Judgment…. You make the call…

[apiaguy]

I must admit that the blade repair would not be "legit"... I have never seen a service manual let you fill or repair a cracked abrasion strip in this manner but when it is very small it is something that is done often... usually the tip of the abrasion strip has been hammered and abraded to the point it is very thin and cracks (it was already a very thin abrasion strip). The abrasion strips do use either scotch-weld or a hysol epoxy to seal the junctions on the inboard and outboard edges of the abrasion strip from erosion, so puckying it on just a little further would be a typical field repair. If you were to put in the logs that it was "cracked" would be a problem as I'm certain the service manual says to remove the blade and send for repairs and "no cracks allowed".

 

It reminds me of my first job as an A&P. I was working on a P210 and found a crack eminating from an antenna mount doubler that was installed in the pressure vessle. I showed it to the boss and we made a new doubler that beefed it up and incorporated it into a patch repair. I asked about doing a 337 as it clearly qualifies under FAR 43 appendix D as a major repair. He pretty much told me that the antenna and original mount were already approved and we were just installing a doubler to beef it up (at least that's what was going into the logs). I can understand that reasoning with the current state of 337 approvals. I had a harder time back then understanding that back then.

 

I'd admit I am a little cowboy and most of these situations show that. It is the way we do it in civil aviation...(that is make it work til it is truely a problem) it is the hardest thing for military pilots and mechanics to learn.

 

I admire those that can make hard judgement calls in the face of the circumstances... just be aware as spike stated that you may not make it far in certain sectors of this industry.

[HoverMatt]

apiaguy thanks for sharing. Take my following statements and question in light of the fact that I am completely ignorant on aircraft maintenance issues.

 

The fact that this is the norm in some sectors must mean it is not a big safety problem for them, at least in terms of fatal accidents or expensive aircraft losses. True? I would think if pilots were getting killed this kind of thing wouldn't be going on.

[Pohi]

How about this one form back when I was a student pilot.

 

You have arrived for your first scheduled supervised cross country flight. (A whopping 20 hours under your belt)You tell the CFI that you've done the math and that we can take 20 gallons of fuel in the R-22. You hear him grumble then call and order fuel (Top both tanks)(30 gallons).

When you question him he says we'll never make it back on 20.

Your destination is a class D airport with fuel. What do you do.

 

I usually prefer to carry enough fuel for the mission plus an extra bit for the "what if" situations. In my humble opinion, unless necessary to be at bare fuel minimum, I enjoy having extra fuel on board. The only time (within reason) there is too much fuel is during the fireball after the crash.

[Spike]

OK, so if you even take the time to read this non/hopefully future pilots perspective, let me first give some back ground. I am not an FAA certified A&P mechanic, only a 12 1/2 year Propulsion Craftsman in the Air Force... Trust me there is a difference. I have helped and worked on about all systems in a jet fighter ACFT and have been engine run Qualified since I had 2.5-3 years in (F-16's and F-15's).

 

I will tell you that when the mission is at stake, you better make something happen or have not only complete system knowledge, but black and white tech data to back you up. I suppose in the civilian sector the repurcusions are probably much worse if you lose a big contract, especially in these times.

 

I admit, I voted Apiaguy out of the negative because I saw his post as "real world", and he has the A&P background with the knowledge to make the call. That and if it was just the abrasion strip was blade structure relly compromised? (honestly don't know, different blades than I have worked with). Either way, congrats on the T-shirt apia and it is good to see that some pilots have the vision from both sides. Spike, thanks for trusting the ground grunts that are professionals at maitaining your bird and telling you she is airworthy.

 

All said, it aint (isn't) being cowboy if you know your ship, trust your maitainers, fly safely, and get the job done. But don't ever put getting the job done above your comfort zone. And never never never push a maintainer to sign something off he/she believes is bad. (No matter how much revenue is at stake) Wether your maintainer is right or wrong, he/she bears the weight of a mission lost if they deem an ACFT NMC. Trust me we will take that any day over a non flightline recovered ACFT.

 

 

Thanks for the insight. My intent was to provide limited information to facilitate opinions which are not learned from a text book or from a primary flight instructor. You are absolutely correct with not exceeding personal comfort zones or pushing maintainers to sign-off unairworthy items but I believe that should go without saying… Nor did I mean to imply the utility sector was a bunch of cowboys who tare up the countryside in unairworthy aircraft. To the contrary, these operators are extremely knowledgeable about the machines they operate and definitely know what is acceptable and what is unacceptable. I truly was a rookie at the time of the occurrence and needed to trust those around me who were making the decisions. As an A&P myself, I considered all of the information provided to me at the time and concluded we were safe to go. And, while I stated it was a though-n-through crack, at the time, it was really left up to interpretation from the individual doing the inspection on-site, there, at that moment. I didn’t want to muddy the scenario to generate secondary interrogations…..

 

Forgot to add, I love this thread, it gives some real world thinking/expectations to people like me. Fits right in with the scenario based training, and reminds us that the situations aren't always in the air.

 

Most of the real important judgment calls are made from the ground. While safety is our primary concern, fight safety is usually an easy judgment call to make. Ya don’t do it unless it’s safe to do. On the other hand, some judgment calls can inhibit the ability for a company to make money and this is where the line gets a little fuzzy…..

 

Plus, just because one pilot believes something is unsafe doesn’t necessarily mean that it is actually unsafe. I’ve seen this time-and-time again. That is, a safety claim with nothing to back it other then an opinion…. A perfectly airworthy aircraft, with acceptable weather and lots of fuel sitting on the ramp because someone had increased his personal caution range…… Truly pathetic….

 

BTW, thank you for your service to our country….. Be safe…

[r22butters]

The last time I listened to 'that little man in my head' who told me not to fly (because of an aircraft issue that everyone else said was ok), I averted what would have been my first engine failure,...but then again, I was paying to fly, and my job/career was not at stake.

 

 

I guess these types of things are just those "dammed if you do, dammed if you don't" kind of things?

[iChris]

1) The DO is the boss, the man, the head cheese, head honcho or the HMFIC. His interest is 10 fold of what yours are. Yes, he wants to profit the business but not to the expense of a losing a machine or a pilot (contrary to popular belief). Generally, the DO has it going on. That is, if he says you're good to go, then you're probably go to go. If you question this probability, then you should have a stack of information to back you, especially in the utility sector. Spit shined prefect machines with absolutely zero flaws are rare in the utility sector. Therefore, we metal-set the crack and left the end of the crack exposed. There, we marked the crack with paint to see if, at any time, the crack migrated any further inboard (which is not likely to happen due to centrifugal force). We checked it after every flight for the first 10 hours or so and after that intermittently. After the trip ended and approximately 230 hours of flying, the crack never budged. If you feel this is "cowboyish" then I suggest you stick to the EMS, corporate and to a certain extent, the GOM sectors so you have specific policies and procedures to back you when you claim a safety concern. And, the repair was legit and signed off. In a nutshell, if this kind of stuff bothers you then the utility market is not for you. Furthermore, before you judge me, this was my first turbine gig which I paid thousands of dollars in airfare and lodging and traveled thousands miles to get. Not only that, with literally another pilot waiting in the doorway, it was either "keep an eye on it" or "pack your bags"….. No lie….

 

 

I must admit that the blade repair would not be "legit"... I have never seen a service manual let you fill or repair a cracked abrasion strip in this manner but when it is very small it is something that is done often... usually the tip of the abrasion strip has been hammered and abraded to the point it is very thin and cracks (it was already a very thin abrasion strip). The abrasion strips do use either scotch-weld or a hysol epoxy to seal the junctions on the inboard and outboard edges of the abrasion strip from erosion, so puckying it on just a little further would be a typical field repair. If you were to put in the logs that it was "cracked" would be a problem as I'm certain the service manual says to remove the blade and send for repairs and "no cracks allowed".

 

I'd admit I am a little cowboy and most of these situations show that. It is the way we do it in civil aviation...(that is make it work til it is truely a problem) it is the hardest thing for military pilots and mechanics to learn.

 

I admire those that can make hard judgement calls in the face of the circumstances... just be aware as spike stated that you may not make it far in certain sectors of this industry.

 

That's the way it is with an increasing number of companies. However, you as PIC need to cover yourself.

 

The fact is you already have a stack of information to back you. The main reason for these management positions, like Director of Operations, is to ensure the safety of company operations (FAR 119.65). If management follows the rules all maintenance will be completed per the maintenance manual (FAR 43.13) and signed-off in the aircraft's maintenance log.

 

The problem comes when one side of the house (management) wants to deviate and get the others side (pilots) to go along.

 

As pilot in command it's your responsibility to determine that the aircraft is in an airworthy condition before every flight (FAR 91.7 and 135.71). You're the final authority as to the operation of that aircraft (FAR 91.3). Furthermore, the owner or operator (company) is primarily responsible for maintaining the aircraft in an airworthy condition (FAR 91.403 and 135.413). The company is also required to maintain airworthiness, accomplish all repairs, and make appropriate entries in the aircraft maintenance record in accordance with FAR 43.5, 43.13, 91.405, 91.407, 91.409, 135.65, and 135.419.

 

Whenever you notice an area of concern that places doubt, in your mind, to the airworthiness of the aircraft, bring it direct to your Maintenance Department, DOM, and/or management. In this case, since repairs were made on the rotor blade, make sure maintenance documented something in the maintenance record/log that addressed that repair. Now your end is covered and the ball is in their court. Maintenance has approved the aircraft as good to go.

 

The "just get 'er done" attitude is how some companies operate. So you throw the dice and most every time you win. However, if an accident befalls and people are injured or killed you'll quickly learn it wasn't worth it. As part of management, some years ago, we threw the dice once too many and crapped-out and people were seriously injured. The accident was cited as pilot error (91.7 & 91.13). However, we (DO, DOM, and CP) were also found to have cut corners. We had created a negative culture of justifying deviation that spread like a virus that led into justifying, so called, minor deviations like exceeding aircraft limitations. The culture we created was the real cause of that accident, but as usual the pilot took the fall.

 

Remember, the maintenance log sign-off takes you (PIC) off the hook as far as FAR 91.7 and sometimes FAR 91.13

 

From some of these posts, it may sound like operators or just trying their best to be safe and get things done, but it's money and survival for most of these small companies you new guys will start out with.

 

The following case is often cited in defense of FAR 91.7 (formerly FAR 91.29) violations:

 

"In the EAJA decision, the law judge concluded that, even if all the facts alleged in the complaint were true, there would not have been sufficient legal justification for the airworthiness claim because the Administrator could not establish that Mr. Crittenden should have known that the aircraft was not airworthy.

 

It is clear (and the Administrator concedes) that in order to prove a violation of section 91.29(a) by a pilot-in-command, the Administrator must establish that the pilot should have been aware that a specific condition rendered the aircraft unairworthy. See Administrator v. Parker, 3 NTSB 2997 (1980), recon. denied, 3 NTSB 3005 (1981).

 

The facts in the instant case established that the applicant reviewed the aircraft's logbooks following the inspection of August 1989. Because the aircraft passed an annual inspection in August of 1989, the law judge concluded that the applicant received an opinion from a qualified mechanic that N124K was airworthy."

 

Familiarize yourself with the maintenance side and how it works. You should have a basic understanding of your aircraft's maintenance manual and how to find information. As an example the following is what maintenance would look at for guidance with a MD500 blade issue:

 

Blade Inspection & Repair

Edited August 12, 2011 by iChris

[helonorth]

It was either that, or potentially not be available for the start of the show. The option was to “defuel” and as explained, presented a no guarantee situation. The phone call provided authorization to “make it happen” at any cost. And, I can assure you, the ESPN multimillion dollar conglomerate didn’t care in the slightest…..

So you possibly would not have been able to fly if they didn't cough up to pay for you to ground run the fuel off? Wow. Did they ever call you back for another job? They have plenty of money, I know, but to extort them for your screw up is pretty lame. This thread is indeed a learning session!

[Pohi]

If the helicopter had a collective Hobbs, could it have just been spun up without billing anyone?

[Spike]

So you possibly would not have been able to fly if they didn't cough up to pay for you to ground run the fuel off? Wow. Did they ever call you back for another job? They have plenty of money, I know, but to extort them for your screw up is pretty lame. This thread is indeed a learning session!

 

Extortion…. Really??

 

I explained the problem to the customer and provided the possible solutions. The solution THEY chose was to run the machine at THEIR expense. Furthermore, while I added the “call to the boss” comment, it meant he was fully aware of the situation and agreed to all of the solutions.

 

Additionally, out of 19 years, this was the ONLY time the “fuel tard” got it wrong. And no, I do not always have the opportunity to next the machine during refuel. Do you? I insure they know where the cap is and let them know how much to put it. It’s their job. I was not manipulating the nozzle so how could it have been MY screw-up? Was I supposed to stand there and hold his hand? It’s HIS job to refuel the aircraft to the customer’s request…. The service manager acknowledged this fact and profusely apologized…

[Spike]

If the helicopter had a collective Hobbs, could it have just been spun up without billing anyone?

Good call… Maybe… I never saw the bill..

 

The job was to fly the machine to airport X (about 400 miles away) and have the camera installed. Then fly to the staging airport near the event (about an additional 50 miles). After the event (about 6 hours of flying), return to airport X and remove the camera then return to home base the next morning. I submitted the flight times as required by the company… I was operating out of a satellite base and was not associated with any sort of the billing process.

 

I tried (and obviously failed) to limit the information so folks couldnt read into the scenarios or my replies so I wouldnt have to provide explanation for this or an explanation for that…. I learned my lesson... I guess we can go back to discussing what a 200 hour pilot can or can’t do…. Again....

 

Jezzzz, is refueling a helicopter now considered rocket science????

Edited August 12, 2011 by Spike

[SBuzzkill]

The only times we ever had too much fuel put on an aircraft was when the girls at the front desk screwed up the order. I can't think of a time where a fueler talked directly to a pilot and got the fuel order wrong. Makes me wonder what sort of system that FBO had!

Edited August 12, 2011 by SBuzzkill

[helistar]

to extort them for your screw up is pretty lame. This thread is indeed a learning session!

 

WOW... very strong accusation, considering Spike made it clear he didn't provide all the details up front and this was a learning scenario intended to help those with less experience...

 

So I would assume from your comments your hopefully willing to provide us with what you consider to be a better quality scenario?

[helonorth]

Yes, ask the customer what they would like to do to fix your problem (pony up some cash). I would be embarrassed as hell to call up a customer with something as ridiculous as fuel (here's an idea: run the fuel off and don't even mention it!). You provided plenty of information. Apparently you do not realize this has nothing to do with whose fault it is, but what are you going to do to fix it. Calling the customer is NOT an option. Not rocket science: common sense.

Edited August 12, 2011 by helonorth

[helonorth]

WOW... very strong accusation, considering Spike made it clear he didn't provide all the details up front and this was a learning scenario intended to help those with less experience...

 

So I would assume from your comments your hopefully willing to provide us with what you consider to be a better quality scenario?

Things are not looking good!

[helistar]

Apparently you do not realize this has nothing to do with whose fault it is, but what are you going to do to fix it. Calling the customer is NOT an option. Not rocket science: common sense.

 

3rd generation professional motorsports family that deals with the networks and producers allows me to have a far better understanding of what ESPN expects than you might think... Common Sense Applies, but "Professionalism is Required"... Spike made the right call and in making the call, freed up a cameraman for an hour... During these events communication is the key to success...

[Spike]

Yes, ask the customer what they would like to do to fix your problem (pony up some cash). I would be embarrassed as hell to call up a customer with something as ridiculous as fuel (here's an idea: run the fuel off and don't even mention it!). You provided plenty of information. Apparently you do not realize this has nothing to do with whose fault it is, but what are you going to do to fix it. Calling the customer is NOT an option. Not rocket science: common sense.

 

 

To be clear, I didn’t ask the customer how to fix the problem. I provided options which included potential additional problems to alleviate the issue. If you don’t keep the customer in the loop, regardless of the issue, then someday you’ll suffer for it. Guaranteed… As for “has nothing to do with whose fault it is” then why did you claim it was my fault?

 

Do this, you do what you believe you need to do (not call the customer) and I’ll do what I believe (call). Otherwise, as already suggested why don’t you offer up some event which you had to deal with during your career, that way, we can criticize your actions………

[SBuzzkill]

I'm with Spike on this one. You gotta keep them informed so they don't get screwed last minute by a problem that they could have been planning ahead for.

Edited August 12, 2011 by SBuzzkill

[helonorth]

I'm with Spike on this one. You gotta keep them informed so they don't get screwed last minute by a problem that they could have been planning ahead for.

I just don't get it. This is a problem that has nothing to do with the customer. So why call them and have them pay pay for your stupid problem? I'm curious as to what spike's other "options" were for the customer to fix HIS problem! You had too much gas, you put it on the customer. Am I missing something? Why would you look like an amateur to your customer to save $100 in fuel? Tell me why the customer EVER had to know about your dumb mistake? Just because I said it didn't matter whose fault it was didn't mean it wasn't YOUR fault. You should have fixed it and ate the cost.

[Spike]

I just don't get it.

 

Enough said.....

[rotormandan]

How about pre-flit or pre-flute?

[Utility Pilotechnician]

Judgment…. You make the call…

 

1. Today you’re going to fly... What do you do?

 

2. You’ve prepositioned the helicopter... What do you do?

 

3. You arrive at the hangar at 5 am... What do you do?

...

 

Here's an Alaska Ops point-of-view...

 

1. Talk to the DOM or mechanic in charge of the repair to ensure the repair has been properly documented with an A&P certificate number attached. It is in the best interest of the company officials including DO/DOM/CP to have proper documentation... One BAD accident can literally shut down a small "mom & pop" operation. Paper work is good? Alright, grab your toothbrush and go make some money.

 

2. Here in AK we are constantly dealing with remote fuel operations and odd-standard practices. I regularly have a syphon hose or hand pump in my possession. 5 Min. and three jerry cans (5 gallon gas cans) later you're good to go! What? No Syphon hose? No problem, your local NAPA has one for $9.99, they also have the jerry cans if the local FBO doesn't. I have yet to read a regulation stipulate you can't syphon fuel back out of your helicopter, just don't spill it and the EPA is happy too.

 

3. In AK we deal with fog A LOT! Bring a sleeping bag and a tent Weathered at the base = boredom and no money.... Weathered with the client = money in the bank. Of course I always fill the customer in with what my thoughts are on the weather trends and that we will try and get as much work done before the wx shuts us down. They appreciate being included in the decision making process.

 

 

3. I'm at the LZ in 5 min. from ignition.. pick up my cargo and back to the hangar in less than 25 min. round trip... I land in 500 overcast and 3 miles.. maybe I called SVFR on the way in if the tower was open....

 

This doesn't really help the customer as they wanted to do a survey of some sort, land or aerial we don't know, but at any rate I don't think they were planning on surveying your hangar. Good thought process on the wx though.

 

...Having said that, at the time this is the call I made, and why.

 

1) The DO is the boss, the man, the head cheese, head honcho or the HMFIC.... “keep an eye on it” or “pack your bags”....

 

2) ...I contacted the customer (ESPN) and notified them of the potential problem. Naturally, as with any “live” production shoots, they basically said, “whatever it takes to have the bird overhead at the start of the show!”...I’ve never needed to “defuel” a helicopter in the field. For those of you who said, “defuel”, as a matter of comparison, who of you have actually defueled in the field?...he was happy with the additional revenue…..

 

 

@Spike

 

It's easy for us to sit here and arm-chair supervise your situations However it is my belief that we ALL strive to make the best decisions we can at the time they are presented. Some of us (not me) have more experience than others which means they'll have different solutions because they've either done it already or talked to someone who had. I think you did a great job with the knowledge you had and the missions were completed. I'm not intending to criticize, only showing others my thoughts on your explanation so they have a different point-of-view.

 

1) You're right! The DO is the HMFIC and I am standing right behind you helmet and toothbrush in hand eager to go! However, that doesn't mean we can't respectfully and honorably use some "CYA" tactics like asking to see the logbook entry for the repair.

 

2) I fully agree talking to the customer, THEY should ALWAYS be in the loop. However, I nor my boss would EXPECT them to cover the cost of the FBOs screw up, that is between your operator and the FBO manager. I don't care if the client is little miss Molly or Bill freaking Gates, it's good business practice to fix your own problems. Customer retention has more to do with the success of your fellow pilots and their families then it does the owner of the company you work for. If the customer later offers to cover the cost because they understand it wasn't your (the operators) fault and that they are protecting their interests by guarding their favorite helicopter company from any financial hardships then GREAT!!!

 

3) Good call... We drive helicopters, we can always park and wait That's why I don't fly planes.

 

 

 

@iChris..... Great insight! Thanks!

[Spike]

Here's an Alaska Ops point-of-view...

 

@Spike

 

 

Thanks for the constructive input and welcome to the forum.

 

The point with the whole thread was to enlighten the 200 hour guys that, not all of the decisions we make as pilots are clear-cut airborne decisions. These decisions involve many other facets including management and the customer amongst others. Not just weather, preflight and insuring IMSAFE…

 

Realistically, there were many solutions to these scenarios. And, I never said I came up with was the best answer. I provided the scenario and the solution I came up with at the time. Would I have different solutions now? Maybe… The deal is, it’s important to make the best decision you can under the circumstances presented at the time. Having said that, the criticism I’ve received regarding the fuel scenario is purely speculation. Specifically, NO ONE knows the relationship I had, or my company had, with this particular customer. Was it the first job or the 100th? Has a problem presented itself in the past and the company paid to solve the problem, unsolicited? Was some kind of agreement or specific contract paragraph in place mitigating these kinds of circumstances which allowed the customer to be billed? Maybe the customer embraced our company as their own… Maybe my boss was a convicted felon who cheated everyone he could? Who knows… Only I do… Truthfully, as stated in a previous post, I never knew what the customer was actually charged. The extra time MAY or MAY NOT have been billed. I was the pilot, not a staff member of the finance department. IMO, to criticize or “armchair” is easy. Solving problems at the moment without playing the “blame-game” is more difficult…

 

Again, thanks for the insight. This forum can provide a wealth of information to the new folks. If anyone’s goal is to purely snipe, then there are other forums which will welcome you with open arms…

[SBuzzkill]

Spike this was a great thread and very thought provoking.

 

From what I have seen working on the ground in general aviation there is a very broad range of decision making. There would be days where I never considered flying and nobody else is flying because of the ridiculous wind gusts, low ceilings, rain, etc. and out of the dark, cloudy sky comes the Trislander on his daily UPS run.

 

I've seen pilots come and go from companies that they felt were pressuring them to fly in conditions they found to be beyond their limits, and I've seen other pilots at the same company stroll out to the aircraft whistling and loving every minute of their job. At the end of the day they always come back safe.

 

I guess any pilot needs to evaluate their personal limitations and think about them in relation to the types of jobs they are applying for. If you think the job is going to push your limits too far then it's probably not the job to apply for. I think a lot of times pilots get stuck in a poorly fitting job because they can't find anything else, and that's a shame both for the company they are working for and for the pilots themselves.

Edited August 23, 2011 by SBuzzkill