Repair Lapses Led To Us Air Crash

I would like to caution every one not to mark outsourcing as generally bad. There are many companies out there that are doing a great job. LH Technik , Sabena Technik, SR Technik are companies which are used by many other airlines because they are good.

I believe that the problem is in the quality controll of the outsourcing airline. Bringing the jobs back into the airline will not guarantee that the job will be done propperly. It is the culture within the airline which makes the differance. If you are sloppy controlling what is done outside your door you also will be sloppy when it is done inside your house.
 
I disagree with your last statement. With in-house maintenance the mechanics and inspectors are the oversight. We each have a vested interest in the aircraft that routinely fly our family members to and fro. They are OUR aircraft and they do not leave until we are satisfied that all has been accomplished correctly.

In the case of Mobile Aerospace, their hodge podge of employees(many unlicensed by the FAA) might never see the plane again. They are under strict time constraints to complete the job and start on another or be shown the door. Time is money to Mobile Aerospace.....don't deliver as promised and they pay for lost revenues, etc. That is where the difference comes in.

No disrespect to Lufty and Sabena. If they were getting our work, yes I would still be angry because it is our work. However, I wouldn't be so concerned about the quality or safety associated with their operations. Why? Because in Europe the culture of business in general is vastly different from the cheapest cost mentality of corperate america. Furthermore, we simply have more idiots in aviation management in the USA than they do in Europe. This theory is proved moreover with each passing day. :down:
 
Does anyone know if it is true that the first plane that the Singapore company owned, Mobile Alabama repair shop, did major rebuilding & checks ...had a bunch of emergency landings?...If that is true, that makes me a little nervous, especially after the Charlotte crash about a year ago...
 
E-TRONS said:
I disagree with your last statement. With in-house maintenance the mechanics and inspectors are the oversight. We each have a vested interest in the aircraft that routinely fly our family members to and fro. They are OUR aircraft and they do not leave until we are satisfied that all has been accomplished correctly.

In the case of Mobile Aerospace, their hodge podge of employees(many unlicensed by the FAA) might never see the plane again. They are under strict time constraints to complete the job and start on another or be shown the door. Time is money to Mobile Aerospace.....don't deliver as promised and they pay for lost revenues, etc. That is where the difference comes in.

No disrespect to Lufty and Sabena. If they were getting our work, yes I would still be angry because it is our work. However, I wouldn't be so concerned about the quality or safety associated with their operations. Why? Because in Europe the culture of business in general is vastly different from the cheapest cost mentality of corperate america. Furthermore, we simply have more idiots in aviation management in the USA than they do in Europe. This theory is proved moreover with each passing day. :down:
I have to agree with you that we have many more idiotes in the US than in Europe.

I know for a fact that the US is still lacking on the QA field. Many airlines do not follow ISO QA standards.

And as an airline, I would have my inspector on job site when outsourcing in order to ensure that the airlines standards will be followed and not some one elses. At the end it is the airlines responcebility. It is a mistake the management makes and every one else pays for it. This is where a good QA and Chief Inspector should have lots of input and they are at the end responcible regardless who dose the work!