Shortage of Maintenance Technicians
On the subject of 'unofficial' in-the-field repairs, while I agree that such things are inappropriate for "flying bog rolls from KAF to Bastion", there would surely be a place for them in more extreme circumstances. The trouble is, how do people learn these things if all they ever do is follow the book? We accept certain compromises in standards for airframe battle damage repair, but AFAIK no equivalent process exists for 'combat repair' of systems.
Is there now a process by which the SME at the PT can offer no-strings advice to the duty holder chain as to how a strictly unserviceable aircraft could be flown at the least risk, pending DH risk acceptance? How do those SMEs get to know the fixes? The few PT people I know state that they would refuse to offer any such advice as a matter of principle; while this is admirably "airworthy" I do wonder what would happen when the chips are down.
What do we think is going to happen when the last C130 out of Bastion, the one taking the final force protection troops out with it, develops a snag requiring a multi-day D-state? Here's a clue - they're going to bodge any repairs needed to get airborne and press. If they've got any sense, they'll take the crustiest team of GEs they can find. I'm not sure our airworthiness system is able to cope with the speed or degree of risk involved in such legitimate military command decisions. Unless there is a hidden get-out clause somewhere....
Is there now a process by which the SME at the PT can offer no-strings advice to the duty holder chain as to how a strictly unserviceable aircraft could be flown at the least risk, pending DH risk acceptance? How do those SMEs get to know the fixes? The few PT people I know state that they would refuse to offer any such advice as a matter of principle; while this is admirably "airworthy" I do wonder what would happen when the chips are down.
What do we think is going to happen when the last C130 out of Bastion, the one taking the final force protection troops out with it, develops a snag requiring a multi-day D-state? Here's a clue - they're going to bodge any repairs needed to get airborne and press. If they've got any sense, they'll take the crustiest team of GEs they can find. I'm not sure our airworthiness system is able to cope with the speed or degree of risk involved in such legitimate military command decisions. Unless there is a hidden get-out clause somewhere....
Vin Rouge:
"createive (!) thinking, fine, fully agree, as long as deviations from approved procedures are documented post event as to the reasons why."
Bravo! Exactly where I was going, thank you!
If you are going to do something out of the required actions write it down or better still, tell someone. Register what you're doing with your ops controllers and make sure they know and record why you're doing it. This register could then provide evidence to make this 'deviation' into:
1st. Perhaps a local operating procedure
2nd. Perhaps a new and official task.
Widening the maintenance envelope to suit the operators requirements is what many civil operators do.
"createive (!) thinking, fine, fully agree, as long as deviations from approved procedures are documented post event as to the reasons why."
Bravo! Exactly where I was going, thank you!
If you are going to do something out of the required actions write it down or better still, tell someone. Register what you're doing with your ops controllers and make sure they know and record why you're doing it. This register could then provide evidence to make this 'deviation' into:
1st. Perhaps a local operating procedure
2nd. Perhaps a new and official task.
Widening the maintenance envelope to suit the operators requirements is what many civil operators do.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,449
Received 3,192 Likes
on
1,339 Posts
What do we think is going to happen when the last C130 out of Bastion, the one taking the final force protection troops out with it, develops a snag requiring a multi-day D-state? Here's a clue - they're going to bodge any repairs needed to get airborne and press. If they've got any sense, they'll take the crustiest team of GEs they can find. I'm not sure our airworthiness system is able to cope with the speed or degree of risk involved in such legitimate military command decisions. Unless there is a hidden get-out clause somewhere....
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,449
Received 3,192 Likes
on
1,339 Posts
Only way you will fix that is to reverse reductions in staff, and embark on improving training.. oddly enough civilian companies if they do not have the engineering staffing requirements can lose their approvals.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deviating from the official maintenance procedures.
I think the situation will only get worse as the NEM now only allows anyone who joined on or before their 18th birthday service to age 53. LoS 32 for Chf Techs and LoS 35 for FS and WO.
Two years and then maybe a three year extension in your 50's isn't enough stability or a retaining factor.
Two years and then maybe a three year extension in your 50's isn't enough stability or a retaining factor.
Last edited by jayc530; 26th May 2014 at 15:28.
