This forum is for conversations about IFS Maintenix.
- 35 Topics
- 87 Replies
Why does Maintenix use use terms that are not industry standard? Two examples come immediately to mind: The term “record oil uptake” should be “record oil service” and using the term “inventory” when ATA codes are the industry standard.Granted both are minor issues but it illustrates a point. That point is there seeming no consulting the people that actually use Maintenix. The people that use Maintenix in high stress environments such as turning aircraft under time constraints.
MTX, clear workscope button can be click without confirmation
When you prepare the Workpacke and it is commited, you can scheduel the WP, however the the CLEAR WORKSCOPE button located beside allows you to clear the workscope, this without without warning.It is possible to have a confirmation windows when you missclick on the “CLEAR WORKSCOPE” button instead of Schedule Workscope to avoid clearing the workscope.This can have a big impact on the already agreed workcope.
MTX, System do not prevent to COMMIT a WP with a FORECAST TASK
When preparing Workpackage upfront the WP may contains Task in FORECAST status. The system does allow you to COMMIT a WP with this TASK FORECAST without a warning.By process we know that WP with TASK FORECAST shouldn’t be commit.Do you have a warning or a message alert to trigger to warn the user to NOT COMMIT the WP because it contains a FORECAST Tasks?
Finding a way to administrate Fault Definition (FD) in MTX
Increased use of FD get more frequent FD need to be removed.A FD cannot be obsoleted or deleted from the CS it was created.Today the FD are renamed starting by "OBSOLETED" which is not correct for end user in the GUI. Potential solution identified are :RSTAT2 the FD? Move the FD into an unused organisation? Any other solution?
Fault Definition use of Failure Category and Failure Type Field?
Failure Category & Fault Priority Field, are BASELINE defined by Fault Definition and not modifiable on ACTUALSFault Type field, is BASELINE & ACTUAL modifiableCan IFS advise is a Parent / Child relation between Failure Category & Failure type exist ? How IFS would recommend tio uses those type of fields with Fault Definition?And finalys how to set up Fault Priority to have them reflecting a priority according to the Fault Definition?
Initialize as not applicable in Ref Doc limitation.
When engineering users flag N/A more than 20 A/C at same time on INITIALIZE REF DOC page generates "error message", which is in fact a "message built by IFS due to technical limitations "URL exeeded the maximum lenght".Please see attached docDoes other airlines have the same experience?If Yes, an IDEA could be raised to support a system improvement for Large fleet administration.
Hyperlink to Maintenix Reference Document or Requirement
Hello, We have the possibility to go to a Barcode with an hyperlink with the following format:http://mtx.afklmdomain.com/maintenix/servlet/ScanBarcode?aBarcodeScan=TRFX123456789&aReturnToPage=/Do you have similar hyperlink definition to go directly to a document in the baseline?like a Refdoc, a Requirement code…? by definition the baseline documents do not have Barcodes. Thanks
Price Type Field Modification
The Repair Order Price Type field needs to retain the type selected by the Component Repair Analyst and not change to “Confirmed” when the order is received. Once the CRA validates the service with the vendor that matches the price paid these should remain on the order and not automatically be changed by the system. The field currently changes to confirmed on receipt. Need to validate the Price Type field is a text field Need to expand the Price Type field to include all services: Test, Inspect, Calibration, Minor Repair, Std Repair, Major Repair, Overhaul, Modification, RAI
Where do I find the planned release schedule for IFS Maintenix?
I was trying to find the Release Schedule for IFS Maintenix but couldn’t find it.I found the master article for release schedule that is tagged as a related topic. However, this article didn’t contain any information regarding when SP6 and SP7 is planned to be released.
Access to Maintenix for 3rd party
Can someone please inform us how they are providing access to their Maintenix system to third parties i.e. MRO / Line stations ? Do you use citrix, vpn, or some other technology, or are your servers on the internet? We are trying to plan our configuration and are looking to find out how others have theirs configured.
Service Condition - Order Information Retention
On a repair order, the service condition should not change to the current condition of the unit. Today, a unit will be received back from a vendor in SVC condition. At this point the order should lock the condition as it’s the condition we received the unit from the vendor and is also the condition for our price. Our current system will change these order conditions to whatever the current condition is of the unit. For example, the below Closed order shows the service condition as installed on an aircraft. When it’s removed this condition will change again to unserviceable. We need to get this condition locked to the condition of the unit at time of receipt and not to keep changing with the current condition of the unit.
Release date for IFS Maintenix 8.3 SP6
My understanding is that IFS Maintenix 8.3 SP6 was planned to be released at 07-APR-2022 (GA).I have searched the product bulletins on the community and did not find one for making SP6 GA. My conclusion is that SP6 has been delayed.Is there a new release date for IFS Maintenix 8.3 SP6?
Can't move aircraft from one hangar bay to another bay with multiple In-Work package
HiMaintenix allow user to move Workpackage (WP) from one TRACK to another when there is only one WP with status IN-WORK. But if there are more then one WP with status IN-WORK then the system doesn’t allow it, why not ?This happen quite often for us when C-check is coming to an end that the aircraft is moved between Hangar (track) slots.
On-wing Component Tasks with Calendar Limits going overdue on Shelf
Hi,Would like to get ideas on how Maintenix users in Organisations handle inventory with calendar based on-wing tasks that go overdue whilst on shelf.I believe this would affect any organisation using Maintenix for components with/without a supply solution. When inventory has an overdue task, a Maintenix job changes the status REPREQ. The supply department would suspect the inventory requires repair, (in our business requires back-office review for each part to consider) The inventory cannot be issued or electronically fitted by the maintenance repair organisation without this back office support to clear or overrun the task. The maintenance repair organisation maybe now subject extra work without notification, this is depending on how your business handles overdue tasks. In our business we need to have the units RFI. Therefore back-office support is always required.Explored options such as;Baseline Create on Install, suits a limited range of tasks due to complaince.DANI - Do at next i
HR API - Primary Organization
Hi,When creating new users using the HR API, the ADMIN organization is assigned to the users by default, however in restricted mode. You must then manually assign a Primary Organization through the GUI.How do other IFS Maintenix users handle this when loading multiple users using the HR API?
How are other operators managing kits that have alternate part numbers?
At Southwest we have hundreds of examples where we have an in-house built kits as alternates to OEM kits, however the functionality in Maintenix does not allow for alternate kit part numbers. Curious if other users have dealt with this and if so, how are they managing this?
IFS Maintenix impacts: Log4j2 CVE-2021-44228
Hi all,An impact assessment has taken place on the IFS Maintenix tech stack to determine required mitigation actions to secure your on prem systems. Please note only versions 8.3 and 8.3-SP1 are affected by this issue. We will be releasing software updates on all supported streams to upgrade log4j2 to version 184.108.40.2061-12-14 Update: We anticipate software updates to be delivered by Friday 2021-12-17.2021-12-14 Update: Updates will upgrade to Apache’s log4j 220.127.116.111-12-17 Update: Apache has released a new CVE-2021-45046 to indicate that the below recommended mitigation techniques are not sufficient to contain all possible vectors. The new recommendation is to install log4j 2.16.0 which completely removes the ability to perform a JndiLookup, there is an alternate mitigation technique to manually remove the class file from the jar if an upgrade to 2.16.0 is not possible. Please refer to Apache’s security article on this topic. ALL >= 8.3 IFS MAINTENIX INSTALLATIONS: The alternate
Engine related tasks created to airplane assembly
currently the software consider Engine and airplane as different assembly. However, there are manufacturer tasks for engine assy but followed airplane Flight cycle and flight hour which require to be created on airplane assy. But there is an issue that during engine removed from an airplane installed back the scheduling require manual intervention. please is there anyone who experience this problem? and some sort of solution as well.
Update Panel Names in Maintenix
Hi Team,Is there a .jsp we cannot find for editing panel descriptions?There is a security privilege that suggests there is one Category1 Parm Name2 Description Enabled Assembly - Panels ACTION_EDIT_PANEL_DETAILS Permission to edit panel. We’d like to update the panel descriptions, ie EQP_TASK_PANEL.DESC_SDESCUnderstand for adding new Panels we need to use configurator. Thanks in Advance
IFS 10 nie uruchamia się.
Dzień dobry.Jak w tytule.Klikam w Enterprise Explorer… i nic się nie dzieje. Także bezpośrednio odpalana “Ifs.Fnd.Explorer.application” nie działa.Stało się tak się tak po zawieszeniu komputera w trakcie pracy IFS i zimnym restarcie . Do momentu zawieszenia wszystko było OK. Może trzeba coś wykasować albo w rejestrze coś się “zatrzasnęło”? Bo o ile wiem to instalki w tej wersji niema?Pozdrawiam;Leonard
Cycle Count Experience and implementation on Maintenix(Bench marking)
Please kindly request experience of other airlines with regard to cycle count and Portable Device usage on actual stock taking i.e includes MANPOWER ,time to complete one cycle and cycle count plan is required for benchmarking and implementation.
Already have an account? Login
Login to the community
No account yet? Create an account
Login as an IFS Employee
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.