Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:39 PM - Contractors doing maintenance on airliners (TeamGrumman@aol.com)
2. 01:27 PM - Re: Contractors doing maintenance on airliners (Chuck Jensen)
3. 04:28 PM - Re: Contractors doing maintenance on airliners (BELTEDAIR@aol.com)
4. 08:41 PM - Re: Contractors doing maintenance on airliners (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Contractors doing maintenance on airliners |
--> AnPMech-List message posted by: TeamGrumman@aol.com
Someone sent me an article (USAToday) saying that non-FAA certified mechanics
were working on airliners and that even the inspectors were not certified.
The article says that it is common practice for non-FAA approved maintenance
personnel to do all of the maintenance and that the inspectors signing off the
work may or may not be at the location. The inspectors have been approving
the work after the plane has flown.
Any info or comments?
When a GA aircraft has to have a 337 to move a clock from one side of the
instrument panel to the other and an airliner carrying hundreds of passengers
doesn't even need an FAA certified mechanic to work on it, somethings wrong with
this picture.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Contractors doing maintenance on airliners |
--> AnPMech-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
Sounds like more sour grapes from $75/hr mechanics at Northwest that are
walking instead of working--though stranger things have been true.
Chuck
Do Not Archive
--> AnPMech-List message posted by: TeamGrumman@aol.com
Someone sent me an article (USAToday) saying that non-FAA certified
mechanics
were working on airliners and that even the inspectors were not
certified.
The article says that it is common practice for non-FAA approved
maintenance
personnel to do all of the maintenance and that the inspectors signing
off the
work may or may not be at the location. The inspectors have been
approving
the work after the plane has flown.
Any info or comments?
When a GA aircraft has to have a 337 to move a clock from one side of
the
instrument panel to the other and an airliner carrying hundreds of
passengers
doesn't even need an FAA certified mechanic to work on it, somethings
wrong with
this picture.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Contractors doing maintenance on airliners |
--> AnPMech-List message posted by: BELTEDAIR@aol.com
Yes it is a shame, when mechanics are required to be licenced and responsible
for the planes that fly through maint. bases and have the fines and
liabilities on their shoulders for the planes that left some third world establishment
doing their maintenance. The FAA should be held in neglegence for allowing
this to happen, along with the airlines that jump into this game. Mahogany row
can be cut back if they really want to save, but no it goes to the front line,
less people more responsibility and unsafe planes, it seems nothing has changed
in the 34 years.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Contractors doing maintenance on airliners |
--> AnPMech-List message posted by: FLYaDIVE@aol.com
In a message dated 1/2/06 3:40:08 PM Eastern Standard Time,
TeamGrumman@aol.com writes:
> When a GA aircraft has to have a 337 to move a clock from one side of the
> instrument panel to the other and an airliner carrying hundreds of
> passengers
> doesn't even need an FAA certified mechanic to work on it, somethings
wrong
> with
> this picture.
====================================
Poor analogy ... You do not need to be a certified A&P to work on a plane.
It just has to be inspected and signed off by a certified A&P. What do you
think OWNER ASSIST ANNUALS are! And I like 337's. Better a 337 than a pencil
whipped log book! And for the record, I prefer Owner Assist Annuals. The only
requirement is the A&P has to also evaluate the owner and the quality of work
being done. Do it right the first time or do it over OR I do it and the owner
pays the big bucks.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|