't need any qualifications to work on aircraft in Australia full stop,as long as your work is signed off by a LAME

Wod 7th Feb 2009 07:04

Why is this a QF issue from CASA perspective rather than a wider Industry issue.

I understand that the deceit was identified in QF, but I would have thought CASA would do a circular (belts and braces ) requirement for the National Jets, VBs, Alliances etc.

BrissySparkyCoit 7th Feb 2009 09:20

So when will they start auditing managers to see which ones are genuine and which ones are idiots posing? Or would that be a major embarassment?

framer 7th Feb 2009 09:37


BrissySparkyCoit So when will they start auditing managers to see which ones are genuine and which ones are idiots posing? Or would that be a major embarassment?
Too right. If there was a way of quantifying the risks to safety caused as a result of short sighted self-serving cost-cutting management, CASA would be very busy indeed with it's directives.

Hardworker 7th Feb 2009 20:24

Another Four under Investigation
 
Apparently there are another 4 guys being looking into by CASA, it seems Mr Hespe must take responsibility for this, he ran from the last fake at the SIT and they moved him to Base for protection and now another four...!!!!
Management outsourcing and cost cutting - what a great way to go!
Time to take some responsibility for all of this Mr Cox, Mr Hespe, Mr Mc Dermont!

airsupport 7th Feb 2009 20:42

I find it incredible that this is happening, even once never mind maybe several times.

Surely it is up to the Employer to thoroughly check new Employees, and also current Employees who gain extra qualifications.

Also with current Employees surely fellow Workmates would know whether or not they had done more courses, exams, OJT etc.

1746 7th Feb 2009 21:03

A direct result of the complete dirth of inhouse training!

Another example of QE Management at work!

This management is quick to put their hands out for their bonuses now let us see them take responsibility publically!!!!:ugh::ugh::ugh:

hadagutfull 7th Feb 2009 22:11

Its a catch 22 with training.... Wait for ever for the company to train you or spend thousands of dollars and your annual leave and go buy a course only to be told by your manager that the company has decided they are not going to pay you or recognize it because we dont need that licence...... a :mad:ing kick in the face.

Whilst I dont condone anyone cheating the system, the folk that are smarter than ourselves, have made the licencing system a complete farce and left it wide open to be exploited.

What is auditing our licences going to do?
How many of you were outside your 2 year re-currency on your ETOPS or CTS ( that includes all the crap like maint memos, quality and risk read and signs,etc) and still certifying?

How many times has EQ lost some of your info or qualifications let alone try to find it in there.....

We never had this problem when there was a dedicated tech training department.... you were put into a classroom when your stuff was due

Again, its all about how much they saved not training. Now they should really take a close look at how much it is going to cost them.... not just in $$$$$

As for the system, how does it fail?? You sit the basics, CASA issues you the results and have a record on the database... Qantas or any training provider should confirm this with CASA before you sit a type course... the official results of your type exams go to CASA... when you apply for a licence or rating.... they have all the info. TOO EASY.
If that still does not work.... then put a pitch fork up CASA's butt!

toolowtoofast 7th Feb 2009 23:15


Originally Posted by airsupport (Post 4703121)
I find it incredible that this is happening, even once never mind maybe several times.

Surely it is up to the Employer to thoroughly check new Employees, and also current Employees who gain extra qualifications.

Also with current Employees surely fellow Workmates would know whether or not they had done more courses, exams, OJT etc.

i agree. maybe engineering need to take a leaf out of flight ops pages - or are there QF pilots flying around without a CPL?

DutchRoll 7th Feb 2009 23:31


.......- or are there QF pilots flying around without a CPL?
Sheesh don't put a hex on it now mate. The way I've seen QF's admin system work sometimes, that could be entirely possible, even in Flight Ops!

They are fully capable of screwing up literally anything, and CASA wouldn't have a clue until after it happens.

airsupport 7th Feb 2009 23:43

From what is posted here it would seem that the problem lies with Qantas, not CASA or the ALAEA or anyone else, except of course these Fake Engineers themselves.

I am not aware of this EVER happening before at any other Company, would that be correct, just Qantas and hopefully only recently?

another superlame 8th Feb 2009 02:30

Did this guy just sign for aircraft when no one was looking?

At least Tim Mc had tried to fit in to conceal his deceit. From the reports

so far it seems this person has just certified for a/c without anyone

noticing. If this is the case then it would be QFs fault for not picking

it up in an audit. If it is signed off with a licence number that looks

legit then who would suspect it was fake.

So management is wanting all LAMEs to produce their licences again,

but this wont help if the person who is signing doesn't have a licence

and is getting around in a blue shirt.

Can anyone confirm if this person has any relevant qualifications, eg

basics, type course, GA licence

Bumpfoh 8th Feb 2009 02:31

The Big House beckons
 

Or had he done a JTP course but wasn't on Eq and unable to sign.
Nope he definitely completed a QF 767 course in 2002 or there abouts. Question is did he legitimately pass all of the required basics (i.e AA) or not?

The QF system has him listed as an AME, not a LAME!

There alledgedly is a track record of deceit by this individual to the employer way back during his apprenticeship to the point of him being terminated only to be re-employed.:=

Good luck fool.:hmm:

another superlame 8th Feb 2009 02:46

There are that many top quality AMEs and single type LAMEs at QF that would give their left testicle for a company run type course. And idiots like this who QF gave a second chance by re-employing him and a third chance with a type course,the selection criteria leaves a lot to be desired if this is the result.
Did Tim Mc also do a company type course?

Bucaneer1979 8th Feb 2009 07:45

What blows me away is that these "fake engineers" are certifying QF a/c for the love of it. They are not getting paid any extra. Why bother?? Glory hunters maybe.

Ngineer 8th Feb 2009 08:46

Hopefully this will lead to a crack down on the fake managers also. Some of them deserve some considerable penance for their sins.

whatsupdoc 8th Feb 2009 09:22

Why did he get sacked as an apprentice???

Hasherucf 8th Feb 2009 09:57

Ever thought that it might be a case of workplace pressure to get things done that these people start signing out aircraft ? There not doing it for money and you cant do it for glory.

mahatmacoat 8th Feb 2009 20:14

As an apprentice he was sacked for forgery. On this occassion it was just a doctors certificate.

Gee this self regulation thing is working well isn't it. I had to sign a document declaring that I had only signed within the scope of my licence. I would think that anyone with the guts to sign aircraft out when they don't have a licence wouldn't have a problem with some letter to management. It seems more like an **** covering exercise.

airsupport 8th Feb 2009 20:46


Gee this self regulation thing is working well isn't it. I had to sign a document declaring that I had only signed within the scope of my licence. I would think that anyone with the guts to sign aircraft out when they don't have a licence wouldn't have a problem with some letter to management.
Exactly, how stupid is that.

IF that is all they are doing to stop it, then what a waste of time.

SCHAIRBUS 8th Feb 2009 23:21

This is an industry built on the honesty and integrity of the engineers and pilots that work in it.
The problem is not everyone is honest.
In the computer age it is far to easy to alter and forge documents.
Combine that with all the under resourced departments in the airlines and the regulator, then you have this situation occurring.
The only solution is vigilance by the guys on the job if somone turns with a license one day and it doesn't seem right there should be a way of checking them out.
A discrete email to CASA should be all that's required, a surveyor can do the rest.
I'm sure some will say this is a simplistic and naive solution but it beats trying to blame everyone.
Remember if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.
Speaking to people whom worked with Tim there were plenty of warning signs, it's also looking that way with the latest individual.

Lodown 8th Feb 2009 23:38

Hang on there a minute Schairbus.

"Under-resourced departments" is whose fault?

"Vigilance" is not the only solution. It's one of many.

"A discrete email"? No! A private, secure, but very public method of fact checking would be helpful. Why hasn't this been done, or why hasn't this picked up a problem especially after the last time?

Not blaming everyone. But there are several issues here and they appear to revolve around insufficient or inappropriate supervision.

If there were plenty of warning signs, where is the disconnect preventing the notification from reaching the appropriate people who could rectify the situation? Or was the situation just left to fester because no one felt compelled to spill the beans or were they waiting for a supervisor to fall on his/her sword?

If I were a CASA investigator, there'd be some straightforward actions as a result of the actions of a single individual. If, as you suggested, there were plenty of warning signs, I and a team of headhunters would be going through QF engineering like a dose of salts.

nut turner 8th Feb 2009 23:59

As mahatmacot has said, Self regulation doesn't work. Qantas and CASA had a pretty good system going, they granted the licence and Tech Training entered it into the system and along with QS&RM were the only ones who could make changes. Now to save some money they expect the individual to do it all on a system, eQ, that is so frustrating and difficult to use, is it any wonder problems arise. Where are the checks that should be in place, Tech Training won't do it, Training Co-ordinator gone, CASA and Quality shouldn't get away scott free either. The warning signs were there and they did nothing!

Lodown 9th Feb 2009 01:56


The warning signs were there and they did nothing!
Wow! Makes you wonder what other bombs are waiting to be discovered hopefully before they go off.

Yep, self-regulation works...just like a group of kids with a loaded gun. Seeya Byron.

K9P 9th Feb 2009 02:47

Yep, it just starts at the top and runs downhill.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:10.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.