Pit Final Assy.450

delldude

Veteran
Oct 29, 2002
28,912
6,004
Downrange
back in august,engine shop upper management told the workforce money was spent to start doing cfm56-5 fan blade reprofiling in house instead of shipping them to europe for even slight repair,for a huge savings.also as soon as tooling could be manufactured,-3 engine blades would be done too.recently they created an area to work the blades and are in the process of getting ovens and grinding benches installed.
within the past week they have also begun opening up engine bays that were vacant from doing away with the jt8''s and moving the present QEC area to gain extra bays.in all they should have 6 to 10 additional bays .all that they are saying is this is to make room for doing some big engines. they only lost one planner on the recent round of cuts and no supervisory personnel.?????
 
I'm taking note that the RB211-535's are not mentioned in this?

Does this spell the near term end of our B757's...or just the end of the CLT Engine Shop in general?
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #5
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/5/2002 12:56:25 PM PHL wrote:

Which equipment do these engines fly on?
----------------
[/blockquote]
a330 and 767
1.gif']
 
IUDIAM , or whatever you are? I know what we do...and where we do it. So spare me your inturpretation of what's what Please!!

Maybe you have failed to grasp the trend here? PIT is quickly losing Mainline Flights..CLT has gained them..CLT is also the primary station for Heavy Maintenance on the 767's/A330's and 757's..which often entails the need for having Engines on Demand. CLT is also at the geographical center of our heavily rooted east coast route system. Note the term Omni-Directional Hub...this provides great inward and out-bound flexibilty to move to the need.

With those three prime issues being fact..not fiction!! Where is there any reason to favor a PIT based Engine Shop to QEC engines returning from a farm out..rather than having the centralized shop in CLT doing it?

This is nothing more than the Ghost of Mecca/PIT past rearing it's ugly head...and attempting to keep it's body count up. CLT and PHL are going to be the primary focus Hubs of the mainlines future...why not address and oufit them as such the first time around? Oh , I forgot...this is US..not a fact based culture.
 
[BR]AOG, we do not overhaul any of our engines at all period. They are all farmed out. The only thing the CLT and PIT shops do is the QEC build up and tear down.[BR][BR]And the (GE and French built) CFM56-3 and -5 are airbus narrowbody and 737 engines.[BR][BR]The A330 use the PW4068 and the 767 use the GE CF-6
 
I was not talking about the engine needing to be trucked backed to CLT, I am talking about that we move more parts by truck then air it seems these days.
 
LDKIAM...I realize that PHL does it's fair share of engine changes on our widebodies...I know from first hand knowledge from all the lost tooling involved...and the Spare CF-6 that has been so heavily and improperly robbed of both rotable and consumable items...that it grew beyond PHL's ability to return it to serviceable status. However this still does not support the logic behind having all of our assets in PIT. (As short-sightedness will allow)

The last comments are in direct support of your views regarding the need for stock in Eagle Trucking and PTI The engine had to be returned to CLT for a make-over

I agree that the Airbus S-Checks are going to be a cluster....I also think the FAA was most correct in saying NO to any possible extensions on the checks.

The FAA's logic shows merit.....and with what the current inspections have un-covered on the Airbus to date...I would think any type of extension would be purely foolish on everyone's part.

U is looking at all the wrong issues...if this is the limits of thier projective thinking? Survey says???___________
 
[BR]AOG you know as well as I do that PHL does all the engines changes on the 767s and A330 unless it is scheduled to be done in Heavy. So apparently you dont know what is done where, LOL! In fact the latest 767 engine was done in PHL yesterday.[BR][BR]I agree with you that PIT mtc will probably be downsized serverly, but you know into 2004 and 2005 the airbus narrowbodies are going to run out of time, it is a five year S-check which should take about 30 days to complete in Tampa with no support shops, so the components will be trucked to CLT (would love to know who has stock in Eagle and PTI) and their is no way that two lines of HMV will accomplish all the needed checks in the time required when we were getting several airbus per week. It is gonna be like the summer of 99 with planes parked unless the company adds HMV lines. [BR][BR]Talked to the PMI of the FAA here in CLT and the company has all ready asked for extensions on the Airbus HMV and they were told no, you have never completed one yet and the type has not been in the fleet long enough to establish a reliability pattern.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/6/2002 3:35:05 PM LDKIAM wrote:

I was not talking about the engine needing to be trucked backed to CLT, I am talking about that we move more parts by truck then air it seems these days.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Agreed...I mentioned the Boone-Doggled CF-6 Engine , just for an added demension of my point. PIT will be playing less and less of a role in the International Aspect. Hince the need for A330/B767 anything , up to and including engines will lesson.

CLT due to routine International flights as well as Heavy Issues will always have a need for CF6 and 4168 support...as will PHL. PHL lacking the actual facilities, makes them a Fly-In or Truck-In Customer of sorts. With that said where does a shift of focus to PIT even begin to fit into the picture based on logic??
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #13
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/6/2002 3:30:32 PM AOG-N-IT wrote:

LDKIAM...I realize that PHL does it's fair share of engine changes on our widebodies...I know from first hand knowledge from all the lost tooling involved...and the Spare CF-6 that has been so heavily and improperly robbed of both rotable and consumable items...that it grew beyond PHL's ability to return it to serviceable status. However this still does not support the logic behind having all of our assets in PIT. (As short-sightedness will allow)

The last comments are in direct support of your views regarding the need for stock in "Eagle Trucking and PTI" The engine had to be returned to CLT for a "make-over"

I agree that the Airbus S-Checks are going to be a cluster....I also think the FAA was most correct in saying "NO" to any possible extensions on the checks.

The FAA's logic shows merit.....and with what the current inspections have un-covered on the Airbus to date...I would think any type of extension would be purely foolish on everyone's part.

U is looking at all the wrong issues...if this is the limits of thier projective thinking? Survey says???___________
----------------
[/blockquote]
FACT:Pit has done some 100+ 737 engine changes in the last 3 months.first they were doing it to return a certain group of '37s to mojave.then Davey Bonner jumped in and made his bid for U.suddenly,the plane,the plane...that were being prepped for return to lessor changed to be parked and the ones in the desert that were to be returned to lessor end up going back in service as 'Bama Retirees owned the ones in the desert.as of right now,hangar 3/4 is devoid of engines laying in wait to be changed.seems things are maybe where they should be,however-there are 8 serviceable cfm-3's on the ready pad in PIT.(normal config is 3)FACT:PIT line has shown an unpresidented ability to handle massive engine changes on call.
FACT:PHL engine changes only require one transport permit for the PA turnpike directly into PIT.
FACT:to save on permits they could fly engine changes into PIT and truck across the ramp to PIT FAB.
FACT:sometime this week ,PIT engine shops director Radcliff
is scheduled to bring a group of bean counters and floor space freeks to mull over PIT FABS capability to handle increased engine work.believe it-they have the square
footage.
FACT:PIT FAB has a state of the art Test Cell recently calibrated and currently in process to handle all our engines.
FACT:prior to CH-11 filing,PIT FAB was in negotiations to handle QEC work for GE and possibly WN and some others.
FACT:in the past 2 weeks PIT FAB has been polishing all the door knobs and moving all the furniture,why?(can't get an honest answer)[img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/9.gif'] [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/14.gif'] [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/8.gif']
 
As has been mentioned before, moving work from CLT to PIT does nothing to decrease costs. The CLT engine shop, as once again has been mentioned before, is shared with the wheel and brake shop as well as flight control/composite shop. The building is not something that can be subdivided with another company due to the set up.

Also, the costs of trucking engines is relatively small in the big picture of things. A larger issue is stocking of parts that are only kept in the base where the shop is, and how to get them to line stations to support the fleet. With PIT being reduced on a schedule basis, and serving mainly an E-W presence, this all points to a logistics nightmare. What happens when a plane is AOG in a check station such as TPA or DCA and PIT cannot get the part there due to no more flights. You are then faced with dealing with the costs associated with either hiring an air taxi for the part, taking a bump in the ETR (leading to reduced revenue due to a longer out of service time), or if lucky, robbing the part and then the associated costs in productivity of having to reinstall a part on the robbed engien or aircraft (you have now done the same job twice). You may say, well still stock the parts in CLT. You then have increased spares inventory, and the costs associated with that. I can see doing overhaul in PIT (we don't do it now, but since we did the JT-8, there is no reason we cannot gear up to do CFM work. I cannot say I would be surprised at anything, but moving all QEC work to PIT is just another way of protecting Mecca, at the expense of common sense. I was beginning to think this mentality was disappearing, but if this happens, I am dead wrong.
 
Checkout the interview with RSA Dr. Bronner, he wants a maintenance facility in Alabama. If his bid holds up, RSA has 37% of U, and probably will have some influence on future facilities.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top