Mitch Cronin Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 Seven engine changes to our crew over the past month or so... and seven grounded aircraft. The manager honcho of our hangars approached me this morning... shaking his head... obviously very disappointed... We'd had a chat recently about our crews' performance... He'd asked me, in disgust, how many airplanes I thought we could get done by morning if they'd give us 30 engine changes to do... in response, I asked "do I get to pick the guys, and are they perfect airplanes?"... Seems the folks in YUL (as well as several here in YYZ) are somewhat less than pleased with our performance thus far. They all think back to "days of yore" when an airplane would come in at night for an engine change, and go out serviceable in the morning.... The thing is... we don't have perfect aircraft! Thay all had issues with items that needed to be addressed before the new engine went back up. Back in those golden days, the airplanes were newer, and perhaps the crews doing the changes were younger, less experienced, and more inclined to do as they were told, without fussing over little problems? ....I don't know.... but I hate this! This morning it was a simple broken bracket on a hydraulic line on the pylon.... and a disintegrated asbestos seal around a duct that needed to be removed for access to replace that bracket... the seal only existed in YWG. On the last one, it was a bit of damaged structure that needed replacement... the one before that, a fire seal only available in some other base... ... All I know is I'd much rather send the airplane on it's way in a serviceable condition than see and hear all the crap that comes from all of those who think back to those wonderful times when, apparently, all was well with the world..... evidently before our crew started doing engine changes.... or so some would have me believe.... Hell, I remember times at WD when our A310's were all coming due for their first engine changes, where we could do the job in 5 hours, from outside to back outside, leak checks and runs accomplished. But they were mighty fine aircraft in comparison! These things are not! They need time on the ground to fix their aches and pains... but that's not what gets noticed.... it's the time it takes us to complete an engine change that hits their minds.... To some minds, we've failed them. "That's seven!" He said.... shaking his head... I told him: "There are people who would have this job done by now, who would have signed for that pylon inspection with their eyes closed... you could have these engine changes done there.... but don't let your kids fly on those airplanes!" Seems sometimes right is wrong and wrong is right.... to some people.... Our crew is the problem... Hell, we snag things! We want to fix things.... rotten sods that we are... Right is right, I'm sure of it! .... unserviceable is unserviceable, I'm sure of that too!... 4 days off now... I'm pretty sure of that.... If this kind of kick in the ass is going to keep coming every time we do our jobs properly, can we buy some new airplanes now please? ... where's my freakin' Appleton's!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flapsforty Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 Hey Mitch, Don't let it get you down. Keep doing the right thing. You'll sleep way better at night. You're there for the Pax, your fellow flyers, and especially their kids. Cheers Mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steam Driven Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 Mitch it's engineers like you, at all operators, that keep us going safely. I for one appreciate it would like to send you a bottle of appleton's... Sorry my scanner's broken... Keep your chin up Mitch, keep doing what you know is right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 Mitch: Doing the right thing is the correct path. The problem I have over here is that the engine changes aren't done in the morning and there were no snags. At least you guys are finding problems my guys are just slow. Actually that is not fair, My crew performs well and routinely has the engine changes done in the am. Its when I come in on day one and there is an engine change that has been ongoing for TWO days that ticks me off. When I was at AC we could do and E/C in a night easy if thigs were ok. Matter of fact we set the record for the L1011 wing engine change. 3 hrs if I recall with 5 guys and a QEC. But you are correct back then the planes were newer and in much better shape (and they weren't airbusses) B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrlupin Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 Perspective... Our team leader in YUL was getting agitated a few weeks ago, too many airplanes out of service he said.... I tried consoling him.... Think of how much safer the sky will be today... Seriously, the planning department has to take some responsibility for these out of service airplanes. With all the FMRs and long term deferrals on our airplanes,it's no wonder airplanes are taking delays. The planning department "plans" work for the night (planning in this context is used very loosely) ,they plan inspections, component changes, A checks,MEL items to be repaired etc. The problem is they never seem to order the parts to repair the problems or when they call inspections, they always assume you will not find anything!! Seriously, how unorganized can you get?? Last week myself and my work partner were scheduled to do a boroscope inspection and replace a fuel pump on a A320 (an Airworthiness Directive),they did not have the pump in Montreal. The pump got shipped to Montreal but got lost somewhere in stores. I did not receive the pump until 12:30 in the morning. Of course they planned to have the airplane out on a 7:00am flight. Which if you calculate carefully,gives me a few hours to remove the HMU,replace the pump, do a boro on the engine. Very realistic.... I imagine that every time you need parts Mitch, they are in YUL? lol Same for us, every time we need parts they are in YYZ If it's broken snag it and address it. Simple as that. It's nice to see airplanes leave in the morning but as an old friend told me,"of all the things that can be rushed in this world..... Airplane maintenance isn't one of them!!" Eric p.s. don't take it personnal Mitch, it's the airplane that is broken... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conehead Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 I told him: "There are people who would have this job done by now, who would have signed for that pylon inspection with their eyes closed... you could have these engine changes done there.... but don't let your kids fly on those airplanes!" The Manager you speak of isn't mature enough to realize the value of safety. He really would rather have someone sign off those inspections without looking at them. And he's not old enough to have children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Check Pilot Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 Has he gotten with the (new regulatory) times regarding SMS? I was under the impression that this was to be "woven into the fabric". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted October 5, 2005 Author Share Posted October 5, 2005 And he's not old enough to have children. ... so is the one he's got yours? How goes that Embraer course Conehead? She got enough one's and zero's, and if-and-or-but-not-if-nor gates to keep your interest? Eric... Right on. ...and, I gotcha... don't take it personally... I've been hearing that a lot lately... trying to get that message through my thickness. BTW... those engine driven fuel pumps are fun aren't they?... our crew did two this past week... Nothing like taking your work home with you... Sez my wife: "I hate the small of kerosene in the morning!" Boestar... you've got one of the best AME's in the business on your crew... I have no doubt those little Jbirds are in good hands. Steam... Flaps... You guys are alright. Thanks. ...scanner eh? Yessir, that little girl in 24D and all the folks in the back deserve our best, and that's just what they'll continue to get....but what's this stuff about sleeping at night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 I'm sorry. Dolt that I am I wonder....is there another side of the story? Is there ever? A guy wants to do his job to the best of his ability. A laudable goal. So---the manager. He's not a "guy" just trying to do a job to the best of "his" ability? Maybe there's another forum somewhere and he is posting his laments there and gathering, like a maiden in a flowered meadow , messages of both support and sympathy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted October 6, 2005 Author Share Posted October 6, 2005 Check Pilot... both he and his boss (along with all management below them) appear to be driven by a fear of the next honcho up the line, who seems to have a poor understanding of what good people management is (he's a very large man, with a very commanding presence and a voice that'll thunder clean through the thickest concrete walls ...which he'll not hesitate to use to achieve his goals... he can command respect in ways and for things he doesn't deserve, though he does certainly deserve some). They know the talk of safety quite well, but they're all more driven by the notion of production... ( that comes, I suspect, from micromanagement, from the top down, and the ass-covering, eyes behind you at all times, fingers ready to point in any direction management system that appears to be firmly entrenched here.... right down to the lowest of the management pile.) If I was inclined to speak my mind, I think I'd say the bastards should be rewarding us all for saving their asses on an almost daily basis! ...but maybe I shouldn't say that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted October 6, 2005 Author Share Posted October 6, 2005 UpperDeck, Of course there's that side... Absolutely he's just a guy trying to do his job to the best of his ability! ...but that's not the issue... I'm just a shmuck on the internet squawking my squawks to any colleagues who'll listen.... I guess like any thread here, "the point" is whatever the last poster wanted to make it... my initial goal here was simply to vent... is there anything wrong with seeking out support for safe mindedness? ...right mindedness? ... so to speak... in the face of pressure towards a wrong, I think it's rather natural for one who prefers not to go there to reach for support, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rattler Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Mitch, I guess I am curious. Why are you being singled out??? Are you the Lead/forman or just one of the crew??? If only one of the crew then I wonder why (perhaps previous correspondence). Not signing out an unsafe aircraft is def. the way to go but does the buck stop at you or is there someone else on your crew who is responsible for the signout? Please excuse my ignorance. Perhaps you can enlighten those of us who don't work for AC on how the crews are made up and what the chain of command is?? Thx Rattler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Keep the fight, Mitch. It's one that's worth winning and I sure that all of us front-enders want all of you wrench benders to keep doing it that way. FWIW, if they do ask you to cut a corner some night, just ask them to put that in writing, suitable for "framing". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 J.O.... Did Mitch say that ---"they wanted me to cut a corner"? He can speak for himself but I didn't read that in his post. Please be fair.....someone has to be concerned with productivity. One fellow says; "Hey! Why the delay?" and you expect the AME to say "Because.....", not "yassah, boss. Out the door now.!" The fact of questioning ought not to be construed as inviting the departure from a safety regimen and the reasonable response similarly ought not to be construed as obstructionary. Two sides to the same coin; both necessary to get a Coke from the machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newgirl Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Stay with me here as this questions is serious... If an aircraft comes in for an engine change , are other minor snags looked at and repaired at the same time ? In the small bases we don't have AME's or anyone who can correct small problems. IE, the broken seat that can't be used but hasn't been fixed in a week resulting in an aircraft with 139 seat capacity instead of 140. If this aircraft flies 6 flight legs a day at 400.00 per leg= 2400.00 per day revenue loss! Now lets say that 10 aircraft each have a seat that unserviceable =24000.00 per day x 7 days =168000.00 ! Lots of revenue lost. I figure the savings could pay for a few more AME's , more parts held in stock for when needed, less down time of the arcrft and happier customers . How frustrating must it be after long shifts, managers on your back to speed it up and get the aircraft flying when the "tools" to do the job aren't there?????? After 4 days on duty you go home for 4 days off and still feel sh** ty because nothing was accomplished according to Managements schedule. I feel for you Mitch because no matter how hard working you are , it's never enough for the powers that be. Perhaps Mr Milton and Mr Brewer should travel in Y class and have the trays fall down in their laps during flight or a reading light thats burnt out or the headphone jacks don't work!!!!! Imagine what the passengers think? Aeroflot of Canada ? Lastly this is not a criticism towards any staff as we all know how hard we work to get the job done properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted October 6, 2005 Author Share Posted October 6, 2005 Rattler, it sounds like you're assuming a bit too much, so sure, I'll see if I can lay out the structure for you... and maybe clarify a bit: First, I need to say that nobody I know is being asked directly to sign anything out that's not airworthy... but we all know there are those who wish we wouldn't see some of what we see, or at least ignore it. ...they let that be known in all manner of subtle and not so subtle ways. I haven't been singled out at all. His remarks to me were simply due to our earlier conversations about the subject. In the above mentioned engine changes, I've been involved with 5 of the 7. We have grunts, with licences, like me, called LAT's... (Licenced Aircraft Technicians)... and we have "AT's" (unlicenced).. together we number about twenty or so, on a good day... and we have an LLAT (lead). Typically on an A check, we'll have a dozen or so... on an aircraft if for called work, or de-snag of some sort, we'll often have 3 or 4 guys... on an engine change 6 is ideal, but we'll do them with 5 or even 4 if necessary... The buck stops with any of us... any of us can ground an aircraft if we find something needing attention. No one can make a unilateral decision to let an aircraft go without all who are aware of the concern agreeing to live with it. So the standard produced by the crew on the airplane will be to that of the individual with the highest standards. ...that is, those standards that judgment effects. Management cannot override us, they can only offer persuasion, or offer alternate legal courses of action... they cannot sign the aircraft out. It's typically the lead who signs out our aircraft when all the work is done, but it's not at all uncommon for any of us (avec liicense) to do so. All work done that isn't of an "elementary" nature, must include a "maintenance release" signature as well... without which the aircraft cannot be signed out... which each of us are responsible for. So when I find a snag, work to fix something, or change some component, it's my buck... as for any of us. Hope that clarifies? Cheers, Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted October 6, 2005 Author Share Posted October 6, 2005 FWIW, if they do ask you to cut a corner some night, just ask them to put that in writing, suitable for "framing". I've never had to use that line Jeff, but I've always kept it up my sleeve.... thing is, I don't think there's a manager I've ever worked for who didn't know they'd never be able to pull rank on me over what I knew to be right... even if any had wanted to. So I'll never get to ask for that, but I'll keep it handy just the same. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rattler Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Rattler, it sounds like you're assuming a bit too much, so sure, I'll see if I can lay out the structure for you... and maybe clarify a bit: First, I need to say that nobody I know is being asked directly to sign anything out that's not airworthy... but we all know there are those who wish we wouldn't see some of what we see, or at least ignore it. ...they let that be known in all manner of subtle and not so subtle ways. I haven't been singled out at all. His remarks to me were simply due to our earlier conversations about the subject. In the above mentioned engine changes, I've been involved with 5 of the 7. We have grunts, with licences, like me, called LAT's... (Licenced Aircraft Technicians)... and we have "AT's" (unlicenced).. together we number about twenty or so, on a good day... and we have an LLAT (lead). Typically on an A check, we'll have a dozen or so... on an aircraft if for called work, or de-snag of some sort, we'll often have 3 or 4 guys... on an engine change 6 is ideal, but we'll do them with 5 or even 4 if necessary... The buck stops with any of us... any of us can ground an aircraft if we find something needing attention. No one can make a unilateral decision to let an aircraft go without all who are aware of the concern agreeing to live with it. So the standard produced by the crew on the airplane will be to that of the individual with the highest standards. ...that is, those standards that judgment effects. Management cannot override us, they can only offer persuasion, or offer alternate legal courses of action... they cannot sign the aircraft out. It's typically the lead who signs out our aircraft when all the work is done, but it's not at all uncommon for any of us (avec liicense) to do so. All work done that isn't of an "elementary" nature, must include a "maintenance release" signature as well... without which the aircraft cannot be signed out... which each of us are responsible for. So when I find a snag, work to fix something, or change some component, it's my buck... as for any of us. Hope that clarifies? Cheers, Mitch Thanks Mitch. This gives me and I hope others an insite into "your world". Keep up the good work.... Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted October 6, 2005 Author Share Posted October 6, 2005 someone has to be concerned with productivity. One fellow says; "Hey! Why the delay?" and you expect the AME to say "Because.....", not "yassah, boss. Out the door now.!" The fact of questioning ought not to be construed as inviting the departure from a safety regimen and the reasonable response similarly ought not to be construed as obstructionary. Two sides to the same coin; both necessary to get a Coke from the machine. Right you are UpperDeck. It's not the question "why" that serves as such an invitation though. It's a persistent, overt, display of displeasure at the results, regardless of cause, that in itself serves to add pressure to all (not least of which is the next manager down, and immediately above us) to improve results to please. Some will succumb, to varying degrees, to the resultant pressure of that nature, from what can become several sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted October 6, 2005 Author Share Posted October 6, 2005 If an aircraft comes in for an engine change , are other minor snags looked at and repaired at the same time ? In the small bases we don't have AME's or anyone who can correct small problems. Short answer, yes. It will depend on manpower availabilty though, depending on the nature of the minor snag and who's domain it falls within. "After 4 days on duty you go home for 4 days off and still feel sh** ty because nothing was accomplished according to Managements schedule." You obviously "get it" NewGirl. That's a Bingo! It's hard to feel very satisfied when the boss is so unhappy. Cheers, Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrlupin Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Rattler, it sounds like you're assuming a bit too much, so sure, I'll see if I can lay out the structure for you... and maybe clarify a bit: First, I need to say that nobody I know is being asked directly to sign anything out that's not airworthy... but we all know there are those who wish we wouldn't see some of what we see, or at least ignore it. ...they let that be known in all manner of subtle and not so subtle ways. I haven't been singled out at all. His remarks to me were simply due to our earlier conversations about the subject. In the above mentioned engine changes, I've been involved with 5 of the 7. We have grunts, with licences, like me, called LAT's... (Licenced Aircraft Technicians)... and we have "AT's" (unlicenced).. together we number about twenty or so, on a good day... and we have an LLAT (lead). Typically on an A check, we'll have a dozen or so... on an aircraft if for called work, or de-snag of some sort, we'll often have 3 or 4 guys... on an engine change 6 is ideal, but we'll do them with 5 or even 4 if necessary... The buck stops with any of us... any of us can ground an aircraft if we find something needing attention. No one can make a unilateral decision to let an aircraft go without all who are aware of the concern agreeing to live with it. So the standard produced by the crew on the airplane will be to that of the individual with the highest standards. ...that is, those standards that judgment effects. Management cannot override us, they can only offer persuasion, or offer alternate legal courses of action... they cannot sign the aircraft out. It's typically the lead who signs out our aircraft when all the work is done, but it's not at all uncommon for any of us (avec liicense) to do so. All work done that isn't of an "elementary" nature, must include a "maintenance release" signature as well... without which the aircraft cannot be signed out... which each of us are responsible for. So when I find a snag, work to fix something, or change some component, it's my buck... as for any of us. Hope that clarifies? Cheers, Mitch You guys get 5-6 guys for an engine change???? WOW!!! We usually have to do them with 3 cat 01 and a cat 38!! As for the A checks, I imagine it all depends on what type of Aircraft,the RJs usually require slightly more manpower then the busses. 6 for a CL-65 ,5 for an A320 and the 767 don't get many A checks in YUL anymore but they require a small army. Seriously, YUL line is so understaffed it's ridiculous! A month ago we had an A check on an RJ and there was a grand total to 8 cat 01 one on the entire crew (we don't have three crews like YYZ has) They put three cat 01 on the A check and let the 5 other cat 01 mechs do the 18 ramp airplanes we had that night. Then they have the nerve to ask for a reason why the MEL items didn't get fixed.... Then the company wonders why airplanes don't make the morning departure.... Éric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Perspective... Our team leader in YUL was getting agitated a few weeks ago, too many airplanes out of service he said.... I tried consoling him.... Think of how much safer the sky will be today... Seriously, the planning department has to take some responsibility for these out of service airplanes. With all the FMRs and long term deferrals on our airplanes,it's no wonder airplanes are taking delays. The planning department "plans" work for the night (planning in this context is used very loosely) ,they plan inspections, component changes, A checks,MEL items to be repaired etc. The problem is they never seem to order the parts to repair the problems or when they call inspections, they always assume you will not find anything!! Seriously, how unorganized can you get?? Last week myself and my work partner were scheduled to do a boroscope inspection and replace a fuel pump on a A320 (an Airworthiness Directive),they did not have the pump in Montreal. The pump got shipped to Montreal but got lost somewhere in stores. I did not receive the pump until 12:30 in the morning. Of course they planned to have the airplane out on a 7:00am flight. Which if you calculate carefully,gives me a few hours to remove the HMU,replace the pump, do a boro on the engine. Very realistic.... I imagine that every time you need parts Mitch, they are in YUL? lol Same for us, every time we need parts they are in YYZ If it's broken snag it and address it. Simple as that. It's nice to see airplanes leave in the morning but as an old friend told me,"of all the things that can be rushed in this world..... Airplane maintenance isn't one of them!!" Eric p.s. don't take it personnal Mitch, it's the airplane that is broken... WOW What a familiar tune.. Our planning department schedules large work packages on an aircraft that arrives at 0015 and departs at 0630 and expects us not to reschedule much of the work. Things are the same no matter where yougo I guess. B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Boestar... you've got one of the best AME's in the business on your crew... I have no doubt those little Jbirds are in good hands. Who would that be. There are a few. Send me a PM. B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 You guys get 5-6 guys for an engine change???? WOW!!! We usually have to do them with 3 cat 01 and a cat 38!! As for the A checks, I imagine it all depends on what type of Aircraft,the RJs usually require slightly more manpower then the busses. 6 for a CL-65 ,5 for an A320 and the 767 don't get many A checks in YUL anymore but they require a small army. Seriously, YUL line is so understaffed it's ridiculous! A month ago we had an A check on an RJ and there was a grand total to 8 cat 01 one on the entire crew (we don't have three crews like YYZ has) They put three cat 01 on the A check and let the 5 other cat 01 mechs do the 18 ramp airplanes we had that night. Then they have the nerve to ask for a reason why the MEL items didn't get fixed.... Then the company wonders why airplanes don't make the morning departure.... Éric We do CRJ A checks every night with 4 Mechs and a Avionics or two. Our program must differ from yours somewhat. B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 As a "White Shirt Guy" I can say that I have never asked any of my guys to do anything "Untoward". When I was on the floor I had relatively high standards for the work I did and I expect similar from my crew. If the aircraft is grounded, it's Grounded. We will deal with it. We do our best to get the aircraft in the air in as safe a condition as possible. Sometimes it doesn't work out and there are some left in the hangar at the end of the night. I do take alot of pressure from higher up and hear alot of crap, but in the end we are trying to supply SAFE transportation to our customers. My guys know the pressure I feel as the routinely (Crew Chiefs) sit in on our morning status meetings and hear the @#$% being flung when stuff is wrong. I make every effort NOT to pass on the @#$% unless for some reason it is warranted. Lets all keep up the good work and make 'em safe. B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.