strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
might as well get rid of the FAA.....they come around once a year at ORD, for one week, and they tell the company well in advance so AA can tidy up the place. That pretty good oversight, isn't it.
First 757 to outsourced MRO
- Thread starter boeing767mech
- Start date
tech2101
Veteran
You have no idea what they do behind the scenes. I promise, they are looking at your operation more than you know.
xUT
Veteran
IMHO,
That's about to change. FAA is about to put a borescope up AA's documentation and it won't be pretty.
If you don't follow OEM MM and CMM "to the letter", be prepared to send it to the OEM or a vendor that 'says'
it's in compliance. UA tried to fight some of these actions that were clearly nonsensical but lost as the FAA only looks at OEM documentation and you must comply, even if it's wrong.Look forward to your engineering staff being decimated as well.
After UA's BK we had a bevy of new FAA inspectors descend on UA with the sole purpose of finding faults in our system. Forget past practice, and NTO's, get ready for the hammer!
Remember, OEM documentation is 'king', even if it's wrong. :wacko:
B) xUT
From what I understand the FAA is funded by the fines they impose on offending parties. Since there are not any other airline doing heavy maint. in the U.S. besides AA, they fine AA millions of dollars for the smallest infractions. Southwest is their pet airline so they get away with flying airplanes with cracked crown skins that are "overlooked" in El Salvador. United has been accused by their mechanics of pencil whipping descrepancies while in heavy maintenance in South America. Maybe the FAA doesn't have the power to fine foreign repair stations, but if that is the case, they should not sanction their operations. I ask for an even playing field, no more or less. They come to Tulsa and look at everything under a microscope and yet they leave those others alone. This is not a level playing field by any stretch of the imagination.
xUT
Veteran
Depends on your definition of HMV.
If you consider C checks are HMV, then yes, otherwise no.
strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
Good! It's about time!
tech2101
Veteran
Wow. Now I understand why you are posting this nonsense.
You really need to educate yourself on the federal appropriation process before you make such presumptive statements.
You also have some paranoia issues.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
A showing of hands...who remembers the Aviation Trust Fund? Started in 1970 and intended to fund improvements in airports and airways, it reached a balance of $7.35 Billion in 2001. Starting with AIR-21 and "enhanced" with Vision 100, the Trust Fund has increasingly been used to fund FAA operations and EAS. The balance was $770 million at the end of FY 2010 - about 10% of what it was at the peak. Currently the Trust Fund pays 2/3 of the FAA's operational budget of $9+ Billion/year. [source - GEO report to Congress]
Jim
Jim
Paranoia issues??? How many FAA inspections have you been through? I go through them once a year and have noticed how much more they nitpick each year. This past year we were threatened with a finding for not having unservicable parts identified. When I protested this to the inspector, he looked at me like I was something on the bottom of his shoe. I pointed out that serviable parts are identified by servicable parts tags and if there is no servicable parts tag, then the part is not servicable. This is a fact that is taught to anyone who has ever worked on an aircraft either in the military or civilian sector. Surely the FAA is aware of this, but in their effort to write things up, real or imagined, this inspector decided to create a problem where there was none. He was accompanied by two AA employees that acted like bobble head dolls when he said anything no matter how rediculous. To make a long story short, he didn't write it up. But my point has been that the FAA refuses to inspect the foreign repair stations that are stealing our jobs. If the aircraft are allowed in our country, they ought to be held to the same scrutiny that we are. I have been in aviation for over 35 years and have seen FAA inspections and they are now searching for the slightest infractions. If this is paranoia then so be it, but the MD80 fiasco with the wire bundle ties would not have happened a few years ago when all airlines did their heavy maintenance here. As far as the funding goes, I am betting the money goes right to the FAA. As far as your assesment of me, I have been accused of lots worse. But I am sure, in your humble opinion, that you are all knowing and there is nobody on this planet that could disagree with you without being a complete idiot, which reminds me of someone else who posts on this board. I am wondering if you use another alias. But maybe I am just paranoid.
787nightmare
Veteran
- Aug 28, 2010
- 722
- 153
Carmen....don't do that again. -D
Relax now pops...take a deep breath.
Btw, I hear ya, And it's true.
-DRelax now pops...take a deep breath.
Btw, I hear ya, And it's true.
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
Paranoia [ˌpar.rəˈnoɪ.ə] (adjective: paranoid [ˈpar.rə.noɪd]) is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. False accusations and the distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia.
strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
I think you got the wrong guy brother!!!!! I didn't write that!!!Carmen....don't do that again.
Relax now pops...take a deep breath.
Btw, I hear ya, And it's true.
I would never call myself OLDGUY@AA
Carm
tech2101
Veteran
I only have one moniker here. And yes, you are paranoid.
I am familiar with he ATOS process.
