GA & CHTR - Please Read

[GA145]

What are your thoughts on the current maintenance facilities in this big brown land?

I'm not talking about the QF or VA guys, I mean the men and women on the ground, keeping your GA fleet and the Charter guys in the air - day to day.

What are they doing right? Where can they improve?
Are there enough services provided at your local LAME's hangar?
How far do you usually travel for maintenance?
Are you happy with turnaround times?

I really am interested in what owners, both private and commercial think of their maintenance org's - all in a totally anonymous setting and without naming or shaming anybody.

What (if any) component maintenance would you like to see, what services would you like provided, anything, I am just looking for general feedback on your particular situation and where there are improvements that could be made.

Leave no stone un turned.
Lets keep it clean and not turn it into a slinging match. Cheers guys!

[PLovett]

And you are............with a user name that suggests low capacity rpt maintenance?

[Pinky the pilot]

PLovett; If he's really a Journo seeking to do a spot of muckraking he'll easily be found out after a few posts.

if he is whom/what you suspect, does it matter?

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

My maintenance organisation seems to be continually being 'buggered around' by the continual stream of 'new' material from CASA, our supposed 'regulator', who are imposing more and more 'paperwork duties' onto what has been for the last couple of decades, a competent and efficient maint. organisation.

This has led to, and is continuing to lead to, more and more time taken in 'paperwork' duties to satisfy the regulator without ANY improvement in the safety case for either the LAMEs concerned, or for me as an aircraft owner.

This has lead to increase costs to me - for NO APPARENT reason at all.

My aircraft is 'vintage' requiring some skills not found in as many shops as they used to be....fabric work etc. and older 'vintage' engines.

And, I do NOT NEED 'different' categories of maintenance....

It does not have to maintained to an 'airline' standard -
its either fixed and is airworthy, or it is NOT (??) !!

I would venture that this is just the start of your 'enquiry'.

Go print that!!

No Cheers, Nope, None At All...!!

[Band a Lot]

What are they doing right?, seems most if you read the crash comics monthly.
Where can they improve? Start at start here, when did practical work stop during the apprenticeship training!
Are there enough services provided at your local LAME's hangar? If not very hard to issue a MR!
How far do you usually travel for maintenance? That must be service - can not travel if you need maintenance (you need LAME come to you).
Are you happy with turnaround times? Not unless it was yesterday!

[GA145]

Cheers Pinky, & Plovett, I can assure you, I am no journo, hate the bastards as a matter of fact - the hide of them to slag off Australian aviation safety when in fact they are usually referring to RA. If in doubt, you can rest assured I have just returned from work with a healthy sheen of AD100 and whisper of eau de Shell5.

If you must know Plovett, I post on here under another name, but as I am currently an employee who is in the process of 'going it out on my own' I wish to remain relatively anonymous as I know my superiors and other colleagues read this forum.
As for RPT - not anymore for this black duck, been there done that, got fat from drinking coffee and sitting in the smoko room! As the names suggests GA.

Thanks for the response Griffo, definitely agree with you in regards to the continual badgering from our regulator, especially when 99% are ex Military and have no idea re; GA.

[GA145]

Band a Lot, thanks. I agree the 147's have some serious explaining to do!
Sorry, I will re-word that, how far do you travel for Service, obviously if you have an expired MR, you're out of hours or have a major snag, you will not be flying (although I have seen some aircraft magically appear overnight here and there over the years).

[kaz3g]

Griffo must be going to the same LAME I do!

Kaz

[Hasherucf]

I lament the lack of training, hardly anyone I know has been put on company supplied type training in the last 5 years. Of course there are people paying their own way and taking holidays to attend.

Apprentice training is f$%ked short and simple.

Paperwork is a killer,working in a 145 organisation and I spend more time on paperwork than actual work. That isn't a joke ..... this isn't helped by dinosaur computer systems and dealing with so many clients different types of paperwork

Also the 'can do' attitude isn't possible in 145. If you don't have a manual it can't be done. I wrote off a stall vane weeks back for a open circuit diode. The part was about 10 cents but I replaced the core exchange part for 8k.

[Eddie Dean]

Does GA maintenance require a Part 145 MRO facility?

Where did you see the constant stream of documentation from CASA?

Except for issue of MR, why don't you use Part 2 of the MR for endorsement, corrective action and release to service of same?

Is the lack of apprentii the fault of the MROs or a lack of interest on the part of the young folk?

[Hasherucf]

Except for issue of MR, why don't you use Part 2 of the MR for endorsement, corrective action and release to service of same?

Because endorsing the MR grounds the aircraft unless you have a MEL in force.Smaller aircraft generally don't have MEL's. Operators drum into pilots that they aren't to endorse MR's unless asking prior permission.

Is the lack of apprentii the fault of the MROs or a lack of interest on the part of the young folk?

Young folk come in and work hard but a licence outcome is very hard . Aviation Australia has a monopoly on training and their assessments can take a year plus. Of course these guys aren't stupid and usually float into other trade streams or opportunities as getting a licence is too hard or expensive. Several states don't even have 147 approved training. Employers are reluctant to employ apprentices without a clear path to a licenced outcome. Risk vs reward is very low for any tradesman in aviation

Does GA maintenance require a Part 145 MRO facility?

That depends on who their clients are........

[GA145]

Hashercuf; Re the stall vane, could you have written in up as a general electrical snag and repaired it IAW Standard Prac's? Not having a dig, genuinely interested.

Eddie; Re the constant CASA torment, Exhibit A) The current rock-show that is SIDS...

I count myself as a 'young bloke' and I see the issues with CAR30, 145 and our regulator every day of the week, maybe its the businessman in me, or maybe its me wanting to keep doing something I love, but I can still see opportunity...

[sheppey]

Operators drum into pilots that they aren't to endorse MR's unless asking prior permission.

That's nothing new.. In fact it has been a less than redeeming feature of general aviation for over sixty years. I recall the situation where an LAME owned several trainers and put them on line with a flying school. A private pilot entered a serious defect in the MR and the LAME promptly directed the flying school CFI to ban that pilot from flying any of his aircraft. The word quickly got around and maintenance releases were always clean after that..

[Duck Pilot]

GA maintenance does not have to be done by a 145. I'm led to believe that piston GA types are difficult to integrate into the 145 system due to the cost of getting them up to the required airworthiness level, although once an aircraft has been integrated into a 145 system of maintenance the ongoing costs are more advantages, especially if the aircraft was being previously maintained under the Schedule 5 system of maintenance.

I'm no subject expert in this area, however this is what I have heard from a few GA operators who have made the change.

[Eddie Dean]

CAR30 MRO in some form will continue.
CAR31 Licence in some form will continue.

Or not?

[Band a Lot]

Basically it is not really possible to run a combined CAR 30 & Part 145 Maint org on the same premise. The 145 requirements will not allow CAR 30 stuff in the hangar, the documentation would be tricky but hard to keep separate.


Lets say 2 LAME @ $100K each, 1 apprentice @ $30K, 1 office staff CAR 30 @ $50K & 1 Part 145 office staff @ $60K (CAR 30 will assist 145 with paperwork).


That is $340,000 a year in wages only. So if 2 Lame and 1 appy do a C402 and a C210 hly a week (4,600 flown hours a year) = $10,000 a week in income at best in labour.


46 weeks a year = $460,000.


Now cover rent, insurance, workers comp, power, water, manuals, tooling, phones, office equipment, transport, fuel, bad debts, bank fees, computer programs, staff mistakes, etc.

Then the appy is away a lot and staff get sick.


You can save $60K by not doing 145, but is there the work for 4 staff or even the 5?
(Ball park figures)

[LeadSled]

Folks,
The only thing that limits the application of Part 145 to RPT (more or less) is not a limitation withing Part 145, it is a Legislative Instrument that limits Part 145 to RPT (sort of).

A certain group of CASA AWIs ( including at conferences of "approved persons") have been happy to inform those present, that the LI will not be renewed "next time", which instantly makes it Part 145 for all.

Same cheery CASA persons are quite happy to tell you that they expect that about 80% of the present CAR 30 outfits will never make Part 145, they are just not big enough to handle the avalanche of additional paperwork to do a simple job, which makes them happy and their union happy, because it is impossible to unionise small organisations. Particularly when the only LAMEs in the business own the business.

All in the interests of air safety, you understand, because you would all agree, wouldn't you, that non- union labour is a threat to air safety.

Tootle

[Hasherucf]

Hashercuf; Re the stall vane, could you have written in up as a general electrical snag and repaired it IAW Standard Prac's? Not having a dig, genuinely interested.

It is a component and I have no testing procedure or IPC to find correct parts. So in 145 I have to send it to a repair station with that capability. Many repair stations refuse work based on the fact they don't have a manual.If i was out in the sticks in a car30 organisation sure the diode would magically change. That is where the value of a good Lame comes from . I measure my performance in money I can save the customer with a can do attitude. That is discouraged in a 145 company.

When writing up a defect in CAR30 I would write something like;
Taxi lamp U/S - Lamp replaced , Tested satis

In Part 145;
Taxi lamp U/S - Gained access to Taxi lamp . Replaced IAW Cessna 402 AMM PN; 12334-54545 Rev4 ATA chapter 33-50-00. Test satisfactory P/N; GE456 GRN;123455 . Plus any test equipment you use....

In GA CAR30 you are discouraged to write anything too long as 'its rope to hang yourself'. In 145 you cant do anything without a reference, which makes it hard if you don't have valid up to date manuals

Manuals are another huge annual cost in CAR30 and 145 .With auditors wanting to see your subscriptions. Companies like ATP love it.

[PLovett]

It is possible to run CAR 30 and Part 145 maintenance out of the same hangar but it requires approval.

What may yet put the cat among the pigeons is Part 135 which is supposed to do away with the distinction between low-capacity RPT and charter. At some recent workshops on the risk matrix for this level of aviation I could not get any clear answer as to the maintenance requirements for the sector.

If it is going to be all Part 145 then the howls of outrage should be deafening. What was very clear at those workshops was that there is absolutely no safety case for such a requirement.

[Band a Lot]

"Replaced IAW Cessna 402 AMM PN; 12334-54545 Rev4 ATA chapter 33-50-00."


Is incorrect unless stated in company procedures manual.


"Manuals are another huge annual cost in CAR30 and 145 .With auditors wanting to see your subscriptions. Companies like ATP love it."


CASA too if you run a mixed fleet look at $20K+ annually.


"Plus any test equipment you use...."


Yes traceable details in worksheets are required for each calibrated tool, again many $?,000 a year in calibration.

I think CAR 30 will be fine for current piston charter AMO,s but no new will pass & no current can keep CAR 30 and get Part 145 as well??