To all mechanics: VERBATIM

[Hopeful]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1230506970...hs&ru=yahoo

 

[bravozulu@afw]

Mr Blair Gregg, AFW Director, personally gave a lecture, Airworthiness Directive (AD) Compliance (Y1032), to several assemblies of AO Dock AMTs, on 17DEC2008. The gist of the class was simply "100 % VERBATIM COMPLIANCE". Several questions were asked, the reply to most of them was "The FAA wrote the AD. M&E Engineering translated the legalese to english that those of you on the floor can understand. COMPLY WITH THE ORDER AS WRITTEN. COMPLY WITHIN THE TOLERANCES STATED. PROTECT YOURSELF FIRST!"
Looks like there is a change in GPM Policies & Procedures blowing in through the window, from the 'Crystal Palace' Compliance Office, and it ain't pretty! BEWARE!! BE INFORMED!!

 

[Hopeful]

I am quite amused...At JFK we still have supervisors, er, I mean, Managers.....excuse me...........Complaining that mechanics are taking to long looking up paperwork......If they hired supervisors with experience, they would be aware that a brake change also requires several other tasks to be printed to facilitate the brake change....

 

[The Goose]

Most supervisors/managers do have a lot of experience, but it's not within the realm of mechanics.

Their area of expertise is in creating suction as knowledge/experience is not a desirable quality for management personnel at American Airlines and certainly not why said people were considered for their positions.

 

[xmarlin]

Mr Blair Gregg, AFW Director, personally gave a lecture, Airworthiness Directive (AD) Compliance (Y1032), to several assemblies of AO Dock AMTs, on 17DEC2008. The gist of the class was simply "100 % VERBATIM COMPLIANCE". Several questions were asked, the reply to most of them was "The FAA wrote the AD. M&E Engineering translated the legalese to english that those of you on the floor can understand. COMPLY WITH THE ORDER AS WRITTEN. COMPLY WITHIN THE TOLERANCES STATED. PROTECT YOURSELF FIRST!"
Looks like there is a change in GPM Policies & Procedures blowing in through the window, from the 'Crystal Palace' Compliance Office, and it ain't pretty! BEWARE!! BE INFORMED!!

"Looks like there is a change in GPM Policies & Procedures..."

How so? The GPM has always required mechanics to follow written policies and procedures. Just because M&E has always blown it off, and EPQA never bothered to enforce the requirement or has at least shown an unwillingness to follow the requirement doesn't change anything.

As usual, this is just another example of an effort to enforce an existing policy, and typically, it has been rolled out without any real understanding of how the policy should be communicated.

There will be more mis-interpretation of this than you can possibly imagine.

I'm betting that most people have never even read the GPM, and that of those who have, less than 10% understand it.

 

[The Goose]

"Looks like there is a change in GPM Policies & Procedures..."

How so? The GPM has always required mechanics to follow written policies and procedures. Just because M&E has always blown it off, and EPQA never bothered to enforce the requirement or has at least shown an unwillingness to follow the requirement doesn't change anything.

As usual, this is just another example of an effort to enforce an existing policy, and typically, it has been rolled out without any real understanding of how the policy should be communicated.

There will be more mis-interpretation of this than you can possibly imagine.

I'm betting that most people have never even read the GPM, and that of those who have, less than 10% understand it.

Once upon a time, there was a little common sense applied when a "sin" such as American's hen spacing was specified re: fixes as the string-ties on a bundle of wiring. Many of us looked at this rather nondescript bit of the books and didn't give a second thought to it.

Nowhere is a tolerance specified (plus or minus), re: the physical spacing of these ties and that's what bit AA in its collective posterior. The specification was "one inch". Now, anyone with only a quarter brain (that doesn't include government employees trying desperately to cover their butts as they obviously have less) would realize an eight of an inch or less variance in this spacing wouldn't make a bit of difference with respect to airworthyness. The FAA chose to push this simply to deflect criticism of their (continuing) relationship with Southwest and pick up a few operating bucks from American via fines.

I'm not necessarily pleased with the incoming President, but with any luck he'll install people that will restore the FAA's credibility and undo much of what caused this problem within the FAA that was allowed to fester for the eight years of BushCo's reign.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

I am quite amused...At JFK we still have supervisors, er, I mean, Managers.....excuse me...........Complaining that mechanics are taking to long looking up paperwork......If they hired supervisors with experience, they would be aware that a brake change also requires several other tasks to be printed to facilitate the brake change....

Hey HOPEFUL,

Just a thought.

Thou never an AA/AMT, I'm still very familiar w/AA HAVING to say something(about anything), to cover there A$$ via the FEDS,..................but(as you know well), NEVER wanting the employee to ACTUALLY DO, what the manager just officially stated.

I retired just before the "common" existence of camera cell phones/U Tube.

I swear, if I were still "grinding away" at AA, EVERY time those clowns issued an Edict, or COMPLAINED about the employee following said Edict,...........I'd be.."U Tubing Away" every second that I(or other like minded co workers) was on the clock !!

While it may be illegal to tape via audio, it ISN'T, via Video.

I could imagine a scenario where Every Time some incompetent Stupervisor was........."Being STUPID", that a half dozen camera phones emerged from the pockets of 6 AMT's

Think that might change management's...."M O" ??

 

[1AA]

It is quite obvious that this is a direct result of our cutting back of Aircraft Maintenance as we knew it before the cutbacks of 2003. The big boys who awarded themselves for doing such a fine job with bonuses have screwed up so bad that the FAA will impose fines and the actions that led to the grounding of the MD-80s led to a financial disaster. Now we as the front line AMTS will take the blame and get hit with non compliences and possible suspensions for practices that we all have been doing in the past that have not been a problem. We can thank the geniouses like Martinez and Redding. Starting next month you will see delays and out of service aircraft increase. If we are to be punished by following the M/M to the exact letter even though many steps in the M/M do not always work like it should heads are going to roll again at the top. Day shift and afternoon shift guys will placard everything instead of taking the time to go back to the office and pull out the M/M for every job. Night shift will follow the M/M and if any special tooling is required that is not available the plane will sit until it's repaired per the M/M.

Has anyone seen the M/M procedure for adjusting a tray table, ops checking a recline, securing an armrest cover, seat back pouch, floor track covering, interior trim covers, oven timers, galley door compartment latches, Coffee makers, etc...
You see where this is going to go.

DO NOT SIGN ANYTHING OFF WITHOUT A M/M REFERENCE!!
You will be caught and punished. You can thank our boys Martinez and Redding for this mess.

HAPPY NEW YEAR to all!!

 

[Edward]

This is starting to drift. Lets stay on topic. Thanks & Happy New Year to all.

 

[Hopeful]

Let us all understand something here, especially to the non mechanic folks who post here.

Aircraft maintenance and GPM procedures are always followed. But with the recent MD80 Airworthiness Directive issue, the FAA is splitting hairs over an 1/8 of inch here and a 1/16th of an inch there. Their cozy relationships with the airlines were exposed after Southwest Airlines flew thousands of flights without having accomplished certain mandatory AD's.

Mechanics have always been granted LEGAL "leeway" in interpreting certain instructions in maintenance manuals and even ADs. So now the FAA and the company are enforcing the NO DEVIATION rule. No problem, but expect more delays and more deferrals.
As for the issue that AA mechanics have never been required to sign off a maintenance action with the actual MM reference is true. BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN THE MAINTENACE MANUAL WAS NOT FOLLOWED!!!!

It only meant we weren't required to put the MM reference chapter and verse in the sign off.. that's all.

Now, when we here about the recent "enforcement" of strictly following the MM and AD VERBATIM, non mechanics accuse us of having not followed procedure before this.

What this actually means and flight crews will especially understand, is those last minute gate calls of inop coffeemakers, tray tables, seat reclines, cabin lighting, exterior lights will cause a bulk of the delays and will increase the MEL count drastically.

Let's face it, a "RE-SEAT" of a coffeemaker to stop a leak is a "LEEWAY" afforded the mechanic. But not anymore.


So with respect to "VERBATIM".........


Have a Happy New Year.........YOU MUST HAVE A HAPPY NEW YEAR....NO DEVIATION.......DO YOU UNDERSTAND????.....IF YOU DON'T HAVE A HAPPY NEW YEAR, YOUR LICENSES WILL BE SUSPENDED.....

 

[DalMD88]

I agree with a lot that has been said here. This isn't just an issue at AA. We are going through the same issues at DL. One thing I have to add is the need to have these AD's written better the first time. I know we get these E.O.s and AD's from engineering that make no sence. We get either no diagrams or a gobbled up mess of lines showing what engineering wants. So we spend a couple of hours on the phone with a midnight engineer in ATL trying to decipher the paperwork.

Usually this phone conference comes up with a solution to our question. Sometimes it leads to a stop all work while we write a revison. Other times it leads to a faxed Variation Auth for that airplane. Because of all this we all cringe when a new operation comes out. Will I be the next guy taken to the carpet for something like wire wrap spacing being off by 1/16 th?

 

[Hopeful]

I agree with a lot that has been said here. This isn't just an issue at AA. We are going through the same issues at DL. One thing I have to add is the need to have these AD's written better the first time. I know we get these E.O.s and AD's from engineering that make no sence. We get either no diagrams or a gobbled up mess of lines showing what engineering wants. So we spend a couple of hours on the phone with a midnight engineer in ATL trying to decipher the paperwork.

Usually this phone conference comes up with a solution to our question. Sometimes it leads to a stop all work while we write a revison. Other times it leads to a faxed Variation Auth for that airplane. Because of all this we all cringe when a new operation comes out. Will I be the next guy taken to the carpet for something like wire wrap spacing being off by 1/16 th?

This is all boiling down to much more accountability on the part of the mechanic. More and more pressure and responsibility but no increase in compensation.

 

[KCKKen]

I agree with a lot that has been said here. This isn't just an issue at AA. We are going through the same issues at DL. One thing I have to add is the need to have these AD's written better the first time.

BINGO!

The real problem is you have a bunch of (text excised :angry so-called "engineers" that have never turned a tap telling people with decades of maintenance experience how to do their job, I call it the "paper airplane versus the aluminum and steel airplane" scenario. I frankly don't care what your paper tells you is "correct"; I'm looking at a real, live flying machine and here's what I see.

Using our MD-80 fiasco as a reference, anyone know why we had to even tie the bundle as much in the first place? Because no one was intelligent enough to realize that if you took the hydraulic pump connector apart (which was usually done to shorten the wires and install the correct plug backshell) you could have just installed the sleeving WITHOUT CUTTING THE THING LENGTHWISE and the wiring would have been 1) protected, and 2) less prone to opening up when a tie broke. But you get what we have now -- rejoyce and be happy.

Just last week I had to repair a misrouted wire bundle on a mod we're doing. Why? Because the mechanic that installed it had a drawing (paper airplane) that showed 5 parallel wire bundles in this area when the aircraft (real airplane) had only 3 in that area. IF the so-called "engineer" would have given more references as to the exact bundle (other wire numbers we could find in it) and made them far more prominent in the drawing it would have been done right the first time.

While the mechanic gets his (text excised :blink cut off because he screwed up doing something some "engineer" told him to do, the "engineer" probably doesn't even know it was a problem -- or even cares.

 

[The Goose]

BINGO!

The real problem is you have a bunch of (text excised :angry so-called "engineers" that have never turned a tap telling people with decades of maintenance experience how to do their job, I call it the "paper airplane versus the aluminum and steel airplane" scenario. I frankly don't care what your paper tells you is "correct"; I'm looking at a real, live flying machine and here's what I see.

Using our MD-80 fiasco as a reference, anyone know why we had to even tie the bundle as much in the first place? Because no one was intelligent enough to realize that if you took the hydraulic pump connector apart (which was usually done to shorten the wires and install the correct plug backshell) you could have just installed the sleeving WITHOUT CUTTING THE THING LENGTHWISE and the wiring would have been 1) protected, and 2) less prone to opening up when a tie broke. But you get what we have now -- rejoyce and be happy.

Just last week I had to repair a misrouted wire bundle on a mod we're doing. Why? Because the mechanic that installed it had a drawing (paper airplane) that showed 5 parallel wire bundles in this area when the aircraft (real airplane) had only 3 in that area. IF the so-called "engineer" would have given more references as to the exact bundle (other wire numbers we could find in it) and made them far more prominent in the drawing it would have been done right the first time.

While the mechanic gets his (text excised :blink cut off because he screwed up doing something some "engineer" told him to do, the "engineer" probably doesn't even know it was a problem -- or even cares.

I've had to do math for far too many designers of engines in my time to have any belief they are competent, regardless of what piece of paper they sucked their way into possession of.

It's bad when competence is not a qualification for any engineering position; the only two considerations being the third party's opinion (degree) that one is willing to play the game and the ability to generate enough negative pressure to suck-start a Harley Davidson.

I've got a thermometer with many degrees and it's dumber than mud.

For a laugh about engineers:

http://www.sacbusiness.org/cs/hesterj/Bewa...0Abibarshim.htm