Just noticed the posts on tools, the engineer's bread and butter. My father, whose toolbox included one or two for pre-war biplanes, and another which became widely produced on-station for Hurricane tubing battle damage, allowed me to try the pump-action screwdriver mentioned on a scrap panel. One attempt was enough and he admitted he could not use the damn thing himself. The socket set was the first tool which was a really practical replacement for the box spanners used until (I think) around 1950 in the RAF at any rate. Ratchets etc had to be booked out from Stores.

Anyone remember the socket-set beginnings? Today of course we can buy a serviceable set for £50 or less, my first set of BSF and BSW cost me two weeks' wages.

Anyone remember using a "grolleybar"?

Heathen kit. I have a screw shaker that sorts out any fastener. Don't use it on composite panels mind. The Jaguar was an example. Riggers, you can only use a speedy. Armourers and Sooties were using impact drivers to remove the same bloody 5/16" and 3/8" offset machine screws. I borrowed an impact driver off the sooties on day to take off the the L/E panels off a Jag wing. A job that took 2 blokes, two days with speedys, took me a morning. Of course I have screw grab now that the RAF didn't have.

Agree, Air force windy drills were crap apart from the better Cleco's. Then again, the straight, 30 degree and 90 degree windys, had little speed control on them. Still got my sheetie kit, not used it properly in 13 years since I got my line job.

Bloody hell, windies, that takes me back, still got mine tucked up in my garage! The noise! I'll go to bed tonight and dream of 747 belly skins getting drilled off. 😁

Given most of us have some involvement in BDR, if at all possible could you elaborate on this please ?

" and another which became widely produced on-station for Hurricane tubing battle damage,"

True, the pistol grip windy was by far the best option, IF, space / access permitted and, as others have said, "controlling" the speed of other windies by kinking the air hose was fine, until, the hose went "pop ! " in the vicinity of your hand.

However, as I've said before, RAF tools were embarrassing when compared to other nations, likewise ground equip, some of which seem to be dated back to the 40's / 50's.

You got the impression "every expense spared" was the motto for procurement and, by doing so, displayed why engineers are / were, undervalued.

Corroded to hell as BMS3-33 is ####e primer.

Grolleybars heathen? They were the only way of getting the stressed skin panels off the sides of the mighty toom. Admittedly there would be a number of busted anchor nuts to rivet back on.

The Centre Seats all ended up in the STN Role Equipment Bay in “Mobility” stores - I found one of those Tool Boxes (no tools) in a 7 Sqn Bin - Fixed the hinge on it and I still have it for some of my metalwork kit! - Probably up for sale soon!

Grollie bars, was that the contraption we used on the VC10 wing tank panels,

when you got a screw out you screwed the vertical bar in its place, on that there was a split hinged horizontal bar of some length, it contained a floating extension on which you would put a screwdriver socket, on the top you would put an extension and a ratchet handle / breaker bar If I remember correctly. One man would put his weight / strength into forcing the bar down and hence the screwdriver bit into the screw while the other person attempted to undo it.

Grollie Bars - Tool of ‘next to last’ resort. Then came the Easy Outs. Harrier high torque screws were a nightmare, once you managed to get a drill bit to the right cutting angles for those screws , you hung onto it for life. Not great tool control though.

Because the things were over torqued on fit.

Anyone remember the "Aer Lingus" tool? 😁

American Airlines leading the charge.
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....1e895ce949.jpg

Crew chiefs will be getting £113K apparently.

How can the military hope to retain engineers when civvy wages are rapidly becoming huge?

Sky Sports,

They can't - next question.

It's exactly 25 years since I made the hyper-space jump from RAF SNCO to unqualified airline mechanic. Coupled with the transition from Section L to EASA that was going on, the route to achieving my unrestricted licence was an ordeal.

With the advent of dual airworthiness certified aircraft like P-8/737, Atlas, King Air, and the MAA, is there any better commonality now between military technician training syllabi, certification and qualification that makes the transition easier?

Not in UK CAA/EASA land as far as I'm aware.

I worked with some Aussie guys whose technical type training on Bell 205 in Aus Army and Air Force was recognised by CASA as soon as they left and obtained licence.

Probably all changed now since CASA started following EASA procedures.

The RAF Licenced Engineers such as on the Shadow fleet have their powers “throttled” in the RAF I believe to justify the existence of Engineering Officers who simply do not exist in the real world, that task being undertaken by Licenced Engineers. As was previously pointed out to me

Having seen civil apprentice training, I'd say the MOD curriculum is eons behind in so many respects. However, the experiences gained on RAF Line Units (Forward Units?) through their intense over-servicing of aircraft is enormous compared to that of civil LAMEs. I remember that almost all Ryanair Lineys gathered one night at Stansted to take part in the very rare event of changing an aileron!!

There is no correlation of P8 to 737 - probably due to significant structural and system differences. P8 wings might be similar to a 737-800 but perhaps it has hard points?

Atlas is the same but there is only one civil registered...I believe?

King Air 350 is similar to Shadow but, again, Shadow has has some large mods to get where it is today, though not as large as the P8. I investigated doing similar DLR and Optical/IR mods for a civil anti-pirate project. (but without the Snooping gear I think?)

The MAA/EDA are nowhere close to the CAA/EASA which are supposed to be independent of other authorities. The MAA is definitely not independent of any MOD influences and, as if to prove it, has 'developed' in some places the antithesis of CAA regulations and quietly ignores others of its own. Do not confuse the two regulations, I have worked with both, separately, for some years.

I'm showing my age when I say that a former Maintenance Manager I knew (RIP) for Bristow Helicopters applied for and got his first Section L AML with a Whirlwind Type Rating because he was "Q"d on Whirlwinds in the RAF! (different times, I know). The CAA and EASA clearly legislate the training required now for their Part 66 licences and, to be honest, there are only two differences between them which are: a. the need to Log their specified aircraft State registrations for your experience logs and b. the covers of the regulations used. If you base your Any Part 66 commonality would probably be in the Maths and Theory of Flight exams - and there aren't too many of those. My experience of Licensing ceased almost a year ago so I may be a little out of date.