Nothing here, last thing I heard was the same as @mprentice1 said. All flying cancelled until at least September, but no guarantees that it starts up again then, just a guarantee it won’t start before then!
Anyone had any updates? Are we AEFing again?
We’ve had an email from our WAvO which implies we are flying again in October?
Same, we have allocated AEF places from Oct-Dec.
Nothing confirmed but yes, RAFAC wise we are planning for that as Plan A so I am not surprised WAvnOs are working on that basis. Whether it does is in the hands of 6FTS and whether they are happy we are safe to restart. Plan B therefore also exists!
From my recent chat with AOC 22 Gp = expect the 3rd airframe to have met the 150 hrs + engine oil test results towards end of Sep.
1 Like
3rd as in 3rd of the full fleet? So we have 3 Aircraft in the whole of the UK that can take cadets?
Or have they got x amount at 150hrs + checks is satisfactory for the fleet to go back?
1 Like
That was the stated limitation - 3 airframes with satisfactory checks after the 150 hrs oil inspection.
1 Like
So the question now becomes whether AEF will be at full capacity before or after the upgrade to whichever aircraft type comes next.
Hmmm, had my FOI back concerning the number of DASORs for Tutors for the specified technical issues.
Some 400+ linked DASORs, but apparently trying to datamine into the different reports would require more than the specified limit on man hrs to go over the FOI cost limit.
Yeah, right. If they can’t interrogate a simple data base, something is very wrong. I can feel an appeal coming on.
We’ve been advised flying to resume on 4 Oct.
We’ve had all flying cancelled up-to the 1st of October. But not had anything confirmed about a back to flying yet!
You’re assuming they’re actually collating the data into a referencable database in the first place.
If they aren’t, it sounds negligent not to do so.
2 Likes
No news on resumption of flying here, but we been all-but barred from the station anyway
1 Like
Well we use an online engineering platform called GOLDesp.
It’s got a function to search fault/symptom and work done. Which can be filtered down to tail number if required.
The system isn’t very user friendly though and can take a lot of time to sift through.
There will 100% be a system to search, but does the FOI investigator have access? Because they certainly won’t to something like GOLD.
It should link to the RAF system, rather than being independent? If, on the very, VERY slim chance that the database is not referenceable, then I’ve got them there.
2 Likes
All captured on dasor as mentioned above
I am asking for an internal review - they are quoting 1100 Tutor DASORs ( 01 Jan 2019 to date ) of which some 590 are “Technical” reports - but they are assuming 5 mins per DASO to review / identify = load of codswallop. That would add up (on their figures) to 90+ hrs work = over the £600 limit as per S.12 of the FOI Act. I’m not asking for full details for each DASO, merely those under the headings of:
Propellers detaching in flight
Engine failures
Trim tab cracks
Main wing spar cracks
Engine oil seal failures
I reckon (conservatively) that it would be a maximum of one min per 590 Technical DASORs, with the off-chance that some might fall in the Non-Service Control specification - Environmental / Human Factors (HF) being the other key areas. Even if you roped in all DASORs, it would only take 1100 mins but realistically (& statistically), Environmental (bird strikes, weather, etc) & HF (human error, failing to do / see something, etc), will make up the vast bulk of the remainder.
I suspect not, but is there a similar fleet we might be able to compare to?
This way, even if we can’t get the specifics, we may be able to compare and contrast overall numbers to a similar fleet and understand whether we’re producing more issues or fewer.
I don’t think so, as CAA ATOs use different aircraft types. There might also be areas where “equivalency” of operating could cause difficulties in trying to use comparative figures.