Ilovenz
Topic Author
Posts: 141
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 7:49 am

Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 6:37 pm

(and I also didn't mean to make the title vague, but I just wanted to acknowledge that I'm aware I might incense some people with this question)

With the airline industry these days fighting for profits any way they can, and with a U.S. government that is not known for its honesty or devotion to common people when it comes to making money, How do I know the planes I'm flying are safely maintained? Can I trust the safety of the planes I fly on in the U.S. and the government oversight that is at least supposed to exist? How do I know airlines are not cutting corners in maintenance checks when it would be a very easy way to save money doing so?

The "747-400 shot to hell" thread got me thinking about this. I realize many aircraft which are less-than-immaculate on the inside are nonetheless very safe overall.

-Sam
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 6:55 pm

The problem with the American system is that bureaucrats set thousands of arbitrary standards for safety and then the airlines and manufacturers have little incentive to exceed them. The best way to ensure safety would be to make the airlines and manufacturers compete to provide better safety. To do this, just privatise the FAA, turning the inspection arm into something like Underwriters Laboratories. Then every airline would get (probably for every fleet) a score. Passengers could choose their airlines based on which provided the greatest safety.

One of my pet peeves is that airlines don't provide smoke hoods for passengers -- only for crew. If I had to choose between a life vest and a smoke hood, I'd rather have the smoke hood loaded. If the FAA were privatized, some airlines would start carry smoke hoods for all their passengers in order to achieve higher safety ratings. The same is true for every aspect of airline safety, from equipment to maintainance, to training, to crew rest.
 
antiuser
Posts: 646
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:43 am

Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 6:57 pm

Airlines are cutting costs wherever they can, but I don't think they would skimp on maintenance. In the current market climate, an incident or crash due to bad maintenance would be a fatal blow to most carriers. Just my 2 cents...
Azzurri Campioni del Mondo!
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:03 pm

Oh Boy.

This is a can of worms isnt it?

The simple fact is, that you have to trust that they are doing the right thing and that the people in the places that matter when it comes to MX are the right people who do not have an agenda other than the safety of the fleet.

I also think judging America's airlines on the basis of that country's politcal regime would be a mistake.

American, United, Delta, Northwest, Continental, Southwest, JetBlue, etc - all are fine companies with proud histories and they are a damn sight more honest and caring than the Bush regime. Although sometimes when you are on the phone to Delta customer services for two hours it may seem otherwise...  Wink
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
backfire
Posts: 3467
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:01 am

Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:47 pm

There will always be companies which will try to walk a fine line.

No-one intentionally sets out to have an accident, or create the circumstances for one. But it's hard to see eventual consequences of the occasional decision to trim costs here and there.

The initial reasoning might be sound, but when combined with later decisions down the line (which might equally seem OK), the whole thing can lead to an unintentional erosion of safety margins.
 
User avatar
BNE
Posts: 2922
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2000 9:37 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....

Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:32 pm

I guess there are so many checks and double checks that are put in place so that planes are maintained properly.

One crash could really put an airline out of business.

Quoting Ilovenz (Thread starter):
(and I also didn't mean to make the title vague, but I just wanted to acknowledge that I'm aware I might incense some people with this question)

So I added a bit so it wasn't so vague.
Why fly non stop when you can connect
 
chqdispatch
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 7:57 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:51 pm

Working closely with my MX guys every day, there is no fear on my part. I know they do a good job and get problems resolved.
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:01 pm

Poor maintenance in the airline industry is an easy way to put yourself out of business very quickly.

In the short term, there may be some savings but in the long term the company will pay dearly. Generally, with today's commercial transports, if maintenance is deferred you do save money in the short run by not completing the inspection/job. However, what happens is in the long term dispatch reliability starts to suffer. You get a lower and lower completion rate, you have multiple inflight diversions, the list goes on and on.

As a commercial pilot, I have no problem with the oversight. I find that the mechanics have my and the passenger's best interests at heart. They know their reputation is on the line every time they release the aircraft to me. In my 25+ years of commercial aviation, I've never had a second thought about taking an aircraft if the mechanic signed it off.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 1):
One of my pet peeves is that airlines don't provide smoke hoods for passengers -- only for crew.

So, who gives you the initial training and recurrent training? What happens if someone can't use the hood? Does the airline let them fly? I understand what your point is, but it simply isn't practical. Who becomes liable if the hood doesn't work? Why not ask for an ejection seat?
Fly fast, live slow
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:10 pm

Actually it depends on us guys on the ground to do the MX properly. We are personally responsible for the airworthiness of the aircraft, both in accordance to criminal prosecution as well as civil liability. In short: If I f*ck up and there is an accident because of this I go to jail.

Unfortunately the bea counters in management see us only as a cost factor. Proper maintenance costs a lot of $$$, but doesn't bring any visible short term profit. Therefore the beancounters are very reluctant in providing us with the staff, equipment, tools and materials we need.

I actually wish that the aviation authorities would put more pressure on the airlines and MX companies, e.g. through more unannounced audits. The Irish Aviation Authority under which's jurisdiction I'm currently working, is actually quite strict, what can not be said of the FAA.
I think the biggest problem with the FAA is that they have two sometimes contradicting jobs: On one hand they have to enforce the regulations and on the other hand they have to promote aviation.
This leads to a situation where rules don't really get enforced because enforcement will led to higher expenses for the airlines and can bring them into economic difficulties. The IAA on the other hand only enforces the rules.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:11 pm

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 7):
So, who gives you the initial training and recurrent training? What happens if someone can't use the hood? Does the airline let them fly? I understand what your point is, but it simply isn't practical. Who becomes liable if the hood doesn't work? Why not ask for an ejection seat?

There are smoke hoods that require no more training than a life vest. All of the objections you raise apply just much to life vests as to smoke hoods. See: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&q=evac+u8+smoke+hood
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12495
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:17 pm

There are a number of incentives beyond government run inspections to maintain high an very safe levels of MX quality.
The fear of liability, losing customers or even their continued existance if have a fatal crash or serious incidents, is of course of great influence. Pressure from their insurance providers including higher premium costs and thus higher operational costs if there are accidents and incidents, is an additional incentive. MX people also have a huge personal responsibility and their butts on the record on paper or computers as to each aircraft for their work - especially when something goes wrong. The AS crash several years ago caused by an improperly maintained rudder jackscrew shows where perhaps cheaping or procedural errors as to maintence can be fatal. Poor MX can also cause a/c to have to be diverted, have to make emergency landings with there huge costs to the airline and inconvenience to customers, also leading to losing customers.
 
707437
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:51 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:22 pm

Well if you're looking for an example the Alaskair MD-80 trim screwjack that failed several years ago. IMO that was cutting corners. . .

Alaska has cleaned up its act and I have flown with them several times since. But it can happen, though recently I'm not aware of any US majors having any MX related incident that resulted in injury or fatality.

Myself I've flown on a single engine 767, On a 757 with a blown main gear tire on a 732 that appeared to have brakes on only the left side and on a DC9 with a failed autopilot and a poor job of hand flying (some pilots can earn their pay and some will spill your coffee). So shit breaks all the time but seek salvation for redundancy.
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:36 pm

"shit breaks all the time but seek salvation for redundancy"

Thats my new tagline.  Smile
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
707437
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:51 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:41 pm

I meant to say:

"So shit breaks all the time but seek salvation in redundancy."

Cheers,

KKP in KPAE

These days with the almighty W ruling our fair land it doesn't hurt to sound a bit evangleical (even if tainted by sarcasm).
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:46 pm

Quoting 707437 (Reply 11):
Well if you're looking for an example the Alaskair MD-80 trim screwjack that failed several years ago. IMO that was cutting corners. . .

That was following government rules, rather than the profit motive. When an airline decides based on the profit motive when to replace a part, it gets replaced if it is anywhere near spec. When one is simply working to spec (as encouraged by government mandates) then one put off replacing a part as long as legally permitted. If the airlines were free set their own MX rules and there were a body like Underwriters Laboratories to rate them, then lower insurance costs alone would be a powerful incentive to maintain very high standards. So would dispatch reliability.
 
md80fanatic
Posts: 2365
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:29 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Mainte

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:49 pm

The Evac-U8 unit looks interesting. Although I bet money the TSA would not allow you to take it aboard with you thinking you may have plans to fill the cabin with smoke and use your hood to avoid it. Great idea anyway, DuPont!!!  Smile
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:55 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 9):
There are smoke hoods that require no more training than a life vest

Your reference provides unlimited links to Evac U8 hoods. Please take a look at the links you provided. I would suggest if you are that concerned, then buy one!

Your analogy to the life vest isn't quite true. The smoke hoods are more complex and require training. Like how to put them PROPERLY in a dark smoke filled environment. Personally, I'd rather have the hood than the live vest!

There are many things the airlines could do to make travel safer. However, it all comes at a cost. To be honest, the average person in the US doesn't care. They want the cheapest flight from point A to B. Look at the US airline industry now, they can't make a profit to save their lives.
Fly fast, live slow
 
masseybrown
Posts: 4488
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 10:48 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 3):
I also think judging America's airlines on the basis of that country's politcal regime would be a mistake.

The US has had sleazy politicians for about 229 years now; but the bureaucracy of the federal government at the working level is pretty much immune to them. (I'm not sure I would say that about state and local bodies, however.) There is sufficient provision for whistle-blowing that I wouldn't worry about government complicity in avoiding maintenance regulations.

At the company level the story is different. There are all kinds of ways to skimp. That's why people used to avoid the "non-scheduled" airlines of 30 years ago and still do avoid small airlines in certain parts of the world.

If you're worried, judge by the airline's reputation.
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 11:01 pm

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 10):
There are a number of incentives beyond government run inspections to maintain high an very safe levels of MX quality.
The fear of liability, losing customers or even their continued existance if have a fatal crash or serious incidents, is of course of great influence. Pressure from their insurance providers including higher premium costs and thus higher operational costs if there are accidents and incidents, is an additional incentive.

The problem is that most CEOs today only think ahead to the next quarterly results. Quality MX costs money in the short run, but saves it in the long run, but very few CEOs, especially since many today haven't grown up inside the industry, don't really understand this.
I have heard one manager calling cutting corners "risk management". Push the risk to the subordinates, like the mechanics, but harvest the profits from short term savings.
If an accident happens, the mechanic will be made the scape goat (after all his signature is on all job cards and tech log pages), and the management will say that this mechanic was just a bad apple, who fell through the net.
That there is often a company culture, which rewards sloppy maintenance by putting pressure on the mechanics to let not really airworthy aircrft fly (in many airline, though nover put on paper and not openly outspoken, it is a greater crime to ground an aircraft or to cause a delay than to sign off an aircraft against regulations. You will not get fired for grounding an aircraft, because it would be illegal, but in some airlines, if you delay or ground aircraft too often for valid MX reasons, you'll be the next to be made redundant. It takes strong nerves to act against such pressure.).

On the other hand I was surprised how well maintained the aircraft of the European LCC I currently work for, are. The cosmetics of the interior might not be to smart and the aircraft not too clean, but from a maintenance point of view they are very well maintained.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
LMP737
Posts: 4923
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 01, 2005 11:25 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 1):
The best way to ensure safety would be to make the airlines and manufacturers compete to provide better safety. To do this, just privatise the FAA, turning the inspection arm into something like Underwriters Laboratories. Then every airline would get (probably for every fleet) a score. Passengers could choose their airlines based on which provided the greatest safety.

So your proposing to implement something that would be subjective in nature. How exactly would this score based system operate. Do you have any details? Since the FAA is undermaned who's going to pay for all the new inspectors you would have to hire? Also since it would be a private organization who would enforce federal rules and regulations if they found violations. After all enforcement of federal laws, rules and regulations is the domain of federal agencies.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 14):
That was following government rules, rather than the profit motive. When an airline decides based on the profit motive when to replace a part, it gets replaced if it is anywhere near spec. When one is simply working to spec (as encouraged by government mandates) then one put off replacing a part as long as legally permitted. If the airlines were free set their own MX rules and there were a body like Underwriters Laboratories to rate them, then lower insurance costs alone would be a powerful incentive to maintain very high standards. So would dispatch reliability.

There are no government rules in regards to jack screw wear limits. The manufacturer sets those. Now please tell me why having a "profit motive" would have meant the part would have been replaced.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:58 am

Quoting MD80fanatic (Reply 15):
The Evac-U8 unit looks interesting. Although I bet money the TSA would not allow you to take it aboard with you thinking you may have plans to fill the cabin with smoke and use your hood to avoid it. Great idea anyway, DuPont!!!



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 16):
Your reference provides unlimited links to Evac U8 hoods. Please take a look at the links you provided. I would suggest if you are that concerned, then buy one!

I do own one and the TSA has never given me any grief beyond asking what it is. They have given me grief over countless obviously harmless things.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 16):
Personally, I'd rather have the hood than the live vest!

We agree on that.

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 19):
So your proposing to implement something that would be subjective in nature. How exactly would this score based system operate. Do you have any details? Since the FAA is undermaned who's going to pay for all the new inspectors you would have to hire? Also since it would be a private organization who would enforce federal rules and regulations if they found violations. After all enforcement of federal laws, rules and regulations is the domain of federal agencies.

It would not be anymore subjective or arbitrary than limits set by bureaucrats. Anyway, you missed my point. All the federal regs should be eliminated. Inspections would be paid for by the airlines. If they don't pay, they don't get rated. If they don't get rated, they don't get insurance. With no safety rating and no insurance, they would get very, very few customers. Not enough to survive in business.
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 1:43 am

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 8):
actually quite strict, what can not be said of the FAA.

The depends on the region/directorate.

The FAA requirements that I am currently required to meet are stricter than any CAA, JAA, EASA, JCAB, LBA, etc. requirements that I face.

Tod
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:05 am

Well, I have experience with the LBA (who are quite often too bureaucratic, hence in German they have the nick name Luftfahrtbehinderungsamt, aviation obstruction department), the Irish Aviation Authority, the British CAA and the FAA. IMO, both the CAA and the IAA have a pragmatic approach while making sure that the rules are being followed, while the FAA in my experience is rather lax and obedient to the company's management. The EASA rules are being enforced by the local aviation authority.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:19 am

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 22):
Luftfahrtbehinderungsamt,

Can't argue with that. rotfl 

Tod
 
LMP737
Posts: 4923
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:52 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 20):
It would not be anymore subjective or arbitrary than limits set by bureaucrats. Anyway, you missed my point. All the federal regs should be eliminated. Inspections would be paid for by the airlines. If they don't pay, they don't get rated. If they don't get rated, they don't get insurance. With no safety rating and no insurance, they would get very, very few customers. Not enough to survive in business.

If it's not anymore subjective or arbitrary as you say then why replace it? If all federal regs were eliminated what would take their place. And please come up with something better than "inpsectors" from something like Underwriters. You say the inspections would be paid for by the airlines. Don't you think there would be a possible conflict of interest in such a set up. The airlines paying for someone to inspect them.

By the way, is there something inherently unsafe about how the current system is set up? Are airlines crashing planes left and right? Are manufacturers building aircraft that are dangerous?
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 3:26 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 14):
a body like Underwriters Laboratories to rate them

If UL assessed airworthness in a manner comparable to their safety assessment of some electrical components I've used, then I think I'd rather walk.

Tod
 
lowrider
Posts: 2542
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:09 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:42 am

I think the original question is based on a flawed premise. How an aircraft looks has little to do with how it is maintained or functions. If an airline has to chose to cut budgets, I would rather they cut back on carpet cleaning and seat replacement verses inspections and parts inventories. Remember, the aircraft is only legally airworthy when it is maintained in accordance with the manufacture's requirment and the regulatory requirements. An airline may be required to prove this airworthiness at any time as it must produce proof of this mx upon the request of an inspector. Failure to do so will ground the aircraft. These planes are too expensive to leave sitting around for days on end over a mx violation. Ultimately you risk a hull loss (expensive), certificate suspension/revocation (very expensive), and loss of consumer confidence (very very expensive). When looking at the risk/reward equation, minor savings from mx shortcuts do not justify the potential downside.
Proud OOTSK member
 
brownbat
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:33 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Mainte

Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:01 am

I really don't know what the U.S government has to do with aircraft maintenance since it's the FAAs responsibility to regulate U.S aviation. Rest assured, the airlines are not in it to make quick profits by ignoring maintenance. If the founders wanted to make big profits then they got into the wrong business.

Quoting Ilovenz (Thread starter):
How do I know airlines are not cutting corners in maintenance checks when it would be a very easy way to save money doing so?

Because if they did and the plane crashed, it would be the end of the company and the reputation which is more important than saving a few bucks by not doing a few maintenance checks here and there.

Quoting Ilovenz (Thread starter):
The "747-400 shot to hell" thread got me thinking about this. I realize many aircraft which are less-than-immaculate on the inside are nonetheless very safe overall.

It's true, you can't really tell if the aircraft is unsafe to fly by seeing that the seats are torn or the cabin looks dirty. Most of the things that cause an airplane to crash are things that we can't really see that are inside the plane. So it's pointless to feel uncomfortable because the cabin looks horrible.
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:14 am

Quoting Ilovenz (Thread starter):
How do I know airlines are not cutting corners in maintenance checks when it would be a very easy way to save money doing so?

Because the A&P mechanics that work on them are criminally liable for the work they perform, and they have no intention of going to jail if something goes wrong. So it gets fixed.....
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
Electech6299
Posts: 606
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 11:13 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:08 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 1):
One of my pet peeves is that airlines don't provide smoke hoods for passengers -- only for crew. If I had to choose between a life vest and a smoke hood, I'd rather have the smoke hood loaded.

As someone with responsibility for public safety, and professionally trained to wear smoke hoods (as well as other types of respirators), I have to disagree as well. Selling hoods like the evac-U8 to the general public is just another example of post- 9/11 opportunistic marketing. Any public safety official will tell you that safety equipment is only as good as the training that goes with it, and a promotional video and product manual just don't cut it. Besides, for airline use, the liability to the manufacturer is limited, but if something went wrong the airline could be sued for providing the product. If any company I worked for started passing those things out, I'd quit. I can't stand jeopardizing others with a semblance of safety when it's most likely actually more dangerous.

This is in contrast to the many Federal buildings I work in, where escape masks are provided to the office staff. Every person working in those buildings has gone through a 2-hour practical training program, explaining the use and limitations, and actually putting on and wearing a training mask for 10 minutes. You have no idea how many people are claustophobic, and would never have anticipated their reaction to the mask until it was too late- when 30 seconds running down the hall would have saved a life, but 30 seconds fiddling with a mask without practical training can prove fatal.

Quoting Tod (Reply 25):
If UL assessed airworthness in a manner comparable to their safety assessment of some electrical components I've used, then I think I'd rather walk.

       Thank God that they aren't in charge of airline safety! But the work they do is good at weeding out the really bad stuff, so only products with hidden flaws will make it to market   

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 20):
All the federal regs should be eliminated. Inspections would be paid for by the airlines. If they don't pay, they don't get rated. If they don't get rated, they don't get insurance. With no safety rating and no insurance, they would get very, very few customers. Not enough to survive in business

And who rates or regulates the insurance companies? And how many planes have to crash to find out who are the better underwriters, and who really knows what they're doing with aircraft safety. Replacing safety regulations with an unregulated private enterprise for a free-market economy to sift out is a recipie for disaster- and as many cronies as there are, the Feds wouldn't do that to the American people. Oh, and replacing the regs with a regulated insurance carrier would be more expensive all around- for the feds to inspect the companies inspecting the airlines inspecting the planes- it just doesn't make sense!   

Oh, and back to the topic.... The cost cutting is more likely to affect the Mx pay, benefits, and softness of the toilet paper in the shop than the job requirements and performance of the Mx personnel. I'd fly any major US carrier 7 days a week if I could. And like others said- nothing to do with the politics of the day- the airlines, Boeing, and Airbus know what their job is and do it well. The inspection atmosphere may change, but the regs hit hard when there's any kind of lapse- not just an accident- so I doubt any airlines are goofing off while the FAA's back is turned...

[Edited 2005-11-02 03:13:44]
Send not to know for whom the bell tolls...it tolls for thee
 
LMP737
Posts: 4923
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:06 am

Quoting Electech6299 (Reply 29):
Oh, and back to the topic.... The cost cutting is more likely to affect the Mx pay, benefits, and softness of the toilet paper in the shop than the job requirements and performance of the Mx personnel. I'd fly any major US carrier 7 days a week if I could. And like others said- nothing to do with the politics of the day- the airlines, Boeing, and Airbus know what their job is and do it well. The inspection atmosphere may change, but the regs hit hard when there's any kind of lapse- not just an accident- so I doubt any airlines are goofing off while the FAA's back is turned...

Very well put. As I pointed out before it's not like there's a safety crisis in aviation here in the states. What Zvezda purposes is basically tearing down the house because it has some flaws.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29917
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Thu Nov 03, 2005 1:10 pm

Quoting Electech6299 (Reply 29):
As someone with responsibility for public safety, and professionally trained to wear smoke hoods

What do you do Exactly...Fire service.

Quoting Electech6299 (Reply 29):
when 30 seconds running down the hall would have saved a life, but 30 seconds fiddling with a mask without practical training can prove fatal.

Very true.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
mandala499
Posts: 6460
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:46 pm

Here's the sad truth...
Skip on maintenance? Nothing new... BUT...
1. They either find out the result with a smoking hole in the ground....
2. They got discovered and got off lightly with a promise not to do it again...

Unfortunately, those who got #2 won't learn much and sooner or later they try and do it again... eventually, they'll get #1...

Though some got #1 and still try and get away with it afterwards...

It comes back to the regulatory body's effectiveness AND company culture...

Normally the trigger for maintenance cuts are cut throat competition, management tolerance of safety cuts for a few pennies or today's number of flights flown, and lack of effective teamwork between all aspects of the airline...

Though I am relieved to say, these kinds of companies are (very) RARE...

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
amtrosie
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:44 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:10 am

I just want to reiterate. The FAA may regulate- but the mechanics ensure the maintenance is performed to standards.... bottom line, when the mechanic has to sign his/her name to the log or work card the federal regulating body has nothing to do with it. They/we are doing this out of professional pride. Why believe this? SIMPLE, they are NOT doing it for the money!!!

Quoting BrownBat (Reply 27):
I really don't know what the U.S government has to do with aircraft maintenance since it's the FAAs responsibility to regulate U.S aviation.

What are you STUPID?

The FAA is the "Federal Aviation Administration"-- That is the government under the Dept. of Transportation (its director a Cabinet Post), it's funding are our tax dollars ALLOTTED by the U.S. Congress.

How IDIOTIC a statement can you possibly make?
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:07 pm

If you want to discuss Smoke Hoods please start a fresh topic - thank you
 
eilennaei
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:41 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 08, 2005 6:28 am

Quoting BrownBat (Reply 27):
I really don't know what the U.S government has to do with aircraft maintenance since it's the FAAs responsibility to regulate U.S aviation.

Who does appoint the key people of FAA? Does the FAA issue anything on aviation maintenance?
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 08, 2005 6:40 am

Quoting Eilennaei (Reply 35):
Who does appoint the key people of FAA? Does the FAA issue anything on aviation maintenance?

For the US laws regulating the FAA:
click here

Tod
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29917
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:21 pm

Out here the Quality Control Department headed by a QCM [Quality Control Manager is the Airline link to the Regulatory Authorities [DGCA].
The QCM & its team coordinate with the Mx Dept to ensure all rules are followed with regards to Mx work.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
jeb94
Posts: 587
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 9:19 pm

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:31 pm

The FARs are still the same no matter who is the president or who is in congress. The regulations are the same, the penalties for violating the regulations are the same and the punishment for those caught breaking the law, be they airline employee/president or FAA inspector are still the same. Airlines must follow the same regulations they've had to follow for the last 20 years. There are people in prison to this day for findings in the Valu-Jet and Alaska Air crashes.
 
eilennaei
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:41 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:13 pm

Quoting Jeb94 (Reply 38):
Airlines must follow the same regulations they've had to follow for the last 20 years.

I should think they must and will follow all applicable regulations, no matter what their age is. Even FARs do get updated and changed, and that process is ultimately governed by politically appointed officials.


Quoting Tod (Reply 36):
For the US laws regulating the FAA:
click here

Thanks for the link, but unfortunately this one did not include data on the election procedure, or I failed to see it. Prior to writing #35 I did however check the CV abstracts of some of the individuals now holding key posts in the FAA for their nomination details, using standard google, and playing dum for rhetorical purposes.
 
amtrosie
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:44 am

RE: Gonna Get Hell For Asking This....Plane Maintenance

Wed Nov 09, 2005 10:58 am

Quoting Eilennaei (Reply 39):
Even FARs do get updated and changed, and that process is ultimately governed by politically appointed officials.



The top two or three individuals are political appointees, but the rest of the FAA are career individuals. As with any government entity, there is a politically appointed/elected individual at its head. The actual "work" is done by the knowledgeable souls.

Quoting Eilennaei (Reply 35):
Does the FAA issue anything on aviation maintenance?

YES!!!! They issue the very license we must have to work. They make the regulations we must follow, and those same regs. Can put us in prison for deviating from them!!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos