This is a huge issue in aviation.
In extreme cases it explodes into situations where somebody finds it worthwhile to abandon their plane in the maintenance company and walk away; we had a case here recently and I know of several more which got really close (example: a plane worth maybe 30k, an initial Annual bill of 10k+, following a clearly poor prebuy job). Some planes are retrieved and then dumped as “project” planes.
So when I read an article by Mike Busch in the US AOPA mag, I thought it is worth posting an extract from it here. I think it is quite an objective overview – the problems are usually caused by both sides:
I’d say it’s more or less the same as in car maintenance, except that part prices are correspondingly higher. A couple of years ago, an alternator belt snapped in my car as I was driving through Belgium. An Opel dealership nearby had the right belt in stock, so I asked them to replace it and also to charge my battery, which had gone flat by the time I got there. 40 minutes later, I was handed a bill for 300-something euros: “Your battery no longer charges up, we have installed a new one for €210”. I told them to put the old one back in, and it has been happily starting my engine ever since. Incidentally, a new battery of this size can be had for €80.
Whether it’s a car or a plane, I need to be on first-name terms with the maintenance people before I let them work on it in my absence, and would generally prefer to do as much as possible myself.
Sorry for this beginner’s question but, if you are EASA-reg, the CAMO tells you what needs to be done , right ?
And once your plane is dismantled for inspection and the shop finds an AOG discrepancy, your freedom of action is quite limited isn’t it , and any solution has to be approved by the CAMO ?
I was going to say “Not only in the aviation world, but also automotive” – I think @Ultranomad covered it, but I’ve also been a victim of this in the past. I do believe this practice has largely been eliminated in modern times due to the amount of complaints from customers (and its probably against the law now in many countries, especially ones in the EU).
Jujupilote wrote:
Sorry for this beginner’s question but, if you are EASA-reg, the CAMO tells you what needs to be done , right ?And once your plane is dismantled for inspection and the shop finds an AOG discrepancy, your freedom of action is quite limited isn’t it , and any solution has to be approved by the CAMO ?
If you are not operating the aircraft commercially, you don’t have to have a CAMO. Also, a good CAMO would not prescribe unnecessary maintenance and may even find a way to minimize overall costs by combining several maintenance operations into one, deferring what can be deferred, finding approved alternative solutions or even changing to a different type of maintenance program. Finally, with some discrepancies, even if the aircraft is generally unairworthy, you may be able to get a one-time ferry permit.
Ultranomad wrote:
even if the aircraft is generally unairworthy, you may be able to get a one-time ferry permit.
@Coda, sometimes you have no other solution (admittedly, this was not in EASAland).
Ultranomad wrote:
this was not in EASAland
Coda wrote:
If you can find someone mad enough to ferry it :D
Most aircraft are in a constant state of unworthiness. We just aren’t aware of it.
So if you are aware of the issue, its probably a better situation to be in for that ferry flight.
Some cultures (national and otherwise) have the tendency to view service businesses as ‘partnerships’ with the rules dictated by a third party, for example a vehicle manufacturer or government. Others see service as just that – maintaining a relationship with the customer by doing what he asks for, or facing his wrath and rejection. Assuming the customer knows his business, the latter setup is IMO a lot more advantageous. If the customer doesn’t know his business so well, it’d be best if he learned what he can…
In maintaining my aircraft I try to get the best of both worlds by maintaining real (non manipulative) partnerships with knowledgeable people (now friends) who help me maintain the planes, but meanwhile maintain total control over what’s planned and done on my plane, parts supply, working space and so on.
