Maintenance Standards
Pilots' Pal
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: USA
Age: 63
Posts: 1,158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know of one organisation that occasionally sends replacement engineers to one line base on the jump seat, overnight,more than likely to be on duty on arrival (working on the aircraft in which he/she flew). When questioned about this, an individual in the organisation stated that it was not economically viable to send personnel on scheduled flights if alternatives were available. I don't know if the Accountable Manager holds this view but the cause of safety is not best served in this way.
Believe me, and I can speak from a QA and hands-on perspective, the effort that goes into EASA 145/JAR 145 Human Factors training is largely wasted. Those engineers inclined to push the limit are sometimes not actively discouraged from doing so.
Throughout my career, I have also experienced QA managers' complicity in pushing the limits, often with very creative interpretations of the regulations and even company procedures. Those companies now taking this issue seriously may be those who were stung by not taking it seriously (if you understand my drift).
Again from personal experience, the pressure applied on an engineer for refusing to release an aircraft to service is huge; you may expect coercion rather than support from your superiors.
Believe me, and I can speak from a QA and hands-on perspective, the effort that goes into EASA 145/JAR 145 Human Factors training is largely wasted. Those engineers inclined to push the limit are sometimes not actively discouraged from doing so.
Throughout my career, I have also experienced QA managers' complicity in pushing the limits, often with very creative interpretations of the regulations and even company procedures. Those companies now taking this issue seriously may be those who were stung by not taking it seriously (if you understand my drift).
Again from personal experience, the pressure applied on an engineer for refusing to release an aircraft to service is huge; you may expect coercion rather than support from your superiors.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The Beautiful South
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA are about to introduce a "new" maintenance computerized system called EWS. The end users of the safety critical parts are the LAEs.
EWS is a very user-unfriendly system and overly complicated. It has been pointed out that instead of making our job easier , that it makes the job much harder, and more frustrating. I foresee many quality lapses.
BA have suffered an increase in maintenance related incidents, including two at the highest (cat. A ) level in the last two months........ this is with the old systems still in place !
With this in mind, do you think that they might delay the introduction ????
BA must have spent upwards of £200 million so far on the EWS project...... so go figure !
EWS is a very user-unfriendly system and overly complicated. It has been pointed out that instead of making our job easier , that it makes the job much harder, and more frustrating. I foresee many quality lapses.
BA have suffered an increase in maintenance related incidents, including two at the highest (cat. A ) level in the last two months........ this is with the old systems still in place !
With this in mind, do you think that they might delay the introduction ????
BA must have spent upwards of £200 million so far on the EWS project...... so go figure !
Cirrus01 said.........BA have suffered an increase in maintenance related incidents, including two at the highest (cat. A ) level in the last two months........ this is with the old systems still in place !
(How do you get those nice litle blue boxes for quotes.....RTFM I suppose)
I got handbagged on another thread for suggesting that BA might not be perfect...I had those two cases, among others, in mind....
Seriously, BA's probems are BAs. The industry's problem is that there is too little money coming in from the end users, through the low-fare revolution. Revenues per flight hour are simply insufficient to pay for proper maintenance and build reserves for future maintenance.
So what gives way...
Flight crew are in demand...can't save much without losing them to a competitor.
Aircraft cost the same to buy or hire no matter who you are, unless you are huige enough to get discounts.
Running costs ditto, varied only by skilled management eg forward purchase of fuel, clever bargaining with airports and handlers etc
Cabin crew; with respect to the boys and girls, they couldn't get much cheaper anyway
Cabin Service ..all gone anyway
Parts and component overhauls are and will be expensive.
Ah, here we are; Maintenance Labour. let's save on that, by paying them so little they'll go somewhere else (Rail is popular) and we can then get in cheap foreigners and/or send the aircraft overseas to the cheap foreigners. Ticket to Estonia from Prestwick, anyone?
So the guy that signs off a B757, say, as airworthy in all respects could get far more pay, in many or most cases, by servicing Beamers for yuppies.
(Incidentally I am well aware that the foreigners are well-qualified in many cases, bioth here and at home. But that's not the point. They'll finish up on the railways too, sooner or later)
That's the real problem. Aircraft engineering does not attract the right young people; except perhaps on funded "Foundation Degree" courses for the wrong reasons. They don't stay, often, after getting the "degree".
Apprenticeships are dead, with a few praiseworthy exceptions such as Marshals, because Tone does not understand what they are and do, and the publicly-funded sycophants in SEMTA don't want to rock the funding gravy train; they might fall off it.
The CAA presides over all this saying they can't interfere. As an EASA agency perhaps, but as the body which is still charged with ensuring the economic stability and future of UK Ltd aerospace industry they are ineffective, to put it mildly. Did they have anything to say about Airbus? I didn't hear it. Do we believe the stuff about how the jobs will stay in the UK for ever if we don't have a stake in Airbus? Not if we're off the medication, we don't.
Does the CAA have anything to say about funding or nature of aircraft engineer training? 'Not our business, old boy, that's another department. We just licence them, so we use all our energy on making sure we set much more difficult standards than those awful French people, Spaniards, Greeks and so on. You know, over there. No, of course we can't stop them working here on their EASA licences, don't be silly; why would we ever want to do that?'
Sorry, I'm ranting again..................................!
An RAF Tornado Pilot was taken on in Aviation House, to look after JAR Ops 1 Compliance Issues, after a combat injury in Iraq removed his t*******s, c/w container and drainpipe.
Boss, sorry, Team Leader, on the pilots' first day; "Now, listen up, this is important. We work from 8.30 - 10.00, then it's a cup of tea, and from 10.30 until lunch in the subsidised canteen at 12.30, bit of a kip, then restart at 2.00 for a jolly hard slog until 4.30 when we all go home exhausted. Working outside those times achieves nothing careerwise and upsets the cleaners, so please don't do it. And you, dear boy, only need to start at 10.30."
"Why's that, then?"
"Well, you see, for the first session we just stand around and scratch, and without wishing to be rude, m'dear fellow, you've got nothing to scratch, have you?"
(How do you get those nice litle blue boxes for quotes.....RTFM I suppose)
I got handbagged on another thread for suggesting that BA might not be perfect...I had those two cases, among others, in mind....
Seriously, BA's probems are BAs. The industry's problem is that there is too little money coming in from the end users, through the low-fare revolution. Revenues per flight hour are simply insufficient to pay for proper maintenance and build reserves for future maintenance.
So what gives way...
Flight crew are in demand...can't save much without losing them to a competitor.
Aircraft cost the same to buy or hire no matter who you are, unless you are huige enough to get discounts.
Running costs ditto, varied only by skilled management eg forward purchase of fuel, clever bargaining with airports and handlers etc
Cabin crew; with respect to the boys and girls, they couldn't get much cheaper anyway
Cabin Service ..all gone anyway
Parts and component overhauls are and will be expensive.
Ah, here we are; Maintenance Labour. let's save on that, by paying them so little they'll go somewhere else (Rail is popular) and we can then get in cheap foreigners and/or send the aircraft overseas to the cheap foreigners. Ticket to Estonia from Prestwick, anyone?
So the guy that signs off a B757, say, as airworthy in all respects could get far more pay, in many or most cases, by servicing Beamers for yuppies.
(Incidentally I am well aware that the foreigners are well-qualified in many cases, bioth here and at home. But that's not the point. They'll finish up on the railways too, sooner or later)
That's the real problem. Aircraft engineering does not attract the right young people; except perhaps on funded "Foundation Degree" courses for the wrong reasons. They don't stay, often, after getting the "degree".
Apprenticeships are dead, with a few praiseworthy exceptions such as Marshals, because Tone does not understand what they are and do, and the publicly-funded sycophants in SEMTA don't want to rock the funding gravy train; they might fall off it.
The CAA presides over all this saying they can't interfere. As an EASA agency perhaps, but as the body which is still charged with ensuring the economic stability and future of UK Ltd aerospace industry they are ineffective, to put it mildly. Did they have anything to say about Airbus? I didn't hear it. Do we believe the stuff about how the jobs will stay in the UK for ever if we don't have a stake in Airbus? Not if we're off the medication, we don't.
Does the CAA have anything to say about funding or nature of aircraft engineer training? 'Not our business, old boy, that's another department. We just licence them, so we use all our energy on making sure we set much more difficult standards than those awful French people, Spaniards, Greeks and so on. You know, over there. No, of course we can't stop them working here on their EASA licences, don't be silly; why would we ever want to do that?'
Sorry, I'm ranting again..................................!
An RAF Tornado Pilot was taken on in Aviation House, to look after JAR Ops 1 Compliance Issues, after a combat injury in Iraq removed his t*******s, c/w container and drainpipe.
Boss, sorry, Team Leader, on the pilots' first day; "Now, listen up, this is important. We work from 8.30 - 10.00, then it's a cup of tea, and from 10.30 until lunch in the subsidised canteen at 12.30, bit of a kip, then restart at 2.00 for a jolly hard slog until 4.30 when we all go home exhausted. Working outside those times achieves nothing careerwise and upsets the cleaners, so please don't do it. And you, dear boy, only need to start at 10.30."
"Why's that, then?"
"Well, you see, for the first session we just stand around and scratch, and without wishing to be rude, m'dear fellow, you've got nothing to scratch, have you?"
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dunstable, Beds UK
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having been an LAE for many years I can see part of the problem just reading this thread.
When I started in the 50's the LAE was God as far as maintenance was concerned.
There was no higher authority.
Reading the thread we see LAE' being threatened and put under pressure by
" Management", " supervisors", " managers" etc, none of whom have to put their signatures on the paper!
Also regarding another comment " in the Old Days"
we had ARB ( yes ARB !!) inspectors at the airline most weeks actually watching guys working and checking log book entries. Cant remember when I last saw a CAA guy doing that
When I started in the 50's the LAE was God as far as maintenance was concerned.
There was no higher authority.Reading the thread we see LAE' being threatened and put under pressure by
" Management", " supervisors", " managers" etc, none of whom have to put their signatures on the paper!
Also regarding another comment " in the Old Days"
we had ARB ( yes ARB !!) inspectors at the airline most weeks actually watching guys working and checking log book entries. Cant remember when I last saw a CAA guy doing that
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fully agree that standards have gone down. Without getting into the usual argument over ease of getting qualifiactions nowdays...although I don't believe anyone can honestly say that it is as hard nowdays to get a licence and type approval as it used to be....I am fortunate that the comapny I work for have fairly high standards, don't carry to many ADD's and there is no real pressure to sign off things....however I have worked for such places in the past.The latest idear from EASA that companies can issue CRS type approvals to 'appropriate authorised staff' and therefore at a stroke of a pen remove the need for a majority of their B1 and B2 staff is very worrying indeed. I just pity the poor sod who signs of something without the full understanding of it all....
see the ALAE site or airmec.co.uk for more info on this..
see the ALAE site or airmec.co.uk for more info on this..
Sims Fly Virtually
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Used to be 3rd Sand Dune from the Left - But now I'm somewhere else somewhere else.
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would it be naive (yes, probably
) to know the airlines who are worse in this respect?
Would "pax pressure" (i.e.- flying with someone else, even if the fare was $100 more, but I'd rather arive in one piece) be enough to wake up the bean-counters?
As a pax these days, I have looked out of the cabin window and seen muddy footprints on the top of the words "NO STEP" - and yes, I'll name the airline - SV
I know the guys don't want to foul their empoyers, who pay their wages, but isn't it a good idea to let the travelling public know when safety is being compromised?
I assume (naively) that the Big Boys operate in a responsible manner, but unless the "customers" know where their safety lies, then there's no pressure to improve.
The airline who I currently fly with most frequently has only had one Hull Loss in recent years, and that was "Pilot Error" (or probably CRM). So I assume that maintenece standards are good (I hope!)
I've worked 24-hour shift, although a flight sim doesn't kill people, but aware that my performance in the last few hours was probably less than 100%
As Le Penn says, it's no good moaning on a BBS, the "authorities" (CAA) have to be alerted to a problem and, if they won't act on it,then the "popular press" need to be wound up to report it to the "customers".
Sorry, but we have to "name names". Even on sims, I couldn't "downgrade" an A-snag (British Airways, 1970's) On REAL aircraft, faulty systems cannot be ignored (and yes, I long for the days of a "real engineer" in the 3rd seat - not that it will ever come back - "P3" on the Trident took care of that one
) to know the airlines who are worse in this respect?Would "pax pressure" (i.e.- flying with someone else, even if the fare was $100 more, but I'd rather arive in one piece) be enough to wake up the bean-counters?
As a pax these days, I have looked out of the cabin window and seen muddy footprints on the top of the words "NO STEP" - and yes, I'll name the airline - SV
I know the guys don't want to foul their empoyers, who pay their wages, but isn't it a good idea to let the travelling public know when safety is being compromised?
I assume (naively) that the Big Boys operate in a responsible manner, but unless the "customers" know where their safety lies, then there's no pressure to improve.
The airline who I currently fly with most frequently has only had one Hull Loss in recent years, and that was "Pilot Error" (or probably CRM). So I assume that maintenece standards are good (I hope!)
I've worked 24-hour shift, although a flight sim doesn't kill people, but aware that my performance in the last few hours was probably less than 100%
As Le Penn says, it's no good moaning on a BBS, the "authorities" (CAA) have to be alerted to a problem and, if they won't act on it,then the "popular press" need to be wound up to report it to the "customers".
Sorry, but we have to "name names". Even on sims, I couldn't "downgrade" an A-snag (British Airways, 1970's) On REAL aircraft, faulty systems cannot be ignored (and yes, I long for the days of a "real engineer" in the 3rd seat - not that it will ever come back - "P3" on the Trident took care of that one
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ExSimGuy
I assume (naively) that the Big Boys operate in a responsible manner, but unless the "customers" know where their safety lies, then there's no pressure to improve.
As the whole industry comes under cost pressures maintenance standards (for all airlines) are slipping - the trend for maintenance related accidents is rising.
If the EASA proposals go ahead stand by for smoking holes in the ground - if the rate of maintenance accidents is rising with fully qualified engineers just imagine what it will be with semi-qualified engineers.
.......and the same problems are occurring at the airfields.......more and more traffic, less and less staff, pressures to cut corners, poor standards of supervision, management with insufficient time to keep their eye on the ball and a regulator which tends to look very superficially and for whom everything is dressed up when they are around. Sorry guys, despite the professionalism in which many of us pride ourselves, most of the sloppy standards evident elsewhere in society are slowly creeping into aviation as well.
H49
H49
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Europe
Age: 46
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little story from a company somewhwere in europe...
A guy with 300 hours overtime in one year and 100 of those the last month was told by a manager that he wasn“t loyal to the company when he said that he didn“t want to work extra on a weekend....
I“ve written reports to quality managers about to much work being laid out for just a handfull of people. Whenever you do that they call you instantly and have a very soft voice but nothing happends...
But I know for my sake that I have the guts to say no this is not flying and i would never ever release an aircraft that I would not fly in myself...
This is a very important subject...
sorry for spelling errors and such...
A guy with 300 hours overtime in one year and 100 of those the last month was told by a manager that he wasn“t loyal to the company when he said that he didn“t want to work extra on a weekend....
I“ve written reports to quality managers about to much work being laid out for just a handfull of people. Whenever you do that they call you instantly and have a very soft voice but nothing happends...
But I know for my sake that I have the guts to say no this is not flying and i would never ever release an aircraft that I would not fly in myself...
This is a very important subject...
sorry for spelling errors and such...
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Balmullo,Scotland
Posts: 933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And You can imagine how We feel about this! and believe Me this is not a rumour it is fact as detaied in the ALAE Tech log magazine.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=216663
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=216663
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Balmullo,Scotland
Posts: 933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bus429
I know of one organisation that occasionally sends replacement engineers to one line base on the jump seat, overnight,more than likely to be on duty on arrival (working on the aircraft in which he/she flew). When questioned about this, an individual in the organisation stated that it was not economically viable to send personnel on scheduled flights if alternatives were available. I don't know if the Accountable Manager holds this view but the cause of safety is not best served in this way.
Believe me, and I can speak from a QA and hands-on perspective, the effort that goes into EASA 145/JAR 145 Human Factors training is largely wasted. Those engineers inclined to push the limit are sometimes not actively discouraged from doing so.
Throughout my career, I have also experienced QA managers' complicity in pushing the limits, often with very creative interpretations of the regulations and even company procedures. Those companies now taking this issue seriously may be those who were stung by not taking it seriously (if you understand my drift).
Again from personal experience, the pressure applied on an engineer for refusing to release an aircraft to service is huge; you may expect coercion rather than support from your superiors.
Believe me, and I can speak from a QA and hands-on perspective, the effort that goes into EASA 145/JAR 145 Human Factors training is largely wasted. Those engineers inclined to push the limit are sometimes not actively discouraged from doing so.
Throughout my career, I have also experienced QA managers' complicity in pushing the limits, often with very creative interpretations of the regulations and even company procedures. Those companies now taking this issue seriously may be those who were stung by not taking it seriously (if you understand my drift).
Again from personal experience, the pressure applied on an engineer for refusing to release an aircraft to service is huge; you may expect coercion rather than support from your superiors.
MK
Interesting that flight crew & their representative bodies appear to be taking little interest in legislation that is of 'CRITICAL' importance.
Should safety be an absolute? Safe flight is our ultimate goal,but most of us realise that it exists only within a framework of finite resources,profit is 'a' main driver.
Certain functions can & are contracted out on the basis of economics,the same should be true of the 'theoretically' universal playing field that EASA has created amongst approved maintenance organisations,cheapest should not mean unsafe.
British licenced engineers are not alone in Europe in their fears that maintenance standards are & have been diluted.
Maintenance related incidents & accidents are not falling either in percentage or real terms,they are on the rise!
The average median age of engineers in the UK is well above 40 with few choosing to join the industry.
In short you can look forward to a less qualified ,inexperienced & in many cases unlicenced 'person' maintaining your aircraft,beware!
Should safety be an absolute? Safe flight is our ultimate goal,but most of us realise that it exists only within a framework of finite resources,profit is 'a' main driver.
Certain functions can & are contracted out on the basis of economics,the same should be true of the 'theoretically' universal playing field that EASA has created amongst approved maintenance organisations,cheapest should not mean unsafe.
British licenced engineers are not alone in Europe in their fears that maintenance standards are & have been diluted.
Maintenance related incidents & accidents are not falling either in percentage or real terms,they are on the rise!
The average median age of engineers in the UK is well above 40 with few choosing to join the industry.
In short you can look forward to a less qualified ,inexperienced & in many cases unlicenced 'person' maintaining your aircraft,beware!
Last edited by woptb; 20th Apr 2006 at 18:59.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Le Pen
Now after a four year apprenticeship, an HND, two CAA licences and five aircraft types I am a "technician". Not even worthy of professional status in his eyes.
You seem to think title of "technican" is something to be looked down upon? Does it pay any less the be a licenced "technican" than it does to be a licenced "engineer" or a licenced "mechanic"? They can call me what ever thay want too, as long as I get paid. I can't spend a title.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Out of interest,the only airworthiness authority representative monitoring hands on maintenance in the UK I've ever seen was from the FAA. They are here every year monitoring maintenance of US registered aircraft. Strangely, not seen the CAA near an aircraft in 17 years.
All of this is becoming academic because it's never going to change (in the UK anyway) because here maintenance, in my experience anyway, is run by negative, narrow minded and vindictive people.
If you want to be treated better, best thing is maybe to look at moving within the industry, but not so far you have trouble renewing your licences as that would be a waste of your past efforts. By the way, I did a BSc Honours degree and it was no harder than my multi-X licence exams.
I personally don't know anyone under 30 years of age in this industry (in the UK), so when we retire it's probably pretty much over anyway.
edited for spelling because my fingers are dyslexic.
All of this is becoming academic because it's never going to change (in the UK anyway) because here maintenance, in my experience anyway, is run by negative, narrow minded and vindictive people.
If you want to be treated better, best thing is maybe to look at moving within the industry, but not so far you have trouble renewing your licences as that would be a waste of your past efforts. By the way, I did a BSc Honours degree and it was no harder than my multi-X licence exams.
I personally don't know anyone under 30 years of age in this industry (in the UK), so when we retire it's probably pretty much over anyway.
edited for spelling because my fingers are dyslexic.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dunstable, Beds UK
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Auto glide
Yes it does seem such a waste to throw the licenece away when it cost alot of effort to get it. Especially when you consider having to add each type rating in the old days
I have just had another reminder from CAA that if I want to continue in the big boys league I have to change my licence to a JAA one. For that they want £200 !!! plus I renewed my UK recently but that doesnt count
Forget it !
Yes it does seem such a waste to throw the licenece away when it cost alot of effort to get it. Especially when you consider having to add each type rating in the old days
I have just had another reminder from CAA that if I want to continue in the big boys league I have to change my licence to a JAA one. For that they want £200 !!! plus I renewed my UK recently but that doesnt count
Forget it !
Originally Posted by AUTOGLIDE
Out of interest,the only airworthiness authority representative monitoring hands on maintenance in the UK I've ever seen was from the FAA. They are here every year monitoring maintenance of US .
The CAA seems more interested in collecting fees than overseeing flight safety as the UK's NAA!
The FAA has the right attitude - hit companies in their pocket ,it is the only thing that has any effect.
