how and why should this be any different to a manufacturers recommendation??
be it SOV or white fleet i complete a “first parade” check of the vehicle, fluids under the bonnet, tread and air in the tyres, and lights. little more can be achieved without getting a set of tools out and to do that (correctly) it should be a professional. Why get a professional to check a SOV weekly prior to use or even service a vehicle every 3 months when the manufacturer recommends every 20k miles/2 years.
i heard about this from a friend who had one, he said his and another ATC Squadron have bought them…the VIN plate being only one character different!
I would hope it wouldn’t be every three months - that would be overkill IMO. Personally, I mostly agree with you - the manufacturer knows best, and there is such a thing as an over maintained vehicle. That said, who inspects for corrosion on structural components? Brake wear? Damaged suspension parts…
A first parade should be carried out - but what happens if something fails? Would you cancel an event the bus is booked for, for example, if a brake light has failed?
If you replace it, is it replaced correctly? Is the correct bulb used? Is the housing replaced correctly? Could you injure yourself whilst trying to replace it? For most people, it would be no issue, but some people do struggle with basic maintenance tasks like this.
Once you’ve done that, where have you recorded that it’s been done? Has it been changed recently? Could it be an indication of a wider fault with the vehicle? Who collates that information? Could you prove that your bulb wasn’t fitted incorrectly, reducing the visibility of your vehicle in that rain shower? What if your bus is rear ended by an artic? Can you prove to a court that your bulb was fitted correctly, and didn’t contribute to the deaths of your rear seat passengers?
An extreme example, perhaps, but why risk it, when you can pay a garage to take on that risk?
the MOT inspector.
this is done annually. it is done so as that is determined to be the adequate and suitable time frame to spot faults.
it would have to be a very poor vehicle in very extreme conditions that would pass an MOT one year and then be a fail to the state of “unrepairable” the next.
when i was on a unit with SOV there was a log book for the driver.
basic stuff like date, driver, location to/from and reason. this could (should) include “maintenance checked” which is the first parade check and then a box for notes.
if a bulb fails, refit a new one if competent and mark it in the book.
no one would fit a replacement bulb and then not check it.
like the MOT the first parade is only as good as the moment it is signed. a 2hour journey to the Lake District later that bulb which was ok at 0900 that morning then fails…
if due diligence was taken, checks done and faults (and repairs) recorded there is little more anyone can do.
the example offered requires MT section level of support. an SOV with a team of technicians and box load of spares.
anything more serious than a change in bulb is going to effect the chances of successfully completing the journey, be it a worn tyre or other “wear and tear” element - but wear and tear is to a degree predictable. consumable items wear out and can be readily replaced on a service or well before dangerous levels.
Taking the example of tyres the legal limit for a PCV minibus is 1mm - but for a car is 1.6mm. why wait for the tyre to get to 1mm…? get it changed at 1.6mm and it doesn’t feel out of place to a car driver, yet is preventative maintenance which is easily adopted without changing the mindset of operators
To be honest, I think that even MT sections are moving away from doing that work. I visited an MT section on last year’s camp, and because of contractual rules regarding white fleet vehicles, they couldn’t even change a wheel if it had a flat. They had to call an approved tyre fitter!
I do agree with what you say about MOTs, although I do know a few people who think a pass is a pass - no need to worry until next MOT, regardless of what advisories ( minor faults?? ) are uncovered. There would need to be some system in place to ensure that minor faults are dealt with - for example, tyres nearing the minimum tread is one of those which could be put off and put off until it’s too late.
I do think there is a need for a universal ‘First parade’ checklist, with appropriate storage instructions. Plus, there is the issue that a CFAV might not nessecarily recognise that, say, brake fluid is low, or if a cut in the tyre is safe or not.
is this then where the WSO annual check comes in?
i see the MOT you had done 9 months ago shows low tread depth …has that been changed/repaired/replaced as appropriate? can you prove it with paperwork?
I would imagine a system more like how we deal with DBS clearances would be more appropriate. Get Badger HQ to create an SOV tab on the SMS, submit a copy of the MOT to WHQ, who upload it, along with details of any defects. WSOs can then run monthly reports, chase up outstanding faults, and upload proof of work to the SMS. HQAC could get snapshots into the state of the fleet, audit at will, and prove that we are operating safely, and within legislation.
WSO checklists, with the best will in the world, are a bit wooly. I’ve not had a WSO visit for nearly two years…
i see that as the best solution - but is still more effort for the CFAV, uploading items, WSOs chasing…
and doesn’t cover the unseen elements such as faulty light bulb, wiper blades, tyres, fluid levels etc all of which can “fail” within a 6 month period…if they are recorded on a Squadron system, when will a WSO or HQAC know? and if they don’t know they wont expect a professional to replace the part…
If the system is only set up to check up on an MOT - it just becomes a nagging tool to sort advisories which any vehicle owner would correct anyway in time for the following MOT. if the vehicle isn’t roadworthy for the MOT it won’t pass. if it is safe enough to pass, it is a pass and in the case of advisories suggested fixes to avoid a fail in 12 months time.
The system wouldn’t pick up up on “everyday wear and tear” or indeed pick up on more serious faults which might occur between MOTs…
This is why the guidance for commercial operators (and P19 holders by default) is that they carry out regular safety checks every 13 weeks or less, I guess!
Our problem will be finding the right balance between safety, assurance, sustainability, and practicality. I have trouble believing any system that is acceptable to HQAC will be welcomed by any SOV owners. Like you said, more paperwork, more effort, and possibly more cost…
What has happened (apart from HQAC finding an advisor) to kick this debate off?
Has there been any serious accidents death or serious injury involving SOVs in the last 5 years? If so this would have been a ‘thing’ a long time before now as HQACs sphincter would have been twitching like mad.
As for all the ‘daily’ checks who does these for their own cars? From a personal perspective I check oil and water monthly and screen wash top up when the light comes on. Tyres get a monthly blow and look over, as I’ve found through experience that this is when it needs to be done, all on a vehicle that gets used every day of the week. If I’m doing a long run I’ll do these just before, so I don’t get caught out and stick some oil, antifreeze mix and screen wash in the boot. Compare this to an SOV which will sit idle for weeks at a time, you would have to be bloody unlucky to have bulbs blow or fluid drops sufficient to need a top up if it’s not been used on run of less than a couple of hundred miles. If bulbs are blowing such that you need to check them, then there is a problem with the electrics and some water getting in probably.
As for other things going wrong, I’ve had my current car 10 years and in that time apart from plugs, filters and tyres, I’ve needed front headlight and rear brake light one each, brakes replaced 4 years ago, new cat converter 6 years ago and front suspension 2 years ago, on a vehicle that does around 13K miles pa. This has been no different on all the cars I’ve owned.
I cannot see how or why an SOV would need or attract the sort of things people are talking about to be checked and replaced. What are people doing in these to make all these problems appear? It certainly won’t be mileage. The biggest problems I’ve seen on SOVs are bodywork bumps and scrapes as people aren’t used to the size. You can’t compare us to commercial operators as their vehicles will be used all the time and they are commercial so doing it as a business and all the extra that will entail.
If this all comes to pass, for all the world looks like HQAC building up another storm in a teacup for the poor old CFAV again as some in the ivory towers who has never been a CFAV gets a new job.
Something I’ve never quite grasped is why RFCA supply the ACF with a fleet of minibuses and the ATC has to buy them on a squadron basis? Why aren’t we given the same resource, it would remove all of the SOV costs and BS in an instant.
I’ve often wondered that, too! I wondered if it was because we “own” aircraft, so as an organisation, are higher outgoings that the ACF. That said, the ACF buses seem to be county based, so the equivalent would be a fleet managed by Wing.
Good question! I have a few ideas; all of them probably wrong!
The emphasis in our own regulations on what the P19 is needed for seems to have changed over the years. The old AP1919 gave the impression it was for driving buses on a B licence. The “new” ACTO alludes to it being needed for the ‘hire and reward’ conditions. Maybe the grey area about Pay Vs Renumeration has sparked questions about operating under a P19?
There also seems to have been a change in the permitting system - From one off issues, to 5 yearly renewals. Maybe the whole system has been tightened up, and somebody has realised that HQAC may be potentially breaking the rules?
Or maybe someone in another organisation or school has been involved in an accident, which has sparked a review?
For what’s it’s worth, I agree with you on the amount of maintenance needed. What is missing, however, is a universal method of ensuring maintenance happens, is recorded, and that a method of detecting and rectifying safety related faults in a timely fashion is in place.
Parental vehicles are not operated under a P19 issues by HQAC, so if it’s organised as part of an activity eg. Meet at the squadron, divide into 3’s and allocated a DBS cleared parent, then they need to comply with the minimum insurance level set out in ACP300.
If it’s before the activity starts, eg. Picking up some mates on the way to the squadron, then as long as the car is legal, no issues.
1000 miles a month is a little under what I average going back and forth to work and normal family things. If a squadron is averaging a 1000 miles a month (250 miles a week) in an SOV, that’s some serious journeys, in 8 nights and potentially 4 weekends. Plus the fuel cost which would be north of £200 per month.
What are people’s average annual mileages for SOVs?
I have currently got parents with sons and daughters who do all manner of things, and the mums/dads do a lot of ferrying for those and us. For which I am and have been eternally grateful for.
Start putting stipulations in place and parents would recoil from doing it and we’d all lose a valuable asset. I’ve seen parents willing to and actively helping get the hard sell (not from me) and drift away.
When our kids were involved in teams and groups, we’d do a fair amount of taxiing but no one from these ever pressured us or the other parents, like I have seen in the ATC. I do feel because we have this overarching entity (HQAC) who seem to have embarked on some form of crusade, that there is a danger of urinating on the fires we need to nurture to keep going.
Parents should be left well alone in all regulations etc.
Hi all,
As a qualified transport manager and Midas Assessor at a school operating 11 minibuses (both over and under 3.5 tonnes) and 9 contract bus companies. Please be very careful with advice on B1 / D1 (101) licences, they are not only restricted by seat numbers but by vehicle MAM - . Also D1(101) drivers can be paid but driving with B1 those CANNOT be paid - except out of pocket expenses So for example Flt Lt Smith with a B1 licence drives to Wg Sports Day and is being paid - He is no longer volunteering to drive but being paid - Driving not in accordance with their licence - Therefore breaking the law. Also Permit 19 / 22 are currently under scrutiny by the Transport Select Committee and we may see them disappear. That would leave anyone wanting to drive ANY minibus will require a full D1 - no restrictions. Now onto recommended 10 Wkly inspections, they are recommended, therefore seen as industry standard and if found to be a cause of an accident expect to face the bench. I am a qualified engineer. However, I do not do any work on any critical component, it is sent to our local garage, they have the liability insurance should anything go wrong. Having novices or cdt’s doing services on SOV’s - No - Cdt Jones fails to tighten oil filter housing, total lose of oil , engine ceases on motorway. Nightmare ensues. Safety is paramount - take it to the garage. 10 wk insp cost’s 48 quid at our garage. Finally, permit 19’s are to be displayed on the vehicle whilst being operated under that permit. Hope that has cleared the mud a bit. Regards, G.
The problem comes not from HQACs assertion that we are not paid and therefore nor employees and but what the other authorities definition the money we get is. if they deem we are being paid, then HQAC need to reappraise what the money we get is and make it just an ex-gratia payment. Driving and being paid enters the murky world of driving hours. My one of my nephews drives for a living and has had to stop in many lay bys and back roads as his hours have run out due to unforeseen things.
Except even if you were to accept that what we receive is pay, you aren’t being paid at the time you are doing the driving, you have to put a claim in afterwards. If you don’t intend to claim when you drive you aren’t committing the offence, if you then claim afterwards because you have changed your mind you don’t then commit an offence. (There is very dull Law around picking wild fruit which sets the precedent).