Q&A Discussion for our Aerospace and Defense Customers
Recently active
Our company direction is to move to Oracle 23C in 2024. What are the plans for IFS Maintenix on-premises to move to Oracle 23C?
Southwest Airlines Problem Statement: During heavy checks and cabin visits, QC often has multiple identical faults to document with only slight changes to station locations or seat rows. We would like a way to create a template or duplicate faults without having to goes through all the steps of fault creation. Southwest is looking for feedback/guidance if this is currently available functionality in Maintenix.
It would appear that all the Hyperlinks from the tab produce 'The request is invalid and could not be processed.'V8.3 SP5.
South west is pursuing better processes of ensuring Panel requiring special instructions have job steps for the Mechanics to sign off. We are seeking information if other users have developed a process for this . As current functionality on OPEN/CLOSE panels does not allow job steps to be authored.
Hi AllI’m a beginner of IFS Cloud MRO and IFS Maintenix, and confusing with the relationship between them. In other words, I want to know what kind of customer business these two solutions can handle, and what kind of customer need to use one of them or both of them. Thank you so much!
Southwest Airlines will soon be assigning seats, so the need to track inop seats at the actual seat number will be critical. Currently, we track seats for each row, not at the individual seat number. When we have a fault or an MEL, the seat in question is notated in the fault description, but we have no means of being able to select the actual seat. How do other operators, that assign seats, track inop seats in Maintenix? Are your seats currently tracked to the individual seats?
When a demand is generated for materials from different Work Orders MRP is not possible to differentiate which requisition corresponds to which demand. Without the ability to connect the demand to the originating requisition, once the PR>PO is processed and the parts are received into inventory, the inventory can then be reserved by any of the WOs.This is challenging for Aerospace Industry, due to having strict controls over the parts to be used for specific work tasks. Customers are using custom fields such as “Tail No: provides the Aircraft tail number. and Demand Info - provides the WO number. in the purchase requisition lines to resolve the issue. However this leads to other challenges when the PR line contains multiple Work orders for same due date. What is expected is a soft pegging between the work tasks material demand and Purchase Requisition and the Purchase Orders, so that when the part is received to the inventory correct part is reserved to the correct demand from the W
When new deliverables is available for download, e.g. a new release, or being distributed we would like to be able to confirm that the files have not been compromised, altered or tampered, with(preferably) a digital signature* of the software files or binarys, or a checksum control of the software files or binarys.*This digital signature validates the identity of the software author or publisher and verifies that the file has not been altered or tampered with since it was signed. Is this applicable in the way described above ?
Is ATCM going to be adding individual parts to existing part groups?Is there going to be common functionality between inventory classes, or will there be a difference based on the class?
IFS Maintenix already have developed API for AeroBuy from AeroExchange few years ago (pre-Covid). Do you know if there is on IFS agenda to add API for AeroRepair ? I know there are Maintenix customer is already using AeroRepair module from AeroExchange and each one is using their internal method of trying to automate processes between Maintenix and AeroRepair.
Hi All,I am working with an aircraft OEM and they manage different kind of rotable pools with their customers wherein customer can take a part from the rotable pool and in-return will supply the unserviceable core item to the OEM for repair.This OEM does not carry out internal repairs and create a CRO of repair order type “external service order” to send the unserviceable core part (P1) to supplier and get it repaired. Some of the times, the supplier will perform modification to the part (P1) which leads to change of part number (P1 now becomes P2). When we receive the modified part (P2), OEM would perform Register Arrival - utilize modify receipt conditions and change the part number (P2 - ensure alternates are defined) and receive the modified part (P2) in inventory. This creates a part serial transaction for the received modified part and serial.Now the caveat over here is, the CRO external order which was initially created for the unserviceable part P1 remains open and under the tr
Description•Add a History tab in Stock Details, to see updates and changes made in Stock details.Impact•Restock levels and automatic restock actions changes need to be reviewed via periodic analysis. Need historical change information to tie to the outcome of those changes.Role•Inventory PlanningFrequency•Daily
Southwest Airlines would like to know how other operators manage Tasks that require accomplishment after a minimum usage but before a maximum usage. Plan after but Before a specified scheduling parameter. example: Task must be accomplished after 10 flight cycles (FC) and before 25 flight cycles after initialization. Task must be accomplished 4 times and then terminate: Accomplished between 50-100 FC Accomplished between 150-200 FC Accomplished between 250-300 FC Accomplished between 350-400 FC terminates Terminates after 4th accomplishment
With the upgrade to Maintenix 8.3 SP10, we need to upgrade JasperReports Server to version 9.0.0, this is fine, we’ve already installed it on our Dev box. We have a lot of custom reports and we have used Jasper Studio in the past to develop and publish reports. Unfortunately, it looks like Jasper Studio 9.0.0 now needs an internet connection to log into the Jaspersoft community before we can use it. Our Dev box (and all our servers) are not allowed to be on the internet due to ITAR constraints, we also aren’t allowed to install software on our local machines due to our company security policy. We have a lot of security restrictions that make this process difficult.We’re talking to our Infrastructure team to try and find a solution and are wondering if anyone else has run into this issue and how they have solved it.
