Good Ole Bob

[Overspeed]

I also got to witness the results of NWA/Iam outsourced maintenance first hand, with my own eyes, as I worked in MSP until 2002. My friends (no Scabs either) that worked in the NWA hangers before the lock-out/strike would call me over to see all the mistakes/f-ups and they had to fix on the DC-10 and the 747 hanger queens before they were released into service after returning from the China chop shops. Flaps mis-rigged, fuel leaks in the wings, landing lights that didn't work, engines that were profusely leaking oil, cabin doors that wouldn't close properly, on and on. These aircraft were right out of heavy check, and had to be reworked for 2 weeks or better. How is that a cost savings? Oh I forgot, I guess they didn't need those aircraft that fast, plenty of time for a post chop shop redo. One of my friends got hired back to Delta with all the MSP scabs, he quit after less than a year, the place is worse than when he got axed under the NWA force manure. Good thing it's mostly a line maintenance operation now, those Chinese chop shop birds might never leave the hanger after the heavy checks.

You witnessed shoddy maintenance? Did you fill out the SDR with the FAA for those unsafe aircraft?

Bottom line, the FAA was supposedly overseeing all distressed carriers including AA. As well all know the FAA is under sever scrutiny right now and is hammering AA but not so much the other guys outsourcing all their maintenance. The question is either all that outsourced work is being done right or they want to make it look like in-sourced maintenance isn't better than outsourced? Hmmm...

Delta is not a mostly a line maintenance operation. They outsourced almost all the heavy airframe overhaul. Delta Tech Ops in ATL has thousands of mechanics working engines and components for themselves as well as other airlines. Look it up.

 

[Overspeed]

I am saying, time is gonna come when these domestic aircraft chop shops will no longer be able to take in more work. At this point, they cannot staff their facilities with skilled labor. Ask yourself, would you go to A&P school for two years, drop upwards of $30k at a: Embry Riddle, Spartan, Northrop, PIA or a similar institution only to work at some chop shop? The laws of supply and demand will come into play. The chop shops, in an effort to attract more talent, will have to offer more pay and benefits, still won't be enough. This will drive the cost up to the airlines using their services. The airline got rid of their overhaul capability - oh oh - no alternative.

The almighty dollar vs safety. Fly the plane down to one of these third world hell holes. To have a bunch of illiterate simpletons - who have no concept of the importance of the structures and components they may be working on are.
Now to the untrained eye, people like you, may argue there is no difference in the quality of work performed at one of these banana republics vs Tulsa. Well, Aerosmith has a song - it called "Dream On".

Not saying their quality is better at the outsources because its not at many of them. FAA is hammering AA but not the outsourcers, why? They hammer us, the AA AMTs on regulation because they won't or can't go to China or El Salvador whenever they want to inspect their paperwork. All 145/121 carriers needs to be held to the same standard.

 

[Overspeed]

Well those days are gone. The regulators are no longer so accomodating. Go talk to your ASAP coordinator and ask him how busy he is and how often LOIs are sent out nowadays.

You are right Bob, they are hammering our AA people, not the outsourcers from China or El Salvador.

 

[Frank Szabo]

You are right Bob, they are hammering our AA people, not the outsourcers from China or El Salvador.

The government is also "hammering" other entities like Gibson Guitars for not having their work done out of country. This supposed "labor friendly" administration can't be gone soon enough to suit me - then again, it never should have been allowed to begin.

... and our so-called "representation" will be front and center recommending we vote the SCOAMF back into office to finish off the country.

 

[Hackman]

You witnessed shoddy maintenance? Did you fill out the SDR with the FAA for those unsafe aircraft?

Bottom line, the FAA was supposedly overseeing all distressed carriers including AA. As well all know the FAA is under sever scrutiny right now and is hammering AA but not so much the other guys outsourcing all their maintenance. The question is either all that outsourced work is being done right or they want to make it look like in-sourced maintenance isn't better than outsourced? Hmmm...

Delta is not a mostly a line maintenance operation. They outsourced almost all the heavy airframe overhaul. Delta Tech Ops in ATL has thousands of mechanics working engines and components for themselves as well as other airlines. Look it up.

Yes NOverspeed, I witnessed the NWA flying junk in rework after returning from China, I didn't work at NWA, just went over to visit and to observe the "Outsourced Cost Savings" that was suppose to be happening. So any FAA reports were up to those NWA employees who were tasked to deal with said aircraft. I'm sure the FAA were informed, but like what occurred during the AMFA strike, the reports were probably ignored, and/or the complainant admonished and removed from the aircraft.

The FAA is supposedly overseeing the outsourcing chop shops operation, however that is not the case as for those of us who have been on the inside for many years, and choose not to swallow the company/FAA line of BS like yourself. My goodness, you sure are a gullible one. Don't ever sign up for the World Poker Tour NOverspeed..... easy money for the sharks at your table.

I don't know if I typed too fast for you, maybe just had a mental "lapse", or a senior "moment"??? Did you read the sentence where I stated "I worked in MSP until 2002"??? I guess the reading comprehension lessons didn't help. Delta at MSP is mostly a line operation today, that's where the NWA DC10's and the 747's were once upon a time before the Iam allowed them to be cut and chopped in Red China. NWA tore down most of the hangers (2008?) along 494 where they used to do heavy maintenance. There are a few narrow body hangers left, but the big ones for wide bodies are gone along with all the shops. Understand now? Somehow, I kind of doubt it.

I know about Delta Tech OPS in ATL, I don't need to "Look it up". Did you know that does Delta has their Rolls 777 Trents' overhauled and tested at AFW? Nope, Delta Tech OPS doesn't do them. Imagine that.

Have a nice day....and don't forget to rest those sore knees. 😉

 

[Overspeed]

Yes NOverspeed, I witnessed the NWA flying junk in rework after returning from China, I didn't work at NWA, just went over to visit and to observe the "Outsourced Cost Savings" that was suppose to be happening. So any FAA reports were up to those NWA employees who were tasked to deal with said aircraft. I'm sure the FAA were informed, but like what occurred during the AMFA strike, the reports were probably ignored, and/or the complainant admonished and removed from the aircraft.

The FAA is supposedly overseeing the outsourcing chop shops operation, however that is not the case as for those of us who have been on the inside for many years, and choose not to swallow the company/FAA line of BS like yourself. My goodness, you sure are a gullible one. Don't ever sign up for the World Poker Tour NOverspeed..... easy money for the sharks at your table.

I don't know if I typed too fast for you, maybe just had a mental "lapse", or a senior "moment"??? Did you read the sentence where I stated "I worked in MSP until 2002"??? I guess the reading comprehension lessons didn't help. Delta at MSP is mostly a line operation today, that's where the NWA DC10's and the 747's were once upon a time before the Iam allowed them to be cut and chopped in Red China. NWA tore down most of the hangers (2008?) along 494 where they used to do heavy maintenance. There are a few narrow body hangers left, but the big ones for wide bodies are gone along with all the shops. Understand now? Somehow, I kind of doubt it.

I know about Delta Tech OPS in ATL, I don't need to "Look it up". Did you know that does Delta has their Rolls 777 Trents' overhauled and tested at AFW? Nope, Delta Tech OPS doesn't do them. Imagine that.

Have a nice day....and don't forget to rest those sore knees. 😉

I never signed up for outsourcing BS.

The point is that the FAA is not on the US AMTs side plain and simple. Not gullible at all, if the government removes the barriers to outsourcing then as expected, the airlines dumped the in-houes work in a heart beat. No senior moment.

Yes I know full well that Trents are overhauled at AFW by TAESL, not AA. They are under PbtH agreements and RR has joint ventures around the world. FYI - who overhauled all of AAs PW2037s under PbtH agreements too. When you have a small fleet it does not make sense to do the work in-house. You get a cheaper rate when you outsource the work to those who do volume.

I would love taking your money at the poker table.

 

[eolesen]

The point is that the FAA is not on the US AMTs side plain and simple.

Duh. The FAA's supposed to be on the side of safety. They're not there to create regulations or increase oversight just to favor the plight of the US AMT and create jobs.

Prove that safety is at risk, and you'll have them on your side.

After almost ten years of discussing this, I haven't seen anything other than a lot of hyperbole and anecdotal evidence that overseas overhaul is unsafe.

Is it perhaps more expensive? Perhaps. But unsafe? Hasn't been proven, and probably won't be, given that airplanes flown by every airline in the world using those overseas overhaul bases seem to stay in the air just fine.

 

[Hackman]

I never signed up for outsourcing BS.

The point is that the FAA is not on the US AMTs side plain and simple. Not gullible at all, if the government removes the barriers to outsourcing then as expected, the airlines dumped the in-houes work in a heart beat. No senior moment.

Yes I know full well that Trents are overhauled at AFW by TAESL, not AA. They are under PbtH agreements and RR has joint ventures around the world. FYI - who overhauled all of AAs PW2037s under PbtH agreements too. When you have a small fleet it does not make sense to do the work in-house. You get a cheaper rate when you outsource the work to those who do volume.

I would love taking your money at the poker table.

I for one would like to know what you have signed up for exactly, because apparently towing the compAAny/Twu line and regurgitating the fear is what you excell at. If not gullible, then your purely a simpleton who like a few others on here, would sell their soul and their mother for a dollar. I can smell the fear in you....it permeates every post you write, compAAny tool.

With a fools statement like this one: "Prove that they take twice the amount to turn an aircraft and who cares how long it takes if you don't need the aircraft that fast. AA has more aircraft out of service than anyone else daily. So we are better? Uh, no. " I'm fairly certain I'm safe at any game of chance and skill if your playing.

Duh...uh, Hey George, can I pet the lil' bunny rabbit? "The point is that the FAA is not on the US AMTs side plain and simple." Jeez bright boy, do ya think? :blink:

Now return to your knees and shine those boots.....

 

[Overspeed]

Duh. The FAA's supposed to be on the side of safety. They're not there to create regulations or increase oversight just to favor the plight of the US AMT and create jobs.

Prove that safety is at risk, and you'll have them on your side.

After almost ten years of discussing this, I haven't seen anything other than a lot of hyperbole and anecdotal evidence that overseas overhaul is unsafe.

Is it perhaps more expensive? Perhaps. But unsafe? Hasn't been proven, and probably won't be, given that airplanes flown by every airline in the world using those overseas overhaul bases seem to stay in the air just fine.

You also missed my point. The issue is a uniform standard of safety. If drug testing, unannounced random audits, and security background checks is good for the US AMTs why is there a different standard of safety enforced by the FAA for US airlines if they choose to outsource. The NTSB raised this concern back in 1999 when the FAA started instituting the risk-based safety inspections for airlines. Read the OIG reports in 2003 and 2007 they clearly state that the FAA is not, and still not, holding all overhaul facilities to the same standard. In fact, the OIG gives the FAA a big FAIL and cites multiple examples of safety and compliance failures in their reports.

Maybe we should use prisoners to cut costs like Oneworld partner Qantas http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-12-17/qantas-gives-jobs-to-prisoners-over-disabled/1181950 or give prisoners access to sensitive parts of the aircraft like ST Aero in Singapore http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/criminals-clean-qantas-planes/story-e6frfkp9-1111113145863

It is about safety and security. The standards should be the same for all, PERIOD.

The government role is to establish an acceptable standard to ensure all reasonable measures have been taken to make sure passengers are safe. Either passengers that fly on US aircraft are safer or the level of oversight and regulation of US AMTs is too high.

Should we be drug tested only when there is just cause? Should we have background checks and fingerprints only if the company that employs us feels like it? Should we be audited or inspected only when the FAA gives us advance notice?

If you are okay with that then call your representatives and tell them you want no drug testing for AMTs, no security checks, and FAA inspections only once a year with advance notice.

 

[chris perry]

Duh. The FAA's supposed to be on the side of safety. They're not there to create regulations or increase oversight just to favor the plight of the US AMT and create jobs.

Prove that safety is at risk, and you'll have them on your side.

After almost ten years of discussing this, I haven't seen anything other than a lot of hyperbole and anecdotal evidence that overseas overhaul is unsafe.

Is it perhaps more expensive? Perhaps. But unsafe? Hasn't been proven, and probably won't be, given that airplanes flown by every airline in the world using those overseas overhaul bases seem to stay in the air just fine.

American used to mean quaility,now it mean's imported from the cheapest country with exploited labor!

 

[eolesen]

.

The government role is to establish an acceptable standard to ensure all reasonable measures have been taken to make sure passengers are safe. Either passengers that fly on US aircraft are safer or the level of oversight and regulation of US AMTs is too high.

Should we be drug tested only when there is just cause? Should we have background checks and fingerprints only if the company that employs us feels like it? Should we be audited or inspected only when the FAA gives us advance notice?

If you are okay with that then call your representatives and tell them you want no drug testing for AMTs, no security checks, and FAA inspections only once a year with advance notice.

Personally, some of the oversight IS over the top.

How many certificated employees have been fired for failing a drug test since testing came about in the late 1980's? I'm not talking about fleet service or stores. I'm talking about license holders.

How many millions of dollars have been spent on testing? Did testing serve as a deterrent? Or are pilots, dispatchers and mechanics simply less prone to using recreational drugs?.... I suspect the latter.

Fingerprinting? Same thing. It's all part of the post 9/11 security theater, and a waste of time in my opinion.

 

[Hopeful]

Duh. The FAA's supposed to be on the side of safety. They're not there to create regulations or increase oversight just to favor the plight of the US AMT and create jobs.

Prove that safety is at risk, and you'll have them on your side.

After almost ten years of discussing this, I haven't seen anything other than a lot of hyperbole and anecdotal evidence that overseas overhaul is unsafe.

Is it perhaps more expensive? Perhaps. But unsafe? Hasn't been proven, and probably won't be, given that airplanes flown by every airline in the world using those overseas overhaul bases seem to stay in the air just fine.

You forgot the other role of the FAA..Which is to promote the aviation industry and air travel in general. They should not have the dual role of enforcing regulations AND promoting the industry. It is a conflict of interest when they need to make costly and over do changes, the airlines run like little kids whining how they can't afford all the changes and regulations.

 

[Aristidas]

Now i'm glad that I noticed airlineforums.com , exactly the suitable information which wanted!

 

[Hopeful]

Now i'm glad that I noticed airlineforums.com , exactly the suitable information which wanted!

You're in for the experience of a lifetime!

 

[Birdman]

How many certificated employees have been fired for failing a drug test since testing came about in the late 1980's? I'm not talking about fleet service or stores. I'm talking about license holders.

A man I hired in with didn't last 6 months and many more have been terminated since.

Did testing serve as a deterrent? Or are pilots, dispatchers and mechanics simply less prone to using recreational drugs?.... I suspect the latter.

Testing is a huge deterrent and none of us think it's random.