New AT at Brize

[duffman]

By worst case scenario, I meant worst case, not that somebody had forgotten their duty frees. I am talking about If large amounts of British troops are about to die because a Civvy company won't let us use airframes painted in our colours, flown by our pilots and based at our units, I am pretty sure they will be told it will be sorted afterwards and the aircraft will fly.

That was my thought as well, if a jet is really needed for afghan it will go.

 

[I Look Like Kevin Costner]

However, I suppose that if the sh1t really hit the fan i.e world war 3 and the RAF commandeered the frames, then the RAF could do what it wants with them.


TW

Yeph, like what happened to half the merchant fleet during the Falklands war. If these airframes are required for such an event, then a governmnt will pull the strings to do so. They wouldn't be flying other charters straght afterwards though. The thread really is talking about the engineering differences between a civvy PART 145 and RAF proceedures. Brize and Lyneham boys don't apply ETOPS proceedures to their current kites (and I don't know how the AT engineering regs cover simaltanious engine boroscopes etc), but an A330 will have to.. That means that the same bloke cannot do the same checks on both engines as a one'r between sectors.

 

[Talk Wrench]

Yeph, like what happened to half the merchant fleet during the Falklands war. If these airframes are required for such an event, then a governmnt will pull the strings to do so. They wouldn't be flying other charters straght afterwards though. The thread really is talking about the engineering differences between a civvy PART 145 and RAF proceedures. Brize and Lyneham boys don't apply ETOPS proceedures to their current kites (and I don't know how the AT engineering regs cover simaltanious engine boroscopes etc), but an A330 will have to.. That means that the same bloke cannot do the same checks on both engines as a one'r between sectors.

I missed the thrust of Weebls post, but my response was valid nevertheless.

Lyneham and Brize don't apply ETOPS because they have no need to, especially when all the kites have got more than 2 engines. (as well as not being on the civvy register) You are spot on with A330 though, it's definitely ETOPS.


For those who are interested, ETOPS is described in CAP513. http://www.britflight.com/wingfiles/navigation/cap513.pdf

TW

 

[I Look Like Kevin Costner]

Lyneham and Brize don't apply ETOPS because they have no need to, especially when all the kites have got more than 2 engines. (as well as not being on the civvy register) You are spot on with A330 though, it's definitely ETOPS.

TW

Having never worked on RAF AT, I was mentioning the point about the changes that ETOPS would have in regards to planning of maintenance at the coal face. I don't know if the AT regulations allow somebody to do checks and maintenance on all three engines of a Tristar of the four of a VC10/Herc. Wobbly or somebody else might suggest what is the case if it is prudent on this forum to do so. I couldn't say if CDCCL is applied to RAF AT either (although it is becoming more of a buzz word I believe in the RAF), however with the A330, it will also apply.

 

[Rigga]

I don't really want to start treading on toes and making arguements for the sake, but you really think if corners were cut as now on ops the caa would effectivly ground the RAF's AT? They could but I really can't see it. I guess I just have this thought of a/c grounded at brize with cargo/pax needing to go to afghan.

How bad and for how long do civvy companies have to be for the caa to ground them? Does it happen all the time?

One thing to remember- FSTA will NOT be the "RAFs" AT.

During the recent 2000's El-Al was banned from UK Skies for unsafe practices - this is the airline that has all the most secure practices - and they took two years to get permission to fly here again. A new MOE had to be written for them (and I know the guy that did it)

Several major Scheduled and Charter Airlines have had their ETOPS approvals withdrawn - and you have still flown on them (I know them personally too).

The CAA don't mess about with their rules - it's either Black or White. No Grey.

..and just who are FSTA? naught but another AOC holder.

Along with some new Licences; the lads chosen to do this work WILL have to change their attitudes and trade practices, or sink the whole programme. I dont think they would return to the RAF practices after doing this for a short while.

It has been said on here that those at FS and above will be given Licences - IMO this is because the RAF Officer Corps sees them as "Badges" that Senior Ranks should have. They should see them, however, as similar to having B/F and Turnaround approvals. Not that I think they are that level of work.

Officers SHOULD NOT be involved with the day-to-day deferment of defects using MELs - Once again I think this would be a travesty of Officers grabbing NCO/SNCO work because they are slowly being sidelined - but I cant think of what else they could do all day, except interfere?

 

[Dirty Harry]

Just to elaborate on a couple of the points Rigga has made, if you want to know what the authorities do when an operator fails to follow strict procedures and conform to requirements have a look HERE. There is more to the story than meets the eye and an accumulation of factors including shoddy maintenance practices resulted in the airline having it's ETOPS approval pulled. Bearing in mind many airlines rely on flights under ETOPS conditions to generate revenue, if that ability to make money is taken away they do not stay in business very long.

I’m still struggling to get my head around the plans to give FS licenses. Why? FSTA isn’t going to be operated like your typical RAF set-up with each and every rank having a say in the way things are run. I cannot imagine for one minute some crusty old FS donning a pair of overalls to change a liquid level sensor on an A330 bog tank (trust me it’s the most unpleasant of jobs) can you? Their argument that they will need a licence for reds and greens just doesn’t wash either, the Licensed Engineer takes care of that. I’m in agreement with Rigga and it would seem that the senior ranks (including officers) obviously don’t like the fact that there roles will now become redundant with the arrival of the LAE in the military.

As for officers not being involved in the day to day deferment of defects etc, I couldn't agree more. In fact the same goes for any other rank who is unqualified. You see, in the real world the people who actually run the show and make all the crucial airworthiness decisions actually know what they are talking about.

It looks like Airtanker are already on the lookout for a number of key personnel, have a look HERE. Chances are the shift leaders are going to be experienced licensed guys rated on type too. There are some interesting times ahead and there will need to be some big changes if the project is going to work

 

[duffman]

One thing to remember- FSTA will NOT be the "RAFs" AT.


It has been said on here that those at FS and above will be given Licences - IMO this is because the RAF Officer Corps sees them as "Badges" that Senior Ranks should have. They should see them, however, as similar to having B/F and Turnaround approvals. Not that I think they are that level of work.

Technically you are right, however the pax and AAR versions will be on permanent lease to us, so I meant they were ours in the sense that no one else will be using them.

The licences will start at cpl and finish and fs. WO and officers aren't in the plan to gain them. The fairly wide 'rank' range, compared with civvy street is to deal with the wider range of diversions and possibly a better understanding of the their job with ref to SJAR.

 

[I Look Like Kevin Costner]

Technically you are right, however the pax and AAR versions will be on permanent lease to us, so I meant they were ours in the sense that no one else will be using them.

The licences will start at cpl and finish and fs. WO and officers aren't in the plan to gain them. The fairly wide 'rank' range, compared with civvy street is to deal with the wider range of diversions and possibly a better understanding of the their job with ref to SJAR.

Officers will only be in the loop for the service management function I would assume. The JAP will be irrelevent in regards to the engineering of these aircraft as the MOE for FSTA will be the Bible for maintenance opperations. Some MRO's have a fairly similar structure of grades to the RAF if you take a bay crew chief as C/T rank. The production manager will propably be licenced as well.. However it is worth remembering that a LAE only retains his rating by being employed working on that type for a percentage of set time frame. If he doesn't keep currency hands on, then that rating / approval will end up being pulled. No rating = NO CERTIFYING..

 

[Throatarea]

Ladies and gents some of you know me, like DH, so I am talking from some auth on the subject, but what I do not understand from the FSTA and the little waddo project is how the JAP and EASA fit together. Rank has no bearing on certifying privalages. Cobham, who are a key player in the tanker project, comply with pt145, pt147 and ptM etc, and have nothing at all to do with JAP. It is all to do with Pt66. Some of the guys in that company are licenced are in there 20s and are switched on cookies and will not entertain dicussion with RAF FS/WO/SENGO when it come to engeneering issues. It does not work out.

They will need to review the TORs of anybody who is in the service with a Pt66 licence because it is about knowledge ability, not rank.
DT_Xtremez_32:

 

[Weebl]

how the JAP and EASA fit together.

They don't.

The JAP will have bearing on how FSTA is to operate, it will operate as though it were a Civvy aircraft (because it is)

 

[Rigga]

Well said Weebl.

An MOE was mentioned earlier - this fleet should be operating from a CAME that includes the Part 145 procedures.

Examples of various MOEs and CAMEs are freely available on the CAA website if you want to see what sort of things they contain:
www.caa.co.uk/camo

...I think that should get you there. Bear in mind that these MOEs and CAMEs are the "JAP" for all EASA Commercial Air Transport Operators.

 

[Dirty Harry]

AirTanker

AirTanker

Looks like AirTanker are starting to ramp up recruitment for the engineering functions at Brize.

AirTanker Jobs

It will be interesting to see the packages on offer, particularly as the licensed guys will need to sign up as sponsored reservists.

 

[Tashy_Man]

Looks like AirTanker are starting to ramp up recruitment for the engineering functions at Brize.

AirTanker Jobs

It will be interesting to see the packages on offer, particularly as the licensed guys will need to sign up as sponsored reservists.

Agreed....just took a look :

What will I need to do?

As well as the potential to be deployed on operations, when working as a Sponsored Reservist you will be required to:

• wear military uniform
• be under military command
• be subject to the Service Discipline Act
• undertake additional duties (e.g. Guard)

I think the packages these guys get should be substantial !!

 

[metimmee]

Are the RAF technicians in the training system yet? I presume this is at Barry College?

 

[mightyhunter]

Not as far as I know. I wish "they" would release the application dates.

 

[Sospan]

Have they announced how the Sqn manning structure will be set out?

 

[metimmee]

Not as far as I know. I wish "they" would release the application dates.

Crikey, whats the ISD? they need to get a move on since they'll have to do the course and then get the required experience somewhere.