Discuss About The Efficiency Approved Helicopter Maintenance.

IT Systems and Organizational Factors

Discuss About The Efficiency Approved Helicopter Maintenance.

In present era, it has become unthinkable to run effective aircraft maintenance operations without using IT systems. The necessity to use those kinds of IT systems has been most of the time originating from specific business use. For instance, O’Connor et al.  (2017) showed that companies require going through inventory management. Hence inventory management system or aircraft reliability is needed to be imposed. On more complex scales, Albers et al. (2017) explain that aircraft agencies possess various distinct methods to use and require to over to integrated maintenance and engineering tool fulfilling every requirement and needs. 

Maintenance activities of the helicopter are essential where a single carelessness can lead to bringing disaster. The events of maintenance for helicopters are developed by several procedures, which can lead to the extended periods of downtime and wastage of the resources along with time. For determining whether an aircraft integrated the system, single-purpose system or IT system could be of competitive advantage. Henriksen and Ponte (2017) argues that the business need to see the system as a resource of the organisation. As it treated as a resource, one can apply various commonly used frameworks for determining whether it has been delivering competitive advantage or not.

For examples, the models can look at the resources and then determine whether the resource is valuable or it is rare or costly to imitate or could be exploited by the agency. According to Van der Linden (2015) as the business needs to seek whether the IT system used has been under engineering or maintenance environment has been providing a competitive advantage, there have been four primary arguments to ask to themselves.

First, it must be determined whether the IT systems have been adding value by exploiting different opportunities or neutralising valuable threats. Next, it must be found out whether the organization have been possessing similar IT system. As the companies never have the similar IT system like others, they must find out whether they have been facing a cost disadvantage since it needs to acquire same software tool. Lastly, it must be determined whether the company has been organised for exploiting the total potential of their IT system.

As any Approved Helicopter maintenance system is needed to be improved and then the system should be understood. Understanding deep into the aircraft agency can make a notable contribution towards prevention of accidents. One of the important accomplishments in the "Reason Model",  this is deployed to do away with workplace factors, immediate factors and organisational factors as a systematic precursor of security measures and not to lay the blame to the people. For instance, as demonstrated by Van der Linden (2015), various activities from Maintenance Error Investigation and Managing Engineering Safety Health, showed that inputs to the tasks have been vital to determine how it has been performed and there have been precise causes towards accidents and incidents. This model has been providing a systematic analytic framework to work back from a specific event for identifying unknown and proximal factors. This can influence specific outcomes. The weakness of the approach has been that it has been providing no basis to understand the precise role of the organisational factors like how they can operate normally and what has been distinctive about their operation. These are for specific instances, as things are not working well.

Models and Frameworks for Competitive Advantage

However, weakness of the approach is that it has not been providing any basis to understand precise roles of these kinds of organizational factors. This has been regarding how they have normally been operating and what has been distinctive about their operation in a specific case, as the things have not been working well for them. In this way, it can be said that the strength of the reason model has also been its weakness. Here, for instance, the reason has been highlighting differences taking place between hindsight and different foresight. With the help of hindsight, one can very often recognise the presence of warning signs. This, when utilised properly can prevent the disaster. Lumpé (2016) discusses that accidents have been appearing to the outcome of largely complex coincidences that is very rarely seen by various people involved people regarding the way in which aircraft maintenance dealing has also been problematic. Since less has been known regarding how systems have been operating, to deal with human error has turned centred in various information campaigns. It has been showing the accident and revealing individuals to reject those errors repeatedly. People included in such kind of incident have been sent for training. Thus at the operational level, this policy of the approved helicopter maintenance organisation has turned into "blame and train policy" from a "no blame" one. Categorizations of errors and violation have also been bringing difficulties. This is done through documenting analysis track task performance, surveying and interviewing people and naturalistic observations of tasks.

Klimas (2016) found out that more than one-third of the surveyed tasks aircraft maintenance engineering has not carried out their work according to manuals or procedures delivered by the manufacturer or the company. It is found that under various normal states of events the aviation system has not been supporting performance. Instead, people have been optimizing their system performance and then changing error theories over their head.

On the other hand, Hudson (2017) raises the question why those things can be referred as "violations" while the people are doing them for making such kind of system work.  However, error theories have never been providing various criterions to differentiate between right system or proper procedure and the bad ones. This event has been taking the value of current system granted. Despite this, it has been leaving blame before the doorstep of the individual. Since while investigating accidents there have been findings regarding violations that have been taking place most of the time saying one thing. However, it has been known that in routine practice violations there has been occurring about 30% of the time. This is because it cannot be concluded that these violations are accidents. For example, Wagner and Walton (2016) researchers as in a crash there has been finding that violations have been taking place for about 30-40% of time indicating one thing, however, in typical practice violations has been occurring for the same time. Thus it cannot be concluded that violations have not been causing accidents. 

Role of Organizational Factors in Accident Prevention

However, Holt (2016) examines that the requirement to change operational and organisational system must not be considered to be granted. Furthermore, there have been decidedly less longitudinal studies about change processes and those evidence at present has been tending to suggest that gaining operational and organisational change has been mostly problematic. Moreover, Mediratta, Ahluwalia and Yeo (2016) investigated that there have been very complicated factors assimilating to maintain stability in any approved helicopter maintenance organisation. Due to this reason, people are required to understand that these factors can overcome those kinds of inertial forces within a resources programme of change and adequately planned. As per the article by Kearns (2018), one series of in-depth investigations over human or economics factors under helicopter maintenance industry since the last decade has displayed few complicated relationships taking place between organisational and human elements that are to be considered. This situation occurs as these aviation industries can implement or plan improvement or change programmes with any likelihood of success. The interplay of those factors like the necessity of large elements versus the need for double standard or flexibility that could be seen to exemplify various complicated homoeostatic mechanisms. Further, instances of this include multiple inabilities to cope up with different normal operations regarding quality management systems, organisation culture for meeting customers over various necessities of staff, distinct mistrust ensuing and different double standard related to task documentation. These tasks have been maintaining the relative stability of operating system under dynamic environment instead of allowing the changes to take place.

In order to understand the requirement for change has been posing two practical and theoretical challenges as described by Garefalakis et al. (2016). These are helpful to understand the processes to change understand how to move forward in altering the system. This initial challenge requires different independent criterion of system adequacy. Eriksson and Steenhuis (2015) highlighted that here different human or ergonomic factor error theirs have been falling short. Various theories regarding human or ergonomic factors for human error have been falling short. These theories have been simply driven by different ambiguity whether those mistakes are cognitive or systemic. Siddiqui and Bisaria (2018) at one end describe it as a procedural violation and Davies, and Delane (2017) refers this to as bricolage. However, it has been unclear when either those two conflicting interpretations have been proper or correct. Duburguet and King (2015) have defined the error as per as moving away from a process. This has been the result of precluding various critical analysis of that procedural system.

Challenges in Changing Operational and Organizational Systems

Apart from these, here, the utmost criterion of the system adequacy, individuals requires to possess an ecologically and an extensive comprehensive model of operational system. This has been representing not what is been meant to happen. It denoted what has been occurring in reality. Apart of the process to be ultimate criterion regarding system adequacy peoples needs to possess ecologically and an effective comprehensive model that should be valid of operational system. Those models has been providing possibilities to make sense how those systems requires to change for improving the way it has been functioning. Moreover, Eriksson and Steenhuis (2015) reveal that there has been proper methodology needed to redesign and analyse operational processes as per which the operations have been achieving those outcomes. Tasks carried out here as part of the projects of approved helicopter maintenance organisation always attempted to address those challenges done through exploring model regarding human or ergonomic factors moving beyond assessing human fallibility and variously related performance deficits. This has been rousingly discussing how people have been behaving in ordinary operational contexts and how those performances in those contexts could be developed. Moreover, it has been addressing how people have been acting in the familiar operational background and how their performance in those situations could be improved. This has been the work related to aircraft maintenance checking development programme that has been reported here.

Further, Patankar and Taylor (2017) reported, in this case, there is a high necessity for scientific approach or various latest model of imposing training for aircraft maintenance technicians. Additionally, exhaustive studies are done to maintain training system under multiple nations has shown many exciting reality regarding limitations as per as Reicher, Currie and Birchall (2018). The training system is regarded as a score board approach instead of competency and skill-based approach. Ryerson (2017) suggests a cognitive model-based method for increasing efficiency to maintain training. Further, the heuristic model is helpful to transform maintenance training from a system that must be compliance based towards a performance-based approach. Van der Linden (2015) had collected data from more than seventy training including six different countries and highlighted that the model of occurrence based training, whether it can be incident or accident has higher efficiency in comparison to the traditional method. In this way, the proposed innovative model of practice has been seen empirically as an an= smart, capable model regarding training of aircraft maintenance.

The Necessity of an Ecological and Comprehensive Model of the Operational System

There have been different factors giving a contribution to the rise in maintenance cost. Aircraft has been needing lots of support along with some high level of modifications doe some of those aeroplanes. All of these have been contributing to rising in maintenance costs. Aviation, at the same time, have been achieving new aircrafts generating admixture of new and old technology. Eriksson and Steenhuis (2015) show the fact that both the latest and conventional aeroplanes are maintained by same workforce rending to raise the cost of maintenance. Further, an interesting feature is that the same couple of year time is keeping expenses as a percentage of overall operating costs. However, this has been not sounding too much as stated by Van der Linden (2015), and just denoting about half of one percent. Despite this, the importance of the rise is seen as one considers that the savings to the aviation industry have the costs held constant over those two years of time. It has been a substantial number and has been indicating the difference between loss and profit for few air carriers. 

Reicher, Currie and Birchall (2018) explain that the fact to maintain those costs as a percent of overall operating loss has been providing a powerful incentive for examining the productivity of the workforce. As the performance of the maintaining of the workforce is improved, the productivity correspondingly enhances. Since the primary interest of helicopters organizations has been safety, many of them have not been concerned with the productivity of the industry and like to work with the industry in such cases. Further, it has been difficult to distinguish productivity and safety. As one develops the flight operations and maintenance safety, the productivity of workforce automatically improves. Research programmes done by Mediratta, Ahluwalia and Yeo (2016) have been targeting a safety in an almost certain manner having a positive effect on their productivity also. In particular, Van der Linden (2015) showed that four major factors have been affecting the technician of aviation maintenance. It has included characteristics of aircraft and working environment along with data and information available and training of technician. 

The factors have been rising popularly as these kinds of commercial aircraft industries have been realizing the human error instead of mechanical failure underlining most aviation incidents and accidents. Mediratta, Ahluwalia and Yeo (2016) explain that human factors regarding technologies or science have been multidisciplinary field shave been involving a contribution from anthropometry, operations research, statistics, industrial design, engineering and psychology. This term has been covering science to understand properties of human abilities and application of this for understanding deployment, development and designing of services and systems and art to ensure successful implementation of principles of human factors. All these are done to maintain the working environment as described by Garefalakis et al. (2016). List of these human factors is impacting the maintenance of aviation and extend the work performance. Moreover, they have been encompassing a broad range of challenges influencing people very separately as people never have similar abilities, limitations, weaknesses, strengths and capabilities. Van der Linden (2015) examined that it has been unfortunate that aviation maintenance tasks have never been accounting for a huge quantity of human limitations and have been resulting in injuries and technical errors. Some of those factors are serious, and in almost all the cases, as some of them are combined, they have been creating issues contributing to incident or accident.

Wagner and Walton (2016) highlight that human factors have comprised of multiple disciplines. The research on these factors has been complicated and since there has been only a straightforward answer for fixing the changes how people have been affecting through certain situations or conditions. Maintenance of aviation has been researching on human factors having overall aim or optimize and recognize factors affecting human performance to inspect and maintain. According to Mediratta, Ahluwalia and Yeo (2016), the focus has been initiating on technicians and extending to the complete technical and engineering organization. Their research is optimized through incorporating various disciplines affecting human factors along with helping how people could work more efficiently maintaining work performance. 

Garefalakis et al. (2016) help in understanding that there have been two environments for aviation maintenance. Every aviation organization consists of physical workshops on-ramp, shop or hangar. Additionally, there has been organization scenario existing under the organizations. Various human factor programs have been paying attention to both the environments. The physical settings have been visible. This has been including ranges of workplace design, cleanliness, noise control lighting, humidity and temperature. These must be acknowledged by aviation industries as written by Karnis, Fang and Bristow (2015).

 The next environment is the organizational environment which is less tangible and environment. Vital factors within an organization have been related typically to culture, mutual respect, shared values, communications and cooperation related to profitability, safety and additional vital factors. Best companies have been supporting and guiding their people and fostering their safety culture as shown by Addepalli et al. (2018). Safe culture is one where this possesses a shared value and an attitude towards security. In safe culture, every person needs to understand the individual role for contributing overall mission safely.

Every successful human factor has been carefully analysing the actions of people that must do to complete tasks safely and efficiently. For this, Timmis et al. (2015) suggest JTA or Job Tasks which is a standard human factor to recognize attitudes, skills and knowledge needed to do all those tasks for a given job. JTA has been helping to identify what the instructions and tools and other resources have been necessary. Further, adherence to JTA has been assuring employees to get properly trained, and every workplace possesses necessary tool and other resources to do the task. Various regulatory authorities have needed JTA services as the aviation industries general maintenance training and manual plan. Various human factor problems related to job cards and technical documentation has been under the actions. All these are understood from the article of Turney (2017) ensuring checklists and instructions as a useable and correct approach.

Thus it is seen from the above discussion that maintenance of approved helicopter maintenance is a necessary intervention for overcoming human limitations and develop individual and group performance. Maintaining those training raises the situation and competency awareness and thus the technicians have been likely to commit to fewer error while the maintenance. Though the technicians have been attaining over 90% of the sophisticated skills through various on-job training, it has been an expensive approach of airlines to make them study through multiple experiences. The above factors identified points out that helicopter maintenance training needs a radically latest approach for delivery. 

In helicopter maintenance, operation management is one of the important roles within any enterprises. It helps to develop backbone on which the organization is structured.  The operation is also considered a process that is instrumental in governing the functionality of the departments like finance, logistics, human resources as well as research and development. Operations can be defined as the input of the raw materials as well as resources through a particular process and gaining the output of product or service. Apart from this, the input of raw materials as well as resources by process of making conversion where several components act as an essential role. Hence, the significance of streaming the operation procedure needs interaction between several departments within the particular enterprise.

The functional strategy of a particular organisation is included in operational proceedings within the business opportunity. It is considered as a series of the activities set by the organization. It is needed to fulfil the demands of customers. Hence, it is important to develop effective functional strategy and to get an unserviceable helicopter due to maintenance or make the service effective. It encompasses the supporting departments like logistics and stores. The tool crib is generic as well as special tools developed for helicopter maintenance. Also, it helps to ensure that the tools are correctly calibrated as well as perfect working condition. On the other hand, the environment like temperature as well as humidity is properly controlled for prevention of deterioration of the tools. 

On the other hand, the bonded store is inspected as well as serviceable spares that can be kept as well as systematically arranged on the racks. It helps several rubber based spares like tyres as well as O-rings are provided for special attention for shelf life as well as discarded shelf life that is exceeded in the project. The Quarantine store is usually rejected. 

Planning and technical records department are included for monitoring flight hours as well as calendar dates for every helicopter in the roster to ensure that the helicopters are usually brought for maintaining the specific interval. On the other hand, technical records department is responsible for updating flight hours on the logbooks as well as log-cards for individual elements. Updated hours are fed back to the planning department for anticipating in future as well as forecasting of maintenance activities for the helicopters.

 Quality control and department of assurance need to ensure that maintenance activities are properly carried out with proper adherence to the maintenance manual as well as related manuals. The department is responsible for ensuring that new spares are used on a helicopter at the time of maintenance.  The department is responsible for providing complete documentation of the spares. The technical inspectors are needed to double check the jobs carried out for the helicopter as well as helps during functional tests to ensure the systems are working correctly. The quality assurance department is responsible for upkeep safety equipment. It is important for the organization to develop a facility for maintaining the services. The facilities like emergency showers, eye wash solutions are made by the organization. The avionic workshop is responsible for troubleshooting, maintenance activities and defect rectification.

Discussion of the literature review is helpful to analyse the secondary data obtained in the research. In the chapter, literature review related to the factors of approved helicopter maintenance service is done. It assists the researcher to gain effective strategy for maintaining services for helicopters. Also, literature review part is also helpful to get a proper outcome for the research.

References

Albers, S., Baum, H., Auerbach, S. and Delfmann, W., 2017. Strategic Management in the Aviation Industry. Routledge.

Boyd, B.K., Adams, R. and Gove, S., 2017. Research methodology of governance studies: Challenges and opportunities. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 25(6), pp.382-383.

Brinkmann, S., 2014. Interview. In Encyclopedia of critical psychology (pp. 1008-1010). Springer New York.

Bye, R.J., Johnsen, S.O. and Lillehammer, G., 2018. Addressing Differences in Safety Influencing Factors—A Comparison of Offshore and Onshore Helicopter Operations. Safety, 4(1), p.4.

Davies, J.M. and Delaney, G., 2017. Can the aviation industry be useful in teaching oncology about safety?. Clinical Oncology, 29(10), pp.669-675.

Duburguet, D. and King, G.G., 2015. Leveraging Virtual Training Environments to Develop Professional Flight Officers in a Rapidly Changing Aviation Industry. International Journal of Professional Aviation Training & Testing Research, 7(2).

Eriksson, S. and Steenhuis, H.J. eds., 2015. The global commercial aviation industry. Routledge.

Garefalakis, A., Mantalis, G., Lemonakis, C. and Vassakis, K., 2016. Determinants of Profitability in Aviation Industry of Europe and America. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 5(2), pp.131-137.

Helmreich, R.L. and Merritt, A.C., 2017. Culture at work in aviation and medicine: National, organizational and professional influences. Routledge.

Henriksen, L.F. and Ponte, S., 2017. Public orchestration, social networks, and transnational environmental governance: Lessons from the aviation industry. Regulation & Governance.

Holt, T.B., 2016. The Problem with Postsecondary Aviation Safety Training, as Voiced by Aviation Industry Professionals.

Hudson, P.T., 2017, November. Safety culture and human error in the aviation industry: In search of perfection. In Aviation Resource Management: Proceedings of the Fourth Australian Aviation Psychology Symposium: v. 1 (pp. 19-31). Routledge.

Karp, J.F., Dew, M.A., Wahed, A.S., Fitzgerald, K., Bolon, C.A., Weiner, D.K., Morse, J.Q., Albert, S., Butters, M., Gildengers, A. and Reynolds, C.F., 2016. Challenges and solutions for depression prevention research: methodology for a depression prevention trial for older adults with knee arthritis and emotional distress. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 24(6), pp.433-443.

Kearns, S.K., 2018. Fundamentals of International Aviation: An Introduction for the Next Generation of Aviation Professionals.

Klimas, P., 2016. Organizational culture and coopetition: An exploratory study of the features, models and role in the Polish Aviation Industry. Industrial Marketing Management, 53, pp.91-102.

Lewis, S., 2015. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Health promotion practice, 16(4), pp.473-475.

Lumpé, M.P., 2016. Leadership and organization in the aviation industry. Routledge.

Lushey, C.J. and Munro, E.R., 2015. Participatory peer research methodology: An effective method for obtaining young people’s perspectives on transitions from care to adulthood?. Qualitative Social Work, 14(4), pp.522-537.

Machado, M.C., Araújo, M.A.G.E., Urbina, L.M.S. and Macau, F.R., 2016. A qualitative study of outsourced aeronautical maintenance: The case of Brazilian organizations. Journal of Air Transport Management, 55, pp.176-184.
Antonovsky, A., Pollock, C. and Straker, L., 2014. Identification of the human factors contributing to maintenance failures in a petroleum operation. Human factors, 56(2), pp.306-321.

Martin, R.A., 2017. Challenging the Sacred Assumption: A Call for a Systemic Review of Army Aviation Maintenance. US Army School for Advanced Military Studies Fort Leavenworth United States.

Maurino, D.E., Reason, J., Johnston, N. and Lee, R.B., 2017. Beyond aviation human factors: Safety in high technology systems. Routledge.

McCusker, K. and Gunaydin, S., 2015. Research using qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods and choice based on the research. Perfusion, 30(7), pp.537-542.

Mediratta, R., Ahluwalia, K. and Yeo, S.H., 2016. State-of-the-art on vibratory finishing in the aviation industry: an industrial and academic perspective. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 85(1-4), pp.415-429.

O’Connor, P., Flin, R., Fletcher, G. and Hemsley, P., 2017. Methods used to evaluate the effectiveness of flightcrew CRM training in the UK aviation industry. Crew Resource Management: Critical Essays.

Patankar, M.S. and Taylor, J.C., 2017. Applied human factors in aviation maintenance. Taylor & Francis.

Patankar, M.S. and Taylor, J.C., 2017. Risk management and error reduction in aviation maintenance. Routledge.

Reicher, J., Currie, S. and Birchall, D., 2018. Safety of working patterns among UK neuroradiologists: what can we learn from the aviation industry and cognitive science?. TheBritish journal of radiology, 91(xxxx), p.20170284.

Ryerson, M.S., 2017. FUTURE ENERGY DEMANDS ON THE GLOBAL AVIATION INDUSTRY.

Shanmugam, A. and Paul Robert, T., 2015. Human factors engineering in aircraft maintenance: a review. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 21(4), pp.478-505.

Shukri, S.A., Millar, R.M., Gratton, G. and Garner, M., 2016, October. The potential risk of communication media in conveying critical information in the aircraft maintenance organisation: a case study. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 152, No. 1, p. 012044). IOP Publishing.

Siddiqui, N.N. and Bisaria, G., 2018. Innovative Techniques of Motivation for Employee Retention in Aviation Industry. ANVESHAK-International Journal of Management, 7(1), pp.136-151.

Ta, V. and Ickes, W., 2018. Empathic Accuracy: Standard Stimulus Paradigm (EA?SSP). The Sourcebook of Listening Research: Methodology and Measures, pp.259-264.

Van der Linden, F.R., 2015. Airlines and Air Mail: The Post Office and the Birth of the Commercial Aviation Industry. University Press of Kentucky.

Wagner, S.M. and Walton, R.O., 2016. Additive manufacturing’s impact and future in the aviation industry. Production Planning & Control, 27(13), pp.1124-1130.

Wong, S. and Brooks, N., 2015. Evolving risk-based security: A review of current issues and emerging trends impacting security screening in the aviation industry. Journal of Air Transport Management, 48, pp.60-64.