Alabama Maintenance Contrator
- Thread starter AP Tech
- Start date
It had everything to do with outsourcing. The problems with the CF-6 are related with a fire loop, which are NOT repaired in-house, they are vendored out.
US even sent QA to the repair facility to get to the bottom of it.
Don't let the facts get in your way.
US even sent QA to the repair facility to get to the bottom of it.
Don't let the facts get in your way.
Are you that ignorant?
It had nothing to do with general mtc. After EVERY single flight the oil on the CF-6 engines are checked and recored into the maxi-merlin system, that is mandatory due to the ETOPS on the plane and a logbook entry has to be made.
The problem was with a fire loop that is manufactured and repaired by a vendor, nothing to do with oil levels.
Like I said, keep reaching.
It had nothing to do with general mtc. After EVERY single flight the oil on the CF-6 engines are checked and recored into the maxi-merlin system, that is mandatory due to the ETOPS on the plane and a logbook entry has to be made.
The problem was with a fire loop that is manufactured and repaired by a vendor, nothing to do with oil levels.
Like I said, keep reaching.
700UW said:
Answer to first question - No.
Your always trying to imply the any outsourcing will lead to problems. That only U employees know what they are doing. NOT TRUE. I cannot go any further on this matter because of course, you know all.....or should I say, half the facts....
But don't let that get in your way.
Outsourcing does not always lead to problems, its just difficult to police when your own people are not doing the work. With a handful of QA people overseeing third party maintenence it difficult to monitor the quality of work, more so when you go with the lowest bidder. Believe it or not you do get what you pay for.
Unfortunately USAir does not look upon the mechanics as an asset but more as a liability. Some of the jobs that were contracted will be done at a lower price but many will cost the company much more.
Unfortunately USAir does not look upon the mechanics as an asset but more as a liability. Some of the jobs that were contracted will be done at a lower price but many will cost the company much more.
mrfish3726
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2004
- Messages
- 931
- Reaction score
- 0
700,
The mechanics at UAL had the nose gear turned on them MORE THAN ONCE when I worked there. That was a flaw in the Airbus Maintenance Manual not the guys doing the work. No one is infalible EVEN YOU! How many times has USAIR, UniTED, NW, or AW lost engine cowls. How about the USAIR Airbus that your mechanics drove into the concourse, I beleive MORE THAN ONCE. If your QA isn't policing what is happening at your 3rd party maintenance then shame on them. And having worked 3rd party before, to many times the company REP turned down the request for a repair and pencil whipped it himself. It would be interesting to compile a survey or find a source as to how many incidences there are with shitty in house maintenance VS 3rd party. They'd probably run neck to neck!
The mechanics at UAL had the nose gear turned on them MORE THAN ONCE when I worked there. That was a flaw in the Airbus Maintenance Manual not the guys doing the work. No one is infalible EVEN YOU! How many times has USAIR, UniTED, NW, or AW lost engine cowls. How about the USAIR Airbus that your mechanics drove into the concourse, I beleive MORE THAN ONCE. If your QA isn't policing what is happening at your 3rd party maintenance then shame on them. And having worked 3rd party before, to many times the company REP turned down the request for a repair and pencil whipped it himself. It would be interesting to compile a survey or find a source as to how many incidences there are with shitty in house maintenance VS 3rd party. They'd probably run neck to neck!
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Where did the Hawk go?
I guess he figured a plane crash couldn't be explained away.
I guess he figured a plane crash couldn't be explained away.
