About the preflight check.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: east
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About the preflight check.
S-76 flight manual said the pilot will determine that the exterior preflight checks should be done before the first flight of the day. And there are around 100 items of the exterior prefilght check, the procedure in my company is that the mechanist do these checks everyday, and the pilot do it again after they finished. Also I heared some other helicompany are doing same.
Is this reasonable or necessary?
I really do not want to do this.
Cheers Helieagle
Is this reasonable or necessary?
I really do not want to do this.
Cheers Helieagle
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: North of Eq
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don’t operate the S76 but I believe the principle is the same regardless of type.
Our maintenance people carryout the pre-flight check on our helicopters and sign for it in the Technical Log. Personally I believe that this covers me from a legal aspect and I am comfortable that our maintenance personnel no more than I do about the mechanical aspects of the machine. In my pre-flight I do check that the panels are secure, fluid levels are correct (where they are visible through a sight glass without opening panels), and that there are no obvious signs of physical damage.
There is also an additional concern. It is not possible to inspect certain items on the checklist without climbing to a height of more than 2 metres above ground level. It is now illegal, in our jurisdiction, to work, permit, or require someone else to work at heights above 2 metres without a safety harness, or work platforms with safety rails. Obviously this is impractical on a flight-line.
It would seem to me that the days when pilots are seen clambering over their aircraft before flight are coming to an end.
Our maintenance people carryout the pre-flight check on our helicopters and sign for it in the Technical Log. Personally I believe that this covers me from a legal aspect and I am comfortable that our maintenance personnel no more than I do about the mechanical aspects of the machine. In my pre-flight I do check that the panels are secure, fluid levels are correct (where they are visible through a sight glass without opening panels), and that there are no obvious signs of physical damage.
There is also an additional concern. It is not possible to inspect certain items on the checklist without climbing to a height of more than 2 metres above ground level. It is now illegal, in our jurisdiction, to work, permit, or require someone else to work at heights above 2 metres without a safety harness, or work platforms with safety rails. Obviously this is impractical on a flight-line.
It would seem to me that the days when pilots are seen clambering over their aircraft before flight are coming to an end.
"It would seem to me that the days when pilots are seen clambering over their aircraft before flight are coming to an end".
I'd rather clamber over my aircraft before flight to ensure it doesn't come to an end earlier than anticipated. Come to think of it, I'm sure my crew would want me to as well!
I'd rather clamber over my aircraft before flight to ensure it doesn't come to an end earlier than anticipated. Come to think of it, I'm sure my crew would want me to as well!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 431 Likes
on
227 Posts
Originally Posted by Hidden Agenda
We don’t operate the S76 but I believe the principle is the same regardless of type.
Our maintenance people carryout the pre-flight check on our helicopters and sign for it in the Technical Log. Personally I believe that this covers me from a legal aspect and I am comfortable that our maintenance personnel no more than I do about the mechanical aspects of the machine. In my pre-flight I do check that the panels are secure, fluid levels are correct (where they are visible through a sight glass without opening panels), and that there are no obvious signs of physical damage.
There is also an additional concern. It is not possible to inspect certain items on the checklist without climbing to a height of more than 2 metres above ground level. It is now illegal, in our jurisdiction, to work, permit, or require someone else to work at heights above 2 metres without a safety harness, or work platforms with safety rails. Obviously this is impractical on a flight-line.
It would seem to me that the days when pilots are seen clambering over their aircraft before flight are coming to an end.
Our maintenance people carryout the pre-flight check on our helicopters and sign for it in the Technical Log. Personally I believe that this covers me from a legal aspect and I am comfortable that our maintenance personnel no more than I do about the mechanical aspects of the machine. In my pre-flight I do check that the panels are secure, fluid levels are correct (where they are visible through a sight glass without opening panels), and that there are no obvious signs of physical damage.
There is also an additional concern. It is not possible to inspect certain items on the checklist without climbing to a height of more than 2 metres above ground level. It is now illegal, in our jurisdiction, to work, permit, or require someone else to work at heights above 2 metres without a safety harness, or work platforms with safety rails. Obviously this is impractical on a flight-line.
It would seem to me that the days when pilots are seen clambering over their aircraft before flight are coming to an end.
Great idea, must remember to mention it to our company. Once I've finished refuelling it, topping up the oils, putting it away for the night and cleaning it out.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: North of Eq
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shy Torque, I hear where you are coming from and I used to do all those things too. But I am not allowed to anymore…they are maintenance functions!
I am not allowed to remove the quick release dual controls, remove or refit the doors (which are held on by pins) or remove or refit the seat backs (which are attached with Velcro) they are maintenance functions and it is considered that I am not trained, qualified or licensed/certificated to do this.
I know, I know….but why should I when my employer rebukes me for it, and the regulatory authority can take action against me for doing it.
Fortyodd2, are you sure that your crew really want you to do it, wouldn’t they prefer that it was done by a specialist, a maintenance professional. I am not saying that pilots should totally ignore the procedure I am just saying that they should manage it.
Do we not use the auto-pilot / SAS / Flight Director even though we were trained to fly ‘hands-on’. I have come to believe that there are some things that pilots shouldn’t be doing when there is a better alternative, and that pre-flight inspections is perhaps one of them.
I am not allowed to remove the quick release dual controls, remove or refit the doors (which are held on by pins) or remove or refit the seat backs (which are attached with Velcro) they are maintenance functions and it is considered that I am not trained, qualified or licensed/certificated to do this.
I know, I know….but why should I when my employer rebukes me for it, and the regulatory authority can take action against me for doing it.
Fortyodd2, are you sure that your crew really want you to do it, wouldn’t they prefer that it was done by a specialist, a maintenance professional. I am not saying that pilots should totally ignore the procedure I am just saying that they should manage it.
Do we not use the auto-pilot / SAS / Flight Director even though we were trained to fly ‘hands-on’. I have come to believe that there are some things that pilots shouldn’t be doing when there is a better alternative, and that pre-flight inspections is perhaps one of them.
Hidden Agenda,
Yes, it would be lovely if an engineer was available to do it before every flight. However, in the real world there's me, (for me - read "the Duty Pilot"), - except on Mondays when our engineer has his weekly visit to make sure that any required maintenance is done and to check that I have not missed anything. And, with the possible exception of the Met, it's probably the same at all UK Police ASU's.
Yes, an on-site engineer would be a better alternative but, neither I nor the Police Authority nor the Maintenance Organisation are going to fund one.
Yes, it would be lovely if an engineer was available to do it before every flight. However, in the real world there's me, (for me - read "the Duty Pilot"), - except on Mondays when our engineer has his weekly visit to make sure that any required maintenance is done and to check that I have not missed anything. And, with the possible exception of the Met, it's probably the same at all UK Police ASU's.
Yes, an on-site engineer would be a better alternative but, neither I nor the Police Authority nor the Maintenance Organisation are going to fund one.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: North of Eq
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fortyodd2,
It does seem that we are playing by different rules.
We are not allowed by the regulators to do a daily inspection although we can do the pre-flight check, so we cannot live without an engineer on-site. If he is sick and there is no replacement we are grounded.
It would be nice to have the flexibility that you have.
You say “it would be lovely if an engineer was available to do it before every flight”. So presumably you agree with me that when maintenance personnel are required to be available to conduct a daily inspection, that it is acceptable to let them get on with the pre-flight check simultaneously, and then not repeat the task?
HA
It does seem that we are playing by different rules.
We are not allowed by the regulators to do a daily inspection although we can do the pre-flight check, so we cannot live without an engineer on-site. If he is sick and there is no replacement we are grounded.
It would be nice to have the flexibility that you have.
You say “it would be lovely if an engineer was available to do it before every flight”. So presumably you agree with me that when maintenance personnel are required to be available to conduct a daily inspection, that it is acceptable to let them get on with the pre-flight check simultaneously, and then not repeat the task?
HA
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most engineers I know would think I'd lost the plot if I didn't do a complete pre-flight myself. Nothing to do with manuals,releases and various regulations around the world etc.
Just that any seasoned team of Engineers/Pilots would never under estimate the ability of a human being to f*** up on a regular and ongoing basis.
The old scenario of a ' wrench laying near an inlet/control run' is for real sometimes, and the bazillion minor and not so minor problems I've found doing a pre-flight, didn't become major because I found them...Then a engineer guy fixed em...
As you'd appreciate an engineer running out to stop you backing into something you didn't see, or forgot about...He/she appreciates you double checking their work.
Trust isn't anywhere in the picture....They don't want you to trust them.
They want you to double check?...
At least that's the feedback I get from some of the great ones I've worked with...
Just that any seasoned team of Engineers/Pilots would never under estimate the ability of a human being to f*** up on a regular and ongoing basis.
The old scenario of a ' wrench laying near an inlet/control run' is for real sometimes, and the bazillion minor and not so minor problems I've found doing a pre-flight, didn't become major because I found them...Then a engineer guy fixed em...
As you'd appreciate an engineer running out to stop you backing into something you didn't see, or forgot about...He/she appreciates you double checking their work.
Trust isn't anywhere in the picture....They don't want you to trust them.
They want you to double check?...
At least that's the feedback I get from some of the great ones I've worked with...
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: North of Eq
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
170’, the points you make are undoubtedly sound and steeped in tradition.
Part of the preflight check for a Bell 206, for example, calls for ‘Engine – condition, security of attachments …throttle linkage – condition, security, and freedom of operation…Hoses and Tubing – chafing, security and condition’ etc., etc.
Why do we have to go through such a check procedure when Maintenance personnel have just inspected the aircraft? I don’t see our distant cousins on fixed wing aircraft opening engine cowlings and poking around inside the engine bay prior to strapping an Airbus A 340 on to their backs for an 18-hour flight across the Oceans. Why do we consider it is necessary to do it immediately after a maintainer has checked our rotorcraft when our maximum flight duration is about three hours?
Today’s aircraft are supposed to be getting simpler and easier to fly and maintain. Do you think that part of that simplification should be extended to the Daily Inspection and Pre-flight check? Reviewing the Flight Manuals of the latest Eurocopter models I think that you could reasonably come to that conclusion.
Part of the preflight check for a Bell 206, for example, calls for ‘Engine – condition, security of attachments …throttle linkage – condition, security, and freedom of operation…Hoses and Tubing – chafing, security and condition’ etc., etc.
Why do we have to go through such a check procedure when Maintenance personnel have just inspected the aircraft? I don’t see our distant cousins on fixed wing aircraft opening engine cowlings and poking around inside the engine bay prior to strapping an Airbus A 340 on to their backs for an 18-hour flight across the Oceans. Why do we consider it is necessary to do it immediately after a maintainer has checked our rotorcraft when our maximum flight duration is about three hours?
Today’s aircraft are supposed to be getting simpler and easier to fly and maintain. Do you think that part of that simplification should be extended to the Daily Inspection and Pre-flight check? Reviewing the Flight Manuals of the latest Eurocopter models I think that you could reasonably come to that conclusion.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: U.S.
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how much experience you have?
As a non-mechanic pilot I may not be considered "a trained, professional technical specialist..." (????)....
...however....
...rather early in my career, after I'd found tools left behind and cotter keys left off "completed" work**, I learned that when the machine becomes "mine," I should look it over thoroughly. And yes, this means opening panels and such.
If your employer takes issue with this to the point of probition or discouragement of the practice, I would urge you to attempt to get them to change the practice, on the grounds of safety. If you are unable to get them to change, look for a job where management has their head on straight, and until you get it, hope that the mechs don't overlook anything that will "affect" you.
**Nothing personal against mechs here. The fact is, they make mistakes just like us pilots do. A professional mech won't mind somebody checking his work, or an extra set of eyes looking over the machine on a regular basis.
...however....
...rather early in my career, after I'd found tools left behind and cotter keys left off "completed" work**, I learned that when the machine becomes "mine," I should look it over thoroughly. And yes, this means opening panels and such.
If your employer takes issue with this to the point of probition or discouragement of the practice, I would urge you to attempt to get them to change the practice, on the grounds of safety. If you are unable to get them to change, look for a job where management has their head on straight, and until you get it, hope that the mechs don't overlook anything that will "affect" you.
**Nothing personal against mechs here. The fact is, they make mistakes just like us pilots do. A professional mech won't mind somebody checking his work, or an extra set of eyes looking over the machine on a regular basis.
arismount:
As long as you don't mind mechanics riding along with you, looking over your shoulder and "checking your work," making sure you don't make any mistakes that {ahem} *might* go unrepo...err, unnoticed by you, eh?
Or does this "checking one's work" only flow in one direction?
**Nothing personal against mechs here. The fact is, they make mistakes just like us pilots do. A professional mech won't mind somebody checking his work, or an extra set of eyes looking over the machine on a regular basis.
Or does this "checking one's work" only flow in one direction?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hidden Agenda
I can't argue the point with you, as I don't know enough about later model equipment. And as steeped in tradition as I am... Yes, I get the point
Certain things have stood the test of time. Pre-flight being one of them...
Dual/duplicate inspection is and has been a standard engineering practice for a long time.For excellent reasons!
I can't say where we're going with new developments, inspection protocols etc..but for the relatively short amount of time it takes to go over the ship yourself. I think the benefit is real and substantial...
Last point is subjective depending on your maintenance setup, but for most operations a daily inspection is carried out by a single person. Not a crew of highly motivated people who's raison d’ętre is to find that one cotter key that's missing...That's your job as person carrying out the duplicate inspection....
170
I can't argue the point with you, as I don't know enough about later model equipment. And as steeped in tradition as I am... Yes, I get the point
Certain things have stood the test of time. Pre-flight being one of them...
Dual/duplicate inspection is and has been a standard engineering practice for a long time.For excellent reasons!
I can't say where we're going with new developments, inspection protocols etc..but for the relatively short amount of time it takes to go over the ship yourself. I think the benefit is real and substantial...
Last point is subjective depending on your maintenance setup, but for most operations a daily inspection is carried out by a single person. Not a crew of highly motivated people who's raison d’ętre is to find that one cotter key that's missing...That's your job as person carrying out the duplicate inspection....
170
I've been on both sides of the fence - started off in helicopter maintenance, then learned to fly. It's nice to have a different set of eyes looking everything over, because we all screw up sometimes...
In my military days one motivator for maintenance crews to give a crap was knowing that they were all going for a ride just as soon as we finished the test flights after phase maintenance on CH-47's - whether they wanted to or not
In my military days one motivator for maintenance crews to give a crap was knowing that they were all going for a ride just as soon as we finished the test flights after phase maintenance on CH-47's - whether they wanted to or not
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: vocation
Age: 57
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't understand why it ISN'T standard practice for the engineer who did the work to come and prove its integrity by riding in the aircraft.
If he doesn't want to sign for it, neither do I!
If he doesn't want to sign for it, neither do I!
I always feel a bit uneasy when someone else has done the daily, not because I think I know better than others, but because:
1. I'm then sure all the things that I always check before flight have been looked at.
2. It gets me into gear and thinking professionally before jumping in and taking off.
3. If I've looked at the machine carefully before flight, then I can see if anything's changed at the end of the day and maybe pick up a problem.
4. It can be a little tech lesson every time you notice something you haven't really seen properly before.
1. I'm then sure all the things that I always check before flight have been looked at.
2. It gets me into gear and thinking professionally before jumping in and taking off.
3. If I've looked at the machine carefully before flight, then I can see if anything's changed at the end of the day and maybe pick up a problem.
4. It can be a little tech lesson every time you notice something you haven't really seen properly before.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
Helieagle - why do you not want to do this?
At our place, the engineers (plural) swarm all over the machine, and we do a preflight every time, though I'm still not used to not having to untie the blades by myself
I can't ever see a point where I would not do my own preflight, no matter how many people have looked at it before. The preflight is not the same as a daily check, either - treat it as a last line of defence against a mistake before you fly - you can never check the machine enough beforehand, as long as you don't get obsessive about it.
We had the ridiculous situation in UK in my previous place where the CAA were quite happy for pilots to do daily checks away from base where there was no engineering support, but not do them at base where there was an engineer.
Phil
At our place, the engineers (plural) swarm all over the machine, and we do a preflight every time, though I'm still not used to not having to untie the blades by myself
I can't ever see a point where I would not do my own preflight, no matter how many people have looked at it before. The preflight is not the same as a daily check, either - treat it as a last line of defence against a mistake before you fly - you can never check the machine enough beforehand, as long as you don't get obsessive about it.
We had the ridiculous situation in UK in my previous place where the CAA were quite happy for pilots to do daily checks away from base where there was no engineering support, but not do them at base where there was an engineer.
Phil
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: U.S.
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad for a chance to make things clear
>>As long as you don't mind mechanics riding along with you, looking over your shoulder and "checking your work," making sure you don't make any mistakes that {ahem} *might* go unrepo...err, unnoticed by you, eh?
Or does this "checking one's work" only flow in one direction?<<
No, have never minded mechanics riding along...on the 1% of the flights on which they do....
No, have never minded a mech or anyone else, including copilots, med crews, and/or pax pointing out any mistakes I am making, or any mistakes they think I am making. And, yes, I have made mistakes and I expect to make them again...this is why I believe in and practice CRM.
No, the "checking one's work" does not flow only in one direction.
I thought all this went without saying from a professional pilot. Apparently not. Glad I had the opportunity to make this all clear to you.
Fly (and/or turn wrenches) safely, and have a nice day.
Or does this "checking one's work" only flow in one direction?<<
No, have never minded mechanics riding along...on the 1% of the flights on which they do....
No, have never minded a mech or anyone else, including copilots, med crews, and/or pax pointing out any mistakes I am making, or any mistakes they think I am making. And, yes, I have made mistakes and I expect to make them again...this is why I believe in and practice CRM.
No, the "checking one's work" does not flow only in one direction.
I thought all this went without saying from a professional pilot. Apparently not. Glad I had the opportunity to make this all clear to you.
Fly (and/or turn wrenches) safely, and have a nice day.
I can't understand why it ISN'T standard practice for the engineer who did the work to come and prove its integrity by riding in the aircraft.
If he doesn't want to sign for it, neither do I!
If he doesn't want to sign for it, neither do I!
Our number of wasted hours dropped, availability and expediency in resolving genuine snags increased dramatically.
And the person fixing it goes along too. Keeps everyone honest!
Hidden Agenda,
You say “it would be lovely if an engineer was available to do it before every flight”. So presumably you agree with me that when maintenance personnel are required to be available to conduct a daily inspection, that it is acceptable to let them get on with the pre-flight check simultaneously, and then not repeat the task?
Er, no - what I'm saying is that if we had an engineer to do the daily check every day then, whilst he was doing it, I could get on with the paperwork, briefing etc, and get the aircraft online quicker - increasing the availability for the customer, (ie - the bobby on the ground). The downside, for the engineer, is that being a single aircraft, single base operation, once the daily check has been done, what does he/she do for the rest of the day??
If I have not done the daily check then the pre-flight is still my responsibility - I'm the one getting airborne in it.
You say “it would be lovely if an engineer was available to do it before every flight”. So presumably you agree with me that when maintenance personnel are required to be available to conduct a daily inspection, that it is acceptable to let them get on with the pre-flight check simultaneously, and then not repeat the task?
Er, no - what I'm saying is that if we had an engineer to do the daily check every day then, whilst he was doing it, I could get on with the paperwork, briefing etc, and get the aircraft online quicker - increasing the availability for the customer, (ie - the bobby on the ground). The downside, for the engineer, is that being a single aircraft, single base operation, once the daily check has been done, what does he/she do for the rest of the day??
If I have not done the daily check then the pre-flight is still my responsibility - I'm the one getting airborne in it.