Spanish aviation under the magnifying glass!!.. same worldwide?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: england
Age: 54
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
switched on Sapinish Pilots
Its worries me that some of you Pilot types can't see what your Spanish Colleagues Can. As a Licensed Engineer i sometimes wonder if you all have your heads buried in the sand. Maintenance is something you dont see whilst you are sat at the sharp end. You get on the Aircraft and assume that the thing has to be working properly as there are no amber or red lights on when all things are running or that all the little yellow stickers mean someone who has years of training has decided that the aircraft can fly with an acceptable fault although he may have made that decision at five in the morning after dealing with maybe 4 or 5 other aircraft with defects that needed to be dealt with.
EASA and their new regulations with respect to Maintenance have raised a few eyebrows amongst the Engineer community with EASA stating that the new diluted regulations are written with a view to them being modified as circumstances dictate. In other words if the reg's have missed something which has been proven by an Incident (or accident) then and only then will they be rewritten. Little like shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted. This is due to the fact that the different National Aviation Authorities had different Regulations and the whole task of combining them to make one is a near impossible task, so it is easier to start again from scratch basically.
Most Engineers in the UK who operated under the ANO and the CAA now find that the rules they adhered to and were trained to have been removed or diluted to such an extent that we can see Big problems with respect to safety in the near future.
As i said earlier all Pilots like the Spanish need to wake up and smell the coffee your the ones that have to fly on them we just have to dispatch them with a clear conscience and walk away.
On a postive note you can be assured that the engineers representative body the ALAE are working on your behalf and are having an input into the rewriting of the EASA regulations by proving to EASA that some of the incidents have happened or will happen.
EASA and their new regulations with respect to Maintenance have raised a few eyebrows amongst the Engineer community with EASA stating that the new diluted regulations are written with a view to them being modified as circumstances dictate. In other words if the reg's have missed something which has been proven by an Incident (or accident) then and only then will they be rewritten. Little like shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted. This is due to the fact that the different National Aviation Authorities had different Regulations and the whole task of combining them to make one is a near impossible task, so it is easier to start again from scratch basically.
Most Engineers in the UK who operated under the ANO and the CAA now find that the rules they adhered to and were trained to have been removed or diluted to such an extent that we can see Big problems with respect to safety in the near future.
As i said earlier all Pilots like the Spanish need to wake up and smell the coffee your the ones that have to fly on them we just have to dispatch them with a clear conscience and walk away.
On a postive note you can be assured that the engineers representative body the ALAE are working on your behalf and are having an input into the rewriting of the EASA regulations by proving to EASA that some of the incidents have happened or will happen.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Palm
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again, the problem is that:
Progressive legislation and professionalism that has the key for a safe operation and that ought to be taken by everyone in the aviation business rather than sit and wait for an accident and then take corrective measures.
Will EASA become a European tool for politicians rather than an effective aviation one?
There are different levels of safety across the world. There is also a lot of written stuff about it but all that has human being's factor and the environment he/she lives in professionally.
The level of safety in country A, despite the same training (sometimes oversea's with different nationalities, and all learning the sam stuff) procedures and reading material to refer to, isn't the same in country K and so on... The truth of the matter is in the "safety culture" of the local authority and consequently its effective authority to the operators registered with that authority.
The level of safety in country A, despite the same training (sometimes oversea's with different nationalities, and all learning the sam stuff) procedures and reading material to refer to, isn't the same in country K and so on... The truth of the matter is in the "safety culture" of the local authority and consequently its effective authority to the operators registered with that authority.
Will EASA become a European tool for politicians rather than an effective aviation one?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safety issues do seldom translate into magazine cover histories. They more likely appear in the form of covered-up mishaps.
From time to time, (fortunately they are very rare events) comes the "big one" that makes its way to the front covers, but these have always existed and will allways exist.
Safety deterioraton is just a meaningless figure to the public: even if accident rates would double or triple to xx accidents/1.000.000 h flown, to the public it's just that: a figure, although safety may have indeed seriously deterorated (which, again and fortunately, does not mean that one in two aircraft that takes off won't make it).
From time to time, (fortunately they are very rare events) comes the "big one" that makes its way to the front covers, but these have always existed and will allways exist.
Safety deterioraton is just a meaningless figure to the public: even if accident rates would double or triple to xx accidents/1.000.000 h flown, to the public it's just that: a figure, although safety may have indeed seriously deterorated (which, again and fortunately, does not mean that one in two aircraft that takes off won't make it).
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you guy's are worried about safety perhaps you should read here on pprune http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=216663 and the engineers bulletin board here http://www.airmech.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=5674
EASA is trying to do away with the trained licenced engineer and replace him with an 'Appropriately Authorised Person'. Threads tell the reall story if they get away with it the guy signing out the aircraft could have been doing who's knows what before the company employing him gave him the authority.
Sit tight guy's and check your a/c well.
EASA is trying to do away with the trained licenced engineer and replace him with an 'Appropriately Authorised Person'. Threads tell the reall story if they get away with it the guy signing out the aircraft could have been doing who's knows what before the company employing him gave him the authority.
Sit tight guy's and check your a/c well.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sometimes at Home
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reference sought
Airbus a321 wrote:
Apparently, this comes from DGCA rules (Spanish CAA?).
Could someone provide a likewise JAR reference? I would like to show my boss what he's doing to the flying public.
Thanks, PD
the total on type flight time experience of an active flight-crew must be by law, (to improve flight safety !! and so to do all the best for the passengers !!) 500 hours
Could someone provide a likewise JAR reference? I would like to show my boss what he's doing to the flying public.
Thanks, PD
