FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1950
1950 - 0636.PDF
4i6 FLIGHT, 30 March 1950 MAINTENANCE and SAFETY A "Must" in Airline Operation : the Problem of Equating it with Economy By a Service Engineer IN this age of austerity, when civil aviation is beingcalled upon to play its part in economizing, it isimportant that, in making its contribution, the indus- try should maintain its good record and not permit the need for economy to affect its high standards. This applies to constructor and operator alike. The constructor has in his hands the reputation of the British Aviation Industry. Quality and reliability are his twin aims, and those in touch with the export market, as well as those whose task it is to operate British aircraft on overseas routes, have a very real appreciation of the importance of these attributes in aircraft, engines and accessories. Few, if any, of those responsible for the handling of airline passengers fail to experience embarrassment when it is necessary to delay a departure, or switch a party of passengers from one aircraft to another because of engine trouble or an airfraxue snag. People who have paid a large sum of money to be transported from A to B in the shortest possible time cannot be censored if their language is acid when they are delayed. A special measure of tact, too, is required if the passengers are not British nationals. The reputation which our airlines enjoy is an indication that these delays do not occur more frequently than in other airlines, and is also further proof that we have very high standards which we must jealously guard. This is an age of rules, regulations and red tape as well as one of austerity, but, nevertheless, we have cause to be thankful for the rules and regulations which have been drawn up to protect all those who fly and are flown. It is only natural that there should be those who complain at certain of the restrictions which the regulations impose, and there have been lengthy and knowledgeable arguments in clubs, hangars and offices regarding the pros and cons of sections of the British Airworthiness Requirements; but in no way does that detract from the fact that the require- ments are fundamentally sound, and it would be a rash constructor or operator who attempted to ignore them. The requirements cover the design and construction of aircraft and accessories as well as maintenance and over- haul. They are mandatory, and under certain circum- stances even the organization to meet them is laid down. From the operator's point of view all overhauls, repairs and replacements to aircraft, engines, components, accessories and instruments must be carried out under the supervision of an engineer holding the appropriate licence, or under the supervision of an approved inspection organization. A very high standard is required of the individual engineers before they can obtain their licences, and it is only after a period of practical experience, together with an approved course, that engineers already in possession of licences can be accepted for examination for endorsements to cover the new types now coming into service. The examination con- sists of a written paper lasting anything up to s<-\•<•!! hours, and if the candidate does a satisfactory written paper he is then called for an oral, where he has to further prove his knowledge of the aircraft, engines, electrics or instru- ments, as the case may be. An operator wishing to dispense with the necessity of using licensed engineers is given the alternative of working an approved inspection organization. The requirements for the granting of approval are stringent and particular stress is placed on the responsibilities of the chief inspector, who must hold certain qualifications, be thoroughly conversant with the requirements, and be an experienced engineer who IN this article a writer of long practical experience in his subject reviews the basic official tequ/rements for maintenance work and inspection. He goes on to show how largely they bulk in operating costs and how the problem affects the British Airways Corporations can be relied upon to see that the overhaul and mainten- ance are carried out in accordance with the requirements as laid down. In order that he can have the required authority it is stipulated that he should be responsible to his directors only. Tn addition, the approving authority must be satisfied that the number and qualifications of the inspectors under the control of the chief inspector are adequate. Quite apart from the workmanship, the materials and parts used during the maintenance and overhaul of aircraft are subject to strict inspection, and in all cases must be to the approved design and method of construction appro- priate to the particular type. An operator may take it upon himself to manufacture, say, a bracket or other detail fitting: but he may do so only by using approved materials, and by placing the manufacture of the part under the supervision of an engineer holding the necessary licence endorsed for the appropriate aircraft type. The foregoing facts (which will, of course, be well known to those con- cerned) are emphasized here only in order to support the argument which follows. It is fairly apparent that the most efficient method for an operator to adopt is to have an approved inspection organization, and also to have as many as pos- sible of the engineering and inspection staff fully licensed for the types being operated. This has been the practice in the past and has, to a large extent, been instrumental in providing the efficient maintenance and overhaul organization which has characterized our air operating concerns. Although the most efficient is not necessarily the most economical, and it is here that the danger lies. Those responsible are faced with the problem of maintain- ing standards while at the same time effecting economies. Efficient maintenance and overhaul spells safety, which in no circumstances must be allowed to take second place. It is better to economize in other directions than to jeopardize a good safety-record by endangering the standard of main- tenance and overhaul. Those who fly would without doubt rather feel sure of their safety than be superbly comfortable. The ideal, of course, is a combination of both, but, if we must practice economies, let us ensure that they are practised in the right quarter The cost of maintaining and overhauling a fleet of air- craft is always one of the most expensive items an operator is required to face; but if his organization is efficient and his regularity figures are good, it is a cost which he must willingly bear and regard as an investment which pays a big dividend in the form of reliability. With circumstances such as they are in this country, we cannot work out comparisons between a number of airline operators, as can be done in America, and so obtain some indication of the degree of efficiency in each case; but we can compare our two Corporations and, by basing our com- parison on a common denominator, say the usable capacity ton-miles flown, we can get some indication of the items which are proving expensive. All the information required to carry out a comparison is contained in the reports and accounts for the two Cor- porations as issued by H.M. Stationery Office, and using the figures for 1948-40—the latest available at the time of writing—we see that approximately 22 per cent of the total cost per usable capacity ton-mile flown in each case was spent under the heading "Flying Operations," which in- cluded crews' pay, fuel and oil, and landing fees. Maintenance and Overhaul, which included direct and
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
