TECH LOGS/ENGINEERING
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: A land beyond time
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah well Gentle Giant, 10/10 for engineering, 2/10 for paying your crews.
I knew a few of those who worked for you, they had 18 months from hell, never knowing whether they would be able to pay the rent or buy food. I'm surprised they managed to continue functioning under that sort of pressure.
Not suggesting this was entirely your fault of course, I'm sure you can't summon money up from thin air! Not sure you appreciated how hard it was on your crews though.
It is obviously to your credit that you never cut corners on engineering (or pressured your pilots to do so).
[ 16 January 2002: Message edited by: snooze_ya_lose ]</p>
I knew a few of those who worked for you, they had 18 months from hell, never knowing whether they would be able to pay the rent or buy food. I'm surprised they managed to continue functioning under that sort of pressure.
Not suggesting this was entirely your fault of course, I'm sure you can't summon money up from thin air! Not sure you appreciated how hard it was on your crews though.
It is obviously to your credit that you never cut corners on engineering (or pressured your pilots to do so).
[ 16 January 2002: Message edited by: snooze_ya_lose ]</p>
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard the CAA are investigating [airline deleted] on this one. Apparently it followed a routine inspection, but I don't know what sort of tech log irregularities are involved.
Anyone heard anything more?
[ 18 January 2002: Message edited by: Checkboard ]</p>
Anyone heard anything more?
[ 18 January 2002: Message edited by: Checkboard ]</p>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Fellow posters, please note that a journalist is on the loose! He e-mailed me direct, asking for information about this thread; I guess that he probably did the same to other posters. Mr Dalton, I'm aware that you have job to do, but, if you want information, try asking for it out in the open. Also, whilst you use your own name in your Profile, you haven't exactly been forthcoming with your occupation:
Alastair Dalton
Science and Transport correspondent
The Scotsman
Alastair Dalton
Science and Transport correspondent
The Scotsman
Many thanks for the heads up from the Scotsman, was one of my favourite papers already, just a shame the newsagents don't stock it in Hampshire.
I did the annual the other day on a private aircraft owned by a former director of a well known airline. Not a defect or service in the paperwork anywhere, got that sorted however before I signed it off. Being generous, maybe he was just used to other people doing it.
I have heard tales of minor snags only getting written up on the home leg by crews to save them getting stuck somewhere unpleasant, I suspect that is fairly common. But as to ignoring major problems, I've only ever seen that on private aeroplanes where it's somebody's own money involved. Few crews are that concerned about their companies money as to risk safety over it, but a minor excursion from the MEL perhaps.
G
I did the annual the other day on a private aircraft owned by a former director of a well known airline. Not a defect or service in the paperwork anywhere, got that sorted however before I signed it off. Being generous, maybe he was just used to other people doing it.
I have heard tales of minor snags only getting written up on the home leg by crews to save them getting stuck somewhere unpleasant, I suspect that is fairly common. But as to ignoring major problems, I've only ever seen that on private aeroplanes where it's somebody's own money involved. Few crews are that concerned about their companies money as to risk safety over it, but a minor excursion from the MEL perhaps.
G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Where ever boss send me
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It comes down to the fact that the authority need to have the will to do something more progressive than sod all to change. There will always be someone / company who cuts corner even the large narional carriers do it but they pay more so have more inflence. Take JAR OPS the new great white hope. Pity that the playing field is only level in the eyes of the man at the top of the hill, but why cry over spilt milk. Only the chosen few are asked to comment not the general masses, But where have we heard this before.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all, . .My experience has taught me NEVER to make any entries in the TECH LOG as regards faults to be rectified on arrival at destination, because you may not arrive at your planned destination, either due to a problem there, or due to a pax medical problem or something enroute.. .The point being, you could end up landed at an unplanned airport with a tech log entry you can't get signed-off, due no engineering staff available.. .Classic FEs are very limited in what they are allowed to do in the way of maintenance, even those who have a maintenance licence for the type!. .Anything they can do, has to have maintenance authority in writing, for that particular job, prior to work beginning.. .And, as far as -400's go, they are just plane stuck under any circumstances, legally.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentlemen of the air. Please use the Tech Log as and when you notice the defect. It doesn't matter where you land we will get to you and make sure you fly home safely.. .I and my collegues with our feet on the ground would rather explain the cost of the delay than suffer the resulting crash enquiry. It is not only your licence on the line, our licences are just as hard to get and just as easy to lose. If you are worried about cost of a delay, how much does a diversion cost. Or worse a total hull loss. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: London FIR
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GE 90, we are all well aware of the requirement to enter defects, go back and read the earlier posts here. The whole point of this thread is to highlight the pressure a maverick (name deleted) company might put on its employees to ignore these professional requirements for fear of a P 45. If the company employs engineers as well as pilots then they too are subject to the "comply or leave" philosophy, just as much.
As I said previously those in the extremities of their careers are less likely to kick up over this kind of scam, indeed those entirely new to the business may well leave such a (name deleted) company thinking this is the way aviation is run, and how could they possibly know better? What a sick intro to aviation is that?
I respectfully suggest that we are not implying "merely" delaying the entry of odd defects until "convenient", we are talking the wholesale and widespread denial of the existance of numerous defects on a continuous basis over a long timespan, ie multiple serial failures to record defects.
That is why I think this kind of practice is so utterly unacceptable, and I hate to see it being advertised on this forum. It needs to be eradicated. It has no place in Professional aviation.
GE 90, if you think this scenario is far fetched, think again. It exists, believe me, and I know of P45s to prove it. It may be remote from Gatwick, but you'd better believe it exists.
. . <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
[ 27 January 2002: Message edited by: capt waffoo ]</p>
As I said previously those in the extremities of their careers are less likely to kick up over this kind of scam, indeed those entirely new to the business may well leave such a (name deleted) company thinking this is the way aviation is run, and how could they possibly know better? What a sick intro to aviation is that?
I respectfully suggest that we are not implying "merely" delaying the entry of odd defects until "convenient", we are talking the wholesale and widespread denial of the existance of numerous defects on a continuous basis over a long timespan, ie multiple serial failures to record defects.
That is why I think this kind of practice is so utterly unacceptable, and I hate to see it being advertised on this forum. It needs to be eradicated. It has no place in Professional aviation.
GE 90, if you think this scenario is far fetched, think again. It exists, believe me, and I know of P45s to prove it. It may be remote from Gatwick, but you'd better believe it exists.
. . <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
[ 27 January 2002: Message edited by: capt waffoo ]</p>
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jonno & Capt Waffo Sorry to sound so naieve (no I can't spell) but the thread seemed to be moving towards justifying the fag packet log. I realise that I was speaking from a perfect world as I get the same pressure as you chaps. Quote "If you don't sign it off all these passsengers will have to be put up in hotels." . .With a journo reading some of these posts I wanted such a reaction to bring us back on track.. .The other reason is we engineers are seen more and more as a cost than an asset. If it were possible to get the pilot to fix the plane instead of resting I'm sure my company would push it through. Less engineers = Lower wage bill. . .OK what I really want is more trips to fix 'em in warmer climes and if you don't snag em I can't fix 'em.
