Oh look, my favourite subject. Maintenance Standards.
 

Qantas and Virgin engineers plan strike

Melbourne aircraft engineers today announced nationwide industrial action over safety concerns, despite assurances from Australia's aviation watchdog that passengers were in no danger.

The Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association said by using pilots to conduct pre-takeoff safety checks, airlines were watering down an aviation safety system currently among the best in the world.

"Already we have evidence of three incidents of Virgin Blue pilots being involved in safety inspection oversights with potentially fatal consequences," ALAEA federal president Michael O'Rance said.

The federal executive of the ALAEA today endorsed a series of industry-wide stopwork meetings to consider the issue, starting in Brisbane on March 10.

However Virgin Blue commercial chief David Huttner said the budget airline had always adhered to the safety regulations set by both the aircraft manufacturer and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

"It's unfortunate that the union feels those guidelines should be modified simply to increase their own membership ... and get more membership dues in the till," Mr Huttner told AAP.

"We are running an airline focused on safety not a jobs for the boys campaign and we think it's pathetic that they use such scare tactics against us or Qantas. This has nothing to do with safety."

The ALAEA was welcome to lobby CASA for an amendment to the guidelines, Mr Huttner added.

The engineers' association claimed the problem was highlighted recently when a Virgin Blue captain removed landing gear brake pins from an aircraft and then left them on the tarmac.

But Mr Huttner described the procedure as routine. "The pins were removed by a captain as per CASA guidelines," he said.

CASA said it was satisfied there was no compromise to safety.

"We do not believe (passengers) should be concerned about the fact that pilots are doing turnaround inspections on these brand new Virgin Blue aircraft," said CASA spokesman Peter Gibson.

"There are no safety issues, but ... there are industrial issues which are nothing to do with us."

If a pilot found any damage to an aircraft, Mr Gibson said regulations stated a licensed engineer must be called in.

The ALAEA dismissed CASA's approval of the use of pilots for pre-takeoff inspections, saying the safety watchdog was simply "reacting to the big players."

"CASA has now basically said it's okay for the Australian industry to have a lower standard than the international industry," federal secretary David Kemp said.

"Virgin says it's world best practice, but in fact it's world cheapest practice. Neither of them have really listened (to the engineers)."

PLM

:rolleyes:


Here we go......this'll be very interesting.

Using DJ as the precedent hey, so whatever the result, QF will end up the same...... very risky proposition me thinks............

"We do not believe (passengers) should be concerned about the fact that pilots are doing turnaround inspections on these brand new Virgin Blue aircraft," said CASA spokesman Peter Gibson"

What would Peter Gibson from CASA know........................

He is just a hired spin doctor with no aviation qualifications

And the next episode includes the 'Preflight' done by a Virgin pilot with the aircraft assessed as airworthy, immediately followed by one by a LAME as a duty of care, and lo and behold it's had a birdstrike - to the extent the aircraft is grounded and the engine requires replacement! And 'Gibbo' says not to worry!

(Why didn't the crew flying the previous leg report any abnormal parameters...?)

Watch this space!

And remember...

'You can teach a monkey to ride a bike...'

As an ex LAME who graduated to Flight Engineer, I have been let down on several occasions by my ex LAME colleagues. Luckily I spotted each deficiency during my walk around inspections. That is all but one where we had to dump 64,000kgs of fuel and return to base. An incident that still interfers with my sleep because I missed the clues after the the aircraft was signed off by an LAME. Get real fellows, we are human beings and we will keep on making mistakes. A pilot doing a walkaround inspection is no more prone to miss something as a LAME.

I don't think anybody has suggested that LAMEs are faultless. You are correct...we are all human (welll most of us;) )

AN LAME,

Quite often there is no obvious sign to a bird strike, or the crew don't happen to be looking at the engine gauges at the moment of ingestion.

I can recall three instances of bird stikes I've experienced none of which were felt or heard. Two on landing by day, the bird passed close enough to the aircraft to be aware and thus look closely, though nothing was heard or felt.

One on take off at night involved ingestion in two engines, followed by 600nm over water. The evidence found by a LAME on the subsequent inspection.

On the flip side, I've gone to engineers after they've dailied the aircraft and asked about the blood & guts on the flaps. This just supports previous posts that we are human, the concept that engineers are better than pilots are better than engineers is silly!

Captain,

Yhanks for the info. And you are correct...we are all human. And two sets of eyes are better than one.

This subject has been discussed several times, and nobody is suggesting ONLY Engineers do a Preflight, that would be as stupid as the proposal that ONLY Pilots do a Preflight. :rolleyes:

The current system that has served us well for decades should remain, that is at least 2 independent checks, 1 by a Pilot and 1 by an Engineer. :D

As the the remarks about missing things, I could quote many cases where Pilots have missed things, THAT is the beauty of the current SAFER system, 2 INDEPENDENT INSPECTIONS, who really cares who picks it up as long as one of you do.

Hotdog,
You are correct, nobody is perfect including F/E's.Some of the worst mistakes I have seen in aviation have been made by F/E's and I am qualified to make this statement, so don't have a go at LAME's at least we have a future.
May be you should report your loss of sleep to your company medico, how do you ever cope with sim rides?

Well LAYME, I'm not prepared to enter into a p!ssing contest on this issue but to quote just one example, I must say your attitude appears to match the one of a LAME, employed by a very prominent operator based at SYD International who threatened me with a walkoff because I asked him for a roll of speed tape to cover a fist sized hole in the left inboard flap of our 747; which he and his colleagues missed on their certified transit check and was reluctant to rectify himself to avoid a departure delay!:rolleyes:

HotDog,

You say that you are not prepared to enter a pissing contest, which is very noble of you and how it should be, then you go ahead and say something like that. :(

I am sure that most LAMEs could quote numerous examples the other way round, I know I certainly could, however most LAMEs, including me, are much more professional than that. :rolleyes:

airsupport.

Hotdog,
As I said in my previous post I can give you examples of F/Es making errors that actually jepardised the safety of the aircrcaft inflight, due to fuel starvation and as I said in my previous post I am qualified to make this statement.
Lets not get into a p$ssing contest, nobody is perfect.;)

That's what I tried to convey in my original post, which obviously got your hackles up. So why don't we just drop it, everybody has made their point but I still am of the opinion that a pilot qualified on type is as capable of carrying out a walkaround inspection as a LAME (or should I say LAYME?.:p )

one ball

OOH that hurts.

Get a sense of humor; grow up; both; ******. You're a bloody sook.

I too would have been a bit peaved if flight crew asked for a roll of tape to fix something that A) is obviously a grounding defect, and B) the engineers job to fix anyway.

Sounds like such a request was designed to be a lot sarcarrrrstic and elicited the response that it was intended to............

None the less, I can see that the requirement for a LAME to do the walkaround could well do with some reform, it's a gumby job and need not have a highly paid LAME do it - anyone with airframe experience can follow the simple instructions laid out in a pre flight inspection, particularly if they have received training to that end.

The issue is an inudstrial one, and safety is being used to emotionally stear the agrument, as is done so often in this country.

Pullock,
No comment, just haven't heard Gumby in a damn long time! :D :D :D

hehehehehe!!!!


Cheers!
GTG!

pullocks,

Very interesting point you made, you have convinced me. :rolleyes:

Quote:-

None the less, I can see that the requirement for a LAME to do the walkaround could well do with some reform, it's a gumby job and need not have a highly paid LAME do it - anyone with airframe experience can follow the simple instructions laid out in a pre flight inspection, particularly if they have received training to that end.

Endquote.

Okay, NO LAMEs on tarmac, as you point out, what a waste of money and anyone that can follow a few simple instructions could do it. ;)

Now we have fixed that, what about the flight crew?

Aircraft have already been designed to fly with NO Pilots at all, and IF you must have Pilots on board, just about anyone that can follow a few simple instructions could fly a modern Aircraft, especially with triple autopilots and all the nav aids. :rolleyes:

So why on Earth are we paying not one, but TWO, supposedly highly intelligent, highly trained and highly paid people to carry out a function that is hardly needed, at best ONLY when something goes wrong?

Surely we could do away with one of them. :rolleyes:

Well what is the use IF you are going to take that altitude. ;) :D

I suppose if we all agreed, what would we be debating? ;)