D.O.M. Maintenance Management Blog | Aircraft Maintenance Management Issues

D.O.M. Maintenance Management Blog

Aircraft Maintenance Management Issues

Author Howard DuFour Passes Away

clock December 15, 2009 10:20 by author jescobar

Howard Dufour, co-author of Charles E. Taylor, 1868-1956, The Wright Brothers Mechanician, passed away this weekend in Dayton, OH.

The following bio is taken from his book:

“Howard R. DuFour originally came from Detroit, Michigan. After being introduced to machine tools in technical high school, he was employed, from 1932 until 1940, as a draftsman, photographer, and special machinist. During WWII, his skills were needed to support the defense industry in Dayton, Ohio, culminating with an assignment on the Manhattan Project. Remaining in Dayton after the war, he operated his own camera repair business. Starting in 1951, he worked in Dayton for Monsanto, Dabel, and National Cash Register as an instrument machinist, tool and die maker and machine tool and design engineer, respectively. By 1976, as a master model maker, he joined the staff at Wright State University, supervising the work of its instrument machine shop. During his lengthy career he co-authored several technical reports and secured some U.S. patents. Retired since 1981, he has devoted most of his time to researching the life and times of a kindred spirit – the subject of this book.”

Aircraft maintenance professionals around the world owe Mr. DuFour a great amount of gratitude. Because of Howard’s devotion in the last decades of his life to researching the life and times of Charles E. Taylor, we know about man who designed and built the engine that powered the Wright Flyer as it made the world’s first self-powered flight – a flight that propelled the Wright Brothers into history. Thanks to DuFour, we recognize the importance of Charles Taylor’s contributions to aviation history. Without Charles Taylor’s help, who knows when, or if, the Wright Glider would have become the Wright Flyer. And without DuFour’s research, who knows when, or if, Charles Taylor’s story would have been told.

In the last paragraph of his book, DuFour writes, “A search of relevant literature shows that, in general, Charlie was more of a supporting actor than a main character in the drama of early flight. His role, however, at the time he acted his part, was crucial to the ultimate success of the first act. We observe that he acted his part well. When the curtain fell on his mortal existence, not only had he helped to bring acclaim to the principal actors, but also we, the audience, are better for having observed his performance as well.”

In the Epilogue, Howard goes on to write, “One wonders sometimes if man dreamed about flight, even in the days of Adam. There are, after all, biblical references to flight, myths depicted in various art forms of gods and animals, as well as men, all indulging in this exciting activity. Each emerging civilization, whether in Babylonia, Assyria, Egypt or China, left records of their thoughts on the subject. Even the sophisticated Romans paid homage to a winged god by the name of Mercury. Perhaps the most often quoted example of early thoughts about flight belongs to the Greek legend of Daedalus, who warned his adventurous son, Icarus, against the danger of flying too close to the sun on his waxen wings. The rest, as they say, is history!

“Thought at last gave rise to action. Certain objects could be propelled through the air – arrows, rockets, kites and boomerangs. Slowly, as scientific thought and method permitted, men tried to adapt themselves to the medium of the air, mostly in imitation of the birds. In late medieval times, one Friar Roger Bacon conceived a navigable metal balloon, propelled by flapping wings. The premier Renaissance man, Leonardo da Vinci, numbered several different types of flying machines among his many ideas. By the 18th century, power was king, especially steam, and men had begun to realize therein lay one of the principal keys to manned flight. This was the era of Cayley and Stringfellow. The 19th century ushered in the Industrial Revolution and everything became possible. Without the ability to control a machine in flight, even power would be of little value. Thus, men like the Lilienthals and Plicher tried to solve this problem, ultimately at the expense of their lives. Different approaches were attempted by Hargrave, Chanute, Maxim, and Langley, each coming a little closer to the answer.

“One might envision a very patient Father watching all of this throughout the centuries. Then, as fathers are wont to do with their children, He gave them a little assistance. As mankind entered the 20th century, three of His children came together. Two had the vision, the genius, to assimilate all existing knowledge on the subject and distill it into the final solution. The third had the skills needed to match hand with brain and product the motive power for that final solution. As He looked down at Kitty Hawk, it is not unreasonable to expect, like any father in similar circumstances, a degree of satisfaction to have been expressed. Perhaps, if one could have listened carefully, one might have heard a voice in the wind saying, ‘Well done, boys, all three of you.’”

As Howard DuFour’s curtain falls on his mortal existence, we honor the contribution he made to educating us about Charles E. Taylor. We, the audience, are better thanks to DuFour’s part in the ongoing drama of aviation.

One might even imagine the Father greeting him saying, “Well done, Howard. Well done.”

 

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


LOL!

clock October 29, 2009 18:19 by author jescobar

Mobile phones have evolved quite a bit since I purchased my first one in the late 80s. My first “mobile” phone was about the size of a shoe box that I could carry with me in my car. If memory serves me correctly, I paid around $200 for it. It was just a phone, and it stayed in my truck most of the time — it wasn’t mobile enough to carry it with me at all times.

Jump forward twenty years. I now have a Blackberry Pearl flip phone (affectionately known as my Crackberry for my addiction to its utility!). Like all mobile phones these days, it is very portable and slips easily into my front pocket or in a belt holster. I paid $40 for it with a two-year service commitment. It is a “smart phone,” giving me the opportunity to receive e-mails and keep up with appointments. It also has video and photo capabilities.

The use of text messaging has skyrocketed with the evolution of mobile phones. For years, users have been able to send each other text messages using short messaging service (SMS). The younger generation was the first to embrace text messaging. They quickly mastered the skill of tapping on the phone’s number keys to create short text messages. Over time a variety of acronyms evolved that were used in text messaging to save time. Here are just a few examples:

Oh my God: OMG
Later: L8R
See you later: CUL8R
Looking forward to it: LFTI
Laughing out loud: LOL

These acronyms and many others are used by people when text messaging. They are also used by some in e-mails and online forums. Someone even used one as a headline for his editorial column in D.O.M. magazine.

Unfortunately, a novice user who comes across these acronyms for the first time may have no idea what they mean. Fear of appearing stupid or ignorant may lead them to avoid asking what they mean and taking a guess instead. If they guess wrong, they might then use the acronyms incorrectly from that point forward unless they are corrected.

This happened to a friend of mine. To protect the innocent, let’s just call him John Doe. John has two daughters in their early 20s that live away from home. John and his daughters frequently e-mail each other. John often receives e-mail jokes and forwards some of them to his daughters. A reply to one of his jokes was something like, “Thanks for forwarding that joke dad. LOL!” It was the first time John had seen “LOL.” He assumed it meant “lots of love,” and started to use it as such. “LOL” just doesn’t have the same meaning when used as “lots of love” instead of “laughing out loud.” Imagine his daughters’ confusion when they received e-mails from him saying, “Sorry you are having such a difficult time at school. LOL, Dad.” Or, “I have some bad news. The dog passed away. Your mom is taking it very hard. LOL, Dad.” John eventually learned the errors of his ways, but not before confusing the heck out of his daughters and giving his friends and co-workers a good laugh at his expense.

Aviation is an acronym-heavy industry. We use many different acronyms in our daily communications. An A&P at an MRO may ask her DOM about a new STC for the AOA system. ATA, ISBAO, FAR, TC, TBO, FBO, AOG and many more acronyms are used as part of our aviation lingo. To a new mechanic, it might seem like we are speaking in tongues. Add to that the acronyms we use in our own maintenance shops, and it can seem even more confusing. I once saw a maintenance logbook signoff that read something like: “C/W LH MLG R&R IAW H-90 MM. Rig & Ops check good. ATAF.” That translated to, “Complied with left-hand main landing gear removal and replacement in accordance with H-90 maintenance manual. Rigging and operational check good. All tools accounted for.”

Although we rely on acronyms in our daily conversations, we need to ensure that everyone understands them. We can’t afford a breakdown in communication when it comes to aircraft maintenance. We need to make sure our egos don’t get in the way of effective communication. If we don’t understand something, we need to ask. Making incorrect assumptions can lead to disaster.

Misunderstanding “LOL” in an e-mail might be funny. Misunderstanding an acronym on the hangar floor might lead to a maintenance error. That is definitely nothing to laugh at.
Thanks for reading,

Joe

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Heads Up on Cleveland King Air Brake Overhauls!

clock August 19, 2009 06:05 by author Norm Chance

Sometimes as a distributor, I see other competitors that do things that are just plain wrong. Normally, i can keep quiet. After hearing customers complain about what another distributor has been doing to them, I decided it was time to at least make DOM's aware of a special situation. There is a very large aircraft parts distributor who has been overhauling Cleveland King Air High Float brakes in their own shop (Part Number 30-162), instead of Cleveland's own repair station. While this practice would be normally fine, they have been engaged in a bait and switch technique that has bitten a least six or seven maintenance shops that I know of. What they are doing, is quoting an overhaul exchange price that is roughly $800 less than a factory overhaul. Then 2-3 months later, the customer receives a bill ( almost in every case) for $1,000 to 1,250 per each returned brake core.  What they are doing, in reality, is billing you back on the brake housing. This housing is very expensive, and is routinely replaced due to corrosion. We have chosen to send all of the Cleveland 30-162 brakes through Cleveland, because of their flat rate exchange policy. Cleveland is aware that the corrosion may occur, particularly on old brakes, so they have made sure to address this during overhaul.

Currently rated 3.5 by 2 people

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


A.O.G.s should mean something to parts manufacturers!

clock April 3, 2009 13:41 by author Norm Chance

Norm ChanceBig manufacturers don’t care about AOG’s.

Some things never change. You would think that in this economy, manufacturers would relish every opportunity to move their product. You would think that their customer service would improve, or yet be adequate.  But as usual, this is not the case. Today I called a very large aerospace “conglomerate” with an AOG for a U.S. military aircraft part. Surprisingly, they had the item in stock. But what followed next is the sad malaise that most of my fellow distributors experience. I reasoned that in an AOG situation, with a tail number and aircraft serial, surely this manufacturer would ship this item today.  I also reasoned that this manufacturer would put forth a minimum effort to expedite this item, especially since it was for an AOG U.S. military aircraft.  I was told that they could not ship the product for three days. When I pressed them with a DOD contract number, they bluntly told me that AOG’s aren’t expedited any sooner than three days. The request could be an AOG for an air ambulance or a U.S. military aircraft, neither really mattered to their customer service team!

What has happened here? Isn’t the goal to place product in the hands of the customers, when they need it?  How have we arrived to the point, where large aerospace conglomerates can be financially successful while offering such poor service? As a distributor, I try my best to place product in the hands of my clients as soon as possible. But, man is it hard. Have you had any situations like this? What should we do about it?

Currently rated 4.6 by 5 people

  • Currently 4.6/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Customer Service

clock February 16, 2009 04:05 by author jescobar

 Joe Escobar, Editorial Director, D.O.M. magazine

My wife's Dell computer is sick. Actually, it is committing suicide thanks to a nasty trojan horse. The trojan horse made it through our anti-virus software, and all attempts to remove it have been unsuccessful. It appears we now need to re-format the computer's hard drive and re-install Windows.

Since we bought the computer last July, I called Dell's customer support number yesterday to see if this would be covered under the manufacturer's one-year warranty. I thought it probably would not, but I figured I'd give it a shot.

I was on hold for a few minutes before an agent with a noticeably strong Indian accent came on the line. He took some information from me (name, computer serial number, etc...) and told me he was going to transfer me to the "hardware" department.

I was on hold once again. While on hold, several messages played in a loop -- tips if you will. One caught my attention. It said (I'm paraphrasing from memory), "Tired of waiting on hold? For an extra annual fee you can talk to a Dell representative in the United States in under two minutes each time you call. Press '1' for more information."

After about 20 minutes on hold, another Dell representative with an Indian accent came on the line. He asked similar questions as the first one and told me he was going to transfer me to the "software" department.

I was on hold for another 15 minutes, and heard the same loop of messages including the one where I could pay extra money if I wanted "better service."

A representative from software finally came on and after about five minutes told me this would not be covered.

I'm not upset that fixing the computer isn't covered under Dell's warranty. After all, it isn't their fault we have a trojan horse. 

However, I am amazed at the mediocre level of Dell's customer support and the audacity of the company to offer "better service for more money."

Can you imagine if aircraft manufacturers had the same attitude?

I can see it now -- an aircraft manufacturer tells its new customer, "We apologize for the problems you are having with the aircraft you purchased from us. We will schedule your aircraft for work sometime in the next 30 days. We are going to assign a contract customer service representative to take care of your scheduling and questions. If you would like to schedule your aircraft in a timelier manner, we can get your aircraft in work within two days and assign our in-house customer service professional to take care of all your needs -- but it will cost you extra."

Excellent customer service is an integral part of any successful maintenance operation. Successful repair shops stress customer service at all levels -- from the maintenance professionals on the shop floor to the receptionist answering the phone. Anything less than excellence in customer service is unacceptable.

For the March/April issue of D.O.M. magazine, I interviewed a director of maintenance for an FBO/repair station in Florida. He shared some ways his employees go the extra step to ensure the company's customers receive nothing but the best in terms of top-notch maintenance and customer service. It is this attitude that has helped them continue to grow their business even in the midst of the current downturn in the economy.

What are some of the things you do to promote customer service excellence? What do you expect from your employees and co-workers in terms of attitude and customer service?

Thanks for reading!

Joe Escobar

 

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Jumping to Conclusions

clock February 13, 2009 05:15 by author jescobar

 Joe Escobar, Editorial Director, D.O.M. magazine

The news organizations are buzzing right now, discussing today's crash of Continental flight 3407, a flight operated by Colgan Air, a few miles from the Buffalo airport. I find it utterly amazing how most news organizations rush to publish stories of aircraft accidents as fast as they can without any rhyme or reason.

News.com.au reported, "The house the plane crashed into was damaged."

Gee, I was just sitting at my desk asking myself, "If a Bombardier Q400 crashed into a house, would the house would sustain any damage?" I guess these crack reporters at news.com.au answered my question. They also reported that the flight was operated by Colgan Airways (not Colgan Air).

CNN had a lengthy interview with one witness. The witness told CNN, "The engines didn't sound typical, didn't sound normal. I don't fly a whole bunch, but I've flown enough to know what a typical-sounding engine is."

Wow, he's good. I've flown a whole lot, and I wouldn't know what a "typical-sounding" engine is from inside the aircraft versus hearing it pass 70 feet above my car. 

I guess the news organizations want to scoop their competitors. But at what price?

I will let the news outlets toss out their speculations and prognostications. I'll just wait patiently for the NTSB reports before making any assumptions.

How do you feel about this "typical" accident coverage? Useful? Informative? Entertaining? Useless?

Let us know.

Thanks for reading!

Joe Escobar

 

 

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Thank You, Citigroup? Purchasing a Business Jet IS economic stimulus

clock January 28, 2009 15:00 by author gnapert

 Greg Napert, Publisher, D.O.M. magazine

It’s been really burning me up lately to watch as the media tears apart companies for purchasing business jets.

A real shortfall of recent attempts at economic stimulus is the lack of ability of Washington to recognize that it’s encouraging the purchase of goods that stimulates the economy. It’s not any more complicated than that.

For example, when Washington began handing out money, they should have handed it to people in a way that encouraged them to buy things. A good idea would have been to hand out coupons for the purchase of new cars. This would have created a demand for – you guessed it – new cars!  Instead, they gave it to the auto companies which in turn used it to pay employees to do nothing ­-- the ultimate welfare program!

When Citigroup recently took bailout money given to it and purchased a corporate jet, injecting this cash directly into the economy (we’ll address the France issue in the next paragraph), the welfare advocates had a fit and pointed to Citigroup as some sort of thief! In my opinion, Citigroup should be held up as an example of what to do.

On the France issue (Dassault Falcon Jets are made in France), sure, it would have meant more to the U.S. if they had purchased a US built aircraft – but the truth is that this is a GLOBAL economy! Dassault purchases Millions of dollars of raw materials, equipment, sub-components, etc. to build these jets. And when they are flying in the US – which most of them are – they are purchasing fuel, maintenance services, and employing thousands of individuals who keep this jet flying! In fact, the money gets spread beyond the aircraft directly – check out the back page of our publication, D.O.M. magazine, as well as many other aviation publications. Guess who injected cash into the U.S. economy by purchasing advertising in these industry publications – thereby employing hundreds of journalists, magazine publishers, printers, paper suppliers, and on and on.  That’s right – Dassault!

Just how far reaching is the economic stimulus of a corporate jet? Let’s look at a Gulfstream-V aircraft valued at more than $50 million dollars. A rough desktop analysis shows that the bulk of raw materials used to build the jet is aluminum. Hundreds, if not thousands of people are employed in the mining industry in support of manufacturing aluminum! And further, the plant that produces the alloy of aluminum employs hundreds as well. So apply the same logic to the plastic (from petroleum), and copper, and nickel, and wood, and fabric, and carpet mills, and ranchers that produce the cattle for the leather and on and on – and you employ thousands to simply supply the jet manufacturer and its component manufacturer with raw materials!

Then you have the jet manufacturer itself. Savannah, GA-based Gulfstream employs more than 2,500 people in engineering, design, manufacturing, support, publications, sales, service and more! And that’s just Savannah! Gulfstream also has 7 other facilities in the U.S. and abroad to support these aircraft – each center employing more than 300 individuals.

In addition, corporations that own or operate the aircraft employ thousands of pilots, mechanics and support personnel to keep the aircraft flying. Then there’s the facility that was built to house the aircraft by hundreds of construction workers. There are even hundreds employed in the media industry that produce publications relative to selling, servicing, and flying the aircraft. I could go on – fuel purchases to keep the aircraft in the air, catering companies to provide food and service, telecommunications companies, avionics manufacturers, and training companies that keep pilots and mechanics current, and trade associations as well.  

By now, you get the idea.

The purchase of the aircraft for $40 million is a stimulus that produces a positive domino effect on the economy and results in employment well beyond the aircraft manufacturer.

Next time you hear a company berated for purchasing a corporate aircraft, make sure that the mainstream media knows that you are thankful that someone knows how to stimulate the economy!

On behalf of the thousands of Americans that are employed in the aviation industry and are thankful to be putting food on the table at night - THANK YOU Citigroup for placing the order. 

And shame on those who pressured you to cancel the order! 

 

Currently rated 3.0 by 5 people

  • Currently 3/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Concorde Manslaughter Trial to Begin in 2010

clock January 12, 2009 08:41 by author jescobar

 

 Joe Escobar, Editorial Director, D.O.M. magazine

CNNMoney.com reports today that the trial of Continental Airlines and two of its employees for manslaughter over the 2000 crash of an Air France Concorde will start in February of next year before a criminal court in Pontoise, France. A former French civil aviation official (France's FAA) and two senior members of the Concorde program will also be tried on the same charges.

The French accident inquiry concluded in December 2004 and found that the crash was partly caused by a strip of metal that fell on the runway from a Continental Airlines DC-10 that took off just before the Concorde. The Concorde ran over the strip, causing one of its tires to blowout and send debris into a fuel tank.

The two Continental Airlines employees being named in the suit are the mechanic who allegedly installed the non-standard strip and the airline chief of maintenance.

First of all, we need to remember that the trial hasn't begun. The allegations in the lawsuit are just that -- allegations.

That being said, there is a lot on the line here. This isn't a civil case where families of the deceased are suing everyone and anyone to try to get compensated for their losses. This is a criminal case. The mechanic, the maintenance director, and the airline are facing manslaughter charges.

Imagine the ramifications if there is a trend towards criminalization of maintenance errors. Who will work on aircraft then? Who would want to?

You can read the full article at http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200901121014DOWJONESDJONLINE000335_FORTUNE5.htm  

Thanks for reading!

Joe Escobar

 

 

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Bailing Out the Big Three?

clock December 2, 2008 05:55 by author jescobar

 Joe Escobar, Editorial Director, D.O.M. magazine

Well, the CEOs of the big three U.S. automakers are in Washington today asking the government for $25 billion of taxpayer money. They are submitting detailed proposals on why they need the money, what changes they are making to better compete both now and in the future and making their case on why it would be disastrous if they don't get these "bridge" loans.

I believe that giving loans to the automakers should be considered -- so long as they don't continue with business as usual. There are many reasons the automakers are in trouble. Some of them can be fixed. Some of them will continue to cripple the companies unless major changes take place. And continuing to pay CEOs extreme salaries while they continue to run their businesses into the ground is something that needs to be addressed. This isn't something unique to the auto industry. CEO pay should be tied to performance. It shouldn't be an entitlement.

It's funny how the CEOs made different travel arrangements this time around. Gone are the corporate flights to DC. Word has it that GMs CEO drove a Malibu hybrid from Detroit to Washington. Ford's CEO went in an Escape hybrid. I'm not sure how Chrysler's CEO got there, but I'm pretty sure he ditched the corporate jet.

Corporate flight departments are seen in the public eye as a luxury, a perk for CEOs that make way too much money. But that isn't necessarily the case (the perk part, not the part about way too much money). Corporate flight departments can be a valuable business tool. They provide quicker travel, often to smaller airports not serviced by the major airlines. Multiple facilities can be visited on a given day, making for better use of the management teams' time.

But that may be a moot point in this case. Because of the negative PR from last month's flights, the automakers have already announced plans to scale back or eliminate their flight departments. 

As for the staff of D.O.M., rest assured we always travel commercial.

But a corporate jet sure would be nice! Wink

Thanks for reading!

Joe Escobar

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Farewell Bill

clock November 12, 2008 09:39 by author jescobar

 Joe Escobar, Editorial Director, D.O.M. magazine

It was with great sadness that I learned that Bill O'Brien passed away this past Sunday, November 9, 2008.

A self-proclaimed introvert, Bill always told me he got extremely nervous when he was speaking. If you ever sat in on one of his presentations, you would have never thought so. Bill commanded the room. His seminars were usually standing room only.

The first time I heard speak was at the AS3 show in March 2001. I had just joined AMT magazine a few months earlier, and was eager to meet Bill in person (we had talked on the phone several times, as he was a regular contributor to AMT magazine). I was impressed with how he explained the FARs in a way that was easy to understand. After the presentation, it took half an hour before I could introduce myself, as he had lots of mechanics sharing how they enjoyed his presentation and articles in AMT magazine.

I attended Bill's FAA retirement ceremony a few years ago in Washington. I will never forget how he donned his green top hat and did his "happy dance" on the steps of the FAA headquarters just before he and his wife Marie got ready to leave.

"I am looking forward to this next chapter in my life," Bill told me at his retirement party.

Too bad he couldn't have continued to write that chapter for many more years.

We will miss you Bill.

Joe Escobar

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Welcome

Welcome to D.O.M. magazine's Maintenance Management Blog.  Feel free to comment on any of our blogs. 
We hope you enjoy!

RecentPosts

Sign in