Qantas Maintenance Changes
 

Hey guys. I just wanted to open up some conversation on changes implemented by Qantas last week that has effectively extended the daily check on 738 aircraft out to 48 hours. Up until last Monday, a check 2 was carried out overnight on all aircraft. A check 2 included engine oil servicing and brake/tyre wear checks.


Yesterday VZW had an rtb because the good crew were concerned that engine quantity levels after start were low, particularly considering they were to operate Syd-Bme-Syd. Engines were showing 12 and 13. We believe consumption rates can be up to .7 per hour for each engine.


The boys put 3.5 Quarts into each engine and off she went. Additionally there have been other verbals from crews seeking a check of the oil levels where 4 quarts per donk were added.


It appears that low quantity can be picked up by a vigilant crew however the extension of the check intervals will now often lead to a situation where quantity levels drop to a much lower level before a mandatory Engineering check is undertaken.


I was wondering what triggers are in place for you guys to prompt you to check the levels and at what point do you call for oil level servicing? Also what information has been disseminated by management to make you aware of the changes.


Also other things that reside in the check 2 have been pushed out such as tyre and brake checks. I'm not sure how you guys gauge the serviceability or otherwise of these components.

We often raise these concerns with management and they just brush it aside with a - "If there is any doubt the crew will just call a LAME". How do you guys know when to call a LAME or even if doubt exists in the first place?


cheers in advance. Steve P

Steve, please excuse my ignorance as I am a Driver not a Gingerbeer, but vigilance aside, has management done a risk assessment on each separate item that they have extended the maintenance interval on - tyres, brakes, engine oil etc? One would assume 'yes' and that they are tracking data to ensure that extending these service intervals is actually effective, reduces any safety risk and of course lastly reduces costs? Are management going back and reviewing these changes to see if they actually are effective and not causing some inadvertent or even latent risks?
Is extending the intervals done in the name of 'best practise'? Has something changed in the evolution of maintenance for these intervals to now be extended? I assume the manufacturers and CASA are comfortable with these extensions?
The Alaska Airways crash, re: unlubricated jackscrew, often comes to my mind when I hear of maintenance cuts, extensions or intervals. I'm not saying that the aforementioned accident is relevant to QF and I absolutely respect the work the Australian Gingerbeers do, 100%, but management types do tend to skirt the fringes at times for the sake of saving a few bucks, earning some brownie points and receiving a bonus.
Sorry for the string of questions but those of us who don't do the maintenance can be somewhat naive with all the processes and procedures, but are naturally concerned when there is any change to established procedures. One could assume that in regard to what you mention about VZW that the new procedure isn't working? I could be wrong as there are numerous factors that will cause or contribute to a lower than expected oil level, but my red flag has for some reason popped up!

For those unfamiliar with the Alaska Airways crash;
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/...y/AAR0201.html

OEM requirements
 

What does the OEM's maintenance schedule require?


Is this actually an extension, or is it the removal of QF-imposed additional maintenance to revert to the OEM schedule?

The horse has bolted mate. Flight Ops approved the changes so we are meant to believe the tech crew are OK with it.

Pilots have to realise they need to be more aware of things such as oil levels because there won't be an engineer checking them anywhere near as often. It's a bit late to find out your low on oil after push-back. I bet my left one it went down to an engineering delay regardless. Inbound crews need to report EVERYTHING if they want a safe serviceable aircraft, even if it is an un-manned port. Funny how NGs only seem to get defects on the way back to a maint port...

Just the other day one flew three sectors with a no-dispatch door defect that was written up but not reported. More than one ar$e needs kicking there!

Min oil quantity can be nominated plus .7 for every hour planned for flying . Insert some pictures of a U/S tyre in ops manual showing what to look for .

Off to footy but just briefly. Qantas do some risk assessments. If the Engineering change they want is not endorsed, they find someone who will sign off on a new risk assessment and then deem the first person who rejected the change as a troublemaker and their career is over. This is how Qantas operate.


AMM says to check oil every 24 hours unless otherwise amended in an operator's System of Maintenance. The other option is there for airlines who don't fly their aircraft as much but Qantas take it literally to mean "if we can find some buffoon in CASA to sign off" it will be ok. There are lots of buffoons at CASA and of course many good people also.

If it's unsafe, I'd be putting on a REPCON and then sending the (no doubt bull****) response from QF to the good Senator and maybe some press outlets.

This industry stinks of so many latent threats now, it seems inevitable that something is about to go horribly wrong.It looks like there is no stopping QF and CASA's "relationship", so our only course of action is to make as many impartial organisations aware of our concerns.

This isn't the only safety downgrade being introduced across the QF network either so I am told.

In my type it's 11q minimum with an additional 0.3 per planned flight hour. It's checked by the PNF every sector on the SD of ECAM.

Daily and preflight valid for 36 hours.

It's funny though, from what I recall the intent of even a 36 hour window was not to use it as a rule, but flexibility with aircraft at non engineering ports.

Now it's a target.

B738 48 hour check
 

I have been working overseas for a few years.
The B738 48 hour check has been standard where I work for several years.
AMM minimum oil quantity is 12qts, but I never see it that low.
Regardless of check interval, if its my aircraft, the oils, tyres and brakes are checked every transit. Thats just me, its so easy to do on the 738.
If the aircraft is operating MOD I suggest the pilots adopt the same standard. Its your arse up there at 35,000 feet. If in doubt call for an engineer, they will gladly come out and make sure you aircraft is safe to fly !
Cheers !

For a comparison, don't virgin only do a daily check every 2 days unless it is an ETOPS flight. Seems to work for them, and if I am correct it has been that way for 7 years I know of.

I asked a mate at Virgin, they have gone back to 24hr checks at most ports. A small number of aircraft that overnight at some outports with limited engineering resources operate up to 48hrs.

^^^Very much, this.

It is possible it could be up to 48hours + 12hours before an engineer looks at the aircraft again.

The engineer will typically do the check on a nightshift and the MXI work package will be closed immediately prior to the first flight the next day. I'm sure most tech crew have been delayed due to maintenix issues of a morning and know what it's all about.

The clock starts counting for the next check from the moment the MXI package is closed, usually in the morning, not from when the check was actually carried out the night before.

Just some more food for thought for the tech crew. Think about how many support vehicles approach the aircraft between nightshift and prior to first flight - and where do you see 99% of all aircraft fuselage damage.

I work over seas, we used to do the daily checks religiously every 48 hrs but believe it or not made life a hassle.
The 48 hrs was only meant to be there to get us out of trouble in case of being stuck somewhere.
All our destinations are unmanned with very little or no support.
Note all our flights are international and some are ETOPS.
Thanks to EASA etops can be certified by pilots now.
Also the NG oil use is a max 0.7 qts an hr for oil alerts.
The minimum for dispatch is 70% I have never seen one get so low in 48 hr period so not a big deal.
Before any one judges we can do 40 min hops to 6 hr legs.
It sucks to have management hate you and wish to degrade the quality of service you provide but welcome to the new world is all I can say.

We are a dying breed and an expense that no one wants, but they all need.
Also I have nothing nice to say about EASA pt 66 lic.
I have met dozens of people who have cashed up family go over to England do a 147 training package come out with basic lic, companies go ooh he has a basic lic he must be great!
Yes on paper he is 'great' but no hand skills no common knowledge just spoon fed basics.

Good luck guys.

VA have been doing maintenance on demand for years they haven't had any issues, QF will be fine as well.

-Pilot gets in cockpit.

-As part of pre-flight procedures, pilot checks oil level on cockpit display.

-As per flight manual, pilot calculates minimum oil required for sectors ie base amount plus 'x' per flight hour. Note that on ETOPS sector an engineering check of levels required AS PART OF ETOPS sign off.

In the HIGHLY UNLIKELY case that oil level is less than required, maintenance release entry requesting oil addition.

Airyplane departs and arrives at destination.

Maintenance is required to monitor individual engines for adverse trends in oil consumption.

It ain't that hard.......:ugh:

Hey illusion,
The problem is nowhere in Qantas supplied manuals to pilots, does it state the minimum oil required amounts....base amount or usage per hour.
So yes pilots do have a problem when faced with a 8 hour day of flying stopping at a non maintenance port and turning up to see the aircraft having oil levels anywhere between 12-20 qts.
The first question isn't "are we safe?", it's "are we legal."
And in asking engineers across the network it appears not to many know themselves because the documentation appears lacking. However, on transit through Sydney today, it appeared a more definitive answer of 60% has been established.
But the other issue raised was what about an etops sector?
The answer was 16 qts, again good to know but nowhere is that number listed in pilot documentation.
The next revelation of course is the rumour that shortly Qantas will dispatch all 737 non etops, eliminating the need for engineering input preflight.
One does ask wtf is going on in this place and where is casa in allowing this rubbish to be occurring.
I haven't had time to go back and re read the CARs to establish the pilot in commands requirements for confirming adequate fluid levels on board the aircraft preflight, but it makes it difficult when Qantas' own documentation to pilots provides no reference.

I'm sure we're all aware, but...

CAR REG234

(1) The pilot in command of an aircraft must not commence a flight within Australian territory, or to or from Australian territory, if he or she has not taken reasonable steps to ensure that the aircraft carries sufficient fuel and oil to enable the proposed flight to be undertaken in safety.

(2) An operator of an aircraft must take reasonable steps to ensure that an aircraft does not commence a flight as part of the operator's operations if the aircraft is not carrying sufficient fuel and oil to enable the proposed flight to be undertaken in safety.

To all, do you know how much you require for the flight to be undertaken in safety? If not, best find out!

Maybe it is actually time to waddle out of your protected little pond at Taronga Park Zoo.

Oh boo-hoo, the QF documentation doesn't tell me the limits. Would you even consider that maybe, just maybe, as a professional you should actually know these.

They are published in the OEM data. But no, if it isn't on my spoon I can't swallow it.

The flight deck is not an extension of the forward cabin, it isn't full service.

MP.

Thanks for the updated info I wasn't aware they righted the wrongs.

I would bet that the first most crews would have heard about this 48hr business, if they have at all, is from chatting with a dispatch engie. Of the 3 jet types that normally operate domestically, I see one entry on 8th April on a official (unofficial) blog.

It is just so sad to see how much standards have dropped in recent years by Companies just worried about saving money. :(:(:(

Managers perspective, thanks for the diatribe.
And thanks also for not addressing any of the issues. Qantas has the right to operate their aircraft however they like, and on this,my opinion doesn't count. I accept that, however, now we have a situation where the information you allude to is not available to the pilots.
Again the question is "are we legal."
So get off the blinkered high horse and understand the problem. Qantas has introduced a system where the information the required by the pilot in command is not there. Do the pilots have access to the OEM or AMM?
Answer=no
As for the taronga park line, I've visited a few different zoos around the world and the Qantas one on coward street has a goose as the prized animal, the biggest monkeys enclosure out of the lot of them, and a huge trough out the back,which if drunk from, seems to be able to produce effluent of giant proportions when you consider the metrics of running a successful business.

There are a few comments popping up where posters are saying the pilots should be monitoring systems, picking up potential tech issues of their own accord etc, but I don't think that is the point of this thread.
The point is that a system that worked well was in place, it was a system that added an extra 'defence' in the Swiss cheese model. But in my opinion that particular defence has now been removed. The removal of just one defence creates an elevated level of risk. How many more defences will be removed before the remaining holes in the cheese line up?

Yes indeed, para377.
Won't be long before the management team will have certifying priveliges and then all LAMES can be sacked

cant speak for the type mentioned by the op but for the bus, oil qty checks preflight by the tech crew are in the normal procedures. minimum qty and an allowance for burn are promulgated.

reading that first post simply seems the tech crew missed it preflight.

when mgmt get sick of the delays, return to gates and getting aircraft stuck at non engineering ports i guess they'll change it back

agreed, mgmt do seem to take limits as targets.

I don't think those words mean much to senior QF management. As pilots and engineers we are taught from day 1 'You must be SAFE AND LEGAL - and they are NOT the same'. I just don't think these guys (like MP) actually understand the issues. Their world is based on what you can get away with, the worst they are likely to come across in their lives is losing their job. The 'real' world Qf operates in (like you do something wrong and lots of people are likely to die very quickly) is diametrically opposed to the nice fluffy world of cash-flow projections and PPT presentations.

A bad day for a senior QF manager is a leaking pen, or losing your smartphone in the toilet at Rockpool. Trying to explain a double engine failure at V1 in a nasty crosswind will just get a blank look. I don't think they understand 'cause' and 'effect'.

Which is why an Engineer, Pilot, F/A and Ground staff member really needs to be on the board, so they can explain to the numpties what it is an airline REALLY does and what it NEEDS to do. And it sure as hell aint Lounges and shiny new corporate HQ's.

Does anyone actually know what the minimum oil quantity is for 738's ?
I asked a LAME while doing a walk around a few months ago and he said 16. That made sense to me as it is always 16 or higher on our aircraft as we get topped up every turn around (EDTO). But try as I might I couldn't find it in any manual.
Does anyone have anything definitive?

Gold Plating???????
 

In a galaxy far far away and many light years passed a flight engineer would examine water drains after every refuel,oil would be topped up regardless of qty indication,landing gear struts would be wiped clean and hydraulic qty at optimum ops level and oil tank caps inspected before dep.
This is now referred to as gold plating maintenance.id rather have gold like the smell the taste the touch of it than any other form.

ask us next week

Accurate Engine Oil Levels.
 

Just a small point. To get accurate oil level indications following several hours on the deck, the engines need to be operated for 5 minutes at idle. :ok:

Guess we could ask the Tech Pilot about oil requirements. Oh that's right, those positions no longer exit!!

Thnx for the posts guys. Interesting to see an array of answers. If I could ask a couple of questions specifically about Pilot maintenance. Is there information given to you as part of your 738 training about minimum oil levels? What have you guys been told or taught about this and other things such as tyre and brake limits?

From the maintenance manual minimum dispatch oil level on a 738 is 70% .

I don't remember if 1 qt is 4 or 5% but I assume it is 14 at 5% a can.

Hope that helps after that the oil pressure starts to drop too low.

From what I understand , the airline must be maintained by a part 145 MRO , and the Qantas CASA approved part 145 rules do not allow for pilot maintenance in any form. Not even for an independent inspection if only 1 lame on station. The devil is in the detail of what is considered maintenance or servicing.
Pilots can check oils on the indicators, fair enough, but if EDTO rules are changed to allow pilots to carry out ETOPS checks, what about the IDG oil and delta p checks required ? Servicing function?? Will you be trained to vent the IDG to get the correct oil level ? Will u have PPE to prevent breathing in MJ2 vapour?
Manufacturer and industry standards do not translate to best practice.
It's good to get an overview of opinions from various departments.
Cheers

A small correction.

Pilot Maintenance is not performed under a Part 145 Maintenance Organisation Approval.

It is performed under the CASA approved policies and procedures of the CAMO under Part 42.300.

The Part 42 Manual of Standards limits Pilot Maintenance to the following activities:
1. A pre-flight or daily inspection or an inspection that is equivalent to a pre-flight or daily inspection in the aircraft maintenance program.
2. Replacement of bulbs and lights.
3. Replacement of seats, if the replacement does not involve disassembly of any part of the primary structure of the aircraft.
4. Replenishment of a system fluid other than a gas.
5. Maintenance that is required for the application of a minimum equipment list if the maintenance does not involve any of the following:
(a) removal or disassembly of parts;
(b) disassembly of control systems;
(c) the use of special tools or equipment.
6. Maintenance required by an airworthiness directive, if the airworthiness directive permits a pilot licence holder or a flight engineer to carry out the maintenance.

These activities can only be approved after the pilot has been appropriately trained and approved by the CAMO.

MP

Thnx Manager. The CAMO now doesn't cover this oil level check.


It used to form part of a daily check. That check is now a 48 hourly check and is no longer daily.

Seriously, who writes these CASA regs? How do the pilots get tools through the x-ray machines or get access to the maintenance manual to know which circuit breakers to pull, which parts to fit*, etc.

*The reason why the light is broken may be because the wrong bulb was fitted in the first place.

Doesn't lamp removal invariably involve the removal of a part and the disassembly of a light assembly?

QF engineering policy for replacement of lamps is, power isolated (pull C/B), document pulled C/B in maintenix and use of PPE in the form of eye shields. Ensure correct P/N lamp is used IAW AMM - IPC

If you read the new regulations, pilots of a Large Aircraft can no longer perform ANY maintenance unless he is trained and approved by a Part 145 AMO. This includes changing light bulbs and pulling CB's for the application of an MEL.
Refer CASR 1998 Division 42.G 4 and MOS part 42

maintenance means any task required to ensure, or that could affect, the continuing airworthiness of an aircraft or aeronautical product, including any one or combination of overhaul, repair, inspection, replacement of an aeronautical product, modification or defect rectification.

And the penalties are:

24 Interference with crew or aircraft

(1) A person commits an offence if:

(a) the person does an act; and

(b) the act:

(i) interferes with a crew member of an aircraft in the course of the performance of his or her duties as such a crew member; or

(ii) threatens the safety of an aircraft or of persons on board an aircraft.

Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years.

(2) A person must not tamper with:

(a) an aircraft; or

(b) an aeronautical product that is of such a type that tampering with it may endanger the safety of an aircraft or any person or property;

if tampering with it may endanger the safety of the aircraft or any person or property.

Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years.