Tech Forum

July 6, 2007

Alaska’s 1930s Bush Pilots

Great little article, I was very honored to see my grandfather George “Ed” Young mentioned in it. Thank you.
– Jon Young

Outsourcing

I read your May editorial with great interest and found it ironic this appeared in the same issue as the outstanding drug testing article by Steve Prentice. One big part of the outsourcing problem is the foreign repair stations are exempt from the cost of administering random drug testing programs. If, as you state, there is an equivalent level of safety in using the foreign companies, why in the world is our own government requiring domestic CRSs to go through the expense of these programs, putting us at an economic disadvantage? If the safety level is the same, so should the regulations. DOT should not impose additional burdens on domestic operators simply because they can. That wrong-headed reasoning should be acted upon by Congress before we’re all out of work.

Bill O’Brien once told me that every FAA regulation is written in blood. I can only hope that we don’t see another catastrophic accident before the DOT cleans up this blatantly anti-American economic and safety mess the drug testing exemption has caused. Every mechanic who is out of work due to foreign outsourcing has, in part, our own Departments of State and Transportation to thank for it. Only in America.
– Howard J. Fuller, A&P, IA, CFIH, Fallon, NV

Great article on maintenance outsourcing

As a member of the Professional Airways Systems Specialists (PASS), we continue to address the “tombstone mentality and culture” the FAA continues to support. The levels of the inspector workforce continue to dwindle at an alarming rate, with little adjustments to the hiring ratios needed to ensure the National Airways System is adequately and properly inspected for regulatory and safety compliance; either located here in the United States or overseas.

We are all aware of the current accident rates for the large air carriers; the lowest in history ... Why?

Because there were sufficient aviation safety inspectors out in the field doing what they were trained and paid to do: inspect, investigate, and enforce.

Now, these inspectors are behind computers inputting and analyzing data and performing administrative duties while the oversight of outsourced aircraft maintenance is becoming self-regulated and unchecked.

And what about the General Aviation Accident Rate?

Well, it’s the same old issues: the almighty dollar, and the crash site, just another life ...
– Michael C. Gonzales, PASS

Maintenance outsourcing

I enjoyed reading your viewpoint on outsourcing maintenance. I’m currently a line maintenance manager for a Part 145 operator. We do on-call maintenance for various airlines.

While I do agree that outsourcing means less jobs for mechanics with airlines, it has also created jobs on the outsourcing side. Although, the competition is so fierce it has swallowed up the airlines at each city, it affects the wages offered. The biggest problem I see is this: when an A&P signs off an airline logbook corrective action he must use his license number. The Part 145 operator has no liabilities, it appears all they’re doing is providing a paycheck.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but in a foreign country, for example Mexico, an airline has a gate call. A Mexican licensed mechanic shows up, puts the item on MEL and when he signs the logbook he writes the repair station number, not his license number. Why? We do not honor his license in America.

Now the repair station has the liability, but in the United States we do not follow the same practices.

I’ve asked two different FAA examiners assigned to Southwest and Alaska and they cannot explain why that it is that way. While the airlines are saving the expense of manning outstations, the repair stations are saving on training by not training. The training is provided by the airlines and, believe it or not, it is only logbook policies and procedures. We have gone from having a FAM class for that type aircraft to a paperwork technician. Know how to MEL it and bye-bye aircraft! Times have changed for the better? I don’t think so!
– Fabio Natal

Repairs in the Air

The “Repairs in the Air” article is excellent and I thank both you and my friend “Gia” Koontz, for doing justice to the efforts of mechanic Jerry Dobias.

Family members tell me they are delighted with the story.

Personal comment ... it was a disappointment that the picture of the Glenn Martin Bomber (unknown credit) was an MB-2, not the GMB/MB-1 which flew the rim flight. It’s one of those odd and unexplainable things, that the two airplanes are frequently mis-identified. The Air Force can’t seem to get it right. On page 33 of a book titled “A History of the United States Air Force,” prepared by the editors of USAF Historical Division and Air Power Magazine, there is a picture of MB-1 but the caption reads “The Martin MB-2 bomber came along too late for the war”.

For purposes of quick and distinctive identification: there were four wheels on the landing gear of MB-1. MB-2 had only two wheels.
– Miriam Seymour