The best thing about the helicopter industry...

[cap]

Question to all:

 

During an audit or inspection from MOT (Business & Commercial) has anyone experienced am Inspector climbing in the aircraft, turning on the "Master' and commenting on the accuracy of the various instruments? How say you on this, be it within their 'right to do so' or not? Comments from CTD greatly appreciated. From experience, I note that the Engineering fraternity gets greatly more upset about this than their pilot bretheren. Engineers feel that they or a pilot should be present and that they or the pilot should be activating any switches that the Inspector might require. I'm curious as to why engineers would feel this way and not most of the pilots also. How say you on this item also?

[Guest Bullet Remington]

Cap:

 

I've had that happen only once. But I was there when it happened. My question to the Inspector that did this , "What instruments is it that you are checking?" On the machines that I've worked on, there has been but a limited number of electrically operated instruments, the DG comes to mind. So, what exactly is the purpose in turning on the master, without firing up the machine? It serves no purpose other than to satisfy the curiosity of the inspector.

 

Some inspectors that I have and am familiar with have never worked on Fling Wing. I can probably list about 8. Unless they maintain currency, as a line pilot, with the company, I really don't want anybody playing with the switches on my machine. Heck, I don't even want the drivers playing with them! (Dang can't get the smilies working)

 

Further, you have probably noted, that with respect to AWDs, regardless of the applicability (Ops side or maint side) they are all the Engineer's responsibility. ( Unless TC has embodied a change to the CARs that I'm not aware of.) Therefore, if they want to play with my machine, then I wish to be present.

 

Having stated that, my experience has been that the MMI inspectors are more likely to play around with the machine than the Ops side. Personally, I have never experienced any grief from the Ops side of TC.

 

Sure wish I could say the same about the Maint end.

 

BR

[Guest Bullet Remington]

OT:

 

Good post!

 

To address your points: I believe I was diplomatic. I had listed  the snags, validated them with the CArs reference, and photos. I also advised the pilot that I was contacting the Regional Office and was advising him the aircraft was not airworthy.

 

As for a commercial machine, personally I find that most commercial machines that I have been in contact with, both workwise, and on the ramp, are maintained fairly well. Were I to actually come up a commercial machine that had airworthiness snags on it, AND I was aware of it, the only way my actions would differ is that I would ensure the driver called the company.  That is, I would inform, and point out to the driver the item in question. I would then recommend that he notify his company. If he refused I'd call them. If they told me to perform self gratification on myself, then I would call TC. It's called "due diligence".

 

If I am aware that there is an airworthiness issue and I do nothing about it, I'm as guilty of a crime as the person who let it go. I don't think I could sleep very well at nite if I was aware of an airworthiness issue, did nothing about it and a machine was lost...or worst.

 

Lookit, guys, Transport has set the parameters of airworthiness. I do believe that as such, they have as much responsibility as the rest of the industry to maintain that. I believe they should be the example that we all should emulate.

 

In reality it is not (Not at this time anyway,but they are trying), it is a do as I say, not as I do. Their aircraft should be used as an example to the industry of what is expected.

 

If it isn't then I shall point it out to them. Of course, I shall be diplomatic about it. I would want people to be that way with me, why should I not grant them the same priviledge?

 

As for your question about discussing a commercial operator's situation publicly., to be honest with you, there is an issue of liability, slander, etc, etc. If you are asking me if I would inform the industry, generally, of the situation. Well, that would depend upon several issues. If the operator's airworthiness issue/s were recurring, and they were not doing anything about it, ceratinly! I have too many friends that make their livin flogging these bunches of metal fatiques around. I have a strong disdain for injuries that can easily be prevented. I have seen and experienced the devastation on families and myself.

 

I don't want to go through it again. Whether I know the individual personally or not. I would rather stand face to face and dicker a point with him/her, than to stand in line giving the family my condolences.

 

Laws are NOT made to be broken, they are to be adhered to, by both us (The Industry) and Transport as well.

 

Should people be offended by my stance, that is really too bad (Not being sarcastic here). It really is. My whole interest in the business is maintaining it and watching (seeing??) it grow.

 

Sitting back and waiting for it to happen will not help it. If we continue to lose machines (or worse) we are not helping the business. We are contributing to its demise. However, if we all accept responsibility for the safety of this business, and everybody involved in it,  we can look forward to its increased success.

 

 

But, hey, then again, ..... Maybe its just me!

(Can't get those danged similies to work!!!)

[Over-Talk]

Bullet, as per your old self, very well said.

(don't worry about hiding behind those dang smilies, your words are doing fine without them).

Yours, OT

[Guest Bullet Remington]

O.T:

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Keep posting, t'is nice to see new people and to hear their opinions.

 

Be careful out there!

 

BR is Eastbound, will be checking in from time to time, probably in a week or so.

 

Everybody feel free to agree to disagree. But lets all stay alive!

[CTD]

Hmmm. It looks to me, upon a more careful reading of earlier posts, that the Rt. Hon. Downwash may have thought that Bullet R was a TC inspector. Is that the case, Mr. Wash? That may explain some of the acrimony.

Cap - Re: Your question on TC inspectors

The Delegation of Authority gives the inspector certain rights (enter, inspect, seize, etc), depending on the group he/she works for. Legal right notwithstanding, I would NEVER so much as open a door on an aircraft without the permission of the person responsible for it - out of airmanship and courtesy.

Example: Yesterday, I visited a guy who lives up the road from me who just bought a small piston-engine machine with his partner. They are both new pilots, and very excited about their new toy. I went and introduced myself, offered them any help I could, and left my numbers so they could contact me if they needed anything. I wanted to use the a/c floor as a table to write some info on a sheet of paper, and asked if I could open the door before touching it. Bottom line, don't touch somebody else's aircraft without their permission.

 

Having said that, if I felt there was a violation that could result in an accident, and nobody was around, I'd open any bloody door I deemed necessary.

As OverTalk said, we all 'ramp' everyone else's aircraft to some degree. I don't have a problem with pointing out a discrepancy to anyone, but one has to do so with a certain degree of 'charm'

[downwash]

BR

 

Abject apologies! NOT being acquainted with you (as far as I know) I read your post as coming from a TC Inspector (upon rereading, I see a clue or two that I should have picked up on). From that perspective, I trust you will see where I was coming from.

[407 Driver]

Downwash, you're back from holidays !

Your wrenches treated me like staff on the Syncline Fire yesterday. Thanks ! We have a Short-Ranger of yours in our hangar down here, so we're trying to repay that favor....

 

It's how the industry works

[412driver]

407, gave one of your comrades a lift out of a field the other day. he had one of those funny lights one doesn't like seeing..........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest Bullet Remington]

DeeDuba:

 

Not necessary to apologize, Sir. I acepted and understood you statement and stance, after re-reading my own original post.

 

But thanks, I appreciate your opinons and posts. Please continue being a frank as possible.

 

BR's in Oh! Ta wooo! Be in Trois Rivers tomorrow.

 

Be safe all!!