Paperwork, Arrrrrrgh

[Max Reheat]

If I did a quick straw poll of the guys on my Sqn I reckon I could almost guarantee that none of them have heard of putting the AL state on job cards, MP's yes because theres a block to stick it in.

And as I've never looked for an AL state on a normal job guide I wouldn't know if its there let alone hard to find. Perhaps somebody in Herc world could enlighten me.

What happens to all these procedures when/if we go to electronic job cards? Will there be boxes to click for extra info or do we just forget about it?

And I have no idea what you're on about when you say 145. Who/what are they?

 

[Ex-Splitter and Proud]

And I have no idea what you're on about when you say 145. Who/what are they?

Broadly speaking... (I can't be #### to dig too deep right now)

EASA Part 145 is the Implementing Regulation issued by EASA for the aircraft maintenance sector (Maintenance Organisation Approval) - in the civil world. It establishes the requirements to be met by an organisation to qualify for the issue or continuation of an approval for the maintenance of aircraft and components.


Mil Part 145 is the MoD equivalent for military aircraft operated in a MAOS environment (MAOS = Maintenance Approved Organization Scheme). This enables the MoD to assess the competency of organisations wishing to provide continuing airworthiness support services for military registered aircraft.

Hope that helps...DT_Xtremez_35:

 

[Max Reheat]

That clears that up. Every day's a school day

 

[are u looking at me]

It's a pity that even the Eng Pol people cannot even follow their own instructions in the JAP para quoted. Figure 2 doen't have an amendment state for the AP reference. If even the watchmen cannot achieve perfection on an example, what chance do the mere mortals who have to carry out umpteen tasks and record them all in a normal working day have?

This is a case of trying to shut the door after horse has bolted. All this catch up is fine but where is all the money required to re-establish the build standard for each aircraft type. Haddon-Cave wasn't about standards and practices on the shop floor indeed he praised the enginnering personnel in his report.

The problems in ensuring airworthiness in the Military goes a lot deeper than recording the AL state of an MP. There are problems with legacy platforms, fleets within fleets, failure to amend publications due to cost constraints the list of failures of the hierarchy is long and not very distinguished. Playing catch up with paperwork is all very well and protects the individual but will not address the problems within DE&S that HC highlighted. Large amounts of money and large amounts of manpower are required which if Liam Fox has his way will not be forthcoming anytime soon.

If this is so important then the only correct way to achieve a starting point is to carry out an audit of every airframe to baseline it and the associated components. There should be traceability of modifications in equipment and their associated MPs that can be traced through to the enduser and all this should be available readily along with modifications to the appropriate TE etc. Are we seriously to accept that this is currently the case?

 

[Ex-Splitter and Proud]

That clears that up. Every day's a school day

Tell me about it!


Living, learning, learning, living....

Cap'n Slog would be proud of us (TB...... stfu before you start!)

 

[Ex-Splitter and Proud]

Haddon-Cave wasn't about standards and practices on the shop floor indeed he praised the enginnering personnel in his report.

Yes and No to that one, are u. You're quite right that Haddon-Cave saved his best ballbreakers for DE&S, BAESystems and QinetiQ, but if you look deeper there's a lot of comment regarding engineering practises wrt damaged Refrasil muffs, failure to concess damage, a lack of awareness of the dangers associated, etc....

The problems in ensuring airworthiness in the Military goes a lot deeper than recording the AL state of an MP. There are problems with legacy platforms, fleets within fleets, failure to amend publications due to cost constraints the list of failures of the hierarchy is long and not very distinguished. Playing catch up with paperwork is all very well and protects the individual but will not address the problems within DE&S that HC highlighted. Large amounts of money and large amounts of manpower are required which if Liam Fox has his way will not be forthcoming anytime soon.

Spoken like a Fleet Manager! (That's no criticism, by the way!)

You're dead right - if they want this done right, they've got to recognise there's a cost (a big one). But, and it's a BIG but, you can't just work from the top down, you have to work from the bottom up too.

This is a case of trying to shut the door after horse has bolted.

Not sure I can completely agree with you there, many of the changes mentioned above in this thread (and others) aren't new, they just haven't been followed through, maintained and improved. In that sense, QA/CI hasn't worked as it ought; the culture hasn't changed - possibly due to programme pressures. Hearts and minds haven't be won over - possibly in response to the self-righteous attitude that some present, preventing attitudes and behaviours from changing voluntarily.

 

[MrMasher]

And for Mr Mashers benefit I'm a Sgt

Then you should be well aware of JAP100A-01 ch 4.3.2. Do you also hold 3rd signature?

I have known of this AP referencing for a few years. It's going to cover your back so it's worth taking a bit of time to get it right.
As I was taught at Halton on my mechs course, the job hasn't been done correctly unless you've done the paperwork correctly.

I reject paperwork for a living but I do it to make sure people have covered their backs and don't get screwed over later.

 

[Mickwreay]

Wow,

Glad I was always toooooooooo peed to worry about all this!!!

You need to get back on Max-Reheat Head

 

[Max Reheat]

Then you should be well aware of JAP100A-01 ch 4.3.2. Do you also hold 3rd signature?

I have known of this AP referencing for a few years. It's going to cover your back so it's worth taking a bit of time to get it right.
As I was taught at Halton on my mechs course, the job hasn't been done correctly unless you've done the paperwork correctly.

I reject paperwork for a living but I do it to make sure people have covered their backs and don't get screwed over later.

What the hell is a 3rd signature!!! And no I'm not aware of JAP page blah blah. I only refer to it when I'm unsure of what I'm doing and look at what I need to look at.

You reject paperwork for a living so you are going to know references, I do engineering for a living and do exactly what I was taught to do and adapt my way of doing paperwork when our docs cell informs us of changes. You think I'm bad for not knowing your references, well I'm one of the most thorough people I know when it comes to paperwork so you'd be shocked at some of the crap that I see from Cpl to Chf Tech

Hey Mick, thought you'd rear your ugly head at some point

 

[enginesuck]

Third sig is the job card coardinator.

 

[Max Reheat]

Really? Didn't know it had a name, thought it was just another JAP auth. Then yes I do have 3rd sig.

 

[bluetonic]

Sorry Max but this has been (should've been) standard practice for a while, some squadrons are a bit slow to catch on, i guess the ones you've worked on...?

 

[Max Reheat]

Sorry Max but this has been (should've been) standard practice for a while, some squadrons are a bit slow to catch on, i guess the ones you've worked on...?

Having done 3 camps and 2 tours in MPA in the last 4 years I'm quite astounded at the different working practices between each one. Everywhere seems to do things differently and I had to change my way of thinking each time, but like I said none of them have implemented AL states on normal 707Bs, unless on a PPMWO referring to an MP

 

[Little Tronk]

No man is at all hours wise, so some people who read the JAP for fun need to get off their high horses and realise Sh*t happens. I consider myself a bit of a dab hand at paperwork AND the responsibilities of 1st, 2nd and 3rd sig; the requirment to include 'IAW' but have never heard of amendmant state.

I am now aware of it so will confirm the requirement (It is worth noting that the title of Chapter in question is GUIDANCE FOR....... and that the requirment is only shown in figures not text).

 

[propersplitbrainme]

Everywhere seems to do things differently and I had to change my way of thinking each time.....

Its incredible isn't it? At Lyneham there were two line squadrons sat within 50 yards of one another and each had its own operating nuances and differences. The way the F700s were controlled was different, even the colloquial names used for certain tasks were different.

 

[bluetonic]

Having done 3 camps and 2 tours in MPA in the last 4 years I'm quite astounded at the different working practices between each one. Everywhere seems to do things differently and I had to change my way of thinking each time, but like I said none of them have implemented AL states on normal 707Bs, unless on a PPMWO referring to an MP

I guess the procedure could depend a little on the standards of the relevant 'sick bay', sorry 'Doc's cell' of the sqn.

 

[bluetonic]

so some people who read the JAP for fun need to get off their high horses and realise Sh*t happens.

-said the condemned airman at the board of enquiry..DT_Xtremez_42:

 

[MrMasher]

The biggest issue is interpretation of the JAP. It can be read in different ways and different sections and squadrons have different ideas as to what it means.

Another issue is lax management of standards. Regardless of when or how the JAP changes someone should be passing the info on. How can you keep up to standard if you don't know?

Another issue is ignorance. Purposeful or just blissfully unaware.

I too am an engineer but I have learnt a hell of a lot in this post and am quite keen to pass it on so that others know.

I find it incredible though Max that your are unaware of JAP100a-01 ch 4.3.2. You honestly should have a look. It's what will catch you out if you're unlucky.

 

[Little Tronk]

-said the condemned airman at the board of enquiry..DT_Xtremez_42:

Read in context! To many people on here are very self righteous (sp), I say again, no man is at all hours wise! As Max has stated on numerous occasions, as nearly all APs are DAPs, the date when signed will give any board the ability to back track and ascertain amendment state, so the 'airman should not be condemened at the board of enquiry' for that ommission (Assuming of course he followed the procedure fully!!!)

 

[Max Reheat]

People in docs positions should be setting the standards and passing on the information to the engineers, like you say its your subject of expertise. We have enough to do without referring to the JAP for everything we do and not just paperwork is the issue. JPA is another minefield where its not necessarily ignorance but knowing where to look and find things. Even with the best will in the world we aren't all experts in other peoples fields.

And once again to my original point, paperwork today has got beyond ridiculous.