Peter Alex is the Head of the AlphaAir CAMO (Continuing Airworthiness Management Organization), the organization responsible for the airworthiness of the aircraft of the Italian airline AlphaAir. Since AlphaAir does not have maintenance capabilities, the base inspections of its aircraft are performed by an English aircraft maintenance company called ExperssLines. Mark Slim is the Head of ExperssLines, which is an approved AMO (Aircraft Maintenance Organization).
During the inspection of an AlphaAir’s aircraft, several incidents have happened:
First, an ExperssLines technician has accidentally hit the aircraft with an AGE (Aircraft Ground Equipment), producing damage in a critical part of the structure. Unfortunately, there are neither instructions in the Maintenance Manual nor in the SRM (Structural Repair Manual) on how to repair the damage.
Second, the Nose Landing Gear has not been replaced, even when its Life Limit is almost expired because the replacement is not included in the task package provided by Pedro Sanchez to Mark Slim.
Analyze each disagreement and give clear explanations to support either the position of Mark Slim or the position of Peter Alex.
a) Peter Alex considers it necessary to issue an Occurrence for the damage of the structure in order to communicate the problem to the Competent Authority. Mark Slim states that an Occurrence is not applicable in this case.
b) Peter Alex states that his organization can produce a repair instruction and with it, ExperssLines can repair the damage. Mark Slim disagrees with that approach.
c) Peter Alex knowledge that the Nose Landing Gear replacement was not included in the task package that he provided to Mark Slim. However, he blames ExperssLines because in the Maintenance Manual is clear when the Nose Landing Gear has to be replaced and ExperssLines has received the Log Card of the Nose Landing Gear with the accumulated cycles. Mark Slim does not accept the blame.
The layout of the report:
Divided into three sections. These are (1) the introduction, (2) the content and (3) the summary and conclusions (if any).
Section 1 introduction can be used to clarify the actual purpose of the report.
Section 2 is the content, which you may want to divide into sections.
Section 3, the conclusion, is where you can summarise the report, express your own opinions and make your own conclusions and recommendations.
*Support on legislation-Conclusion.
-Spelling and proper use of acronyms and abbreviations
– Readability (coherence of clauses, sentences, and paragraphs, use of headings and sub-headings, use of illustration)
Answer to the case study
In the given case, an occurrence is being proposed as a means of communication for the problem to the authorities that can handle an issue. The purpose of an occurrence policy is to mitigate events before they occur. In this case, the accident has already occurred, thus leading to the disagreement between Peter Alex, who wishes to issue an occurrence, and Mark Slim, who argues that this should have been issued earlier and before the accident.
ExpressLines was outsourced to carry out maintenance by AlphaAir whereby irreparable damage on the aircraft happened when it was on the grounds of ExpressLines. This has damaged an essential part of the aircraft, which appeared irreparable since the repair instructions did not appear in the aircraft’s manual (Ostadi et al., 2020). Also, the timely replacement of the Nose Landing Gear had not taken place.
The repair and maintenance businesses often start with preparing comprehensive policies that outline risks or eventualities that may arise in the process of carrying out their procedures (D’Alessandro, 2020)—classifying risks as either as economic, operating risks, risks that could arise from strategies or even non-compliance to rules and regulations.
There could also be risks associated with competition, unavailability of credit and dwindling cash flows that would be needed for commercial units, company functions, and investment projects. To be able to focus and prioritize the critical risks, management often focuses on the general picture of the organization’s operations by carrying out a risk assessment by identifying the likely impact in case the risk occurs.
Once the risks are prioritized, various options are then put in place to respond to the risks, that is, acceptance, reduction, sharing, or avoidance (D’Alessandro, 2020). An evaluation of all costs and benefits of any project is carried out in order to assess whether the undertaking is financially viable (Ostadi et al., 2020). Risk response initiatives are also clearly formulated and understood by all operators. Insufficient maintenance processes and procedures, failure of routine checks to identify faults, careless but fatal accidents on the ground, improper installations, and inappropriate procedures all add up to maintenance risks, which would lead to massive losses and destruction if not predicted early of the organization’s image.
For the project’s success, the policy development and a baseline for the assessment needed to be developed. This baseline would significantly help develop an essential procedure for the inspection of the aircraft. Under this baseline, key features and aspects would be outlined for the assessment to be done. An aircraft that fails to meet a given threshold of the stated criteria used would not qualify for any fight or operations (Ostadi et al., 2020). Besides, the mechanical aspect of the aircraft, the analysis would also be based on the aspect of qualification of those involved in the maintenance works. This would help the two individuals focus on what best would be required for the aircraft maintenance works. The lack of agreement between Alex and Mark Slime can be attributed to the two’s challenge in this scenario. The lack of useful knowledge and collective thinking is considered the first most crucial hindrance to the best performance.
Mark Slim, Head of ExpressLines, and Peter Alex had not put in place, and writing conditions for service, repair, and maintenance work. There was no agreed renewable marginal repair or replacement contract procedures or even ideal repair procedures often issued after the warranty expiry. There was no set threshold for repair time during the period when the proof was in force or after it expired. When the warranty period expired, the maintenance and repair would automatically become the individual owner’s responsibility. Before building a new plant or taking on a new project, prudent managers conduct a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate all the potential costs and revenues that a company might generate from the project or lose in case of unprecedented risks (D’Alessandro, 2020).
It will also call for eliminating weaknesses that are often found in the maintenance department and develop a maintenance safety management system. This will ensure efficiency within the maintenance system, instead of only assessing purely what went wrong. In this case, the two managers disagree because both have inadequate or non-existent maintenance and repair policies and are to blame for omissions and commissions in the way they document their operations.
Ostadi, B., & Abbasi Harofteh, S. (2020). A novel risk assessment approach using Monte Carlo simulation based on co-occurrence of risk factors: A case study of a petrochemical plant construction. Scientia Iranica.
D’Alessandro, W. (2020). Proving quadratic reciprocity: explanation, disagreement, transparency and depth. Synthese, 1-44.
Such a cheap price for your free time and healthy sleep
All online transactions are done using all major Credit Cards or Electronic Check through PayPal. These are safe, secure, and efficient online payment methods.