serious question

[Talk Wrench]

I accept the important job that all TG1 & 2 do with regard to aircraft, however, all their work is oversigned. An SAC stacker working in F&L undertakes quality control on fuel, the servicibility of this fuel is not checked by his/her supervisor or oversigned but is still a vital part of flight safety.

That's a very naive view RSB, but you are absolutely correct that fuel checking is an essential link in the Flight safety chain.
It doesn't stop there though, fuel checks are performed on the aircraft as well.

As for oversigs, I think you have rather missed the point.


TW

 

[dantura]

It doesn't stop there though, fuel checks are performed on the aircraft as well.

Can I ask what checks you do 'on the aircraft'?

D

 

[chiefy]

Stop. Go no further. Rethink what you have said.

Awwwww! Leave him be, ignorance is bliss..... DT_Xtremez_31:

 

[Mickwreay]

Stop. Go no further. Rethink what you have said.

I cast my mind back to the mid 90s when working on 1310 Flight at Divulje Barracks in Croatia. We had a few aircraft that had failed water sediment checks; we racked our brains then checked & re-checked the bowsers, fuel supply etc. A few days later I spotted a supplier walking back to his cabin carrying a sample of fuel for water sediment checks, fine you might say but it was F#CKIN RAINING. Tw*t had caused all sorts of problems & lost sorties.

Albert sorry mate this was in reply to the guy you quoted! It's been a long sad day watching football (if you can call Newcastle a football team that is)
Few too many!

 

[Talk Wrench]

Can I ask what checks you do 'on the aircraft'?

D

Water and sedimentation checks are performed on a regular basis. As well as fuel sampling for lab checks.

TW

 

[dantura]

Water and sedimentation checks are performed on a regular basis. As well as fuel sampling for lab checks.

TW

Ahh yes, very true...but not immediately before the A/C takes off, which is what I think RSB is getting at. This is done by the stacker issuing the fuel.

Also, the stacker does FSII, conductivity, full QA incl. water and sediment and can also do a full CLA if required and Q'd.

Not many other trades, except the techies on the ground, actually realise this and think that it's just squirted in by some random MTD who, in turn, magically produce the fuel in a bowser. There's a long, long line of procedures and QA before even reaches an A/C and the majority of fuel dispensing is done by stackers.

Incidentally, when an A/C goes down, one of the first things that is done is the quarantining of all the fuel and sources that have been in the chain to that particular A/C.... we too, sh1t ourselves when it happens and can also be held culpable and tech charged if found negligent.

D

 

[Mickwreay]

Ahh yes, very true...but not immediately before the A/C takes off, which is what I think RSB is getting at. This is done by the stacker issuing the fuel.

Also, the stacker does FSII, conductivity, full QA incl. water and sediment and can also do a full CLA if required and Q'd.

Not many other trades, except the techies on the ground, actually realise this and think that it's just squirted in by some random MTD who, in turn, magically produce the fuel in a bowser. There's a long, long line of procedures and QA before even reaches an A/C and the majority of fuel dispensing is done by stackers.

Incidentally, when an A/C goes down, one of the first things that is done is the quarantining of all the fuel and sources that have been in the chain to that particular A/C.... we too, sh1t ourselves when it happens and can also be held culpable and tech charged if found negligent.

D

I cast my mind back to the mid 90s when working on 1310 Flight at Divulje Barracks in Croatia. We had a few aircraft that had failed water sediment checks; we racked our brains then checked & re-checked the bowsers, fuel supply etc. A few days later I spotted a supplier walking back to his cabin carrying a sample of fuel for water sediment checks, fine you might say but it was F#CKIN RAINING. Tw*t had caused all sorts of problems & lost sorties.

 

[I Look Like Kevin Costner]

Last year before Christmas. Tornado took off from Marham with two crew. Came home with one. Rear seat problem. Family with out one member.

Yes it did and a family man died because of it. The BOI hasn't finished yet as far as I know. Shineys never will take the consquences of their action with a court case or be charged with manslaughter. Their actions might indirectly cause accidents but they will never be accountable. So why pay them the same as people who are??DT_Xtremez_35:DT_Xtremez_35:

 

[dantura]

I cast my mind back to the mid 90s when working on 1310 Flight at Divulje Barracks in Croatia. We had a few aircraft that had failed water sediment checks; we racked our brains then checked & re-checked the bowsers, fuel supply etc. A few days later I spotted a supplier walking back to his cabin carrying a sample of fuel for water sediment checks, fine you might say but it was F#CKIN RAINING. Tw*t had caused all sorts of problems & lost sorties.

Why did you repeat your post?

..ok, the guy was a knob for not realising the consequences of his actions and being mid 90's on UNPROFOR/IFOR/SFOR, it must have been a guy from TSW...believe me he would have got more than a kicking for that.

Since then, specialist courses have been introduced before a stacker can work in fuels. Previously, it was just a module on the basic course.

Without getting in a slanging match, I can name numerous occasions when techies have fcuked up with regards to fuel, when they should have known better, but single actions by individuals do not, a trade make!

D

 

[Talk Wrench]

Ahh yes, very true...but not immediately before the A/C takes off, which is what I think RSB is getting at. This is done by the stacker issuing the fuel.

Also, the stacker does FSII, conductivity, full QA incl. water and sediment and can also do a full CLA if required and Q'd.

Not many other trades, except the techies on the ground, actually realise this and think that it's just squirted in by some random MTD who, in turn, magically produce the fuel in a bowser. There's a long, long line of procedures and QA before even reaches an A/C and the majority of fuel dispensing is done by stackers.


D

I am not doubting you and I am fully aware of the processes involved with fuel quality. What I am saying is that the quality issue does not stop at the stacker. If an engineer fails to check the fuel quality (a daily legal requirement) and the aircraft piles in, it's not the stacker who loses his livelihood. On my present type, fuel sampling is performed on the daily servicing and the sample has to be kept for seven days.

Fuel checks do not stop at the refuel point.

And I personally sign for having carried out the checks on the aircraft documentation.


No sig, No fly.


TW

 

[dantura]

I am not doubting you and I am fully aware of the processes involved with fuel quality. What I am saying is that the quality issue does not stop at the stacker. If an engineer fails to check the fuel quality (a daily legal requirement) and the aircraft piles in, it's not the stacker who loses his livelihood. On my present type, fuel sampling is performed on the daily servicing and the sample has to be kept for seven days.

Fuel checks do not stop at the refuel point.

And I personally sign for having carried out the checks on the aircraft documentation.


No sig, No fly.


TW

I'm a little confused here, not a difficult task believe me?
Many, many times...in fact almost every time, the last task that is carried out before an A/C takes off, is a refuel...more often than not, a captains 'top up'. (at BZN anyway). At no point is there an opportunity/window for a sumpy to draw fuel and test it, before take off.
I know you draw fuel for testing and sampling to Qinetiq regularly, but the make or break stuff, is surely that which has gone in just prior to take off? Does this mean that your are signing a 700 for fuel that you haven't had an opportunity to check...or am I missing something?

D

 

[Albert Park]

... am I missing something?

Lots - too much to list.

 

[dantura]

Lots - too much to list.

Really?
Please explain!

 

[gemarriott]

Really?
Please explain!

If I'm reading this right you lot are turningthis into a p1ssing contestDT_Xtremez_32:

We all appreciate that stackers do "some" of the fuel checks. I hope we all appreciate that techies also do "some" of the fuel checks tooDT_Xtremez_14:


now as we aren't in the fight club can please get back on topic an answer Sgt Scribblys original question which asked about "pre-flight" stuff not "pre bowser leaving MT" MT stuff

 

[Talk Wrench]

Dantura, you haven't missed anything. There are lots of things that happen on aircraft that you will be unaware of. What we have done over the last few posts is to describe the demarkation line between the guys and girls who supply the fuel and the guys and girls who take over the responsibilty at the aircraft refuel point. But we have also demonstrated that there are continuous processes going on which are designed to maintain the integrity of the fuel, be it in the bowser, or in the fuel tanks of an aircraft. At the end of the day, it's all part of the Flight Safety responsibility that we all must adhere to and abide by.


TW

 

[dantura]

If I'm reading this right you lot are turningthis into a p1ssing contestDT_Xtremez_32:

We all appreciate that stackers do "some" of the fuel checks. I hope we all appreciate that techies also do "some" of the fuel checks tooDT_Xtremez_14:


now as we aren't in the fight club can please get back on topic an answer Sgt Scribblys original question which asked about "pre-flight" stuff not "pre bowser leaving MT" MT stuff

At no point have I become personal!
I have asked pertinent questions and pointed out issues, which have evolved from the original question and still remain relevant to it.

There are some serious issues which I think need to be addressed, particularly if someone is signing for something which they cannot have tested. I may be misunderstanding the time frame, but I know I wouldn't sign anything which I have no control over or, not have the opportunity to check. If anyone is doing this, they need to address the implications of their signature and highlight it upwards?


D

 

[dantura]

Dantura, you haven't missed anything. There are lots of things that happen on aircraft that you will be unaware of. What we have done over the last few posts is to describe the demarkation line between the guys and girls who supply the fuel and the guys and girls who take over the responsibilty at the aircraft refuel point. But we have also demonstrated that there are continuous processes going on which are designed to maintain the integrity of the fuel, be it in the bowser, or in the fuel tanks of an aircraft. At the end of the day, it's all part of the Flight Safety responsibility that we all must adhere to and abide by.


TW

Sorry mate, I'm still confused? Do you mean that, after the final refuel but before every take off, fuel is drawn and tested and signed as ok on the 700?

D

 

[monobrow]

The level of responsibility afforded to young LAC/SAC techies and now low pay band AMM's is insurmountable. They are in effect one of the very last links in the flight safety chain, carrying out checks to ensure that the aircraft, aircrew and groundcrew are safe. Not to mention that they have afforded the supervisory role for see off and see in to a senior AMM / SAC(T).

Everyone has their part to play in the world of flight safety, from stopping the cnut with clippy clop shoes strolling inside the hanger to making sure MT is clear of FOD.

 

[mild mannered janitor]

as a cpl if i sign the f700 for the last servicing on a particular aircraft i am signing to say that that aircraft is fit to fly and am therefor responsible if anything goes wrong!
flight servicings include refuelling and vital pre flight checks carried out by amm's/servicing crews and as a supervisor make me directly responsibe for making sure those actions are carried out correctly.
how much more repsonsibility do you need??

 

[Webbo]

as a cpl if i sign the f700 for the last servicing on a particular aircraft i am signing to say that that aircraft is fit to fly and am therefor responsible if anything goes wrong!
flight servicings include refuelling and vital pre flight checks carried out by amm's/servicing crews and as a supervisor make me directly responsibe for making sure those actions are carried out correctly.
how much more repsonsibility do you need??

Signing the F705 NCO i/c flight servicing does not make you responsible for that servicing. You are signing to say you have checked the team have the correct auths for the servicing, supplied them with the correct tools and given them all the relevant and correct info about the aircraft i.e. location, lims, adf's etc.

Signing the F705 co-ordination block does not make you responsible for that servicing. You are signing to say you have checked the F707A for open entries, all the relevant sigs are there from the servicing team and armourers, and all tools are present and the aircraft can go flying.

I, as Line Controller am NOT responsible for the servicing that is carried out.